1 2013-08-07 00:24:25 <jgarzik> Amusing SD phishing site: http://satoshidce.com/ WARNING PHISHING WARNING
2 2013-08-07 00:28:35 <nsh> you mean i might win money *and* i get free fish? <enters all the secrets>
3 2013-08-07 00:29:32 <nsh> reg'd from panama
4 2013-08-07 00:29:52 <nsh> no, that's just the address of whoisguard's offices
5 2013-08-07 00:30:11 <jgarzik> Lame effort if you don't vanitygen 1dice* addresses
6 2013-08-07 00:30:12 <nsh> ACTION doesn't exactly understand how people don't get caught for these kinds of things
7 2013-08-07 00:30:24 <nsh> surely if a domain is registered there's a moneytrail
8 2013-08-07 00:30:33 <TheLordOfTime> jgarzik: we caught someone in -otc trying to advertise a false 1dice address
9 2013-08-07 00:30:37 <nsh> maybe just not worth chasing and enough layers of indirection
10 2013-08-07 00:30:39 <TheLordOfTime> WHY AM I OPPED
11 2013-08-07 00:30:48 <TheLordOfTime> seriously, how am I getting opped :/
12 2013-08-07 00:30:53 <nsh> (services might have gone down maybe)
13 2013-08-07 00:30:55 <TheLordOfTime> ACTION digs around in access lists
14 2013-08-07 00:31:09 <nsh> oh, you can set auto-op off in nickserv too
15 2013-08-07 00:31:14 <TheLordOfTime> gribble must be breaking
16 2013-08-07 00:31:35 <TheLordOfTime> ACTION shrugs
17 2013-08-07 00:31:46 <TheLordOfTime> note to self: set a watch for all +o modes on self...
18 2013-08-07 00:31:47 <TheLordOfTime> anyways...
19 2013-08-07 00:31:57 <TheLordOfTime> we did see someone in -otc trying to pull that, jgarzik
20 2013-08-07 00:32:08 <TheLordOfTime> then there's the 85 1dice addresses I generated just for the hell of it.
21 2013-08-07 00:34:52 <nsh> heh
22 2013-08-07 00:35:31 <TheLordOfTime> but just like the other addresses I generate just to stress test CPU vanitygen on my system, i hide them in a text file and never use them
23 2013-08-07 00:35:31 <TheLordOfTime> :P
24 2013-08-07 00:40:50 <nsh> :)
25 2013-08-07 00:49:49 <TheLordOfTime> nsh: if you're still around, when my ZNC reconnected, can you see what gave me +o?
26 2013-08-07 00:49:55 <TheLordOfTime> it should say in the logs...
27 2013-08-07 00:50:41 <nsh> looking
28 2013-08-07 00:50:55 <TheLordOfTime> if not it should show up sooner or later in the logs
29 2013-08-07 00:51:01 <TheLordOfTime> or i can utilize one of my other systems to watch...
30 2013-08-07 00:51:44 <nsh> i see this: * gribble gives channel operator status to TheLordOfTime
31 2013-08-07 00:51:51 <nsh> just now (6m ago)
32 2013-08-07 00:51:57 <nsh> nothing prior to that in buffer
33 2013-08-07 00:51:59 <TheLordOfTime> okay that's what i thought
34 2013-08-07 00:52:07 <TheLordOfTime> nsh: yeah there shouldn't be except a quit and a join
35 2013-08-07 00:52:13 <nsh> k
36 2013-08-07 00:52:13 <TheLordOfTime> since i forced my ZNC to cycle connectivity
37 2013-08-07 00:52:23 <nsh> (why can't you see the mode change?)
38 2013-08-07 00:52:29 <TheLordOfTime> because i was disconnected :P
39 2013-08-07 00:52:34 <nsh> oh, ok
40 2013-08-07 00:52:37 <TheLordOfTime> ACTION spins up an alt-connection
41 2013-08-07 00:52:47 <nsh> i think my znc set-up keeps that in scrollback
42 2013-08-07 00:52:53 <nsh> but maybe not, i don't admin any channels
43 2013-08-07 00:53:13 <LordOfTime> ACTION watches
44 2013-08-07 00:55:55 <nsh> TheLordOfTime, this module in znc would keep your client appraised of mode changes when reconnecting through buffer playback: http://wiki.znc.in/Buffextras
45 2013-08-07 00:56:24 <LordOfTime> nsh: true, except i have too many channels such that i'd lose too much scrollback
46 2013-08-07 00:56:35 <LordOfTime> hmmm...
47 2013-08-07 00:56:37 <nsh> ah, true
48 2013-08-07 00:56:46 <LordOfTime> i *could* drop my bot I use for logging channels privately here...
49 2013-08-07 00:56:59 <LordOfTime> she's in #bitcoin and #bitcoin-otc and is basically lobotomized for anyone b ut me...
50 2013-08-07 00:57:00 <LordOfTime> but*
51 2013-08-07 00:58:04 <nsh> you could add a perform on connect to /whois yourself on reconnect; if you're client's smart enough it might recognise the flag for the channel
52 2013-08-07 00:58:09 <nsh> that seems less likely the more i think about it
53 2013-08-07 00:58:20 <nsh> ACTION nods
54 2013-08-07 00:59:34 <DiabloD3> http://blog.soylent.me/post/57550580385/just-as-soylent-is-disrupting-the-traditional-food
55 2013-08-07 01:00:34 <nsh> saw this (headlined'd) earlier in passing
56 2013-08-07 01:00:49 <nsh> but i didn't realise that soylent, is... actually... soylent....
57 2013-08-07 01:01:02 <nsh> i'd have loved to have been in that marketing meeting
58 2013-08-07 01:01:40 <nsh> "oh yeah, i heard the name in this book. it's a totally nutritious mix of all the essential food stuffs that's mass produced and keeps everyone healthy for cheap"
59 2013-08-07 01:01:46 <nsh> --"how did the book end?"
60 2013-08-07 01:01:52 <nsh> "oh, i only read the first chapter..."
61 2013-08-07 01:02:36 <jgarzik> U.S. Magistrate Judge Amos L. Mazzant in the Eastern District of Texas ruled on Tuesday that [Trendon Shavers] Bitcoin investments "meet the definition of investment contract, and as such, are securities." http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/06/us-court-sec-bitcoin-idUSBRE97517G20130806
62 2013-08-07 01:02:50 <gmaxwell> nsh: note that this soylent is kind of a gray color. It's the green type you need to worry about.
63 2013-08-07 01:02:53 <nsh> "The cognitive effects are extremely noticeable, in fact the most noticeable for me." --Mr Totally Not-Made-Up Reviewer
64 2013-08-07 01:02:57 <nsh> gmaxwell, good point
65 2013-08-07 01:03:35 <nsh> how binding/precedent-setting is that, do you know, jgarzik?
66 2013-08-07 01:04:48 <rethaw> nsh: It is going to take time, but it's a good sign
67 2013-08-07 01:04:51 <nsh> it would be kinda funny if pirate inadvertently (or through selfless genius) paved the way for legal and financial acceptance of bitcoin
68 2013-08-07 01:05:13 <nsh> though that is really how these things do tend to happen
69 2013-08-07 01:05:19 <nsh> (through case-law)
70 2013-08-07 01:05:22 <rethaw> I would love to have a chat with the Winklevii's lawyer right now
71 2013-08-07 01:05:24 <nsh> (if not always through massive fraud)
72 2013-08-07 01:06:03 <nsh> well, i assume they are a lawyer therefore you can talk with them whenever you want if you apply the cocaine and yachts directly to the relevant areas
73 2013-08-07 01:06:11 <nsh> even during their children's weddings
74 2013-08-07 01:06:37 <nsh> they might not be at liberty to answer some of your questions though :)
75 2013-08-07 01:07:02 <gwillen> I am just amazed that priate did all this using his real name
76 2013-08-07 01:07:13 <gwillen> he's either a complete idiot, or he really just thought that because bitcoin is fake money, nobody would care
77 2013-08-07 01:07:21 <nsh> he might have conned himself more than anyone else in the long run
78 2013-08-07 01:07:30 <gmaxwell> By definition this was not someone who made good life decisions.
