1 2013-07-19 06:30:43 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: didnt I ask you to stop shilling for BFL?
  2 2013-07-19 06:31:58 <gmaxwell> dude you don't get to claim BFL hasn't shipped a product when bunches of people in our channels whom I know and trust tell me they've recieved them.
  3 2013-07-19 06:32:19 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: then wheres the proof
  4 2013-07-19 06:32:51 <Diablo-D3> they've shipped to a few high profile forum users, and have not even put a dent in their several thousand unit obligation.
  5 2013-07-19 06:33:51 <Diablo-D3> at this rate, by the time they finish that, 65nm will be unprofitable
  6 2013-07-19 06:33:57 <Diablo-D3> (ie, over the next two years)
  7 2013-07-19 06:34:08 <Diablo-D3> thats pretty scammy to me, gmaxwell
  8 2013-07-19 06:36:20 <petertodd> Diablo-D3: Do you realize the position they are in? They can't outsource assembly of the units, because they'll get stolen, yet they also can't just buy a bunch more incredibly expensive PCB reflow gear, because that'll make them bankrupt when this temporary surge in demand goes back down.
  9 2013-07-19 06:36:30 <petertodd> This is why all the ASIC mfgs are trying to sell raw chips.
 10 2013-07-19 06:36:39 <Diablo-D3> lol.
 11 2013-07-19 06:36:39 <Diablo-D3> "they'll get stolen"
 12 2013-07-19 06:36:55 <gmaxwell> you laugh, some crazy crap has been going on for these companies.
 13 2013-07-19 06:37:05 <Diablo-D3> petertodd: asicminer is having no trouble meeting the demand
 14 2013-07-19 06:37:33 <petertodd> Diablo-D3: how many orders does asicminer have relative to BFL?
 15 2013-07-19 06:37:54 <Diablo-D3> petertodd: I dont know
 16 2013-07-19 06:38:01 <Diablo-D3> petertodd: its better to compare GH
 17 2013-07-19 06:38:05 <petertodd> Diablo-D3: go find out
 18 2013-07-19 06:38:08 <gmaxwell> meenting _demand_ lol. no no, meeting their promises thats another comment entirely.
 19 2013-07-19 06:38:16 <gmaxwell> meeting*
 20 2013-07-19 06:39:01 <Diablo-D3> petertodd: asicminer does not sell directly to customers
 21 2013-07-19 06:39:07 <Diablo-D3> petertodd: they sell to resellers in target countries
 22 2013-07-19 06:40:21 <petertodd> Diablo-D3: so you're saying you probably don't have a clue what the stats are
 23 2013-07-19 06:40:31 <MC1984> lol you dont know how they do business in china
 24 2013-07-19 06:41:30 <Diablo-D3> petertodd: I dont know what the waiting orders are, no, but its a lot smaller than BFL's
 25 2013-07-19 06:42:08 <MC1984> asicminers operation is pretty vertically integrated no
 26 2013-07-19 06:42:20 <MC1984> or whatever the business speak is
 27 2013-07-19 06:42:24 <MC1984> + they live there
 28 2013-07-19 06:43:08 <warren> Diablo-D3: to be fair, ASICMiner is charging BTC denominated prices far in excess of potential ROI
 29 2013-07-19 06:43:18 <petertodd> Diablo-D3: Right, so ASICMINER has a small problem on their hands, and we should hate on BFL because their much bigger problem is proving tough to fix.
 30 2013-07-19 06:43:27 <warren> Diablo-D3: so it's easy to meet demand when your only buyers by definition are those incapable of math
 31 2013-07-19 06:43:28 <petertodd> Meh, trolling won't get your units any quicker.
 32 2013-07-19 06:43:41 <Diablo-D3> petertodd: asicminer has a small problem?
 33 2013-07-19 06:43:42 <Diablo-D3> dude
 34 2013-07-19 06:43:46 <Diablo-D3> I wish I had their problem
 35 2013-07-19 06:44:01 <warren> ASICMiner has an excellent business.
 36 2013-07-19 06:44:06 <Diablo-D3> being rich is a great problem to have
 37 2013-07-19 06:44:13 <MC1984> i said before, they should have never tried to sell working units
 38 2013-07-19 06:44:19 <warren> yeah, congrats on buying those shares
 39 2013-07-19 06:44:25 <MC1984> not for first batch any way
 40 2013-07-19 06:44:36 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: they never sold first batch units
 41 2013-07-19 06:44:48 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: those were the giant blade prototypes they decided not to continue using
 42 2013-07-19 06:45:04 <Diablo-D3> I mean, not continue producing
 43 2013-07-19 06:45:05 <MC1984> the inside of lukes big box unit looked like shit any way
 44 2013-07-19 06:45:07 <Diablo-D3> they're still using them
 45 2013-07-19 06:45:12 <MC1984> duct tape and hot glue
 46 2013-07-19 06:45:46 <Diablo-D3> but I do know asicminer has sold several thousand USB sticks and over a hundred blades
 47 2013-07-19 06:45:54 <MC1984> and a nexus 7 stuck in the front for some reason toplel
 48 2013-07-19 06:45:56 <Diablo-D3> so they're in the lead for GH delivered
 49 2013-07-19 06:46:25 <MC1984> they bankrolled themselvs out the ass with the hosted mining op
 50 2013-07-19 06:46:34 <MC1984> selling sticks and blades is basically a hobby for them
 51 2013-07-19 06:47:04 <MC1984> one they never wanted to do in the first place i gather
 52 2013-07-19 06:47:21 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: not really
 53 2013-07-19 06:47:30 <Diablo-D3> they've made more money selling the asics than using them
 54 2013-07-19 06:47:50 <MC1984> sure have and it mostly goes back into the farm i think
 55 2013-07-19 06:48:13 <Diablo-D3> no
 56 2013-07-19 06:48:13 <MC1984> which fucks the earning potential of the stuff they just sold you
 57 2013-07-19 06:48:18 <Diablo-D3> they havent been growing the farm
 58 2013-07-19 06:48:23 <Diablo-D3> its still at 15th iirc
 59 2013-07-19 06:48:31 <warren> MC1984: Diablo-D3 has a conflict of interest in defending Asicminer, but I have to agree with him on this one.  It makes no sense to mine yourself when selling shovels is never unprofitable.
