1 2013-05-02 00:47:38 <ashod> ,,
2 2013-05-02 02:20:21 <swulf--1> hey guys, i have a transaction I sent out over a day ago.. and it hasn't confirmed yet. can i claim the funds by reusing that input in another trasaction with higher fees?
3 2013-05-02 02:28:45 <weex> you can try
4 2013-05-02 02:29:20 <jchp> swulf--1: it probably won't work in most cases, but transactions will auto-expire after a couple days, so you can resend the transaction with higher feesthen
5 2013-05-02 02:29:30 <swulf--1> they will?
6 2013-05-02 02:29:39 <jchp> yes, they get dropped after 2-3 days or so
7 2013-05-02 02:29:48 <swulf--1> ah, curious
8 2013-05-02 02:30:09 <jchp> resend the transaction manually in 3 days and it'll probably work
9 2013-05-02 02:30:36 <jchp> if you're paranoid, use a different client to send the manual transaction as your bitcoin client might rebroadcast the old transaction (i'm not sure about the specifics of this part)
10 2013-05-02 02:31:02 <swulf--1> here's the tx: 43829436457ae7406fda074e7adf85225ad2cfcac9c7274e58fe9bedc888eb4e any ideas why you think it wouldn't be included? i would blame the low fees but i've sent out 0-fee txns before that have been included in less than a few hours
11 2013-05-02 02:31:33 <swulf--1> well, actually, i'm working on an offline client so i can just generate the tx myself and be sure it doesn't resend the old one
12 2013-05-02 02:31:57 <jchp> oh wait your original question is correct
13 2013-05-02 02:32:04 <jchp> you can make another transaction and pay double fees or whatever
14 2013-05-02 02:32:16 <jchp> that uses the inputs/change of the transaction that is pending
15 2013-05-02 02:32:34 <swulf--1> so just make a new transaction reusing that input, but with higher fees?
16 2013-05-02 02:32:53 <jchp> that happend to me last month and it worked, apparently slush and eligius will sum up all the dependent transactions
17 2013-05-02 02:32:59 <jchp> yes
18 2013-05-02 02:33:05 <swulf--1> ah, cool
19 2013-05-02 02:33:30 <swulf--1> I have to add this feature to my client quickly...
20 2013-05-02 02:45:56 <IanCormac> Is it true that OP_CHECKSIG does a bunch of other shit besides making sure that stack[1] is signed by stack[0]? And if so, is there any script opcode that JUST checks the validity of a signature?
21 2013-05-02 03:09:37 <IanCormac> Anyone? I'm kind of curious. It seems pretty shitty if OP_CHECKSIG doesn't actually, you know, just check the sig???
22 2013-05-02 03:10:39 <Luke-Jr> IanCormac: the transaction data (which is being signed) is not on the stack
23 2013-05-02 03:11:14 <IanCormac> Right, but is there any primitive that lets you check the signature for some arbitrary data?
24 2013-05-02 03:12:27 <IanCormac> It seems a little limiting to only allow ECDSA signing operations for the entire transaction
25 2013-05-02 03:14:47 <Luke-Jr> IanCormac: sadly, that's how it is
26 2013-05-02 03:15:53 <scintill> if it helps, there's RIPEMD160, SHA1, SHA256, HASH160, HASH256
27 2013-05-02 03:16:09 <IanCormac> Hmm. I wonder what the use cases are for a more flexible ECDSA opcode. Some guy brought it up as a criticism of the scripting system and I had to agree that that was a shortcoming
28 2013-05-02 03:16:13 <IanCormac> yes, it's nice that we have those
29 2013-05-02 03:16:27 <IanCormac> but I'm not sure why we don't have those for ECDSA
30 2013-05-02 03:16:43 <IanCormac> e.g. two separate opcodes, one to hash the transaction, one to check a signature of that hash
31 2013-05-02 03:16:56 <IanCormac> I feel like OP_CHECKSIG should have been the latter of what I just described
32 2013-05-02 03:17:13 <scintill> it could be useful for the script to inspect the transaction data, and could have been implemented that way instead of rolling it all into the CHECKSIG
33 2013-05-02 03:17:36 <IanCormac> Indeed
34 2013-05-02 03:17:36 <Luke-Jr> IanCormac: would make a good idea for a scripting-overhaul hardfork someday
35 2013-05-02 03:18:01 <IanCormac> We're going to need a scripting upgrade at some point anyway. I might go ahead and work on that opcode if I can find the time
36 2013-05-02 03:18:07 <scintill> yeah, or being able to just hash the tx like you say would be good too.
37 2013-05-02 03:19:05 <scintill> I'm wondering if a pull-request for that would be accepted, since nobody will relay or mine non-standard transactions unless they hack up their client.
38 2013-05-02 03:19:56 <IanCormac> I doubt a new opcode would be put into the main fork without a shitload of review, even if the opcode was inactive
39 2013-05-02 03:26:11 <scintill> have there been any discussions about what users can do to self-censor their own blockchain from the stuff that was dumped ~3 weeks ago?
40 2013-05-02 03:26:54 <IanCormac> What are you referring to?
41 2013-05-02 03:28:21 <scintill> http://garzikrants.blogspot.se/2013/04/on-bitcoin-data-spam-and-evil-data.html -- someone encoded a bunch of files into transactions, including Hidden Wiki pages about pedophilia and possibly child porn
42 2013-05-02 03:29:35 <IanCormac> Lol
43 2013-05-02 03:29:45 <IanCormac> Why would you want to self-censor?
44 2013-05-02 03:29:51 <IanCormac> that's probably bad for blockchain integrity
45 2013-05-02 03:30:09 <scintill> also some wikileaks files, DRM keys, etc. but the CP is most worrying from legal standpoints
46 2013-05-02 03:30:12 <IanCormac> And there are probably unspent outputs involved, I would imagine
47 2013-05-02 03:31:00 <IanCormac> Yes, but you can either have a working Bitcoin or you can kiss up to the moral legislators :)
48 2013-05-02 03:31:41 <scintill> yeah, I know it's not trivial to scrub it out and still be secure, so I'm wondering if anyone has looked at ways to do it with minimal disturbance to your own transactions and to the rest of the network.
49 2013-05-02 03:32:57 <IanCormac> Fair enough. Well, I have no idea
50 2013-05-02 03:33:26 <IanCormac> Do you live in the USA? I would just use FDE and take the fifth. That should cover most of your bases
51 2013-05-02 03:33:41 <IanCormac> :p
52 2013-05-02 03:35:13 <Belxjander> ask the authorities to trace down the idiot who "polluted" the blockchain
53 2013-05-02 03:35:48 <IanCormac> How do you propose we do that? If they're dumping CP in the blockchain, they're obviously tech-savvy.
54 2013-05-02 03:36:09 <scintill> yeah, I have FDE and am not all that worried even if I got caught with textual links to that stuff that can be easily explained as just being in the blockchain. but if someone does an actual image... I'm pretty sure knowing that it happened and not reporting that you have it on your hard drive is a huge problem, in the USA at least
55 2013-05-02 03:37:02 <IanCormac> Our culture is so ridiculously afraid of pedophilia :/ it's almost as bad as the red scares
56 2013-05-02 03:37:41 <Belxjander> scintill: I got to walk away from a case back in New Zealand
57 2013-05-02 03:38:11 <Belxjander> basically because If the dept had tried to do me... I would have ripped BOTH investigators new ones... along with breaching a shitload of their existing casework
58 2013-05-02 03:38:25 <Belxjander> they are not allowed to bring "visitors" into the workroom if they become suspects
59 2013-05-02 03:38:33 <scintill> and there are some news stories coming out about this incident, probably in the next few days... soon as legislators get whiff of this, we could be in for some interesting times
60 2013-05-02 03:38:59 <Belxjander> ACTION had not only been IN the workroom but was also able to bust at least one on basic forensics and electronics 101 of never accepting a static sensitive device
61 2013-05-02 03:39:57 <Belxjander> and the only reason they had the case was because I gave them key evidence in the first place
62 2013-05-02 03:40:47 <scintill> Belxjander: they let you in before you were a suspect? and what do you mean about static sensitive device?
63 2013-05-02 03:41:21 <Belxjander> scintill: hand a police officer an unwrapped PCI card or HDD and that pretty much voids the forensics as soon as they touch it
64 2013-05-02 03:41:58 <Belxjander> and I handed one of the lead investigators an unwrapped HDD in the workroom where they process evidence in handing it over to start the case
65 2013-05-02 03:42:39 <scintill> Belxjander: hmm. but how did you prove that, or convince them that you would be able to prive it? seems like they would just say "no, it was handled safely." who's the court going to believe?