79 2013-08-07 01:07:39 <gwillen> I know, but I expected him to at least be clever
80 2013-08-07 01:07:44 <rethaw> gmaxwell: which definition?
81 2013-08-07 01:07:49 <gwillen> how can you run a huge ponzi scheme and not be clever enough to use a fake name
82 2013-08-07 01:08:11 <nsh> there are flavours of guile, i suppose
83 2013-08-07 01:08:27 <gmaxwell> rethaw: by the general definition be being a theif! :P
84 2013-08-07 01:09:00 <nsh> ACTION would contend that theft is sometimes a great life-decision
85 2013-08-07 01:09:05 <nsh> :)
86 2013-08-07 01:09:08 <rethaw> I was astonished people were giving coins to someone with the nick pirate...
87 2013-08-07 01:09:45 <nsh> these days pirates are lovable rogues that give you media entertainment
88 2013-08-07 01:09:57 <gmaxwell> rethaw: well, I mean, it's not like pirate was the MOST nefarious name possible.
89 2013-08-07 01:10:23 <nsh> even historical pirates were often utopian philosopher-poets
90 2013-08-07 01:10:30 <nsh> ok, i'm kinda stretching the truth a bit there
91 2013-08-07 01:10:42 <rethaw> nsh do you write?
92 2013-08-07 01:10:53 <nsh> defence pleadings, mostly :)
93 2013-08-07 01:11:09 <nsh> (no)
94 2013-08-07 01:11:10 <gmaxwell> now if there was someone named ... nefario or something like that you might have a point.
95 2013-08-07 01:11:26 <rethaw> gmaxwell: I caught that
96 2013-08-07 01:11:29 <nsh> Welcome to Darth Sidius Investments and Holdings Corporation
97 2013-08-07 01:11:59 <jgarzik> hah
98 2013-08-07 01:13:48 <gmaxwell> Besides pirate had really awesome otc ratings.
99 2013-08-07 01:14:04 <gmaxwell> I wonder if very high OTC ratings are yet a positive scammyness indicator.
100 2013-08-07 01:14:22 <jgarzik> ACTION is glad he landed on the side of warning people away from HYIPs
101 2013-08-07 01:14:25 <TheLordOfTime> gmaxwell: so BCB's ratings indicate scamminess?
102 2013-08-07 01:14:26 <TheLordOfTime> :P
103 2013-08-07 01:14:33 <TheLordOfTime> seriously stop opping me gribble
104 2013-08-07 01:14:42 <TheLordOfTime> Thank you.
105 2013-08-07 01:14:47 <gmaxwell> maybe the criteria is "more positive ratings than nanotube".
106 2013-08-07 01:14:53 <TheLordOfTime> gmaxwell: lol
107 2013-08-07 01:15:06 <gmaxwell> TheLordOfTime: yea, bcb's in trouble!
108 2013-08-07 01:16:28 <gmaxwell> ACTION points to #bitcoin
109 2013-08-07 01:35:59 <nsh> why isn't there now some kind of bitcoin-tech-based solution to comment spam?
110 2013-08-07 01:36:19 <nsh> what would be required minimally to achieve this?
111 2013-08-07 01:37:27 <rethaw> you just require a proof of work before posting a comment
112 2013-08-07 01:37:33 <rethaw> check out bitmessage
113 2013-08-07 01:39:00 <nsh> hmm, how hard would it be to make a way to plugin bitmessage as a commenting system on e.g. blogs/wikis/news-sites?
114 2013-08-07 01:42:27 <doublec> probably not hard. Give each article a bitmessage. make bitmessages that arrive at that address appear as commnts.
115 2013-08-07 01:42:30 <joesmoe> or make some sort of bbs system that runs over bitmessage
116 2013-08-07 01:42:45 <doublec> bitmessage has an rpc api
117 2013-08-07 01:43:40 <doublec> it's anonymous though so that could result in needing heavier comment moderation even if people don't spam
118 2013-08-07 01:49:27 <nsh> well, it can still have whatever attribution layer you want on top as part of the site software
119 2013-08-07 01:49:37 <nsh> mysql varchar is anonymous too :)
120 2013-08-07 01:50:08 <nsh> ACTION reads some more about bitmessage
121 2013-08-07 01:53:00 <Luke-Jr> nsh: because spam is a social problem, not technical
122 2013-08-07 01:53:12 <Luke-Jr> nsh: that's why Bitcoin has human miners doing the spam filtering
123 2013-08-07 01:53:22 <Temper> i dunno about that
124 2013-08-07 01:53:24 <nsh> hmm
125 2013-08-07 01:53:58 <Temper> spam only exists because of flawed tech
126 2013-08-07 01:54:39 <Luke-Jr> Temper: it is impossible to solve spam with technology alone
127 2013-08-07 01:55:00 <Luke-Jr> without killing all unsolicited data
128 2013-08-07 01:55:02 <nsh> spam classification might be facilitated by human input, but limiting the facility of leaving messages in a way that's tied to scarce resources sounds like a reasonable technological solution to certain parties abusing message-leaving-places
129 2013-08-07 01:55:03 <Temper> i dunno about that either
130 2013-08-07 01:55:34 <nsh> (clearly the write-good-english part of my brain went to sleep already, sorry)
131 2013-08-07 01:56:22 <Temper> i used a voice chat that killed spam effectively
132 2013-08-07 01:56:44 <Luke-Jr> Temper: most likely it just wasn't popular enough
133 2013-08-07 01:57:29 <Temper> no it used nested encryption of bigger primes that took intervention to "level up"
134 2013-08-07 01:57:44 <Temper> then you could restrict lo9w levels
135 2013-08-07 01:57:54 <Temper> and ban ids
136 2013-08-07 01:58:13 <nsh> interesting
137 2013-08-07 01:58:29 <Temper> so at level 45 it took 15 minutes to get an id
138 2013-08-07 01:58:39 <Luke-Jr> so the spammers just need to buy a level 100 id
139 2013-08-07 01:58:49 <Temper> well maybe
140 2013-08-07 01:59:07 <amiller> making it expensive for spammers seems like the best that can be done :|
141 2013-08-07 01:59:08 <Temper> but they'd loose it on the first spam message
142 2013-08-07 01:59:38 <Temper> as the message was signed with the id
143 2013-08-07 01:59:53 <Luke-Jr> "lose" it, how?
144 2013-08-07 01:59:58 <Temper> at level 100 your talking 4 hours
145 2013-08-07 02:00:04 <Luke-Jr> ok, so?
146 2013-08-07 02:00:13 <Temper> id gets marked as spam
147 2013-08-07 02:00:19 <Temper> can't message
148 2013-08-07 02:00:22 <Temper> blocked
149 2013-08-07 02:00:56 <Luke-Jr> by one person
150 2013-08-07 02:00:57 <Temper> level 200 is like weeks
151 2013-08-07 02:01:13 <Temper> well there are repositories
152 2013-08-07 02:01:42 <Luke-Jr> so you're talking a centralized thing
153 2013-08-07 02:01:52 <Temper> not really
154 2013-08-07 02:01:58 <Temper> but yes
155 2013-08-07 02:02:24 <Temper> it could easily be decentralised
156 2013-08-07 02:02:44 <Luke-Jr> not as you're describing it
157 2013-08-07 02:02:57 <Temper> like bitcoin, each time someone clicks spam on you it adds 1 to your id..
158 2013-08-07 02:03:16 <Temper> the user decides any id under 100 with 5 flags is blocked
159 2013-08-07 02:03:50 <Luke-Jr> bitcoin has no such voting-based spam filter
160 2013-08-07 02:03:56 <Temper> building the id is like bitcoin mining..