 60 2013-07-19 06:48:50 <MC1984> they dont mine themselves. pople pay them to mine
 61 2013-07-19 06:48:57 <Diablo-D3> warren: I dont have a conflict of interest because, frankly, I dont care what this channel thinks
 62 2013-07-19 06:49:03 <MC1984> then they pay some dividends and etc
 63 2013-07-19 06:49:08 <Diablo-D3> warren: also, I have also suggested avalon
 64 2013-07-19 06:49:20 <Diablo-D3> avalon has proven themselves by ACTUALLY SHIPPING A LARGE NUMBER OF UNITS
 65 2013-07-19 06:49:41 <Graet> after mining on them for a while
 66 2013-07-19 06:49:45 <MC1984> large number?
 67 2013-07-19 06:49:53 <Diablo-D3> 300+300+600
 68 2013-07-19 06:49:55 <warren> Diablo-D3: no one is denying that BFL has had ... issues.
 69 2013-07-19 06:50:02 <MC1984> couple of hundred of those 60g boxes
 70 2013-07-19 06:50:54 <Diablo-D3> actually
 71 2013-07-19 06:50:58 <Diablo-D3> has batch 3 shipped?
 72 2013-07-19 06:51:06 <Diablo-D3> because then it'd just be 300+300
 73 2013-07-19 07:05:18 <Graet> no batch3 yet
 74 2013-07-19 07:05:37 <Diablo-D3> then its just 600 * 68 gh
 75 2013-07-19 07:05:39 <Diablo-D3> ;;calc 600 * 68
 76 2013-07-19 07:05:39 <gribble> 40800
 77 2013-07-19 07:05:50 <Diablo-D3> ;;calc 40800 / 12
 78 2013-07-19 07:05:50 <gribble> 3400
 79 2013-07-19 07:05:57 <Diablo-D3> ;;calc 40800 / 333
 80 2013-07-19 07:05:57 <gribble> 122.522522523
 81 2013-07-19 07:06:00 <Diablo-D3> er
 82 2013-07-19 07:06:09 <Diablo-D3> ;;calc 40800 / 0.333
 83 2013-07-19 07:06:09 <gribble> 122522.522523
 84 2013-07-19 07:06:33 <Diablo-D3> hrm, I think avalon and asicminer might actually be tied for GH shipped
 85 2013-07-19 07:12:32 <Graet> with conmans firmware avalons are doing 80Gh
 86 2013-07-19 07:12:58 <Diablo-D3> Graet: neat
 87 2013-07-19 07:13:27 <Graet> :)
 88 2013-07-19 07:14:14 <warren> 80!? wow
 89 2013-07-19 07:15:31 <Diablo-D3> Ive requested the number of blades and sticks shipped
 90 2013-07-19 07:15:37 <Diablo-D3> but avalon might actually be in the lead for gh shipped
 91 2013-07-19 07:37:04 <gjs278> I have an avalon
 92 2013-07-19 07:37:06 <gjs278> it owns
 93 2013-07-19 07:38:19 <gjs278> I would gladly buy more asics but I can't find anything to buy that I trust yet
 94 2013-07-19 07:41:14 <gjs278> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=258341.0
 95 2013-07-19 07:41:16 <gjs278> lol
 96 2013-07-19 07:41:19 <gjs278> a company promising not to ship
 97 2013-07-19 07:41:27 <gjs278> they don't have to do that, it's assumed they will never ship
 98 2013-07-19 07:43:55 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: just wait until asicminer ships 28nm
 99 2013-07-19 07:45:46 <gjs278> what are they selling now, just those usb sticks or do they have an asic store beyond that?
100 2013-07-19 07:46:29 <Diablo-D3> they sell blades too
101 2013-07-19 07:46:32 <Diablo-D3> but in smaller numbers
102 2013-07-19 07:46:44 <Diablo-D3> they're both the same 130nm chips though
103 2013-07-19 07:46:45 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: ahh, ok
104 2013-07-19 07:50:11 <TD> gavinandresen is awake?
105 2013-07-19 07:50:30 <BlueMatt> no, but I was responding to a message from hours ago
106 2013-07-19 07:50:33 <Diablo-D3> lol.
107 2013-07-19 07:50:43 <TD> doh
108 2013-07-19 07:50:47 <TD> well it's evening time in oz
109 2013-07-19 07:53:49 <sipa> they're always ahead of ys
110 2013-07-19 07:53:58 <sipa> that's unacceptable!
111 2013-07-19 07:54:24 <Diablo-D3> well
112 2013-07-19 07:54:28 <Diablo-D3> its the australium
113 2013-07-19 07:54:38 <fanquake> 5:50pm west coast and 7:50pm east coast atm
114 2013-07-19 07:54:46 <Diablo-D3> makes guys good looking, muscly, gives them mustaches, and also warps time
115 2013-07-19 07:57:02 <Supa> Hi there
116 2013-07-19 07:58:42 <fanquake> Diablo-D3 moustaches are only for november :p
117 2013-07-19 07:59:03 <Diablo-D3> fanquake: real men wear them all year round.
118 2013-07-19 07:59:11 <Graet> ^^
119 2013-07-19 07:59:18 <Supa> real men's mustaches a re beards
120 2013-07-19 07:59:35 <Diablo-D3> Supa: well
121 2013-07-19 07:59:42 <Diablo-D3> I think my beard got out of hand
122 2013-07-19 07:59:54 <Diablo-D3> Im bordering on RMS proportions
123 2013-07-19 07:59:57 <fanquake> Diablo-D3 I guess I'm just not manly enough then ahah.
124 2013-07-19 08:00:16 <Supa> wouldn't doubt it lots of testosterone filled rage banning all my alts on Bitcoin Talk xD
125 2013-07-19 08:02:34 <TD> "I just realized that right now, the hash rate increases more per hour than it was in total in November 2010, when I first mined..."   --sipa
126 2013-07-19 08:02:35 <TD> lol
127 2013-07-19 08:02:43 <Diablo-D3> that
128 2013-07-19 08:02:44 <Diablo-D3> what
129 2013-07-19 08:02:49 <Diablo-D3> what.