66 2013-05-02 03:42:56 <Belxjander> so they were stuck between a rock and a hard place... if I had gone into the courtroom as a suspect... I would have ripped the dept a gaping new one that would have bled at least one investigators caseload for a long time
67 2013-05-02 03:43:17 <Belxjander> scintill: they also had the rule of non-entry of non-staff...
68 2013-05-02 03:43:20 <Belxjander> I was non-staff
69 2013-05-02 03:43:47 <Belxjander> and being able to state "X is in Y location relative to Z and W, B and D" along with placing where the desks were and various other parts of the room
70 2013-05-02 03:43:55 <Belxjander> as well as what material is located where
71 2013-05-02 03:44:12 <Belxjander> the judge would have to walk into the work room and decide immediately
72 2013-05-02 03:44:22 <scintill> Belxjander: ah, so just the fact that you would know things about that when you shouldn't have, would lend credibility to your story. interesting
73 2013-05-02 03:44:48 <Belxjander> scintill: not just that.... I would be able to quote not just where things are... but WHAT things were where in the workroom
74 2013-05-02 03:45:17 <Belxjander> not just credibility... pretty hard to fake that layout or lie about it and get it right
75 2013-05-02 03:45:41 <Belxjander> or even that there was a specific item on a specific shelf located in a specific place of the workroom
76 2013-05-02 03:46:14 <Belxjander> you can NOT get specific information like that about a windowless room in the middle of a building behind a security door that is staff only without having had physical access
77 2013-05-02 03:46:42 <Belxjander> I had had that physical access to eyeball the room
78 2013-05-02 03:46:54 <scintill> Belxjander: I mean, credibility that since you were near-provably there, you would know what happened. and, if they broke those rules, they may have broken the static rule too
79 2013-05-02 03:47:23 <Belxjander> scintill: It would have ripped the dept a definite new gaping hole since I was there with only ONE of the investigators...
80 2013-05-02 03:47:44 <Belxjander> and if one of them lost their job... the partner would have to undergo IA scrutiny and then some as well
81 2013-05-02 03:56:30 <scintill> hmm, looking at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=11381.100 it looks like we'd need pruning and to assume that addresses containing, say, ASCII text, are not spendable. then they could be pruned and forgotten.
82 2013-05-02 03:57:59 <IanCormac> Yeah, fuck that
83 2013-05-02 03:58:12 <IanCormac> protocol integrity is 10000x more important than legal conformity
84 2013-05-02 03:59:50 <scintill> I'm not advocating for forced legal conformity, just some way for each user to protect himself if he wants.
85 2013-05-02 04:01:37 <IanCormac> By dropping unspent outputs?
86 2013-05-02 04:01:47 <IanCormac> And/or changing the definition of a valid output after the fact?
87 2013-05-02 04:01:51 <IanCormac> Yikes
88 2013-05-02 04:02:00 <scintill> ideally with no disturbance to his own use of the protocol. definitely with no contamination to other peoples' copy of the blockchain
89 2013-05-02 04:02:11 <IanCormac> "All transactions starting with 0x123456 are hereby invalid"
90 2013-05-02 04:02:43 <IanCormac> Each user can't arbitrarily decide what they do or don't want to consider a valid input/output
91 2013-05-02 04:02:46 <IanCormac> I mean, they can
92 2013-05-02 04:02:55 <IanCormac> but they won't be able to use the main network
93 2013-05-02 04:03:04 <scintill> look at http://blockchain.info/tx/6c53cd987119ef797d5adccd76241247988a0a5ef783572a9972e7371c5fb0cc
94 2013-05-02 04:03:12 <IanCormac> OK
95 2013-05-02 04:03:29 <IanCormac> What am I seeing
96 2013-05-02 04:03:49 <scintill> the 1-satoshi escrow outputs are encoded data
97 2013-05-02 04:04:19 <IanCormac> Yep
98 2013-05-02 04:04:23 <IanCormac> And?
99 2013-05-02 04:04:35 <scintill> if you click "show scripts and coinbase" you can see the hex byte-vectors for the public keys. paste those into a hex editor and it's a python program for decoding these types of transactions
100 2013-05-02 04:04:59 <IanCormac> Cool
101 2013-05-02 04:05:06 <scintill> do you really think anybody is going to be hurt by deciding those 1-satoshi escrow outputs can be discarded? it's 99.999% certain nobody has corresponding private keys, once you see the public keys are ASCII Python code
102 2013-05-02 04:05:12 <IanCormac> Yes
103 2013-05-02 04:05:30 <IanCormac> We have no valid way of determining what is and isn't a valid RX address
104 2013-05-02 04:05:47 <IanCormac> Rule of thumb: Don't needlessly fuck with the protocol
105 2013-05-02 04:05:52 <IanCormac> it will never produce good results
106 2013-05-02 04:06:01 <IanCormac> 99.999% chance is not good enough
107 2013-05-02 04:06:58 <scintill> agreed, so I'm not suggesting forced changes. just for users to be able to look at that, say, "I doubt I'll ever be sent coins from those outputs, so I don't care and I don't want the data on my drive."
108 2013-05-02 04:07:08 <IanCormac> Oh, ok
109 2013-05-02 04:07:18 <IanCormac> I guess I was extrapolating a bit much from your comment
110 2013-05-02 04:08:01 <IanCormac> I would never accept automatic rejection of a transaction on such grounds, but I guess manual deletion is fine
111 2013-05-02 04:08:20 <IanCormac> problem is when people who don't really understand what's going on start trying to prune the blockchain, they break it
112 2013-05-02 04:08:45 <IanCormac> and what if ECDSA/RIPE gets broken in the distant future and someone wants to reclaim the BTC from those addresses?
113 2013-05-02 04:08:51 <scintill> I agree there could be a problem if everyone starts doing stuff like this, then it may be hard to find a true record of the transaction
114 2013-05-02 04:09:19 <scintill> and it's possible forgetting the "bogus" outputs would affect your ability to verify any coins tainted by the legitimate outputs, I'm not sure yet.
115 2013-05-02 04:09:43 <IanCormac> EIther way, I'd be very worried about stability
116 2013-05-02 04:10:09 <IanCormac> Perhaps if you're that concerned with legality, running Bitcoin at all may be a bad idea
117 2013-05-02 04:10:22 <IanCormac> what with ITAR restrictions, financial regulations, etc.
118 2013-05-02 04:10:41 <scintill> well, they still could crack the keys, as long as the original transaction was around and trusted. I agree that is a problem if censoring became widespread.
119 2013-05-02 04:11:22 <IanCormac> Well, we'll see. You bring up a good point.
120 2013-05-02 04:12:04 <Belxjander> the only real way to clear out the blockchain would be to drop the whole thing and start over again wouldn't it ?
121 2013-05-02 04:12:10 <Belxjander> new blockchain and signature ?
122 2013-05-02 04:12:39 <Luke-Jr> Belxjander: yes and no
123 2013-05-02 04:12:54 <Luke-Jr> Belxjander: it's quite possible to "start" a new chain with existing coins retained
124 2013-05-02 04:13:05 <Belxjander> ahhhh
125 2013-05-02 04:13:09 <Belxjander> hrmmm
126 2013-05-02 04:13:28 <Belxjander> but that would not "flush" the taint of the coins themselves?
127 2013-05-02 04:13:49 <Luke-Jr> what taint?
128 2013-05-02 04:14:08 <Belxjander> you would need some way to "mark and sweep" garbage collect old coins out of the new blockchain while replacing them with freshly minted material entirely from the new blockchain right ?
129 2013-05-02 04:14:11 <scintill> there's a currently un-implemented way to prune the chain of spent outputs, or outputs that are provably unspendable. I'm suggesting on an individual basis fudging the idea of "provably unspendable" for your own client only, to include outputs that almost certainly don't have an existing private key and therefore probably can't be spent
130 2013-05-02 04:14:28 <Luke-Jr> Belxjander: Bitcoin-Qt already does that
131 2013-05-02 04:14:46 <Belxjander> then the problem is what ?
132 2013-05-02 04:15:08 <Belxjander> I'm sorry if its repetitive... I wasn't aware of most of the previous conversation...
133 2013-05-02 04:15:11 <Belxjander> is there a log ?