161 2013-08-07 02:03:59 <Luke-Jr> the spammers will just vote everyone else to balance it
162 2013-08-07 02:04:10 <Temper> the vote is like the bitcoin log
163 2013-08-07 02:04:31 <Temper> well.. there could be a transaction log
164 2013-08-07 02:04:43 <Temper> you could decide to not count their votes
165 2013-08-07 02:04:51 <Luke-Jr> ???
166 2013-08-07 02:04:59 <Luke-Jr> on what basis?
167 2013-08-07 02:05:14 <Temper> the fact they later became flagged for spam themselves
168 2013-08-07 02:05:51 <Temper> how does bitcoin decide to reject a fake transaction?
169 2013-08-07 02:06:03 <Luke-Jr> miners (humans) decide
170 2013-08-07 02:06:14 <Temper> miners are not human
171 2013-08-07 02:07:03 <Temper> the miner app is just an app running code on a machine
172 2013-08-07 02:07:13 <Temper> without any human interaction
173 2013-08-07 02:07:23 <Temper> you set it up.. run it and then leave
174 2013-08-07 02:07:41 <Luke-Jr> Temper: that's not how it's supposed to work, no.
175 2013-08-07 02:07:47 <Temper> lol
176 2013-08-07 02:07:50 <Temper> what?!
177 2013-08-07 02:07:53 <Luke-Jr> there is supposed to be a human behind it making decisions
178 2013-08-07 02:08:00 <Temper> lol
179 2013-08-07 02:08:06 <TheLordOfTime> :P
180 2013-08-07 02:08:07 <Temper> no there aint
181 2013-08-07 02:08:15 <Luke-Jr> the fact that most miners aren't is why Bitcoin is being hurt so badly by spam these days
182 2013-08-07 02:08:19 <TheLordOfTime> ACTION gives Luke-Jr a +1
183 2013-08-07 02:08:22 <Temper> what is a human supposed to do a checksum?
184 2013-08-07 02:08:38 <Luke-Jr> Temper: they're supposed to make an educated guess
185 2013-08-07 02:08:45 <Temper> lol
186 2013-08-07 02:08:55 <Temper> well that was a flawed design
187 2013-08-07 02:09:10 <Temper> humans and "educated" guess
188 2013-08-07 02:09:51 <Temper> but in the app where is there even a possibility of human interaction?
189 2013-08-07 02:10:26 <Luke-Jr> Temper: a human decides which mining software to run, and configures it how to decide what is spam
190 2013-08-07 02:11:20 <Temper> lol
191 2013-08-07 02:11:27 <Temper> it is a crypto currency
192 2013-08-07 02:11:50 <gmaxwell> this conversation doesn't sound too productive.
193 2013-08-07 02:11:51 <Temper> most people cannot determine if a signed key is authentic by looking at it..
194 2013-08-07 02:11:59 <Temper> yep
195 2013-08-07 02:12:02 <Temper> agreed
196 2013-08-07 02:12:32 <Luke-Jr> Temper: it has nothing to do with the key
197 2013-08-07 02:12:44 <Luke-Jr> if the transaction is totally invalid, every node drops it
198 2013-08-07 02:12:56 <Temper> but basically the idea was to mix bit coin mining to an account id, the bitcoin log to a "spam account", and eliminate spam by using processing power to keep people from spamming
199 2013-08-07 02:13:44 <Temper> Luke-Jr: apparently believes in bitcoin but not that the same design can be used for other things..
200 2013-08-07 02:14:20 <Luke-Jr> Bitcoin has not solved the spam problem.
201 2013-08-07 02:14:27 <Temper> lol
202 2013-08-07 02:14:33 <Temper> i just said HOW IT COULD
203 2013-08-07 02:14:35 <Luke-Jr> it has solved the centralized inflation entity
204 2013-08-07 02:14:38 <Temper> omg.. ok.. im done
205 2013-08-07 02:14:46 <Luke-Jr> Temper: spammers have more resources than legit users
206 2013-08-07 02:15:02 <Temper> doesn't matter
207 2013-08-07 02:15:13 <Temper> each time they send out spam they'd have to START OVER
208 2013-08-07 02:15:31 <Temper> the person abiding by the rules never would have to "start over"
209 2013-08-07 02:15:38 <Luke-Jr> only if you have a centralized entity deciding what is spam
210 2013-08-07 02:15:53 <Temper> lol
211 2013-08-07 02:16:13 <Temper> talk about DENSE.. how does BITCOIN decide iof a transaction is valid?!?!?
212 2013-08-07 02:16:49 <Luke-Jr> spam is valid.
213 2013-08-07 02:17:02 <Luke-Jr> Bitcoin has not solved spam.
214 2013-08-07 02:17:14 <Luke-Jr> why do you think somehow Bitcoin concepts solve spam for other systems, when they don't solve it for Bitcoin?
215 2013-08-07 02:18:01 <Temper> so i can just add 100000 bitcoin to a bitcoin id?
216 2013-08-07 02:18:09 <Luke-Jr> that's not spam
217 2013-08-07 02:18:12 <Temper> how? i really wanna know :)
218 2013-08-07 02:18:18 <Temper> omg
219 2013-08-07 02:18:23 <Temper> nm it is beyond you
220 2013-08-07 02:19:00 <Temper> ame design.. different use.. and "accounting" purpose
221 2013-08-07 02:19:07 <Temper> err same
222 2013-08-07 02:20:06 <nsh> Luke-Jr, i think you somewhat overplay the problems bitcoin has with spam. What proportion of bitcoin transactions are spammy? Compared to, say, emails, or comments on unmoderated boards/wikis?
223 2013-08-07 02:20:31 <Luke-Jr> nsh: I didn't say spam is *worse* for bitcoin than other things, just that Bitcoin hasn't solved it.
224 2013-08-07 02:20:37 <nsh> right
225 2013-08-07 02:21:07 <Luke-Jr> probably more than 50% of transactions on the network right now are spam, but I haven't measured it lately
226 2013-08-07 02:21:07 <nsh> i think transaction fees are reducing the problem too, but i could be wrong
227 2013-08-07 02:21:14 <nsh> hmm
228 2013-08-07 02:21:20 <nsh> that surprises me
229 2013-08-07 02:21:26 <Luke-Jr> nsh: at the expense of legit transactions that we want to go fee-less :/
230 2013-08-07 02:21:51 <nsh> aye, it's lamentable in that respect
231 2013-08-07 02:23:07 <nsh> but there's probably some law of conservation of costs to preventing spam. either social, computational, or financial
232 2013-08-07 02:23:33 <nsh> at some point some sacrifice is inevitable
233 2013-08-07 02:23:40 <Temper> how can you impse a transaction fee on a peer-to-peer network?
234 2013-08-07 02:24:03 <Temper> and how would it prevent "spam"?
235 2013-08-07 02:24:20 <nsh> Temper, https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees
236 2013-08-07 02:24:20 <Temper> if bitcoin "spam" is fake transactions..
237 2013-08-07 02:25:07 <nsh> miners and peers carry a burden of storing and processing bitcoin data
238 2013-08-07 02:25:53 <Temper> yep.. but bitcoin spam is fake transactions right?
239 2013-08-07 02:25:54 <Luke-Jr> no
240 2013-08-07 02:26:19 <nsh> (and free lunches have been scarce since jesus stopped preaching)
241 2013-08-07 02:26:20 <Luke-Jr> as with anything, spam is valid transactions that are unwanted
242 2013-08-07 02:26:20 <Temper> ok i am lost.. what is bitcoin "spam" then?
243 2013-08-07 02:26:30 <Luke-Jr> lol
244 2013-08-07 02:26:50 <Temper> so someone sending btc back and forth between ids?
245 2013-08-07 02:26:59 <Temper> every 10 seconds?
246 2013-08-07 02:27:37 <Temper> what exactly is an "unwanted transaction"?
247 2013-08-07 02:27:38 <Luke-Jr> Temper: yes
248 2013-08-07 02:27:50 <Temper> well
249 2013-08-07 02:27:57 <Luke-Jr> Temper: that's the problem: it's not technically definable
250 2013-08-07 02:28:20 <Temper> well that is how it is designed
251 2013-08-07 02:28:35 <Temper> i mean they promote the idea of creating ids for 1 transaction
252 2013-08-07 02:28:41 <Temper> for "security"
253 2013-08-07 02:28:57 <Luke-Jr> addresses are not ids.