130 2013-07-19 08:02:50 <BlueMatt> finally
131 2013-07-19 08:02:54 <Diablo-D3> that
132 2013-07-19 08:02:57 <Diablo-D3> thats impossible
133 2013-07-19 08:03:14 <Diablo-D3> thats improbable
134 2013-07-19 08:03:18 <Diablo-D3> ACTION gets a calculator
135 2013-07-19 08:03:28 <TD> i remember talking about the possibility of large GPU farms with satoshi in 2009 as a far off, barely imaginable possibility that might be commonplace when we were both old men
136 2013-07-19 08:03:29 <TD> haha
137 2013-07-19 08:03:30 <Diablo-D3> I think he might be right =/
138 2013-07-19 08:03:38 <Diablo-D3> TD: dude
139 2013-07-19 08:03:48 <Diablo-D3> I remember saying someone should go start manufacturing ASICs
140 2013-07-19 08:03:49 <Diablo-D3> and everyone was like
141 2013-07-19 08:03:54 <Diablo-D3> wtf is an ASIC, do we look chinese to you
142 2013-07-19 08:03:57 <BlueMatt> (except ArtForz)
143 2013-07-19 08:03:57 <TD> and now there are ASIC farms. perhaps we'll see datacenters of ASICs being built next to wind farms not so long from now
144 2013-07-19 08:04:05 <Diablo-D3> BlueMatt: I miss him
145 2013-07-19 08:04:05 <TD> yeah. artforz was crazy
146 2013-07-19 08:04:06 <gjs278> is artforz dead
147 2013-07-19 08:04:12 <Diablo-D3> he was fucking awesome
148 2013-07-19 08:04:15 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: no
149 2013-07-19 08:04:19 <BlueMatt> gjs278: no, he contributes to one of the altcoins or something
150 2013-07-19 08:04:22 <BlueMatt> or...somewhere
151 2013-07-19 08:04:28 <BlueMatt> I know I once found him lurking somewhere
152 2013-07-19 08:04:34 <Diablo-D3> he retired to his private Caribbean island
153 2013-07-19 08:04:46 <BlueMatt> right next to satoshi
154 2013-07-19 08:05:13 <Supa> my boss should his his BFL Supercomputer soon
155 2013-07-19 08:05:16 <gjs278> he spends all day in the btc-e chat telling people to pump and dump china coin under fake usernames
156 2013-07-19 08:05:33 <Supa> he traded in his 250 BFL Singles
157 2013-07-19 08:05:35 <Diablo-D3> Supa: soon != 2 years
158 2013-07-19 08:05:41 <Supa> ya
159 2013-07-19 08:05:50 <Supa> lucky bastard has a batch 1 avalon though
160 2013-07-19 08:05:55 <Diablo-D3> heh fuck him
161 2013-07-19 08:06:07 <Supa> no shit
162 2013-07-19 08:06:16 <Supa> talked to him about Primecoin
163 2013-07-19 08:06:21 <Supa> man was that a bad idea
164 2013-07-19 08:06:41 <Supa> has this really pissed off look on his face
165 2013-07-19 08:06:43 <Diablo-D3> ACTION does not see the point of an altcoin
166 2013-07-19 08:06:56 <Supa> then tells me his business partner is DigitalOcean
167 2013-07-19 08:07:00 <Diablo-D3> they keep forking the goddamned bitcoin source
168 2013-07-19 08:07:00 <Supa> I was like omfg...
169 2013-07-19 08:07:04 <Diablo-D3> Supa: ARGH
170 2013-07-19 08:07:08 <Diablo-D3> goddamnitsomuch
171 2013-07-19 08:07:13 <Diablo-D3> ACTION fucking HATES digital ocean
172 2013-07-19 08:07:19 <Supa> I was like wow
173 2013-07-19 08:07:27 <Supa> talk to him about mining on the free vps
174 2013-07-19 08:07:32 <Supa> he got SOOOOO pissed
175 2013-07-19 08:07:38 <gjs278> the point of altcoins is merged mining and selling them for bitcoins
176 2013-07-19 08:07:38 <Supa> cause he gets in shit too
177 2013-07-19 08:08:25 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: yeah pretty much
178 2013-07-19 08:08:32 <Diablo-D3> its sure as hell not for actual currency purposes
179 2013-07-19 08:08:43 <c0rw1n> the point of altcoins is solving different problems, or none
180 2013-07-19 08:08:53 <c0rw1n> namecoin, now that's useful
181 2013-07-19 08:08:54 <gjs278> every altcoin is a pump and dump
182 2013-07-19 08:09:32 <Diablo-D3> yeah like
183 2013-07-19 08:09:35 <Diablo-D3> if I did an altcoin
184 2013-07-19 08:09:43 <Diablo-D3> the problem I would solve is THE BITCOIN SOURCE SUCKS
185 2013-07-19 08:09:51 <jchp> yes for example, the point of primecoin is to make RSA worthless by creating financial incentive for finding primes quickly thereby endangering anyone who has ever sent a PGP message /s
186 2013-07-19 08:09:59 <gjs278> my altcoin would literally just be a non broken makefile
187 2013-07-19 08:10:02 <Diablo-D3> but I just really dont want to tackle that problem
188 2013-07-19 08:10:34 <Diablo-D3> like, goddamnitsomuch crypto
189 2013-07-19 08:11:09 <TD> primecoin doesn't find primes, exactly
190 2013-07-19 08:11:20 <Diablo-D3> it finds chains of primes
191 2013-07-19 08:11:41 <TD> it finds "prime chains". almost but not quite the same thing
192 2013-07-19 08:11:57 <Diablo-D3> it finds lists of primes that have magic properties.
193 2013-07-19 08:12:39 <jchp> yeah :-P exaggerating, hence the /sarcasm
194 2013-07-19 08:13:14 <Supa> hmmmm pump and dumps
195 2013-07-19 08:13:16 <Supa> "drools"
196 2013-07-19 08:13:26 <Diablo-D3> man, I wonder if its possible to do all the crypto in bitcoin using off the shelf software
197 2013-07-19 08:13:30 <Supa> imaginaryly generated money is so awesome
198 2013-07-19 08:13:44 <Supa> imaginarily*
199 2013-07-19 08:15:02 <sipa> TD: yesterday i realized that the hashrate increase per hour is now higher than the total it was in januari 2011
200 2013-07-19 08:15:34 <sipa> Diablo-D3: is openssl 'off the shelf' ?