134 2013-05-02 04:15:22 <Luke-Jr> scintill: it only takes one person to craft a "almost certainly don't have an existing private key" that really does, to break that idea
135 2013-05-02 04:15:31 <Luke-Jr> Belxjander: see topic for log
136 2013-05-02 04:15:49 <Belxjander> thanks
137 2013-05-02 04:16:52 <scintill> Luke-Jr: oh, is pruning already implemented?
138 2013-05-02 04:17:11 <scintill> as to crafting fake-looking public keys, could the pruning be soft, so that it won't affect other peers, and that if the user finds himself receiving coins tainted by his pruned tx, he could un-prune it and get them back?
139 2013-05-02 04:17:21 <Luke-Jr> scintill: yes and no :P
140 2013-05-02 04:17:43 <Luke-Jr> scintill: Bitcoin-Qt works with a set of unspent outputs (which is pruned by design), but it still needs the full blockchain data to serve other nodes bootstrapping
141 2013-05-02 04:18:03 <Luke-Jr> scintill: to un-prune it, he'd have to store it.. so no point
142 2013-05-02 04:19:16 <scintill> Luke-Jr: ok. so, I'm thinking when someone asks for a block I don't have the full copy for, can I just tell them I don't have it and let them get it from someone else? the caveat being, if everyone does that, the original transaction is lost
143 2013-05-02 04:20:25 <scintill> Luke-Jr: to un-prune, you could go get it from someone else? again, assuming they haven't all censored it.
144 2013-05-02 04:22:56 <Luke-Jr> scintill: maybe
145 2013-05-02 04:23:03 <Belxjander> scintill: so breaking the distrust model ?
146 2013-05-02 04:27:28 <scintill> Belxjander: not sure. for simplicity assume the full blocks were all downloaded and verified to bootstrap, and that a record of that has been written and can be trusted. I think you could safely discard and re-download outputs from then on and still be able to fully verify them.
147 2013-05-02 04:28:50 <Belxjander> scintill: no idea...
148 2013-05-02 04:29:04 <Belxjander> I wouldn't mind making code that let me download the blockchain as one script... on a timer
149 2013-05-02 04:29:19 <Belxjander> then sorted out verifying the blockchain in segments...
150 2013-05-02 04:59:05 <swulf--1> will bitcoind "hold" a transaction if a prevout refers to a txhash that it doesn't know about yet? if so, how long will it hold it?
151 2013-05-02 05:32:30 <Luke-Jr> yay http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/willardfoxton2/100009112/the-online-drug-marketplace-silk-road-is-collapsing-did-hackers-government-or-bitcoin-kill-it/
152 2013-05-02 05:33:28 <Belxjander> I'd say intense bitcoin trading where the price fluctuates too rapidly
153 2013-05-02 05:35:05 <kauzu> hihi
154 2013-05-02 05:35:27 <kauzu> is der a mining pool that accepts transactions with zero fee?
155 2013-05-02 05:38:02 <kauzu> i have done some very small test donations without fee to wikileaks to see if and how many days it will take to get acceptet by the network
156 2013-05-02 05:38:24 <kauzu> has any one an idea how long it will take
157 2013-05-02 05:38:58 <kauzu> or is it impossible without a fee
158 2013-05-02 05:54:20 <weex> kauzu: could get in the next block, hard to say
159 2013-05-02 05:55:41 <kauzu> there have been hundreds since transaction was done
160 2013-05-02 05:56:04 <weex> kauzu: was the very small transaction you did from another recent transaction
161 2013-05-02 05:56:07 <weex> ?
162 2013-05-02 05:56:21 <weex> coin age may figure in
163 2013-05-02 05:56:30 <weex> miners can really choose whatever criteria they want
164 2013-05-02 05:57:31 <kauzu> the coins are from mach 2013
165 2013-05-02 05:58:06 <kauzu> i think thats not old from the view of an miner
166 2013-05-02 05:58:24 <weex> it's old enough i'd think
167 2013-05-02 05:58:43 <weex> i think there's a page that'll show statistics so you don't really have to do such tests
168 2013-05-02 05:59:02 <kauzu> where is that page?
169 2013-05-02 05:59:20 <kauzu> i've been searching for something like that
170 2013-05-02 06:00:19 <kauzu> and do you think that a modified client with >500 connections or so can speed up zero fee transactions
171 2013-05-02 06:26:54 <kauzu> why doesnt blockchain.info show information about my transaction ic?
172 2013-05-02 06:26:56 <kauzu> *id
173 2013-05-02 06:28:10 <michagogo> kauzu: What's the ID?
174 2013-05-02 06:28:25 <kauzu> 6aa44c361ba8265b1f1edb493952be124e4eeccf694b995f12be7105d847dcfb
175 2013-05-02 06:28:39 <michagogo> Oh, my node's not running
176 2013-05-02 06:28:41 <michagogo> one sec
177 2013-05-02 06:28:54 <michagogo> kauzu: Could you pastebin the raw transaction?
178 2013-05-02 06:29:18 <kauzu> where can i get the raw transaction?
179 2013-05-02 06:30:36 <michagogo> getrawtransaction 6aa44c361ba8265b1f1edb493952be124e4eeccf694b995f12be7105d847dcfb
180 2013-05-02 06:30:48 <michagogo> In the console, or as an argument to bitcoind
181 2013-05-02 06:33:42 <michagogo> kauzu: With the RPC call getrawtransaction 6aa44c361ba8265b1f1edb493952be124e4eeccf694b995f12be7105d847dcfb
182 2013-05-02 06:34:07 <kauzu> http://pastebin.com/qmkxLNqu
183 2013-05-02 06:34:52 <kauzu> what information does the raw transaction contain?
184 2013-05-02 06:35:26 <lianj> kauzu: your previous output is not found
185 2013-05-02 06:36:03 <lianj> http://paste.mhanne.net/p/34003aee62a5e746fedff53eec610f321185d982?hl=text
186 2013-05-02 06:36:04 <michagogo> That transaction isn't valid, apparently
187 2013-05-02 06:36:17 <michagogo> "TX rejected (code -22)"
188 2013-05-02 06:36:35 <lianj> kauzu: can you do getrawtransaction 42ab3b87753d69d7645f6e8390791f392e11b50e4cbdf6f3aefb2f160045a1e6
189 2013-05-02 06:37:01 <michagogo> kauzu: try getrawtransaction 42ab3b87753d69d7645f6e8390791f392e11b50e4cbdf6f3aefb2f160045a1e6
190 2013-05-02 06:37:02 <michagogo> Ah
191 2013-05-02 06:38:00 <kauzu> http://pastebin.com/JNBb7zAn
192 2013-05-02 06:38:47 <kauzu> is there a tool to get information about raw transaction?
193 2013-05-02 06:41:27 <t7`> kauzu, http://brainwallet.org/#tx ?
194 2013-05-02 06:42:33 <michagogo> kauzu: try getrawtransaction e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328
195 2013-05-02 06:44:39 <kauzu> michagogo -> says 94def4cdab1f8d62cd3b4a3aa6850c74188411a4a0938ce7fe5ab84554398ccf
196 2013-05-02 06:44:50 <michagogo> Huh?
197 2013-05-02 06:44:51 <kauzu> after decoderawtransaction
198 2013-05-02 06:45:14 <michagogo> kauzu: What's the raw transaction of e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328
199 2013-05-02 06:45:29 <michagogo> And then of 94def4cdab1f8d62cd3b4a3aa6850c74188411a4a0938ce7fe5ab84554398ccf
200 2013-05-02 06:47:31 <kauzu> http://pastebin.com/5EL0Wruf
201 2013-05-02 06:52:11 <michagogo> kauzu: I just broadcast e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328 and then 42ab3b87753d69d7645f6e8390791f392e11b50e4cbdf6f3aefb2f160045a1e6 and then 6aa44c361ba8265b1f1edb493952be124e4eeccf694b995f12be7105d847dcfb
202 2013-05-02 06:52:31 <michagogo> Through my node's 13 peers and through blockchain.info/pushtx
203 2013-05-02 06:52:38 <lianj> michagogo: re. resolved?
204 2013-05-02 06:52:46 <michagogo> Maybe
205 2013-05-02 06:52:57 <michagogo> I haven't looked at the actual transactions
206 2013-05-02 06:53:34 <michagogo> https://blockchain.info/tx/e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328 says it's a 1-satoshi spend and a 0 fee
207 2013-05-02 06:53:40 <michagogo> That transaction may never confirm
208 2013-05-02 06:53:59 <michagogo> In which case 42ab3b87753d69d7645f6e8390791f392e11b50e4cbdf6f3aefb2f160045a1e6 and 6aa44c361ba8265b1f1edb493952be124e4eeccf694b995f12be7105d847dcfb also will never confirm
209 2013-05-02 06:54:54 <kauzu> can i brodcast with sendrawtransaction?