254 2013-08-07 02:29:05 <Temper> whatever
255 2013-08-07 02:29:06 <Luke-Jr> they're one time use destinations
256 2013-08-07 02:29:11 <Temper> splitting hairs now?
257 2013-08-07 02:30:08 <Temper> and addresses are by definition ids
258 2013-08-07 02:30:18 <Temper> remember id stands for identification
259 2013-08-07 02:30:30 <Luke-Jr> and addresses don't identify anything
260 2013-08-07 02:30:42 <Temper> like a UUID?
261 2013-08-07 02:30:56 <Temper> omg
262 2013-08-07 02:31:07 <Temper> are you trying to be obtuse?
263 2013-08-07 02:31:26 <gmaxwell> Temper: he's trying to be helpful and answer your questions.
264 2013-08-07 02:31:40 <gmaxwell> I think he should stop wasting is time, as it looks like you simply want to argue.
265 2013-08-07 02:32:00 <Temper> maybe..
266 2013-08-07 02:32:09 <Temper> i did learn what bitcoin "spam" is
267 2013-08-07 02:32:24 <Temper> not sure how it is measured
268 2013-08-07 02:33:08 <gmaxwell> his reponse earlier is that there is no simple objective way to measure it, which is why the ability of the human participants in the bitcoin ecosystem to adapt is important.
269 2013-08-07 02:33:31 <Temper> well he said that 50% of the network was spam
270 2013-08-07 02:33:39 <Temper> it sounded like a measurement
271 2013-08-07 02:33:50 <Temper> so i assumed they were fake rejected transactions
272 2013-08-07 02:34:02 <Temper> more like DOS
273 2013-08-07 02:35:04 <Temper> the optional fee thing sound like a solutions too
274 2013-08-07 02:35:21 <Temper> if you're not willing to pay you have to wait for it to go through
275 2013-08-07 02:36:46 <Temper> it also seems to solve the problem i was expecting
276 2013-08-07 02:36:47 <Luke-Jr> Temper: the largest spammer on the network has a way to trick other people into covering the fees
277 2013-08-07 02:37:04 <Temper> whereas, after time there is no incentive to run miners are the return is nil
278 2013-08-07 02:37:25 <Temper> -are+as
279 2013-08-07 02:37:53 <Luke-Jr> the return is a working system, plus transaction fees
280 2013-08-07 02:38:19 <Temper> Luke-Jr: sounds brilliant to me.. how do they get others to cover the fees?
281 2013-08-07 02:39:11 <Luke-Jr> Temper: social engineering; they exploit gamblers, and take the fees out of their winnings basically
282 2013-08-07 02:39:42 <Temper> well.. the "working system" thing will fall to "the tragedy of the commons".. i see no downfall to the transaction fee but the fee itself
283 2013-08-07 02:39:58 <Temper> wow there are btc casinos?
284 2013-08-07 02:40:01 <Temper> lol
285 2013-08-07 02:40:08 <Temper> i guess i should have guessed
286 2013-08-07 02:40:27 <Temper> i bet each play is probably a "transaction" too
287 2013-08-07 02:40:33 <Luke-Jr> on the spam one, yes
288 2013-08-07 02:40:49 <Luke-Jr> lots of casinos that run without spamming the system
289 2013-08-07 02:41:30 <Temper> so if addresses are not ids.. and you can create an address for 1 transaction.. does it all go into 1 account?
290 2013-08-07 02:41:40 <Luke-Jr> yes
291 2013-08-07 02:41:53 <Luke-Jr> unless you have it go to more than 1 account
292 2013-08-07 02:42:06 <Luke-Jr> accounts are totally invisible to the p2p network
293 2013-08-07 02:42:31 <Temper> weird
294 2013-08-07 02:42:41 <Temper> so.. when i have a wallet what is in it?
295 2013-08-07 02:43:01 <Temper> a list of addresses?
296 2013-08-07 02:43:17 <Luke-Jr> no
297 2013-08-07 02:43:39 <Luke-Jr> wallets contain multiple accounts, their metadata, and numerous ECDSA keys
298 2013-08-07 02:43:39 <Temper> the account.. which i am guessing is like a private key?
299 2013-08-07 02:43:46 <Luke-Jr> no, accounts are just beancounters
300 2013-08-07 02:43:53 <Luke-Jr> they can even be negative
301 2013-08-07 02:44:24 <Temper> hrmm
302 2013-08-07 02:44:54 <Temper> so if i have 5btc in ACC1 and -1 btc in ACC2 my wallet shows 4btc kinda thing?
303 2013-08-07 02:45:24 <Luke-Jr> right
304 2013-08-07 02:45:28 <Temper> also how is any of this secure if you use mtgox?
305 2013-08-07 02:45:39 <Temper> doesn't mtgox know everything you are doing?
306 2013-08-07 02:45:41 <Luke-Jr> if you're storing coins at mtgox, you're trusting mtgox to secure them
307 2013-08-07 02:46:09 <Temper> don't you have to use one of them?
308 2013-08-07 02:46:24 <Luke-Jr> your bank knowing what you do using it, is not a security issue
309 2013-08-07 02:46:30 <Luke-Jr> no, you can just run a wallet yourself
310 2013-08-07 02:46:57 <Temper> Luke-Jr: my bank knowing where i go and what i buy is a security issue
311 2013-08-07 02:47:06 <Temper> i just have no alternative
312 2013-08-07 02:47:19 <Temper> except loads of cash.. which is a security issue as well
313 2013-08-07 02:47:33 <Luke-Jr> well, you have those same options with bitcoin
314 2013-08-07 02:47:45 <Luke-Jr> either you trust a bank to secure your money, and they know what you use your "debit card" for
315 2013-08-07 02:47:57 <Temper> so when you "run you own wallet" what are you doing?
316 2013-08-07 02:48:02 <Luke-Jr> or you run a wallet yourself, and are responsible for making sure viruses or thieves don't steal it
317 2013-08-07 02:48:23 <Temper> you run the bitcoin app?
318 2013-08-07 02:48:25 <Luke-Jr> Temper: storing your sensitive wallet file
319 2013-08-07 02:48:27 <Luke-Jr> yes
320 2013-08-07 02:48:42 <Temper> i c
321 2013-08-07 02:48:50 <Luke-Jr> the wallet software will use your sensitive wallet file to transact directly
322 2013-08-07 02:49:31 <Temper> so.. if i wanted to make a website to automatically recieve bitcoin payments.. like in a checkout process.. i could do it all on the same server as the webserver?
323 2013-08-07 02:50:04 <Luke-Jr> you could, but it'd be stupid
324 2013-08-07 02:50:30 <Temper> well assume i am running an esxi server and the webserver and processing system are two different vms
325 2013-08-07 02:50:35 <Luke-Jr> really you want to make a watch-only copy of your wallet, and give the webserver access to that
326 2013-08-07 02:50:45 <Luke-Jr> and store the read-write wallet in a secured location
327 2013-08-07 02:50:46 <Luke-Jr> offline
328 2013-08-07 02:51:14 <Temper> can a watch only copy create addresses?
329 2013-08-07 02:51:19 <Luke-Jr> yes
330 2013-08-07 02:51:26 <Temper> or how do i determine who i got the btc from?
331 2013-08-07 02:51:39 <Luke-Jr> you create an address for each purchase
332 2013-08-07 02:51:43 <Luke-Jr> note Bitcoin-Qt doesn't support this stuff yet
333 2013-08-07 02:51:51 <Luke-Jr> Armory does. I think Electrum too.