201 2013-07-19 08:16:50 <Diablo-D3> sipa: I think so
202 2013-07-19 08:21:03 <gjs278> I'm only using dragonflybsd from now on
203 2013-07-19 08:21:09 <gjs278> you bros can be jelly my hammerfs
204 2013-07-19 08:24:05 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: "hammerfs: the file system is my penis"
205 2013-07-19 08:24:13 <c0rw1n> lulz
206 2013-07-19 08:33:37 <bmcgee> Hi all, I need some advice on integration testing a pool server with a miner. I'm using the testnet, and I've fixed the target in the block template to max to encourage some real submissions. I only have a little mac mini to run the miner on, get in the order of khash/s which isn't good enough. Is there anything else I can do to encourage some submissions?
207 2013-07-19 08:36:26 <SomeoneWeird> setup a separate blockchain and mine on that, then you'll be able to mine all the blocks
208 2013-07-19 08:37:11 <bmcgee> SomeoneWeird: how would I go about doing that?
209 2013-07-19 08:37:20 <gribble> freewil/bitcoin-testnet-box ?? GitHub: <https://github.com/freewil/bitcoin-testnet-box>; Testnet in a box - Bitcoin Forum: <https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4483.0>; Bitcoin - Browse /Bitcoin/testnet-in-a-box at SourceForge.net: <http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/testnet-in-a-box/>
210 2013-07-19 08:37:20 <SomeoneWeird> ;;google testnet in a box
211 2013-07-19 08:37:26 <SomeoneWeird> ^
212 2013-07-19 08:37:42 <bmcgee> thx guys, i'll have a look
213 2013-07-19 08:40:54 <bmcgee> stupid question, but since I have my pool server hardcoded to set the block template target to difficulty 1, how is that different to using the testnet in a box? Have i not already made things as easy as possible for the miner?
214 2013-07-19 09:43:47 <Eliel_> bmcgee: as I understand it, yes, that's as easy as it gets
215 2013-07-19 10:26:54 <SomeoneWeird> lol github is down
216 2013-07-19 10:40:19 <joeykrim> SomeoneWeird, yea, status says massive outage due to DDoS :x
217 2013-07-19 11:04:55 <t7> who would ddos github ?
218 2013-07-19 11:05:34 <t7> my only gripe with github is they dont opensource alot of their own clients and stuff which are built on mostly open libraries and components
219 2013-07-19 11:05:35 <Diablo-D3> why.jpg
220 2013-07-19 11:05:44 <t7> but at the same time i d opay them $5 a month
221 2013-07-19 11:05:53 <Diablo-D3> t7: because their shit also interacts with the enterprise shit
222 2013-07-19 11:06:04 <Diablo-D3> and thats how they feed themselves and can afford to host our shit for free
223 2013-07-19 11:06:11 <Diablo-D3> its a worthwhile trade
224 2013-07-19 11:06:14 <t7> no i pay them for that
225 2013-07-19 11:06:23 <Diablo-D3> ahh
226 2013-07-19 11:06:23 <Diablo-D3> I dont
227 2013-07-19 11:06:31 <Diablo-D3> none of my projects are popular enough to require that
228 2013-07-19 11:06:42 <SomeoneWeird> if you need to host private stuff, use bitbucket
229 2013-07-19 11:06:46 <t7> mine either but i clone loads of others
230 2013-07-19 11:06:50 <SomeoneWeird> } else { github() }
231 2013-07-19 11:07:04 <Habbie> SomeoneWeird, paying github $7/month easily beats using two sites, for us
232 2013-07-19 11:07:26 <SomeoneWeird> Habbie, yeah ofc it just depends on what you're doing
233 2013-07-19 11:07:55 <Habbie> github has 100 public repos
234 2013-07-19 11:07:57 <Habbie> that's impressive
235 2013-07-19 11:08:27 <Diablo-D3> heh
236 2013-07-19 11:08:40 <Diablo-D3> netflix has quite a few too
237 2013-07-19 11:08:42 <Luke-Jr> ??? just 100?
238 2013-07-19 11:08:53 <Diablo-D3> Luke-Jr: ...
239 2013-07-19 11:08:54 <Habbie> Luke-Jr, from github -themselves-, yes
240 2013-07-19 11:08:57 <Luke-Jr> oh
241 2013-07-19 11:08:58 <Diablo-D3> ACTION facepalms
242 2013-07-19 11:09:06 <Diablo-D3> ACTION doublefacepalms
243 2013-07-19 11:09:21 <t7> mosaic face palms .jpg
244 2013-07-19 11:09:23 <iwilcox> You have two faces?
245 2013-07-19 11:09:31 <Diablo-D3> no, I have two palms
246 2013-07-19 11:09:41 <Luke-Jr> Habbie: how many of them are actual github projects, and not just "forks" with trivial changes? <.<
247 2013-07-19 11:09:46 <Diablo-D3> ACTION facepalms iwilcox 
248 2013-07-19 11:10:37 <Habbie> Luke-Jr, more than half, it seems
249 2013-07-19 11:10:52 <Diablo-D3> what I dont get is
250 2013-07-19 11:11:02 <Diablo-D3> github hosts the most distributed fault tolerant software in the world
251 2013-07-19 11:11:03 <Diablo-D3> yet
252 2013-07-19 11:11:07 <Diablo-D3> github goes down
253 2013-07-19 11:11:18 <Diablo-D3> HOW DOES THAT WORK
254 2013-07-19 11:11:21 <Habbie> you're confusing git, the protocol
255 2013-07-19 11:11:30 <Habbie> with hosting git with a webinterface, which is a service
256 2013-07-19 11:11:36 <Diablo-D3> Habbie: erm, no?
257 2013-07-19 11:11:53 <Habbie> well let's go at this differently
258 2013-07-19 11:11:56 <Diablo-D3> almost all the projects Im thinking of I know for a fact host on github
259 2013-07-19 11:11:58 <Habbie> what do you propose they change
260 2013-07-19 11:12:06 <Habbie> so that they can practically stay up during ddos?
261 2013-07-19 11:12:33 <Diablo-D3> they use a lot of RoR
262 2013-07-19 11:12:33 <Diablo-D3> well
263 2013-07-19 11:12:39 <Diablo-D3> and SOME erlang, but clearly not enough
264 2013-07-19 11:12:55 <Diablo-D3> Habbie: well
265 2013-07-19 11:12:59 <Diablo-D3> if they knew what they were doing
266 2013-07-19 11:13:05 <Diablo-D3> they wouldnt even notice a ddos
267 2013-07-19 11:13:20 <Habbie> oh, they don't know what they're doing
268 2013-07-19 11:13:23 <Habbie> i did not realise that
269 2013-07-19 11:13:27 <Habbie> [sarcasm sign]
270 2013-07-19 11:13:31 <Diablo-D3> sometimes I question their competency, yes.