210 2013-05-02 06:55:03 <michagogo> Not if your client already knows about it
211 2013-05-02 06:55:12 <michagogo> Possibly if you restart your node
212 2013-05-02 06:56:07 <lianj> they all have zero fee
213 2013-05-02 06:56:18 <michagogo> lianj: Right
214 2013-05-02 06:56:41 <michagogo> 42ab3b8775 and 6aa44c361b look fine, except that 42ab3b8775 spends e275a2c8e5 and e275a2c8e5 is a 1-satoshi output with no fee
215 2013-05-02 06:56:59 <michagogo> I have a strong suspicion that e275a2c8e5 will never confirm.
216 2013-05-02 06:57:23 <michagogo> In which case, you'd need to wait a while for the network to forget about those transactions
217 2013-05-02 06:57:42 <michagogo> Then the change from e275a2c8e5 will be released and you can send 6aa44c361b again
218 2013-05-02 06:58:10 <kauzu> https://blockchain.info/tx/e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328 ... there is something wrong... there should only be "1HQufiL8VX1WUaBgRo5FegKtKCqjg4MSkU 0.00000001 BTC" and not "18894QgCCnyytUEVf4sPVhsn1feguqckcG 0.02409999 BTC"
219 2013-05-02 06:58:26 <kauzu> why are there 2 outputs?
220 2013-05-02 07:00:05 <t7> the input is bigger than 0.0000001
221 2013-05-02 07:01:45 <michagogo> kauzu: "18894QgCCnyytUEVf4sPVhsn1feguqckcG 0.02409999 BTC" is change
222 2013-05-02 07:02:03 <michagogo> Basically, when you spend an output, you're spending the entire output at once
223 2013-05-02 07:02:14 <michagogo> You sent to 1HQufiL8VX1WUaBgRo5FegKtKCqjg4MSkU
224 2013-05-02 07:02:16 <kauzu> i dont know what that means
225 2013-05-02 07:02:22 <kauzu> yes
226 2013-05-02 07:02:31 <kauzu> and why 18894QgCCnyytUEVf4sPVhsn1feguqckcG
227 2013-05-02 07:02:34 <michagogo> And your client automatically created another address to send the 0.02409999 to
228 2013-05-02 07:03:00 <michagogo> kauzu: Basically, the address 1C5rwa9Ee8gLFppyEv7R8WWoURofgY25mP got 0.025 BTC
229 2013-05-02 07:03:12 <kauzu> but i cant find 18894QgCCnyytUEVf4sPVhsn1feguqckcG in my wallet
230 2013-05-02 07:03:12 <michagogo> You can't send part of that 0.025 BTC
231 2013-05-02 07:03:18 <michagogo> You need to spend it all at once
232 2013-05-02 07:03:41 <michagogo> SO what happens is, it "destroys" the 0.025 BTC output
233 2013-05-02 07:03:48 <michagogo> And then created 2 outputs
234 2013-05-02 07:04:01 <michagogo> One to 1HQufiL8VX1WUaBgRo5FegKtKCqjg4MSkU in the amount of one satoshi
235 2013-05-02 07:04:20 <kauzu> ok
236 2013-05-02 07:04:26 <michagogo> And then one to 18894QgCCnyytUEVf4sPVhsn1feguqckcG, which is another address controlled by you, for the rest
237 2013-05-02 07:04:36 <michagogo> The 188 address isn't shown in your wallet
238 2013-05-02 07:04:41 <michagogo> But it's part of your wallet.dat
239 2013-05-02 07:05:04 <kauzu> ok
240 2013-05-02 07:05:18 <michagogo> And until e275a2c8e5 confirms (it never will) or is forgotten (takes a few days, I think)
241 2013-05-02 07:05:22 <kauzu> when i do sendrawtransaction e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328 it says TX rejected (code -22)
242 2013-05-02 07:05:25 <michagogo> 42ab3b8775 cannot confirm
243 2013-05-02 07:06:01 <michagogo> kauzu: You would need to sendrawtransaction 0100000001cf8...
244 2013-05-02 07:06:18 <michagogo> kauzu: Also, that won't work
245 2013-05-02 07:06:25 <michagogo> Your node already knows about it
246 2013-05-02 07:07:16 <kauzu> is there a chance to get e275... acceptet?
247 2013-05-02 07:07:54 <kauzu> or when will it be forgotten?
248 2013-05-02 07:07:54 <michagogo> kauzu: Well, if a miner chose to include it, it would get into a block and be confirmed
249 2013-05-02 07:08:44 <michagogo> kauzu: But that transaction is one that I highly doubt will be inclided by a miner
250 2013-05-02 07:09:11 <michagogo> I think it takes a few days to be forgotten
251 2013-05-02 07:09:32 <michagogo> Though, if you restart your node it might forget about it, not sure
252 2013-05-02 07:09:54 <kauzu> will it be forgotten even if my client is running?
253 2013-05-02 07:09:59 <michagogo> Eventually
254 2013-05-02 07:10:19 <g0thX> ACTION wishes he joined earlier..interesting conversation
255 2013-05-02 07:10:20 <michagogo> kauzu: Try exiting bitcoin-qt/bitcoind (whichever you're using)
256 2013-05-02 07:10:43 <michagogo> Then open it again and try getrawtransaction e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328
257 2013-05-02 07:10:58 <michagogo> If that doesn't work, you can try spending again
258 2013-05-02 07:11:46 <kauzu> still works
259 2013-05-02 07:12:05 <michagogo> Ah
260 2013-05-02 07:12:13 <michagogo> I guess it must get saved to disk somewhere
261 2013-05-02 07:12:34 <michagogo> Okay, wait a few days until you see it disappear
262 2013-05-02 07:13:05 <kauzu> what is the minimum condition for a transaction to get confirmed by most miners?
263 2013-05-02 07:14:53 <kauzu> oh i got another question to e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328 ... is send this yesterday 15:16 but blockchain.info says 2013-05-02 08:47:31
264 2013-05-02 07:16:05 <michagogo> kauzu: The time blockchain.info shows is the time it first saw it
265 2013-05-02 07:16:28 <kauzu> why did it take so long?
266 2013-05-02 07:16:38 <michagogo> kauzu: That would be just now, when I put the raw transaction in blockchain.info/pushtx
267 2013-05-02 07:16:55 <michagogo> kauzu: Because it probably didn't get relayed by most nodes
268 2013-05-02 07:17:50 <kauzu> so most miners will never here about e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328 ?
269 2013-05-02 07:18:53 <kauzu> so most miners will never here about e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328 ?
270 2013-05-02 07:19:13 <michagogo> kauzu: Pretty much
271 2013-05-02 07:21:34 <kauzu> so if my node has >500 connections there is a higher chance for e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328 to get accepted?
272 2013-05-02 07:24:28 <michagogo> kauzu: Well
273 2013-05-02 07:24:46 <michagogo> If one of those 500 has a looser relay policy it might get a little further
274 2013-05-02 07:25:38 <kauzu> ^^
275 2013-05-02 07:27:07 <kauzu> so there is a higher chance for winning the lottery than for e275a2c8e5c1346dc1329fb87bcfc04b398fe3f6c6207afa793fb3673a470328 to be accepted?
276 2013-05-02 07:28:39 <michagogo> kauzu: I wouldn't say that
277 2013-05-02 07:28:53 <michagogo> I don't know all the rules each node is using
278 2013-05-02 07:34:44 <kauzu> ok.. thanks for your help
279 2013-05-02 07:35:02 <kauzu> i'll let you know what happens with transactions
280 2013-05-02 07:36:03 <kauzu> oh... if i do addnode="ip of mining pool" does this help?
281 2013-05-02 07:37:04 <michagogo> kauzu: Well, if that's their bitcoin node and you broadcast to them it might help
282 2013-05-02 07:38:18 <kauzu> i think their node is the first relay ip of the transaction form a new block
283 2013-05-02 07:54:00 <grau> Is there a testnet dns feed already ?
284 2013-05-02 07:55:10 <sipa> grau: petertodd runs one, afaik
285 2013-05-02 07:55:31 <grau> thanks sipa, do you also know the name?
