1 2013-10-14 00:29:53 <Krellan> gmaxwell: Thanks for your help earlier along, my patch made it in! https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2937
  2 2013-10-14 00:30:26 <sipa> Krellan: yw :)
  3 2013-10-14 00:30:40 <gmaxwell> Krellan: thanks for contributing!
  4 2013-10-14 00:31:35 <Krellan> Also thanks sipa :)
  5 2013-10-14 00:31:37 <Krellan> yw
  6 2013-10-14 00:32:32 <sipa> Krellan: have you seen https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2784 ?
  7 2013-10-14 00:35:32 <Krellan> sipa: Nice. Informative discussions in there.
  8 2013-10-14 02:40:35 <Zoop_> so my bitcoin client crashed
  9 2013-10-14 02:40:53 <Zoop_> with a MS visual c++ error
 10 2013-10-14 02:41:00 <Zoop_> ran it again
 11 2013-10-14 02:41:17 <Zoop_> shows a warning: check computer time and date
 12 2013-10-14 02:41:39 <Zoop_> bitcoin might not work properly
 13 2013-10-14 02:41:48 <Zoop_> never seen it behave like this
 14 2013-10-14 02:42:00 <Zoop_> paranoid me fears virus
 15 2013-10-14 05:05:45 <BlueMatt> warren: need something still?
 16 2013-10-14 05:11:04 <warren> BlueMatt: we now have a developer dedicated to a long-term maintainable bitcoinj and I'm hoping to engage with upstream on suggestions of how to proceed.  I heard folks were upset about how the last weekend hackjob devs did it.
 17 2013-10-14 05:11:28 <warren> BlueMatt: is there a IRC channel dedicated to bitcoinj dev?
 18 2013-10-14 05:12:16 <BlueMatt> the response I got from TD last time I heard it mentioned was that it was just kind of hacked together and wasnt designed to be merged or anything
 19 2013-10-14 05:12:46 <BlueMatt> I dont think merging in litecoin things is going to happen, but certainly making the required parts abstracted out to interfaces that can be replaced for litecoin could happen
 20 2013-10-14 05:12:55 <warren> something about some namespace or bug reporting thing wasn't changed?
 21 2013-10-14 05:13:03 <BlueMatt> re: irc channel: no, here usually just because the volume is so low no one notices
 22 2013-10-14 05:13:08 <warren> BlueMatt: yeah, abstraction is the goal
 23 2013-10-14 05:13:15 <BlueMatt> I dont remember the details at all
 24 2013-10-14 05:16:31 <warren> oh, it might have been Goonie who was bothered by it
 25 2013-10-14 05:18:09 <warren> jgarzik: those people at your office who run into the MacOS X corruption, what version of the OS is it?
 26 2013-10-14 05:18:42 <warren> jgarzik: all of the reports of corruption I'm seeing for both bitcoin and litecoin are with MacOS X 10.8.x.  zero reports of problems before that.
 27 2013-10-14 06:30:16 <maaku> amiller: there are SPV-compatible colored coin proposals. freimarkets, for example
 28 2013-10-14 06:30:28 <BigBlueNinjaKick> does anyone have any experience using post/get to send commands to bitcoin-qt server
 29 2013-10-14 06:32:03 <weex> BigBlueNinjaKick: usually you use a json rpc lib for your language of choice
 30 2013-10-14 06:33:04 <BigBlueNinjaKick> Yeah, I am using Unity3d and it has some limitations
 31 2013-10-14 06:33:31 <BigBlueNinjaKick> usually .NET limitations
 32 2013-10-14 06:33:40 <BigBlueNinjaKick> trying to find a way around that
 33 2013-10-14 06:34:13 <maaku> BigBlueNinjaKick: client side or server side unity?