271 2013-07-19 11:14:23 <Diablo-D3> seriously, a rack full of microclouds and two 100gbit/sec lines to the outside world
272 2013-07-19 11:14:38 <Diablo-D3> and then do that again in another DC
273 2013-07-19 11:14:47 <Diablo-D3> like to see a ddos drop that.
274 2013-07-19 11:16:28 <Luke-Jr> I've seen DDoSes drop entire datacenters???
275 2013-07-19 11:17:12 <Diablo-D3> Luke-Jr: very shitty ones, yes
276 2013-07-19 11:17:26 <Habbie> bandwidth is hardly interesting in terms of DDoS
277 2013-07-19 11:17:36 <Luke-Jr> well, two 100 Gbit lines wouldn't save you
278 2013-07-19 11:17:38 <Habbie> Diablo-D3, i get the distinct feeling you're not speaking from experience
279 2013-07-19 11:18:03 <Diablo-D3> Habbie: I have the distinct feeling you don't realize what 2 racks of microclouds can do.
280 2013-07-19 11:18:35 <Diablo-D3> Luke-Jr: no, but four probably would.
281 2013-07-19 11:18:36 <Habbie> two 100gbit lines will start to save you when you have routers to go with it - that can filter usefully at 200 million packets per second
282 2013-07-19 11:19:29 <Diablo-D3> Habbie: cisco makes such gear.
283 2013-07-19 11:19:29 <Habbie> Diablo-D3, supermicro microcloud?
284 2013-07-19 11:19:33 <Diablo-D3> yes, supermicro
285 2013-07-19 11:20:31 <Habbie> microcloud does not seem very magical apart from being pretty high density
286 2013-07-19 11:20:52 <Diablo-D3> thats the point.
287 2013-07-19 11:21:47 <Diablo-D3> 168 haswell e3-1200s in 42U.
288 2013-07-19 11:29:36 <t7> are those arm super cluster 2U units ever gonna arive
289 2013-07-19 11:46:13 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: ping
290 2013-07-19 11:46:45 <ThomasV> the bip32 test vector contains the following derivation: [Chain m/0'/1/2'/2]
291 2013-07-19 11:47:06 <ThomasV> this means private-> public -> private
292 2013-07-19 11:47:15 <sipa> ThomasV: correct
293 2013-07-19 11:47:43 <ThomasV> so I assule that in order to do the 2' derivation, I need to have done 1' before
294 2013-07-19 11:47:49 <ThomasV> *assume*
295 2013-07-19 11:47:54 <sipa> no?
296 2013-07-19 11:47:56 <ThomasV> or am I missing something
297 2013-07-19 11:48:26 <sipa> there's perhaps some confusion between type-1 and type-2 derivation, and public and private derivation
298 2013-07-19 11:48:49 <sipa> /n' means you use type-1 derivation, which is only possible if you have the parent private extended key
299 2013-07-19 11:49:05 <ThomasV> exactly
300 2013-07-19 11:49:08 <sipa> /n means you use type-2 derivation, which is possible both when you have the parent private or public extended key
301 2013-07-19 11:49:23 <sipa> but /n' and /n are distinctly different keys
302 2013-07-19 11:49:35 <sipa> /n' is not the public form corresponding to /n
303 2013-07-19 11:49:42 <ThomasV> right
304 2013-07-19 11:49:47 <ThomasV> ok, thanks sipa
305 2013-07-19 11:51:29 <ThomasV> sipa: btw, did you think about adding a recommendation on which bip32 sequences numbers should be reserved for multisig?
306 2013-07-19 11:53:33 <sipa> that's up to the client, imho
307 2013-07-19 11:53:53 <sipa> i don't mind adding a recommendation, but i haven't thought about it
308 2013-07-19 12:34:16 <jgarzik> mornin'
309 2013-07-19 12:49:57 <gmaxwell> ::sigh::
310 2013-07-19 12:49:59 <gmaxwell> https://blog.conformal.com/btcchain-the-bitcoin-chain-package-from-bctd/
311 2013-07-19 12:50:28 <gmaxwell> I wonder what weird for of nature confers stealth power to bluematt's block tester, even after people are explicitly pointed to it?
312 2013-07-19 12:54:38 <petertodd> I'll bet you even if ref-bitcoind was a lovely little modular library just waiting for you to integrate it into your bigger framework people would still rewrite the fucking thing every time.
313 2013-07-19 12:54:50 <petertodd> Human nature.
314 2013-07-19 12:56:42 <sipa> perhaps if bitcoind (or whatever there was instead) would be split up into a "p2p verification node" and wallet nodes connected to it, people wouldn't consider rewriting everything at once the natural thing to do
315 2013-07-19 12:57:07 <BlueMatt> sipa: can we just remove all wallet code in bitcoind completely
316 2013-07-19 12:57:10 <BlueMatt> and remove bitcoin-qt
317 2013-07-19 12:57:33 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: I actually paid a wizard to make it invisible to muggles
318 2013-07-19 12:58:28 <TD> i believe the lack of documentation on basically everything developer related won't help with that.
319 2013-07-19 12:58:39 <TD> i believe the block tester tool is documented on the bitcoinj website and nowhere else
320 2013-07-19 12:58:45 <TD> no wizards required ...
321 2013-07-19 12:59:09 <BlueMatt> wait...you wrote docs for it?
322 2013-07-19 12:59:59 <TD> oh, maybe i didn't actually. i think it might be mentioned in the full verification mode doc.
323 2013-07-19 13:00:03 <TD> but now i don't recall.
324 2013-07-19 13:00:07 <TD> so probably there are no docs at all
325 2013-07-19 13:02:27 <gmaxwell> sipa: I'm pretty sure petertodd is right with the human nature part. There will always be an excuse. ... but that doesn't mean that doing things like that wouldn't help.