286 2013-05-02 07:55:36 <sipa> testnet-seed.bitcoin.petertodd.org
287 2013-05-02 07:55:47 <grau> you are the best
288 2013-05-02 07:56:43 <sipa> ACTION checked net.cpp :)
289 2013-05-02 08:26:27 <jaromil> I'll also vote sipa at the next elections
290 2013-05-02 08:29:52 <jaromil> despite my perverted infatuation for Diablo-D3's harsh tones and perpetual admiration of jgarzik's code. (ok ok 'nuff gossipy OT)
291 2013-05-02 08:59:08 <sipa> jaromil: ehhh wut?
292 2013-05-02 09:01:14 <The_Fly> ACTION shrugs
293 2013-05-02 09:02:39 <bithelp> anyone here who can help us with rawtransaction decoding?
294 2013-05-02 09:03:00 <lianj> help in what sense?
295 2013-05-02 09:03:15 <lianj> whats the real question
296 2013-05-02 09:05:04 <bithelp> explain things to us
297 2013-05-02 09:05:06 <bithelp> were getting stuck
298 2013-05-02 09:05:40 <bithelp> trying to get addressed balances for addresses not in our wallet
299 2013-05-02 09:06:38 <sacrelege> I still don't see any question mark :)
300 2013-05-02 09:07:18 <BlueMatt> bitcoind will not provide address "balances" for addresses not in the wallet, both because its a lot of extra effort/db size and because there arent really balanaces defined for an address at the protocol level
301 2013-05-02 09:08:07 <sipa> it will also not provide balances for addresses that _are_ in the wallet
302 2013-05-02 09:08:11 <sipa> BlueMatt: good morning!
303 2013-05-02 09:08:14 <sipa> noon!
304 2013-05-02 09:08:17 <BlueMatt> ehh, afternoon
305 2013-05-02 09:08:39 <sipa> must be evening for you :)
306 2013-05-02 09:08:56 <BlueMatt> no, more like 6 am
307 2013-05-02 09:09:08 <sipa> right, sign error
308 2013-05-02 09:09:13 <BlueMatt> but after around 4 time stops making sense...
309 2013-05-02 09:09:37 <bithelp> cheers BlueMatt.
310 2013-05-02 09:09:51 <bithelp> dont suppose you wanna get on a quick skype call and help us out a little?
311 2013-05-02 09:09:54 <bithelp> we're in London/UK
312 2013-05-02 09:10:20 <BlueMatt> you're probably better off asking questions here, just keep them specific :)
313 2013-05-02 09:10:36 <bithelp> kk thanks.
314 2013-05-02 09:11:33 <bithelp> we are building a wallet. to allow people to import existing addresses and then display transaction/history and balance etc, we need to parse all blockchain. using getrawtransactions. is that right?
315 2013-05-02 09:12:02 <Brotox> i've 4 bitcoins and i want take them as $, what's the procedure ?
316 2013-05-02 09:12:10 <BlueMatt> yea, you really probably want to create your own db with the data you get from the rawtx api
317 2013-05-02 09:12:52 <bithelp> yup. we're having issues deciphering what comes back in the call, vins vouts etc etc. cant find any data on it
318 2013-05-02 09:13:11 <bithelp> anyone else apart from blockchian.info doing it?
319 2013-05-02 09:13:41 <bithelp> 2 mins on skype.
320 2013-05-02 09:13:54 <BlueMatt> the raw txn api is not /that/ bad, but if you want a more structured library, you might try one of the 30 bitcoin libraries
321 2013-05-02 09:14:29 <bithelp> anywhere we can get a list of whats parsed back in the raw twxn api? we cant find docs
322 2013-05-02 09:14:33 <bithelp> killing us
323 2013-05-02 09:15:10 <BlueMatt> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Raw_Transactions
324 2013-05-02 09:15:25 <bithelp> thanks, but it doesnt go in what the things in the response means
325 2013-05-02 09:15:26 <BlueMatt> not great, but a pseudo-start
326 2013-05-02 09:16:48 <bithelp> do you understand everything that comes back in the response
327 2013-05-02 09:17:10 <Luke-Jr> bithelp: people should not be dealing in private keys
328 2013-05-02 09:17:48 <bithelp> we're not. all encrypt done client side.
329 2013-05-02 09:21:11 <BlueMatt> bithelp: so things that come back from decoderawtransaction: vin is the set of inputs to the transaction, vout is the set of outputs: each output has a value, an index (n) and a scriptPubKey
330 2013-05-02 09:21:32 <bithelp> sure u dont want to get on skype for 2 mins?
331 2013-05-02 09:21:33 <bithelp> :)
332 2013-05-02 09:21:47 <BlueMatt> I have to leave in a few minutes
333 2013-05-02 09:23:39 <lianj> bithelp: please just ask specifc questions.
334 2013-05-02 09:24:01 <bithelp> do we need to recursively parse all vins
335 2013-05-02 09:25:05 <BlueMatt> for what?
336 2013-05-02 09:25:55 <bithelp> to arrive at a live balance for an address or to sign transactions for payments
337 2013-05-02 09:26:07 <BlueMatt> no
338 2013-05-02 09:26:31 <BlueMatt> I dont have the api in front of me, but you will at max have to process one level deep to get the output of the input
339 2013-05-02 09:26:37 <BlueMatt> the output that the input spends, that is
340 2013-05-02 09:28:07 <bithelp> kinda get it. thanks dude
341 2013-05-02 09:29:49 <lianj> you need a db with all transactions. and then its simply a matter of querying the db like for example Output.where(address_ids: id, spent: false).sum(:amount)
342 2013-05-02 09:30:05 <lianj> to get the live address balance.
343 2013-05-02 09:31:40 <bithelp> lianj - wanna get on a qukck skype call?
344 2013-05-02 09:31:46 <bithelp> would make our day :-)
345 2013-05-02 09:33:18 <lianj> no, skype doesn't solve anything. sorry
346 2013-05-02 09:33:33 <bithelp> can we ignore the vins and just store all vouts?
347 2013-05-02 09:34:25 <lianj> not if you want to verify the transactions. and in order to see if outputs are spend you need the vins
348 2013-05-02 09:35:26 <bithelp> but just 1 level deep?
349 2013-05-02 09:35:42 <bithelp> do we need to parse the transaction ids, or the vins? if we do it gets recursive?
350 2013-05-02 09:36:17 <t7> i wonder what % of BTC users are male
351 2013-05-02 09:36:48 <t7> off topic sorry
352 2013-05-02 09:36:50 <lianj> t7: yea, not enough female conference talks are important
353 2013-05-02 09:36:54 <dub> 110%
354 2013-05-02 09:44:23 <bithelp> any ideas?
355 2013-05-02 09:45:19 <The_Fly> blargh, so i ran a bitcoind with an empty dir, as usual cannot connect to RPC during initial download (whether that's expected or not)
356 2013-05-02 09:45:31 <The_Fly> but then when it "finishes" / catches up
357 2013-05-02 09:45:37 <The_Fly> still no connection accepted
358 2013-05-02 09:45:41 <The_Fly> have to kill and run again
359 2013-05-02 09:48:57 <sipa> The_Fly: huh?
360 2013-05-02 09:49:12 <sipa> that's a bug if it's true
361 2013-05-02 09:50:30 <The_Fly> yeah, just checking how it behaves in all my branches
362 2013-05-02 09:51:08 <The_Fly> i saw something similar in master, just need to confirm
363 2013-05-02 09:56:18 <The_Fly> perhaps we should properly warn if bitcoin.conf permissions are wrong (if we dont already)
364 2013-05-02 09:56:25 <The_Fly> just a thought
365 2013-05-02 09:58:16 <The_Fly> yeah so on master i cant connect... spinning up a new bitcoind
366 2013-05-02 09:58:47 <The_Fly> and i'll wager that in the next 8 hours (or however long it takes) after it fetches the blockchain it will remain like this
367 2013-05-02 09:59:05 <sipa> The_Fly: can you paste some debug.log from during the time its RPC is not available?
368 2013-05-02 09:59:11 <The_Fly> k
369 2013-05-02 09:59:15 <The_Fly> this is master btw
370 2013-05-02 10:01:03 <The_Fly> lol, i find it a bit odd that printtoconsole stops debug.log creation
371 2013-05-02 10:01:10 <The_Fly> i believe that is wrong
372 2013-05-02 10:01:30 <The_Fly> but anyway...