334 2013-08-07 02:52:00 <Temper> lost me again
335 2013-08-07 02:52:11 <Temper> i would be using php or c# .net
336 2013-08-07 02:52:16 <Temper> most likely php
337 2013-08-07 02:52:40 <Luke-Jr> wallet software
338 2013-08-07 02:52:54 <Luke-Jr> Bitcoin-Qt is the most popular one, but it doesn't support watch-only wallets yet
339 2013-08-07 02:53:05 <Luke-Jr> or even copyable ("HD") wallets
340 2013-08-07 02:53:15 <Luke-Jr> Armory and Electrum are other clients, that do
341 2013-08-07 02:57:35 <Temper> this doesn't look like something that can interface with a script..
342 2013-08-07 02:58:01 <Temper> electron has a console option that returns the json but..
343 2013-08-07 02:58:19 <Temper> some command still seem to need human interaction
344 2013-08-07 02:59:55 <Luke-Jr> it's possible there is no ready-to-go watch-only wallet for webservers yet.
345 2013-08-07 03:00:02 <Luke-Jr> a lot of merchants use BitPay
346 2013-08-07 03:01:40 <Temper> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/PHP_developer_intro
347 2013-08-07 03:03:23 <Luke-Jr> sure, you can do that. but it isn't very safe.
348 2013-08-07 03:04:46 <CodeShark> was there just a major fork or is blockchain.info just horribly backed up?
349 2013-08-07 03:05:38 <nsh> <1m since last block for me on bc.i
350 2013-08-07 03:05:51 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: my 0.7.2 and next-test clients are in agreement
351 2013-08-07 03:05:54 <Temper> Luke-Jr: what if i send each recieved btc immediately after recieving it to a "safe" wallet?
352 2013-08-07 03:05:59 <gmaxwell> everything looks fine here.
353 2013-08-07 03:06:07 <gmaxwell> bc.i is just stuck ... again, I guess.
354 2013-08-07 03:06:26 <CodeShark> my nodes don't see a problem either
355 2013-08-07 03:06:29 <Luke-Jr> Temper: might be an okay workaround if you don't have much activity
356 2013-08-07 03:06:47 <CodeShark> Temper, it's better to just have it send directly to the safe wallet in the first place :)
357 2013-08-07 03:07:04 <nsh> Temper, you don't need to be "online" to receive funds
358 2013-08-07 03:07:11 <CodeShark> you don't need private keys to detect payments
359 2013-08-07 03:07:15 <nsh> money can be send to a paper wallet
360 2013-08-07 03:07:30 <Luke-Jr> ..
361 2013-08-07 03:07:33 <Luke-Jr> guys, read the context XD
362 2013-08-07 03:07:53 <nsh> oh, i'm not playing if we have to pay attention before throwing out oars in
363 2013-08-07 03:07:54 <nsh> :)
364 2013-08-07 03:07:58 <nsh> *our
365 2013-08-07 03:07:59 <Luke-Jr> that was in response to lack of a webservice-capable watch-only HD wallet
366 2013-08-07 03:08:07 <nsh> right, sorry
367 2013-08-07 03:08:23 <Temper> its all good
368 2013-08-07 03:08:28 <Temper> i'm learning lots
369 2013-08-07 03:08:44 <Temper> even if i am an arguementitive asshole :P
370 2013-08-07 03:08:52 <Temper> that can't spell
371 2013-08-07 03:12:09 <Temper> bitcoin seems great.. since my interest was sparked by no transaction fees but it doesn't seem quite there yet..
372 2013-08-07 03:12:34 <Temper> could i use electron to create a read-only wallet then use that in the bitcoind?
373 2013-08-07 03:12:39 <Luke-Jr> it's going the opposite direction
374 2013-08-07 03:12:50 <Luke-Jr> "no transaction fees" was never intended to be more than a temporary thing
375 2013-08-07 03:13:02 <Luke-Jr> no, wallets do not have compatible formats
376 2013-08-07 03:13:37 <Temper> lol.. that's like computer interoperability 101..
377 2013-08-07 03:14:25 <Temper> so do you think in time the transaction fees will outpace visa?
378 2013-08-07 03:14:37 <Luke-Jr> hopefully not
379 2013-08-07 03:14:46 <Luke-Jr> depends on if development can keep up with users
380 2013-08-07 03:14:55 <gmaxwell> who knows? but if you want visa, why not use visa (denominated in btc, of course)
381 2013-08-07 03:14:57 <Temper> cause i think i would have to pay 2.4% + $0.30 with visa
382 2013-08-07 03:15:12 <CodeShark> wallets do not have compatible formats but are generally not too difficult to interconvert if you have some programming skills
383 2013-08-07 03:15:17 <Temper> you can get a visa bitcoin?
384 2013-08-07 03:15:35 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: you can't convert a view-only HD wallet to a bitcoind-compatible format ;)
385 2013-08-07 03:15:38 <gmaxwell> Temper: not today, but seems like it would be likely in a world where btc was popular enough to have compariable txn fees.
386 2013-08-07 03:15:44 <CodeShark> Luke-
387 2013-08-07 03:15:55 <CodeShark> I guess you're right
388 2013-08-07 03:16:07 <CodeShark> well..
389 2013-08-07 03:16:13 <Temper> well a btc visa would kill the anon part
390 2013-08-07 03:16:22 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: you kinda could, just by making an encrypted wallet with gibberish keys and prefilling it out as far as you might possibly need.
391 2013-08-07 03:16:27 <CodeShark> you could if you use one of the watch-only wallet pull requests ;)
392 2013-08-07 03:16:43 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: that doesn't do HD
393 2013-08-07 03:16:44 <gmaxwell> Temper: sure, pick your poison. There doesn't have to be only one way... btc itself is not really anonymous in any case.
394 2013-08-07 03:16:53 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: well, I guess
395 2013-08-07 03:16:57 <gmaxwell> (it's weakly pseudonomyous as a replacement for privacy)
396 2013-08-07 03:17:02 <Luke-Jr> Temper: Bitcoin isn't anonymous period.
397 2013-08-07 03:17:26 <Temper> so why are they selling drugs on tor using bitcoin... lol
398 2013-08-07 03:17:33 <Luke-Jr> because they're fools
399 2013-08-07 03:17:45 <gmaxwell> People selling drugs are generally not known to be making great life decisions. :P
400 2013-08-07 03:17:45 <Temper> [chose to ignore cp - on purpose]
401 2013-08-07 03:17:51 <CodeShark> lol
402 2013-08-07 03:18:17 <Temper> so the fbi could confiscate bitcoin?
403 2013-08-07 03:18:23 <Luke-Jr> Temper: sure
404 2013-08-07 03:18:24 <Temper> or at least track it?
405 2013-08-07 03:18:25 <gmaxwell> sure, they have.
406 2013-08-07 03:18:27 <Luke-Jr> easily
407 2013-08-07 03:18:37 <gmaxwell> (confisciated someone's bitcoins)
408 2013-08-07 03:18:40 <Luke-Jr> well, if the bitcoins are in their jurisdiction
409 2013-08-07 03:18:49 <CodeShark> to be fair, though, even if the fbi and dea were tracking the whole thing they probably won't go after everything immediately and ruin their chances at building the bigger cases
410 2013-08-07 03:18:56 <Temper> i was lead to believe that they were only able to do it because someone they confiscated from had an insecure wallet
411 2013-08-07 03:19:14 <gmaxwell> There are, of course, complications. Every new technology changes the countours that law enforcement has to navigate.
412 2013-08-07 03:19:34 <Temper> how could you confiscate a bitcoin?
413 2013-08-07 03:19:39 <gmaxwell> Temper: you could say the same thing about confiscating cash. "Only because he had an insecure wallet!" :P
414 2013-08-07 03:19:52 <Temper> yeah well they use force..
415 2013-08-07 03:20:02 <Luke-Jr> Temper: grab the PC with the wallet and force you to give up the passphrase
416 2013-08-07 03:20:03 <Temper> so i guess they could force you to hand it over..
417 2013-08-07 03:20:22 <gmaxwell> Temper: a multitude of ways, you might get them while confisciating a computer.. or you simply hold someone in jail until they provide them once you've established from investigation that they do.