326 2013-07-19 13:03:11 <BlueMatt> hmm... 0.10 BTC bounty for anyone who wants to go through the blocks at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=46370.msg577556#msg577556 and either integrate them in https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/test-scripts or add all of the tested cases to the bitcoinj test tool (or prove that they are already there)
327 2013-07-19 13:03:35 <BlueMatt> NIH syndrome is faaaar too powerful
328 2013-07-19 13:04:08 <BlueMatt> actually 0.01 BTC for each new useful block in the bitcoinj test tool
329 2013-07-19 13:04:49 <sipa> gmaxwell: i can't deny that i myself would like to rewrite it from scratch even :p
330 2013-07-19 13:04:54 <gmaxwell> Yep. "It's but it's not wrtten in COBOL! And Fooze Corp all our software is enterprize cobol, anything less is not business grade!" :P
331 2013-07-19 13:05:14 <jgarzik> huh
332 2013-07-19 13:05:28 <jgarzik> ACTION learns OP_CODESEPARATOR history from TD @ https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=255145.msg2760786#msg2760786
333 2013-07-19 13:05:30 <gmaxwell> sipa: it's not even the content of the software, people like to program. :P
334 2013-07-19 13:05:30 <TD> rewriting code is fun. you always think ..... This Time It Will Be DIFFERENT!
335 2013-07-19 13:05:53 <iwilcox> Then along come users and ruin it.
336 2013-07-19 13:06:34 <sipa> jgarzik: afaik it was roconnor even that discovered that, in git (=svn) history
337 2013-07-19 13:06:54 <TD> "rediscovered", i guess
338 2013-07-19 13:06:57 <sipa> yeah
339 2013-07-19 13:07:01 <sipa> i'm sure it was known before
340 2013-07-19 13:07:09 <sipa> TD: the nice thing about rewriting code is that you always understand the entirety of the codebase
341 2013-07-19 13:07:33 <sipa> except for the fact that it most likely doesn't work at all, untill you've reached similar levels of complexity as the code you were rewriting
342 2013-07-19 13:07:54 <petertodd> gmaxwell: The problem is writing a library to implement Bitcoin is actually really easy, no fancy comp-sci required, except for that pesky consensus part.
343 2013-07-19 13:07:57 <TD> or you get bored and then someone else has to  maintain it
344 2013-07-19 13:08:43 <lianj> but since op_return returns invalid script today, is not running them separately still a security hole?
345 2013-07-19 13:08:45 <jgarzik> speaking of NIH, my SPV wallet is coming along.  Should be able to watch-only in the next couple of days.  https://github.com/gasteve/node-libcoin + https://github.com/jgarzik/wally     tl;dr a bitcoinjs-server cleanup, so not from-scratch.
346 2013-07-19 13:09:05 <TD> cool. though ..... javascript :/
347 2013-07-19 13:09:06 <TD> <sigh>
348 2013-07-19 13:09:07 <lianj> s/not//
349 2013-07-19 13:09:14 <jgarzik> hehe
350 2013-07-19 13:09:43 <petertodd> TD: jgarzik is just pissed that he had to s/tabs/spaces/ in his python library
351 2013-07-19 13:09:45 <TD> it's like people deliberately say,   "ahhh yes. financial software in which a high degree of correctness, security and performance is essential"
352 2013-07-19 13:09:50 <lianj> oh no, not was right. question is, is run(scriptSig+scriptPubKey) ok again?
353 2013-07-19 13:09:56 <jgarzik> BitPay is enamored of node.js and Google v8.  I'm still a C programmer at heart.
354 2013-07-19 13:09:57 <petertodd> lianj: no
355 2013-07-19 13:10:07 <jgarzik> At least v8 runs JS at near-native speed ;p
356 2013-07-19 13:10:15 <lianj> petertodd: why?
357 2013-07-19 13:10:17 <TD> "i will use a single threaded language with no static analysis tools at all, in which the best compilers are several multiples slower than other languages"
358 2013-07-19 13:10:41 <petertodd> lianj: First of all, the ref client doesn't do that, and secondly the basic idea is unsound and just leads to having to go on bug hunts.
359 2013-07-19 13:10:50 <jgarzik> TD, that drives me crazy about python and JS both: what if I _want_ to annotate my types, for better static checking and optimization?
360 2013-07-19 13:11:01 <jgarzik> You can see the results in cython
361 2013-07-19 13:11:06 <TD> jgarzik: well with JS you can and should .... use the closure compiler. it's what we do in google
362 2013-07-19 13:11:16 <TD> basically all javascript has to be type annotated and used with the jscompiler
363 2013-07-19 13:11:22 <TD> we don't really use it as a dynamic language at all
364 2013-07-19 13:11:40 <lianj> petertodd: hm ok, but so its not proven to be a security issue
365 2013-07-19 13:11:47 <TD> the result looks more like an ugly, weird form of java but at least you can have several hundred people share a codebase and it doesn't immediately disintegrate
366 2013-07-19 13:11:48 <petertodd> jgarzik: Yup, and people have also written type-checking libraries for interpreted python as well - which really shows you how ludicriously flexible Python can be.
367 2013-07-19 13:12:00 <petertodd> lianj: not proven, but boy does it smell bad...
368 2013-07-19 13:12:41 <sipa> it must be eval(scriptSig + OP_CODESEPARATOR + scriptPubKey) by the way
369 2013-07-19 13:12:42 <lianj> i don't really see why, if it shares the stack anyway
370 2013-07-19 13:12:52 <sipa> and i'm sure it'll interact funnily with P2SH
371 2013-07-19 13:13:09 <TD> lianj: only the return code of the scriptPubKey matters
372 2013-07-19 13:13:14 <TD> lianj: previously it was all just one program
373 2013-07-19 13:13:17 <TD> kind of fundamental ...
374 2013-07-19 13:13:23 <petertodd> lianj: Point is, why should it do anything other than just share the stack?
375 2013-07-19 13:13:32 <sipa> i don't know why it wouldn't work today
376 2013-07-19 13:13:46 <sipa> modulo weird OP_CODESEPs in your code, and P2SH
377 2013-07-19 13:14:05 <sipa> but there is no way to make scriptSig return before scriptPubKey starts executing now
378 2013-07-19 13:14:13 <sipa> though perhaps with OP_IF you can do something ugly...
379 2013-07-19 13:14:32 <sipa> anyway, i wouldn't bother trying
380 2013-07-19 13:14:40 <gmaxwell> sipa: requires correct OP_CODESEP implementation...