 34 2013-10-14 06:34:30 <BigBlueNinjaKick> server side
 35 2013-10-14 06:34:48 <BigBlueNinjaKick> its really just the communication between the bticoin server and unity
 36 2013-10-14 06:34:58 <BigBlueNinjaKick> any application really
 37 2013-10-14 06:35:07 <BigBlueNinjaKick> not just bitcoin
 38 2013-10-14 06:35:20 <maaku> '.net json rpc' should get you any number of solutions
 39 2013-10-14 06:35:28 <maaku> if it's server side you have control over the environment
 40 2013-10-14 06:36:08 <BigBlueNinjaKick> I will check it out
 41 2013-10-14 06:36:10 <BigBlueNinjaKick> thanks
 42 2013-10-14 06:39:03 <BigBlueNinjaKick> is thee a way to utilize JSON .NET without using net 4.x
 43 2013-10-14 06:39:54 <maaku> this isn't really a bitcoin question, you're more likely to find an answer on a .net channel...
 44 2013-10-14 06:40:06 <BigBlueNinjaKick> ok sounds good
 45 2013-10-14 09:30:41 <TD> sipa: have you done a getpeerinfo on your nodes lately?
 46 2013-10-14 09:31:38 <TD> sipa: i'm seeing about 2/3rds of my connections be to bitcoinj
 47 2013-10-14 09:31:50 <TD> sipa: wondering if that's a quirk of my node or if that's something which holds true across the network
 48 2013-10-14 09:32:19 <TD> sorry, 1/3rd
 49 2013-10-14 09:32:51 <jouke> TD: I did lately and I saw 1/50 to be bitcoinj
 50 2013-10-14 09:33:31 <jouke> Oh, atm it seems to be more.
 51 2013-10-14 09:34:39 <jouke> 10/84
 52 2013-10-14 09:35:02 <kinlo> would it be just overly agressive bitcoinj's, making way too many connections?
 53 2013-10-14 09:35:15 <kinlo> kinda surprises me to have so many bitcoinj's
 54 2013-10-14 09:35:45 <jouke> I was expecting more
 55 2013-10-14 09:36:16 <TD> well, it makes 4 connections
 56 2013-10-14 09:37:00 <TD> for multibit it stays connected as long as the app is open. not much choice there.
 57 2013-10-14 09:37:12 <TD> for the mobile app it shuts down the connections about 10 minutes after no user activity, even if the app is open
 58 2013-10-14 09:37:15 <TD> so i guess it's not that aggressive
 59 2013-10-14 09:37:38 <jouke> Other node has 6/72
 60 2013-10-14 09:37:55 <TD> yeah. i guess they don't land evenly
 61 2013-10-14 09:37:59 <TD> it depends what the DNS seeds do
 62 2013-10-14 09:38:22 <TD> but you definitely see less than me.
 63 2013-10-14 09:38:31 <TD> oddly, all the ones i see are MultiBits. no android wallets at all. usually it's lots of androids
 64 2013-10-14 09:40:16 <jouke> Do you also have multiple connections from the same IPs?
 65 2013-10-14 09:41:41 <jouke> One node seems to have no double connections at all and my other nodes has quite a few.
 66 2013-10-14 09:46:55 <sipa> TD: i have 357 connections, and not a single one is bitcoinj
 67 2013-10-14 09:47:29 <TD> hmm interesting
 68 2013-10-14 09:47:37 <TD> did you manually lift the 120 connection cap?
 69 2013-10-14 09:47:55 <sipa> oh, i grepped for the wrong string; BitCoinJ is with a capital C
 70 2013-10-14 09:47:57 <TD> yeah
 71 2013-10-14 09:48:07 <sipa> still only have 8 BitCoinJ ones
 72 2013-10-14 09:48:07 <TD> legacy of a time when i couldn't spell bitcoin, haha :)
 73 2013-10-14 09:48:21 <TD> i wonder why it's so unbalanced
 74 2013-10-14 09:48:28 <sipa> dns seeds, i'm sure
 75 2013-10-14 09:48:39 <TD> yes but i'd expect them to spread the answers around at least somewhat randomly
 76 2013-10-14 09:48:43 <TD> i mean their smartness is limited, right
 77 2013-10-14 09:49:00 <jouke> 357 connections? :o
 78 2013-10-14 09:49:18 <jouke> none of my nodes has ever reached that amount of connected nodes.