418 2013-08-07 03:20:26 <gmaxwell> Temper: yep.
419 2013-08-07 03:20:32 <Temper> but if you have "cash" in a bank they can just jack it from the bank
420 2013-08-07 03:20:56 <CodeShark> bitcoin at least gives you plausible deniability
421 2013-08-07 03:20:59 <Luke-Jr> Temper: and if you have bitcoins in a bank, the same
422 2013-08-07 03:21:05 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: not more than cash
423 2013-08-07 03:21:09 <gmaxwell> yea, so in the case of btc that kind of exposure exists when you use a third party service. Otherwise the confiscation has to be more direct (or via compromising your computers)
424 2013-08-07 03:21:13 <Luke-Jr> you can bury cash in a large yard too
425 2013-08-07 03:21:27 <gmaxwell> ACTION gets a shovel and heads to luke's house
426 2013-08-07 03:21:30 <CodeShark> can you use steganography on cash?
427 2013-08-07 03:21:37 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: why would I keep cash? :p
428 2013-08-07 03:21:40 <Temper> well.. so they could just go to mtgox and tell them to hand over your wallet?
429 2013-08-07 03:21:42 <DiabloD3> gmaxwell: WARGH WHY IS THERE NO MORE NEW HPMOR
430 2013-08-07 03:21:51 <Luke-Jr> Temper: yes
431 2013-08-07 03:22:14 <gmaxwell> CodeShark: it's _really_ hard to use tools like that effectively. "yippie I used steganography you'll never find my funds!" "whats with this .bash_history file we found here?"
432 2013-08-07 03:22:23 <Temper> but if you did you own wallet.. and were crafty.. they couldn't get it..
433 2013-08-07 03:22:26 <Luke-Jr> Temper: although MtGox is in Japan, so there may be some legal issues
434 2013-08-07 03:22:33 <Temper> but you'd sit in jail forever lol
435 2013-08-07 03:22:36 <Luke-Jr> Temper: if you buried a safe with cash, the same
436 2013-08-07 03:22:45 <gmaxwell> CodeShark: standard attack/defense asymetry. The attacker only needs one hole and can spend weeks chipping away at your defense.
437 2013-08-07 03:22:57 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I have my PC setup so .bash_history excludes commands starting with a space
438 2013-08-07 03:23:06 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: yea, I think I told you how to do that? :P
439 2013-08-07 03:23:15 <CodeShark> gmaxwell, it's actually really simple if you're hiding very small pieces of data inside a huge amount of data
440 2013-08-07 03:23:19 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: maybe. I think it was part of my eternal bash_history stuff
441 2013-08-07 03:23:26 <Temper> yeah but if you forget the prepending space :P
442 2013-08-07 03:23:29 <Luke-Jr> got sick of BASH discarding old commands
443 2013-08-07 03:23:37 <CodeShark> any yeah, don't use bash for that :p
444 2013-08-07 03:24:02 <gmaxwell> CodeShark: the actual thing itself, yes, perhaps, at least for people as savvy as us. Getting the surrounding details right??? uh, especially when your machine might be bugged for months before you know you're being investigated.
445 2013-08-07 03:24:33 <gmaxwell> I think it's easy to overestimate the defenders capabilities here. Certantly some will get away with it, but this is true for all kinda of crime.
446 2013-08-07 03:24:41 <Temper> ok so if it isn't anonymous, can be tracked, has fees, and isn't anymore secure.. why bitcoin then?
447 2013-08-07 03:24:50 <Luke-Jr> Temper: it can't be inflated.
448 2013-08-07 03:24:58 <Luke-Jr> Temper: it opens the door to new innovation
449 2013-08-07 03:25:06 <gmaxwell> ^ these things.
450 2013-08-07 03:25:09 <Temper> neither can silver.. but you can't email that
451 2013-08-07 03:25:20 <Luke-Jr> for example, you could have a corporate wallet that requires 3 people to cooperate to spend from
452 2013-08-07 03:25:30 <Luke-Jr> Temper: yes, thinking of bitcoin as a digital silver isn't a bad idea
453 2013-08-07 03:25:38 <Luke-Jr> except that silver is harder to track
454 2013-08-07 03:25:40 <CodeShark> gmaxwell: it's always possible for an attacker that is sufficiently determined, skilled, and funded to break pretty much any defense in principle - in practice, most people give up unless you're a very high value target
455 2013-08-07 03:25:50 <gmaxwell> Temper: the markets for metals are insanely distorted by people trading around scripts for metal that doesn't exist because there is no really sold way to prove that a note is actually backed.
456 2013-08-07 03:25:58 <Temper> well my silver should be impossible to track
457 2013-08-07 03:26:09 <gmaxwell> (with bitcoin, even if you're not actually trading it directly??? e.g. using visa??? it's trivial to prove the backing coin exists)
458 2013-08-07 03:26:13 <CodeShark> actually, most people give up - period. some people won't give up if you happen to be a very high value target
459 2013-08-07 03:26:13 <Temper> i bought it with cash from pawn shops
460 2013-08-07 03:26:41 <gmaxwell> Temper: pretty trivial to tag metals, if anyone cares.
461 2013-08-07 03:26:55 <CodeShark> tag metals? isotopes?
462 2013-08-07 03:27:04 <Temper> yeah i doubt that happened
463 2013-08-07 03:27:20 <Temper> they still wouldn't know where it is
464 2013-08-07 03:27:32 <Temper> DO NOT DIG IN MY BACKYARD lol
465 2013-08-07 03:27:35 <Luke-Jr> my savings is mostly silver and bitcoin
466 2013-08-07 03:27:53 <Temper> i have almost 2 ounces of gold too
467 2013-08-07 03:27:55 <CodeShark> do coinage metals differ in isotopic composition significantly between different geologic deposits?
468 2013-08-07 03:27:55 <Luke-Jr> not that I recommend saving in bitcoin - I just haven't had the time to convert it yet <.<
469 2013-08-07 03:28:00 <Temper> 300 ounces of silver
470 2013-08-07 03:28:01 <gmaxwell> CodeShark: I agree. Though its also the case that most defenders make a bunch of mistakes. I suggest you actually try releasing something totally anonymously as if your life depended on it.. and in the effort you'll may see that it's a bit harder than you think it is.
471 2013-08-07 03:28:47 <Temper> i have 0.000000 btc
472 2013-08-07 03:29:00 <CodeShark> gmaxwell: the weak link in the chain for most people is hardly cryptography
473 2013-08-07 03:29:05 <Temper> and am unlikely to buy any.. but i am interested in earning in btc
474 2013-08-07 03:29:11 <gmaxwell> CodeShark: I do know that through radioassy they are able to determine to source of gold/silver coins.
475 2013-08-07 03:29:29 <gmaxwell> CodeShark: Hm? above I was using bash_history as an example. I know this.
476 2013-08-07 03:29:33 <Luke-Jr> Temper: that's a good attitude :>
477 2013-08-07 03:29:41 <gmaxwell> Temper: yea, thats probably a good idea.
478 2013-08-07 03:30:01 <Temper> i would most likely convert to cash on a regualr basis too
479 2013-08-07 03:30:10 <Luke-Jr> you have limited liabilities, and you help Bitcoin grow where it needs to the most
480 2013-08-07 03:30:13 <gmaxwell> I generally advise people who want coins to try to earn it rather than buy it, if its income you wouldn't have gotten otherwise you'll never likely regret the outcome regardless of what people value btc for in the future.
481 2013-08-07 03:30:41 <CodeShark> I've pretty much earned all the bitcoins I've ever had :p
482 2013-08-07 03:30:54 <Temper> do you mine?
483 2013-08-07 03:30:57 <CodeShark> me? no
484 2013-08-07 03:31:07 <Luke-Jr> I mined for CodeShark as a donation once :p
485 2013-08-07 03:31:09 <Temper> that asic company has actually started selling the hardware..