373 2013-05-02 10:07:32 <The_Fly> pastebin slow or my internet broken
374 2013-05-02 10:07:44 <The_Fly> i'll see if i can debug current master also and look into it
375 2013-05-02 10:07:57 <The_Fly> but probably after work-work :(
376 2013-05-02 10:20:28 <The_Fly> sipa: http://pastebin.com/FwFEumDS
377 2013-05-02 10:20:45 <The_Fly> current master, fresh ~/.bitcoin
378 2013-05-02 10:20:49 <The_Fly> no RPC
379 2013-05-02 10:33:54 <The_Fly> sipa: it's very strange as i see the acceptors bind and listen
380 2013-05-02 10:34:16 <The_Fly> and the rpc_worker_group threads are created
381 2013-05-02 10:34:21 <The_Fly> but no can connect
382 2013-05-02 10:40:51 <The_Fly> ok and now it seems to be working :S
383 2013-05-02 10:41:01 <The_Fly> will try nuking the ~/.bitcoin dir again......
384 2013-05-02 10:43:10 <The_Fly> gah, now is not doing it!
385 2013-05-02 10:43:26 <The_Fly> same binary, just went through codepath second time round, no bug
386 2013-05-02 10:44:02 <sipa> The_Fly: maybe a bug where the port can't be opened for listening?
387 2013-05-02 10:44:38 <The_Fly> that's what im thinking
388 2013-05-02 10:44:53 <The_Fly> it was definitely reproducable
389 2013-05-02 10:45:09 <The_Fly> then i loaded up two bitcoinds in kdbg, one as rpc server other as client
390 2013-05-02 10:45:10 <The_Fly> worked
391 2013-05-02 10:45:25 <The_Fly> caught the connection
392 2013-05-02 10:45:42 <The_Fly> nuked .bitcoin dir, bug still gone
393 2013-05-02 10:46:09 <The_Fly> im regularly checking process list, so dont think i had a bitcoind running
394 2013-05-02 10:46:31 <The_Fly> but next time it happens a netstat might be helpful
395 2013-05-02 10:47:18 <sipa> The_Fly: you know the OS typically keeps a listening port locked for a while (a minute or so), if it's not properly closed before exiting?
396 2013-05-02 10:48:08 <sipa> 4 minutes, even
397 2013-05-02 10:48:28 <The_Fly> ah i see... no i thought it cleaned up pretty fast
398 2013-05-02 10:48:40 <The_Fly> from experience it does...
399 2013-05-02 10:48:47 <jaakkos> does it use SO_REUSEADDR
400 2013-05-02 10:49:09 <sipa> for P2P connections we use SO_REUSEADDR
401 2013-05-02 10:49:09 <The_Fly> ive killed processes for programs ive written and been able to open fine straight away
402 2013-05-02 10:49:21 <sipa> but the RPC code uses boost asio, no idea whether it uses that
403 2013-05-02 10:49:27 <jaakkos> ok
404 2013-05-02 10:49:38 <The_Fly> there doesn't seem to be any error checking around the listener
405 2013-05-02 10:49:48 <The_Fly> the acceptor->async_accept
406 2013-05-02 10:50:51 <The_Fly> sorry, there is... but it doesn't output anything
407 2013-05-02 10:50:55 <The_Fly> or stop bitcoind
408 2013-05-02 10:51:44 <alaricsp> ACTION wants to buy more BTC, but his spare-BTC-buying-money is currently sitting in bitcoin-24 and won't come out :-/
409 2013-05-02 10:52:09 <The_Fly> id like to buy some also
410 2013-05-02 10:52:15 <The_Fly> price fell a lot in recent days
411 2013-05-02 10:52:17 <alaricsp> Having just spent ~500GBP on having the car fixed, serviced, tested, and taxed for another year doesn't help!
412 2013-05-02 10:52:34 <alaricsp> Perhaps next month, if the prices are still good...
413 2013-05-02 10:53:02 <The_Fly> prices are ok now
414 2013-05-02 10:53:06 <The_Fly> buy buy buy
415 2013-05-02 10:53:21 <alaricsp> Need cash! Are you offering to lend me some? :-D
416 2013-05-02 10:53:54 <The_Fly> maybe if i make it big
417 2013-05-02 10:58:00 <The_Fly> sipa: wait, no, theres a if (!fListening) { Shutdown(): } in bitcoinrpc.cpp
418 2013-05-02 10:58:22 <The_Fly> but it isn't
419 2013-05-02 10:58:22 <The_Fly> so it thinks it is listening...
420 2013-05-02 10:58:37 <Grouver> How do I install bitcoind on linux? It doesnt say anthing about it in the README. And launching it via ./bitcoind without installing it works but then I cant give any commands to it when its running. I hope somebody can give me a nice hint. Thanks.
421 2013-05-02 10:58:48 <The_Fly> pfff. next time i get it into that state i'll try see what netstat gives
422 2013-05-02 10:59:14 <The_Fly> Grouver: you can give commands when you have an rpc server running
423 2013-05-02 10:59:29 <The_Fly> so run ./bitcoind and then in another terminal window issue ./bitcoind help
424 2013-05-02 10:59:36 <The_Fly> ./bitcoind getinfo etc.
425 2013-05-02 10:59:54 <The_Fly> you can also run ./bitcoind -daemon
426 2013-05-02 11:00:00 <The_Fly> and then ./bitcoin stop
427 2013-05-02 11:00:04 <The_Fly> to stop the daemon
428 2013-05-02 11:00:23 <The_Fly> remember that on first run it will want you to create a bitcoin.conf file in ~/.bitcoin
429 2013-05-02 11:01:03 <Grouver> The_Fly: Thanks. I already did this. But I was assuming you could give commands to the terminal itself after you started bitcoind
430 2013-05-02 11:01:03 <The_Fly> as for install... your package manager should have a copy, if not then add the repo
431 2013-05-02 11:01:10 <The_Fly> no
432 2013-05-02 11:01:15 <The_Fly> you cant
433 2013-05-02 11:01:20 <Grouver> ah okay. Clear.
434 2013-05-02 11:01:31 <The_Fly> you can build from source also
435 2013-05-02 11:01:48 <The_Fly> and possibly do "make install" but idk
436 2013-05-02 11:02:14 <The_Fly> no
437 2013-05-02 11:02:20 <The_Fly> cant, we should add that maybe
438 2013-05-02 11:02:35 <Grouver> So you cant install bitcoind. Just run it from the bin/32/bitcoind file via the command: ./bitcoin
439 2013-05-02 11:03:09 <The_Fly> ermmmmmm
440 2013-05-02 11:03:11 <The_Fly> what
441 2013-05-02 11:03:53 <Grouver> Well, I was assuming y ou needed to install bitcoind? But apparently you cant and you can only run bitcoind from the file thats in bin/32/bitcoind
442 2013-05-02 11:04:23 <Grouver> Also if I open another terminal and type: ./bitcoind -getinfo it says bitcoind is already running.
443 2013-05-02 11:04:36 <Grouver> which it is... in the other terminal.
444 2013-05-02 11:04:42 <The_Fly> no
445 2013-05-02 11:04:45 <The_Fly> is not -getinfo
446 2013-05-02 11:04:55 <The_Fly> "./bitcoin getinfo"
447 2013-05-02 11:05:17 <The_Fly> "./bitcoin sentoaddress"
448 2013-05-02 11:05:21 <The_Fly> "./bitcoin help"
449 2013-05-02 11:05:24 <The_Fly> "./bitcoin stop"
450 2013-05-02 11:05:25 <The_Fly> etc.
451 2013-05-02 11:06:37 <Grouver> ah great. Thanks.
452 2013-05-02 11:07:34 <The_Fly> sipa: yeah that bug seems to go away by itself... still would be nice to get better warning or detect the case properly
453 2013-05-02 11:07:49 <The_Fly> its now working fine through the same codepath on all my branches :S
454 2013-05-02 11:07:51 <The_Fly> nvm
455 2013-05-02 11:08:18 <The_Fly> Grouver: np
456 2013-05-02 11:09:25 <ashod> l
457 2013-05-02 11:09:57 <The_Fly> m
458 2013-05-02 11:10:08 <The_Fly> fsedgrhtjkl;l
459 2013-05-02 11:31:26 <The_Fly> also, if my network interface goes down bitcoind sits there flushing to peers.dat and no more
460 2013-05-02 11:32:06 <The_Fly> lets say you migrate a virtual machine, xen etc. or your hosting provider sucks
461 2013-05-02 11:32:40 <The_Fly> then is possible for net to go down and requires handling
462 2013-05-02 11:33:20 <kauzu> are there stats about blockchain size/ number of nodes/ traffic in bitcoin network etc?