381 2013-07-19 13:14:46 <petertodd> sipa: Only if the scriptPubKey has unmatched OP_ELSE/ENDIFs
382 2013-07-19 13:15:38 <petertodd> More generally, the reason why prunable is defined with OP_RETURN first is so that we don't lock ourselves into not being able to do OP_RETURN_TRUE later.
383 2013-07-19 13:15:45 <petertodd> (well, one reason)
384 2013-07-19 13:17:20 <lianj> is confused now, but thanks :D
385 2013-07-19 13:18:19 <petertodd> lianj: I'll admit the amount of special-purpose jargon we've come up with is frightening.
386 2013-07-19 13:18:42 <jgarzik> I hate OP_IF :)
387 2013-07-19 13:18:50 <jgarzik> having implemented it twice now
388 2013-07-19 13:18:52 <lianj> can you explain "prunable is defined with OP_RETURN first", guess i missed that
389 2013-07-19 13:19:21 <jgarzik> lianj, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2791
390 2013-07-19 13:19:46 <petertodd> jgarzik: I love OP_IF, because of all the cool things it could do enable if only the scripting language didn't suck...
391 2013-07-19 13:21:31 <lianj> jgarzik: thanks, but if OP_RETURN makes the script invalid anyway, it clear that its unspendable. so this patch doesn't really redefine op_return, but only applies it to prunable db thinking
392 2013-07-19 13:21:42 <gmaxwell> lianj: OP_RETURN_TRUE OP_RETURN   would be spendable and thus non-prunable.
393 2013-07-19 13:22:07 <gmaxwell> potentially, if ever such a beast were made.
394 2013-07-19 13:22:39 <lianj> gmaxwell: how, if https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script states OP_RETURN = Marks transaction as invalid.  or did this change in code
395 2013-07-19 13:23:14 <jgarzik> lianj, I think that's a case of poor wording
396 2013-07-19 13:23:25 <jgarzik> on the wiki
397 2013-07-19 13:24:37 <lianj> ok, todo for me execute them seperatly and look at the actual code for op_return again. :)
398 2013-07-19 13:28:03 <lianj> op_return it returns false, and op_return_first doesn't exist
399 2013-07-19 13:28:23 <lianj> don't get me wrong, im sure you guys are right. just trying to follow
400 2013-07-19 13:29:33 <lianj> eh s/op_return_first/op_return_true/
401 2013-07-19 13:30:31 <gmaxwell> lianj: right, and potentially someday an OP_RETURN_TRUE is added (which of course carefully checks the context). Someone adds it to your codebase, and then because of how you've implemented unrelated things the world ends.
402 2013-07-19 13:31:46 <gmaxwell> You can say that taking care of that is a responsibility of the person adding OP_RETURN_TRUE but: it's bad to create traps, and If you've pruned that data (because you didn't define prunable to require return in the first position) then it could be very hard to incrementally fix nodes.
403 2013-07-19 13:34:24 <lianj> true. guess i don't care too much about purne so haven't seen it from that angle. thanks
404 2013-07-19 13:51:47 <petertodd> lianj: the patch isn't about making scripts unspendable, it's about deciding on a canonical way to do so
405 2013-07-19 14:08:06 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: Perhaps you'd like to comment: https://blog.conformal.com/btcchain-the-bitcoin-chain-package-from-bctd/#comment-180
406 2013-07-19 14:16:02 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: yea
407 2013-07-19 14:16:14 <BlueMatt> will do
408 2013-07-19 14:29:30 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: Who are those people?
409 2013-07-19 14:30:31 <gmaxwell> Unclear. The only exposure I'd had to them prior to this stuff is one of their engineers showed up here complaining about the bitcoin unit tests failing on their openbsd fork.
410 2013-07-19 14:31:04 <gmaxwell> (Ultimately because their rand() only returned even numbers and coin selection used the least significant bit of rand() in the solver)
411 2013-07-19 14:31:32 <gmaxwell> They seem more professional than some other people who've worked on alternative implementations, so thats good.
412 2013-07-19 14:59:03 <mhanne> how much utxo space does this pruning of provably-unspendable outputs save?
413 2013-07-19 14:59:18 <petertodd> mhanne: pretty much zero now
414 2013-07-19 14:59:26 <petertodd> mhanne: it's more for the future
415 2013-07-19 14:59:46 <mhanne> ah ok. i'd have been surprised..
416 2013-07-19 15:00:35 <gmaxwell> mhanne: in the past we've encouraged people who needed an extra output to use spendable ones...
417 2013-07-19 15:00:35 <mhanne> is there as upcoming usecase that is expected to produce many of these outputs?
418 2013-07-19 15:00:47 <sipa> mhanne: up to a few weeks ago, 0
419 2013-07-19 15:00:54 <sipa> in the main chain
420 2013-07-19 15:01:07 <gmaxwell> e.g. p2pool used to use an anyone can spend output for its sharechain binder.
421 2013-07-19 15:01:20 <sipa> in testnet there have been OP_RETURNS for a while
422 2013-07-19 15:01:24 <gmaxwell> Now it uses an OP_RETURN, specifically because this functionality was upcoming.
423 2013-07-19 15:01:39 <mhanne> gmaxwell: ah, nice
424 2013-07-19 15:03:34 <jgarzik> Nice to see someone building an off-chain gambling competitor to on-chain SatoshiDICE: http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-gambler-cheats-satoshidice-competitor-just-dice-out-of-1300-btc/
425 2013-07-19 15:05:58 <petertodd> jgarzik: satoshiroulet already did that
426 2013-07-19 15:06:44 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: It might be interesting to discover their origins. Non-homogeneous client populations are good, unless it's a douchey political move in which case SHUN
427 2013-07-19 15:07:03 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: it's more complicated than that.
428 2013-07-19 15:07:55 <sipa> gmaxwell: did that kojo guy actually continue ranting that we needed to set a standard rather than coding?
429 2013-07-19 15:07:59 <sipa> ...
430 2013-07-19 15:08:17 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: We have a consensus system. Our value is derrived almost exclusively from nodes behaving _exactly_ the same in the important ways. Verifying identical behavior is really hard even when you're super vigilant.  What is the optimal diversity / consistent risk tradeoff?  Hard question.
431 2013-07-19 15:08:59 <petertodd> jgarzik: So how long until distributed fidelity bonded bitcointalk, so kojo can pay for his rants?