486 2013-08-07 03:31:20 <Luke-Jr> ACTION wonders how much of that CodeShark actually got <.<
487 2013-08-07 03:31:28 <Luke-Jr> Temper: lots of ASIC companies have
488 2013-08-07 03:31:37 <gmaxwell> there are a bunch of ways to earn bitcoin, mining is probably one of the riskier ones.
489 2013-08-07 03:31:45 <Temper> yeah
490 2013-08-07 03:31:57 <Temper> easpecially with 4 video card systms :P
491 2013-08-07 03:31:59 <CodeShark> I don't even remember what address I gave you, Luke-Jr :p
492 2013-08-07 03:32:01 <c0rw1n> it's also a way to get truly anonymous coins, if you're doing it that way
493 2013-08-07 03:32:11 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: you don't use labels? :o
494 2013-08-07 03:32:24 <Luke-Jr> Temper: video cards won't make a profit mining anymore
495 2013-08-07 03:32:31 <Temper> i know lol
496 2013-08-07 03:32:39 <CodeShark> I'm not even sure which wallet contained it
497 2013-08-07 03:32:43 <Luke-Jr> lol
498 2013-08-07 03:32:45 <Temper> costs more in electricity
499 2013-08-07 03:33:11 <Temper> i imagine asic will do the same
500 2013-08-07 03:33:20 <Temper> no reason to think it won't
501 2013-08-07 03:33:21 <c0rw1n> depends on the asic
502 2013-08-07 03:33:21 <CodeShark> I make more money in one afternoon of consulting than I've ever made in mining total
503 2013-08-07 03:33:23 <CodeShark> :p
504 2013-08-07 03:33:41 <Temper> not really.. it more depends on the NEXT ASIC..
505 2013-08-07 03:33:46 <c0rw1n> lulz yes
506 2013-08-07 03:33:55 <gmaxwell> Temper: in any case, if you're interested in the underlying technology, you can get bounties to do testing and get tips from tech support if you learn enough about it.
507 2013-08-07 03:34:24 <Temper> gmaxwell: huh?
508 2013-08-07 03:34:47 <gmaxwell> I'm suggesting some ways other than mining to earn btc. :P
509 2013-08-07 03:35:05 <Temper> i kinda laughed when i was searching bitcoin miner and an android app showed up..
510 2013-08-07 03:35:16 <c0rw1n> ah yeah
511 2013-08-07 03:35:22 <c0rw1n> it's a monitor for your miners
512 2013-08-07 03:35:27 <Temper> gmaxwell: yeah.. i got that part.. but besides that it sounded greek
513 2013-08-07 03:35:29 <Luke-Jr> c0rw1n: no, it's an actual miner.
514 2013-08-07 03:35:33 <c0rw1n> wait wurt
515 2013-08-07 03:35:42 <c0rw1n> hrm
516 2013-08-07 03:35:43 <Luke-Jr> c0rw1n: BFGMiner inside
517 2013-08-07 03:35:48 <Temper> yep
518 2013-08-07 03:35:52 <Temper> its why i laughed
519 2013-08-07 03:36:00 <Temper> a monitor would make sense
520 2013-08-07 03:36:15 <Temper> sounded like a FREE dead battery app
521 2013-08-07 03:36:20 <c0rw1n> what's the hashrate of the Best Droid Evar?
522 2013-08-07 03:36:33 <gmaxwell> Temper: people get to do QA of the bitcoin reference software from time to time. People on IRC hand out tips in BTC to people that help them with tech issues, from time to time, etc.
523 2013-08-07 03:36:42 <Temper> lol its proabably in the kilohashes
524 2013-08-07 03:37:14 <c0rw1n> mh not sure with the gpus, maybe there's one that does a few MH
525 2013-08-07 03:37:17 <Luke-Jr> Temper: the mining doesn't happen on the tablet
526 2013-08-07 03:37:31 <gmaxwell> c0rw1n: those little arm processors are more potentent hashes/joule wise than you might guess.. should be better than any x86 cpu for cpu mining, for whatever thats worth. :P
527 2013-08-07 03:37:35 <Temper> oh.. now it is sounding like your suggesting i give Luke-Jr a tip..
528 2013-08-07 03:37:40 <Luke-Jr> lol
529 2013-08-07 03:37:48 <gmaxwell> Temper: hah we've established you don't have any coin. :P
530 2013-08-07 03:38:04 <Temper> yeah that was going to be my response..
531 2013-08-07 03:38:14 <Temper> ACTION is broke in the bitcoin world..
532 2013-08-07 03:39:07 <Temper> and obviously i don't know enought to get paid
533 2013-08-07 03:39:12 <Temper> i'm a newb
534 2013-08-07 03:40:00 <gmaxwell> yea, now. I'm just pointing out that learning more, beyond satisfying your own interest may leave you with some at-least-somewhat valuable skills in the bitcoin economy.
535 2013-08-07 03:40:00 <Luke-Jr> he's suggesting you could learn, if that's your thing
536 2013-08-07 03:40:14 <gmaxwell> (since you seemed to have at least some interest)
537 2013-08-07 03:40:26 <Temper> and some skill at progamming
538 2013-08-07 03:40:50 <Luke-Jr> right now, the Bitcoin economy is somehow insanely imbalanced between developers and users
539 2013-08-07 03:40:54 <Temper> but the more i am learning about bitcoin - by people who seem to have no real agenda - the less i get interested..
540 2013-08-07 03:41:05 <Luke-Jr> 3 or 4 people work full time on Bitcoin clients, total
541 2013-08-07 03:41:26 <Temper> weird
542 2013-08-07 03:41:40 <Temper> well i was more interested in a php client..
543 2013-08-07 03:41:58 <Temper> which insanely does not appear to exist..
544 2013-08-07 03:42:06 <gmaxwell> Temper: well sometimes we're perhaps a bit _too_ pessimistic around here. For one, tech people are often cynics. For another, we generally think it's better to be fully blunt about the limitations, people do enough stupid things even when you don't gloss over the risks.
545 2013-08-07 03:43:01 <gmaxwell> Temper: you can use php to talk to other clients, but bitcoin itself is a fairly exacting protocol, ... it's a fully decenteralized system, so the nodes are fully responsible for this billion dollar network.
546 2013-08-07 03:43:23 <Temper> oh wait.. http://bitfreak.info/?page=tools&t=bitsci
547 2013-08-07 03:43:58 <gmaxwell> "The script monitors the status of a payment by making use of the data supplied by blockexplorer.com" ... :(
548 2013-08-07 03:44:02 <Luke-Jr> lol
549 2013-08-07 03:45:18 <Luke-Jr> well, at least it doesn't keep the keys somewhere else
550 2013-08-07 03:45:20 <Temper> ok.. what am i missing?
551 2013-08-07 03:45:28 <Luke-Jr> Temper: in short, that's not secure
552 2013-08-07 03:45:50 <gmaxwell> Temper: it connects to some website (a non https one too!) to decide if you've been paid or not.
553 2013-08-07 03:45:50 <Temper> yeah i read that and thought that too
554 2013-08-07 03:46:09 <Temper> but i figured the responses were signed or something..
555 2013-08-07 03:46:18 <Temper> ok well that's crap
556 2013-08-07 03:46:25 <Temper> at least i'm looking :P
557 2013-08-07 03:46:35 <gmaxwell> No, but even if they were??? the website could still be compromised or its operator could turn dishonest.
558 2013-08-07 03:46:37 <Temper> it seems like masterbaiting without the "payoff"
559 2013-08-07 03:47:26 <c0rw1n> you mean pr0n for techs?
560 2013-08-07 03:47:43 <Temper> like that..
561 2013-08-07 03:48:23 <c0rw1n> i would never trust a php wallet
562 2013-08-07 03:48:26 <c0rw1n> ever
563 2013-08-07 03:48:38 <gmaxwell> there is lots and lots of stuff using bitcoin. But mostly the sorts of people who are looking for php solutions are probably also the sorts of people who are happy to trust some random website.