463 2013-05-02 11:33:59 <aaasss> w
464 2013-05-02 11:34:06 <The_Fly> x
465 2013-05-02 11:36:10 <aaasss> s
466 2013-05-02 11:37:48 <aaasss> w
467 2013-05-02 11:58:02 <tedw> anyone see this on bitcointalk? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=192880.0
468 2013-05-02 11:59:47 <jgm> "Until starting on btcd, most of our developers had written almost exclusively in C" So it's a my-first-Go project. Good, good...
469 2013-05-02 12:02:33 <kauzu> are there stats about blockchain size/ number of nodes/ traffic in bitcoin network etc?
470 2013-05-02 12:15:48 <samui2> hello
471 2013-05-02 12:27:02 <tgs3> jgm: C? how about C++
472 2013-05-02 12:29:07 <tgs3> what is the state of multisignature now, to create funds that can be moved only where say 2 separate parties agree and both sign the new transaction from their bitcoind?
473 2013-05-02 12:43:36 <czaanja> Hello, can I please ask if there is known the principle used by blockchain.info to select which nodes to connect ( I mean this http://blockchain.info/connected-nodes )
474 2013-05-02 12:44:11 <sipa> czaanja: ask them, i guess?
475 2013-05-02 12:51:58 <kauzu> czaanja: i think they only listen for connections
476 2013-05-02 12:52:05 <sipa> i doubt that
477 2013-05-02 12:52:58 <kauzu> sipa: why
478 2013-05-02 12:53:48 <czaanja> kauzu: Yes I think so too, but I'm wondering how they decide which nodes to connect.
479 2013-05-02 12:54:34 <sipa> you don't get a 1000 connections just by listening
480 2013-05-02 12:58:24 <czaanja> Oh i see, by "only listen" i meant that they are not running regular bitcoind on the nodes. Sure i know they are discovering the nodes and I just wanted to know how.
481 2013-05-02 12:59:23 <sipa> addr messages?
482 2013-05-02 12:59:27 <sipa> like every other node
483 2013-05-02 13:00:30 <gonffen> when you say, 'regular bitcoind' do you mean, the same variant as everyone else or do you mean it has a fundamental difference in functionality?
484 2013-05-02 13:02:26 <kauzu> in the source of bitocoid in Net.h there is "static const int MAX_OUTBOUND_CONNECTIONS = ####;" set #### to the number of nodes you want to connect recompile and wait some hours
485 2013-05-02 13:02:53 <czaanja> sipa: Ok, i justed wanted to ask if there is some other option, which they might use
486 2013-05-02 13:03:12 <sipa> kauzu: please don't do that
487 2013-05-02 13:03:19 <sipa> 8 is plenty
488 2013-05-02 13:03:44 <czaanja> Ok, i dont think they are using regular bitcoind.
489 2013-05-02 13:03:44 <czaanja> U can try that without recompiling etc. Actually i tried, it is not a good idea.
490 2013-05-02 13:03:59 <sipa> ???
491 2013-05-02 13:04:20 <kauzu> sipa: don't do what? if blockchain.info does not only listen i think they just did something like that
492 2013-05-02 13:04:28 <sipa> kauzu: i consider it abusive
493 2013-05-02 13:05:22 <czaanja> You can use bitcond addnode <ip> onetry for as many nodes as you wish and bitcoind will connect to as many of them as you like.
494 2013-05-02 13:05:36 <sipa> no, bitcoind/bitcoin-qt never make more than 8 outgoing connections
495 2013-05-02 13:06:40 <sipa> ah, onetry may be different
496 2013-05-02 13:07:10 <czaanja> They wont, but if you force them with onetry, they will
497 2013-05-02 13:07:12 <kauzu> sipa: why is it only 8? ok there is no reason for more than that but is it dangerous for the network if everyone has a lot more connections?
498 2013-05-02 13:08:26 <sipa> kauzu: connectable peers on the network are a limited resource (we've had a period when we were actually running out, and new nodes couldn't connect at all)
499 2013-05-02 13:08:43 <sipa> it's better now, but there is still no need to try to connect to everyone
500 2013-05-02 13:11:40 <czaanja> Anyway, if we are talking about this, is there any way to disconnect curently connected outbound connections and connect to new nodes?
501 2013-05-02 13:12:22 <sipa> hmm, not really afaik
502 2013-05-02 13:14:32 <kauzu> czaanja: you could block the ip in your firewall and wait for bitcoin to dump connection
503 2013-05-02 13:20:28 <dansmith_btc> Hello, I'm looking into creating a colored coin client on top of bitcoind. Is bitcoind API enough to search down through the transactions until I find the needed tx output?
504 2013-05-02 13:23:23 <czaanja> kauzu: I thought about that, but it does not seem "clean" to me. There is a CloseSocketDisconnect() method in the code, but can not be accesed via rpc or command. And I am not good with c++ anymore..
505 2013-05-02 13:24:49 <The_Fly> it could be added as an rpc method
506 2013-05-02 13:26:28 <The_Fly> you can add nodes, query connection count, get peer info
507 2013-05-02 13:28:17 <dansmith_btc> In short, how can I find which transaction contains the output in question using bitcoind API? Do I have to scan every single block for that?
508 2013-05-02 13:28:24 <czaanja> The_Fly: Yes, but I did not found a way disconnect them. I can try to write a disconnect rpc method but i did not write a c++ code for ages now
509 2013-05-02 13:29:37 <Scrat> dansmith_btc: well, you'd start from the colored transaction and go up. getrawtransaction with txindex=1 can do that, but it would be slow calling it a few thousand times
510 2013-05-02 13:30:08 <dansmith_btc> Scrat, yes that would be slow indeed.
511 2013-05-02 13:30:17 <The_Fly> czaanja: get back into it
512 2013-05-02 13:31:05 <Scrat> dansmith_btc: depends on the number of transactions for that particular color. you'd only go up from the originating transaction
513 2013-05-02 13:39:56 <JDuke128> hello , how can i create new bitcoin address : "new ECKey()" <= with this? whats ECKey ?
514 2013-05-02 13:40:47 <JDuke128> then , wallet.addKey ?
515 2013-05-02 13:41:33 <sipa> i guess ECKey means an elliptic curve key
516 2013-05-02 13:41:57 <sipa> i.e., a keypair
517 2013-05-02 13:42:21 <JDuke128> okay , so how can i make new bit coin address ?
518 2013-05-02 13:42:40 <czaanja> The_Fly: Ok, I will try to
519 2013-05-02 13:42:50 <JDuke128> ECKey eckey = new ECKey(); wallet.addKey(eckey); <= this makes new bit coin address?
520 2013-05-02 13:42:53 <etotheipi_> sipa: what is in the undo-data you store for each block? is it just the full TxOuts that were removed and the Outputs that had been added?
521 2013-05-02 13:43:02 <gavinandresen> Am I seeign things or is git HEAD Bitcoin-QT suddenly ignoring testnet=1 in bitcoin.conf ?
522 2013-05-02 13:43:25 <etotheipi_> sipa: s/output/outpoint/g
523 2013-05-02 13:43:33 <JDuke128> someone can help ?
524 2013-05-02 13:43:56 <sipa> etotheipi_: the removed txouts
525 2013-05-02 13:44:07 <sipa> etotheipi_: it doesn't contain anything the block data itself contains
526 2013-05-02 13:44:34 <etotheipi_> sipa: I thought we weren't sure we had the block data
527 2013-05-02 13:44:34 <sipa> so not the txids:index of the inputs, or the txids of the outputs being added
528 2013-05-02 13:44:47 <sipa> it assumes you have the block data present
529 2013-05-02 13:44:57 <sipa> that makes the undo data much smaller (like 3x or 4x)
530 2013-05-02 13:45:03 <etotheipi_> sipa: oh, because in this case we aren't full pruning yet...?
531 2013-05-02 13:45:07 <etotheipi_> or am I missing something
532 2013-05-02 13:45:10 <gavinandresen> ??? bah,??it is running testnet but not putting it's data files under testnet3/ for some reason...
533 2013-05-02 13:45:17 <sipa> gavinandresen: heh
534 2013-05-02 13:45:19 <sipa> etotheipi_: huh
535 2013-05-02 13:45:31 <etotheipi_> sipa: nevermind, I'm confusing myself
536 2013-05-02 13:45:36 <etotheipi_> I got it
537 2013-05-02 13:45:44 <sipa> etotheipi_: it just means you need both blocks and undo data for the part you're willing to reorg
538 2013-05-02 13:46:28 <JDuke128> ???