432 2013-07-19 15:09:06 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: there are also other costs: For example, there are many services which _still_ will not let people pay to P2SH addresses. :(
433 2013-07-19 15:09:12 <jgarzik> hah
434 2013-07-19 15:09:36 <petertodd> gmaxwell: ...and mike's been ranting about P2SH lately and how he won't add it to bitcoinj
435 2013-07-19 15:09:46 <jgarzik> distributed forum software is way down on the priority list -- though identity+P2P flood fill is doable in short term
436 2013-07-19 15:09:51 <gmaxwell> petertodd: what??
437 2013-07-19 15:10:03 <jgarzik> yeah, saw that
438 2013-07-19 15:10:08 <gmaxwell> please don't tell me that multibit can't pay to a p2sh address.
439 2013-07-19 15:10:20 <gmaxwell> (... I didn't even think to test that. :( )
440 2013-07-19 15:10:30 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Probably not
441 2013-07-19 15:11:22 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Mike's anti-P2SH rant is why jdillon offered a bounty to ban everything but p2sh and pubkeyhash...
442 2013-07-19 15:11:24 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: so more diversity creates a multiplicative cost in moving the ecosystem forward.
443 2013-07-19 15:11:56 <petertodd> gmaxwell: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=216982.msg2669417#msg2669417
444 2013-07-19 15:13:07 <sipa> :(
445 2013-07-19 15:13:12 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: I'm presuming all those kinds of issues will just be solved, or forced to be solved when majority hash goes one way or the other. Mostly I'm curious as to *why* they're building that client.
446 2013-07-19 15:14:36 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: you can't resolve well split hardforking problems with hashpower. (well excepting in that you get an enormous reorg when the more restrictive side gives up, and you get a massive reorg that potentially gets people robbed) :(
447 2013-07-19 15:15:15 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: they said they were because they had problems running bitcoind on their openbsd fork and they were unimpressed by it.
448 2013-07-19 15:15:23 <petertodd> midnightmagic: Keep in mind that at some point large re-orgs fail due to memory limits.
449 2013-07-19 15:15:27 <jgarzik> huh
450 2013-07-19 15:15:30 <jgarzik> I missed Hal's reply
451 2013-07-19 15:15:52 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: hm?
452 2013-07-19 15:15:55 <petertodd> midnightmagic: Hashing power splits are ugly for so many reasons...
453 2013-07-19 15:16:05 <jgarzik> gmaxwell, on the thread petertodd just linked
454 2013-07-19 15:16:13 <midnightmagic> petertodd: bring it, my machine has 128GB RAM! lol
455 2013-07-19 15:16:38 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: yea. :)
456 2013-07-19 15:16:56 <midnightmagic> ACTION suddenly wants to spend a p2sh tx into mainline
457 2013-07-19 15:17:14 <petertodd> midnightmagic: huh? p2sh is used...
458 2013-07-19 15:17:32 <midnightmagic> what happens when bitcoinj encounters it, if it doesn't support them "at all"?
459 2013-07-19 15:17:51 <petertodd> midnightmagic: 3LejWS17n4s7NpGbpkifBBVpfNp473zCW5 is an example
460 2013-07-19 15:17:53 <midnightmagic> or does it just not verify their correctness.
461 2013-07-19 15:18:04 <lianj> midnightmagic: nothing as its backward compatible
462 2013-07-19 15:18:06 <jgarzik> midnightmagic, probably just means they are invisible to those wallets
463 2013-07-19 15:18:11 <petertodd> midnightmagic: bitcoinj has code to handle them in the chain, but the much easier code to make addresses and stuff isn't there
464 2013-07-19 15:18:20 <midnightmagic> ah
465 2013-07-19 15:18:23 <petertodd> midnightmagic: Sad, because that's like 10 lines...
466 2013-07-19 15:18:28 <lianj> midnightmagic: i simply doesn't eval he inner script
467 2013-07-19 15:18:37 <lianj> *it
468 2013-07-19 15:19:20 <midnightmagic> so really it does support them.
469 2013-07-19 15:19:43 <petertodd> midnightmagic: Incompletely, and the important bit is left out.
470 2013-07-19 15:20:46 <lianj> it doesn't know abou the inner script, so if the inner one would return false it wouldn't know and still think its valid
471 2013-07-19 15:21:08 <midnightmagic> bitcoinj isn't used for mining though is it.
472 2013-07-19 15:21:19 <sipa> i hope not
473 2013-07-19 15:21:36 <petertodd> midnightmagic: Exactly, which is why the p2sh code in it is pretty much useless, yet it leaves out the tiny bit of client code that is useful.
474 2013-07-19 15:21:41 <midnightmagic> I thought I understood a pool was using it somewhere.  Hrm..  now I can't find the log.
475 2013-07-19 15:22:03 <midnightmagic> no matter, back to work
476 2013-07-19 15:22:12 <lianj> petertodd: what would the client gui flow look like?
477 2013-07-19 15:22:44 <petertodd> lianj: For p2sh? All you have to support is spending funds to a P2SH address - trivial. It's just another way of constructing a txout.
478 2013-07-19 15:23:14 <petertodd> lianj: Remember that P2SH *isn't* multisig.
479 2013-07-19 15:23:15 <lianj> yea, but the other person needs to create/define his p2sh address first
480 2013-07-19 15:23:21 <lianj> i do
481 2013-07-19 15:23:27 <sipa> so?
482 2013-07-19 15:23:34 <sipa> it doesn't matter where the p2sh address comes from
483 2013-07-19 15:23:40 <sipa> that's a worry for the one creating it
484 2013-07-19 15:24:03 <petertodd> lianj: Right, but they give you 3LejWS17n4s7NpGbpkifBBVpfNp473zCW5 and your client goes "ahh! the version bit is p2sh, thus I'll create txout OP_HASH160 <digest> OP_EQUAL"
485 2013-07-19 15:24:06 <lianj> right, but for it to be used more widely it should be somewhat easy to create them
486 2013-07-19 15:24:21 <sipa> it's a chicken-and-egg problem
487 2013-07-19 15:24:23 <petertodd> lianj: that's irrelevant to bitcoinj
488 2013-07-19 15:24:24 <lianj> petertodd: mine does :P
489 2013-07-19 15:24:29 <sipa> and eventually both sides need to be implemented
490 2013-07-19 15:24:35 <sipa> but let's start with the easy part