564 2013-08-07 03:49:13 <c0rw1n> or maybe if i could see the code, the live code, and it's still totally tight, and if i have enough reason to believe it's safe
565 2013-08-07 03:49:41 <c0rw1n> not likely, i don't read php
566 2013-08-07 03:50:18 <Luke-Jr> ACTION compromises c0rw1n's PHP interpreter
567 2013-08-07 03:50:22 <CodeShark> lol
568 2013-08-07 03:50:31 <Luke-Jr> c0rw1n will never trust PHP now
569 2013-08-07 03:50:33 <Luke-Jr> :>
570 2013-08-07 03:50:52 <CodeShark> I think we need to be careful to separate the language itself from any prejudice of the types of people who use it :p
571 2013-08-07 03:51:04 <c0rw1n> you're doing it wrong Luke-Jr, i don't _have_ a php interpreter
572 2013-08-07 03:51:21 <Temper> lol
573 2013-08-07 03:51:25 <Temper> what is wrong with php?
574 2013-08-07 03:51:39 <nsh> lol
575 2013-08-07 03:51:44 <gmaxwell> Temper: standard complaints: http://me.veekun.com/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/
576 2013-08-07 03:52:07 <Luke-Jr> I ran a PHP-based IRC bot once..
577 2013-08-07 03:52:09 <Luke-Jr> <.<
578 2013-08-07 03:52:18 <CodeShark> I wonder what that author thinks about bourne shell :p
579 2013-08-07 03:52:24 <CodeShark> if you think php is quirky and irregular...
580 2013-08-07 03:52:38 <Luke-Jr> now I run a PHP program embedded in my Python bot..
581 2013-08-07 03:52:47 <gmaxwell> CodeShark: no one advances sh as a modern language for large web apps exposed to a hostile world. :P
582 2013-08-07 03:53:00 <nsh> pft, speak for yourself
583 2013-08-07 03:53:01 <nsh> :)
584 2013-08-07 03:53:24 <Luke-Jr> who wants to make a bet on whether it works today?
585 2013-08-07 03:53:38 <nsh> your irc bot? probably not on freenode
586 2013-08-07 03:53:41 <gmaxwell> not that you can't create good things in php, of course you can. But there is a lot of busted code out there that people ape, and most people who know better prefer to avoid it.
587 2013-08-07 03:53:49 <Luke-Jr> nsh: sure it is
588 2013-08-07 03:53:53 <nsh> ACTION loses
589 2013-08-07 03:53:57 <Luke-Jr> not yet
590 2013-08-07 03:54:04 <nsh> oh, yeah, that's supybot
591 2013-08-07 03:54:05 <Luke-Jr> the question is whether the PHP stuff works
592 2013-08-07 03:54:16 <Luke-Jr> ]y
593 2013-08-07 03:54:24 <nsh> well, freenode has a ping on connect that wasn't standard a few years ago
594 2013-08-07 03:54:25 <Luke-Jr> ^ if it doesn't respond, it doesn't work
595 2013-08-07 03:54:47 <Luke-Jr> nsh: right, I just mean the long-running instability and memory leaks..
596 2013-08-07 03:54:52 <Luke-Jr> from PHP itself
597 2013-08-07 03:54:59 <nsh> oh right, well yeah... :)
598 2013-08-07 03:55:15 <nsh> the best trick the devil ever played was convincing the world to use PHP
599 2013-08-07 03:55:59 <Luke-Jr> ]part
600 2013-08-07 03:56:31 <Temper> i'd love to hear what the writer of that article sas about JAVA
601 2013-08-07 03:56:50 <Luke-Jr> ACTION doesn't have much better an opinion of Java
602 2013-08-07 03:56:51 <Temper> i once wrote an app for java that had no use of random numbers and NO user input..
603 2013-08-07 03:57:10 <Temper> each time you ran it it had a 15% chance of a "anomoly" output
604 2013-08-07 03:57:36 <Temper> also, facebook is NOT written in php
605 2013-08-07 03:57:45 <CodeShark> of the big popular web dev languages, python is probably the most regular and well-designed...but I probably wouldn't use python to write a really huge app either
606 2013-08-07 03:57:50 <Temper> it resembles php but has its own interpreter
607 2013-08-07 03:57:56 <gmaxwell> I want every programmer who isn't me to program in java. While it's not impossible to footgun yourself there, they did manage to take away a lot of sharp edges.
608 2013-08-07 03:58:15 <gmaxwell> (obviously I hate writing that overly verbose crap myself???)
609 2013-08-07 03:58:31 <Temper> i am a c# guy all the way..
610 2013-08-07 03:58:45 <Temper> it is by far the best language out there..
611 2013-08-07 03:58:55 <Temper> it is also expensive and limiting
612 2013-08-07 03:59:00 <gmaxwell> Temper: yea, too bad it's by msft and no one will trust them further than they can throw them.
613 2013-08-07 03:59:14 <Temper> there is ofcourse mono
614 2013-08-07 03:59:30 <gmaxwell> Temper: yes, and generally people don't trust that either. For the same reasons.
615 2013-08-07 03:59:30 <Luke-Jr> lol
616 2013-08-07 03:59:32 <Temper> and they want like $1500 to use mono with android lol
617 2013-08-07 03:59:38 <CodeShark> I still consider Java to be essentially a dumbed-down safer C++
618 2013-08-07 03:59:47 <Temper> what is wrong with mono?
619 2013-08-07 03:59:54 <Luke-Jr> Temper: you must not know Perl
620 2013-08-07 04:00:07 <Temper> perl is a magical language to me
621 2013-08-07 04:00:15 <Temper> i once wrote a tcp/ip server app
622 2013-08-07 04:00:27 <Temper> and to this day, i don't have a clue how it worked
623 2013-08-07 04:00:28 <CodeShark> I don't really consider Java to be a highly innovative language
624 2013-08-07 04:00:39 <gmaxwell> Temper: implements a language created and controlled by microsoft. :P and everyone excepts microsoft to be evil when it suits their business interests.
625 2013-08-07 04:00:46 <Luke-Jr> I like MOO in some ways.
626 2013-08-07 04:01:06 <Luke-Jr> The sharp edges are so dull that you can run random untrusted MOO code.
627 2013-08-07 04:01:07 <Luke-Jr> :p
628 2013-08-07 04:01:09 <CodeShark> if I'm going to go with something "safe" and am willing to sacrifice performance, I might as well use dynamic languages
629 2013-08-07 04:01:11 <k9quaint> go lisp or go home or go
630 2013-08-07 04:01:12 <gmaxwell> CodeShark: the innovation is making it safer so that you can use more mediocre programmers with fewer terrible bugs.
631 2013-08-07 04:01:22 <Temper> "safe"
632 2013-08-07 04:01:29 <Temper> what the hell is "safe" code?
633 2013-08-07 04:01:36 <CodeShark> as in you won't get segmentation faults
634 2013-08-07 04:01:38 <gmaxwell> CodeShark: the dynamic languages are not safe for mediocre programmers due to a lack of compile time static analysis and type safty.
635 2013-08-07 04:01:42 <CodeShark> or bad pointers
636 2013-08-07 04:01:47 <CodeShark> or memory leaks
637 2013-08-07 04:01:51 <Temper> well don't suck at programming
638 2013-08-07 04:01:52 <k9quaint> temper: no pointers, no memory management, no buffer overruns etc
639 2013-08-07 04:02:12 <Temper> no memory management is a myth
640 2013-08-07 04:02:20 <Temper> it doesn't actually exist..
641 2013-08-07 04:02:29 <CodeShark> it does - it's called a restart :p
642 2013-08-07 04:02:46 <Temper> i haven't used pointers in years
643 2013-08-07 04:02:47 <gmaxwell> CodeShark: you certantly do get memory leaks, just not ones from forgetting free. And no, no null pointer derfes but a failure is still a failure. It's not hard in python or ruby for a stupid typo to kill your app at runtime, one which would have been detected in java/c++/etc.
644 2013-08-07 04:02:50 <Temper> they were cool
645 2013-08-07 04:02:54 <Temper> but stupid