539 2013-05-02 13:46:38 <sipa> JDuke128: sorry, not familiar with bitcoinj
540 2013-05-02 13:48:57 <TD> JDuke128: what's your question?
541 2013-05-02 13:49:17 <JDuke128> i want to make new bitcoin address on bitcoinj api
542 2013-05-02 13:49:23 <JDuke128> and attach on invoices
543 2013-05-02 13:49:38 <JDuke128> ECKey eckey = new ECKey(); wallet.addKey(eckey); <= this makes new bit coin address?
544 2013-05-02 13:49:42 <TD> JDuke128: you're the guy who filed a bug on this topic? please see my email response. you need to read the documentation first: https://code.google.com/p/bitcoinj/wiki/GettingStarted
545 2013-05-02 13:49:43 <JDuke128> on the wallet ?
546 2013-05-02 13:49:56 <TD> once you've read the documentation (all of it), feel free to join the mailing list and ask further questions there
547 2013-05-02 13:50:26 <JDuke128> i read the doc
548 2013-05-02 13:50:32 <JDuke128> but its not so much clear
549 2013-05-02 13:50:38 <JDuke128> so i ask some question...
550 2013-05-02 13:50:46 <JDuke128> simple question
551 2013-05-02 13:50:48 <JDuke128> ECKey eckey = new ECKey(); wallet.addKey(eckey); <= this makes new bit coin address?
552 2013-05-02 13:51:00 <TD> the code snippet you are looking for is in this section:
553 2013-05-02 13:51:03 <TD> https://code.google.com/p/bitcoinj/wiki/GettingStarted#Wallets_and_keys
554 2013-05-02 13:51:10 <TD> it explains how keys and addresses are related
555 2013-05-02 13:51:26 <TD> these are very basic questions. please do read the documentation. if you don't understand it, you are *very likely* to lose money by accident
556 2013-05-02 13:52:05 <TD> anyway, the answer is that generates a new key and inserts it into the wallet. you can turn a key into an address (the "1AbCd....." strings), the docs explain how to do that
557 2013-05-02 13:54:32 <JDuke128> mm
558 2013-05-02 13:54:51 <sipa> gavinandresen: afaik, if you specify a datadir, that exact datadir is always used
559 2013-05-02 13:54:57 <JDuke128> so the bitcoin address is the String which is the public key of the ECKey ?
560 2013-05-02 13:55:22 <gavinandresen> sipa: that is a change, then
561 2013-05-02 13:55:42 <gavinandresen> sipa: ??? and an unwelcome one. Having bitcoind and Bitcoin-Qt behave differently is disastrous in this case
562 2013-05-02 13:55:53 <gavinandresen> (main-net wallet used as testnet or vice-versa)
563 2013-05-02 13:56:06 <sipa> ah, i misread your mail
564 2013-05-02 13:56:08 <Optimo> ;;ticker
565 2013-05-02 13:56:09 <gribble> BTCUSD ticker | Best bid: 97.54295, Best ask: 97.71809, Bid-ask spread: 0.17514, Last trade: 97.71809, 24 hour volume: 270969.87256614, 24 hour low: 91.11000, 24 hour high: 130.00000, 24 hour vwap: 111.60374
566 2013-05-02 13:56:11 <gavinandresen> or, in other words: somebody broke it
567 2013-05-02 13:56:11 <Optimo> sorry
568 2013-05-02 13:56:14 <sipa> i have no idea about bitcoin-qt
569 2013-05-02 13:57:04 <TD> JDuke128: an address is hash of a public key with version and check bytes added, then represented using base 58. see the class javadocs for the Address class
570 2013-05-02 14:04:08 <tlrobinson> is it possible the second "version" message example on here https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification has an incorrect checksum?
571 2013-05-02 14:04:53 <michagogo> Is it normal for an issue to not have any activity on it at all 3 weeks later? (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/2512)
572 2013-05-02 14:05:02 <TD> tlrobinson: certainly.
573 2013-05-02 14:09:55 <TD> michagogo: yes
574 2013-05-02 14:10:02 <michagogo> Okay
575 2013-05-02 14:10:32 <michagogo> Just didn't know if you guys tagged/categorized/etc. issues as they came in or not
576 2013-05-02 14:13:16 <TD> michagogo: there are very few developers working on bitcoin. they have their own priorities. there isn't anyone who just goes through filed bugs and fixes them in order or anything.
577 2013-05-02 14:13:17 <TD> nice though it'd be
578 2013-05-02 14:18:52 <wumpus> gavinandresen: wow that sounds bad, wonder when that changed
579 2013-05-02 14:19:17 <michagogo> TD: k
580 2013-05-02 14:32:38 <tubby> Hi
581 2013-05-02 14:33:43 <tubby> I'm working on a pet project related to colored bitcoins. However I do not know what parts of the code to modify to include a new tab in the main window. Can anyone help me?
582 2013-05-02 14:35:43 <helo> tubby: i more general question is how you will track the ownership of colored coin when it is mixed with non-colored coin
583 2013-05-02 14:35:59 <helo> *a more
584 2013-05-02 14:37:45 <helo> can you transfer them to a random miner via fees?
585 2013-05-02 14:38:45 <pigeons> helo: current "spec" is "mixing" colored with uncolored "destroys" the coloring and uncolors the inputs
586 2013-05-02 14:39:20 <helo> how would you send colored coin without mixing it with uncolored coin to pay the fee?
587 2013-05-02 14:39:57 <jspilman> helo: see https://github.com/bitcoinx/colored-coin-tools/blob/master/colors.md
588 2013-05-02 14:40:01 <helo> thanks
589 2013-05-02 14:41:05 <jspilman> order based tracking is just one way. petertodd also has a fidelity bond writup which talks about tracking using odd/even satoshi: https://github.com/petertodd/trustbits/blob/master/fidelitybond.md#contracts
590 2013-05-02 14:42:41 <tubby2> sorry for the time, back again. As I was saying, I plan on a pet project to test some bitcoin-colouring ideas. To do that I need to add a new tab to the client. The basic problem is that I do not know where to start. Where can I find what files do I need to modify to add the tab?
591 2013-05-02 14:45:28 <helo> tubby2: not sure if you saw these, but they are good reading: https://github.com/bitcoinx/colored-coin-tools/blob/master/colors.md https://github.com/petertodd/trustbits/blob/master/fidelitybond.md#contracts
592 2013-05-02 14:45:33 <jspilman> tubby - check some of the pull requests, there must be someone doing the same thing and you can clone it
593 2013-05-02 14:45:56 <sipa> tubby2: i doubt the GUI is the largest of your problems when implementing this
594 2013-05-02 14:46:08 <sipa> jspilman: i don't know of any pullreqs relating to coin coloring
595 2013-05-02 14:46:32 <jspilman> sipa: yes, I meant just the GUI part, but you are right, GUI is the last thing to worry about
596 2013-05-02 14:47:03 <jspilman> tubby2: the rpc code is really easy to extend if you're just playing around with learning the code and prototyping something
597 2013-05-02 14:47:56 <wumpus> tubby2: walletview.cpp is where the tabs are added
598 2013-05-02 14:48:25 <tubby2> helo thanks, I hadn't read all that. It probably is a good start.
599 2013-05-02 14:49:47 <tubby2> my colouring method is quite stupid. You want to track all tokens from A so all the BTC that leave A are coloured as A. If B got A-coloured coins and wants to send them to C, they just prepare a transaction like B->C(amount of coloured BTC), A(1 satoshi)
600 2013-05-02 14:50:20 <tubby2> It should be simple enough to encode in little time. (extra BTCs from the inputs are sent back to A).
601 2013-05-02 14:51:41 <jspilman> tubby2: you don't need to, and probably shouldn't, invent your own method. check bitcoinx google group if you are interested in learning more, there has been months of discussion on coloring techniques and pros/cons
602 2013-05-02 14:52:35 <jspilman> better yet, there is prototype code in a few different languages which implement the draft specs, so you can see it in action
603 2013-05-02 14:55:17 <tubby2> jspilman, I where can I get that prototype code?
604 2013-05-02 15:05:39 <petertodd> sipa: The code should check if the datafiles, especially wallet, were created in the same mainnet/testnet mode that the code itself is running in, and fail hard if the modes don't match.
605 2013-05-02 15:10:21 <auaua> sj
606 2013-05-02 15:13:59 <auaua> se
607 2013-05-02 15:41:33 <sipa> petertodd: yeah