 79 2013-10-14 09:49:33 <sipa> it's been running for a long time
 80 2013-10-14 09:49:41 <sipa> and i'm running one of the dns seeds on the same system
 81 2013-10-14 09:50:05 <sipa> there's no special logic favoring it, but i'm sure it reaches very high reachability scores in my crawler
 82 2013-10-14 09:51:53 <sipa> 77 days uptime
 83 2013-10-14 09:52:47 <sipa> TD: how do you mean, spread answers around?
 84 2013-10-14 09:53:52 <jouke> I was under the assumption that there was some mechanism that somehow prevented connections to and from the same IP-range. Is this true?
 85 2013-10-14 09:54:13 <sipa> only to
 86 2013-10-14 10:01:56 <TD> sipa: i mean, the seeds would select each node with somewhat equal probability
 87 2013-10-14 10:02:23 <TD> grumble. for some reason peter's testnet DNS seed is still returning single results quite often for me
 88 2013-10-14 10:05:14 <warren> TD: why does bitcoinj not save previously seen peers?
 89 2013-10-14 10:05:42 <TD> because i never got around to writing that code
 90 2013-10-14 10:05:54 <warren> ah
 91 2013-10-14 10:05:58 <TD> also because it's a bit tricky, due to the startup time requirements
 92 2013-10-14 10:06:10 <TD> people expect their smartphone wallets to be on the network within a few seconds of opening them
 93 2013-10-14 10:06:23 <TD> so if you end up with a stale db and spend a lot of time trying nodes that went away, that's not good for the UX
 94 2013-10-14 10:06:42 <TD> however, it could certainly spend a few seconds trying previously tried nodes
 95 2013-10-14 10:07:04 <TD> unfortunately there have always been higher priority bugs and so on
 96 2013-10-14 10:07:12 <warren> previous tried nodes are better than nothing if DNS failed for some reason
 97 2013-10-14 10:07:39 <TD> well, the next thing i'll do in that area is using the DNS seed dumps provided by sipa, to replace the hard-coded seeds array
 98 2013-10-14 10:07:45 <TD> that's pretty straightforward
 99 2013-10-14 10:07:49 <warren> ah
100 2013-10-14 10:07:51 <TD> using addr broadcasts remains on the todo list for now
101 2013-10-14 10:08:23 <TD> hmmm
102 2013-10-14 10:08:49 <TD> for instance, one bug that needs to be resolved - if the DNS seeds don't return enough answers, then bitcoinj doesn't notice and will connect to the same nodes more than once
103 2013-10-14 10:09:08 <TD> that appears to be biasing my getpeerinfos actually. i just noticed that some of them are the same IP connecting multiple times, which isn't supposed to occur when the seeds are healthy
104 2013-10-14 10:09:23 <TD> sipa: why does the seed software sometimes return just one IP address?
105 2013-10-14 10:09:41 <sipa> TD: i suppose because it only has one IP it considers good enough
106 2013-10-14 10:09:49 <sipa> or is it a different one every time?
107 2013-10-14 10:10:17 <sipa> TD: imho, you shouldn't rely on seeds to give you any sane answer
108 2013-10-14 10:10:34 <TD> well, that's easy to say :) but then if they aren't going to yield useful answers, why have them?
109 2013-10-14 10:10:37 <sipa> use it as one source of potential peer addresses in a pool, and pick from the pool
110 2013-10-14 10:10:41 <jouke> TD: hmm, I do have multiple BitCoinJ connections as well.
111 2013-10-14 10:10:46 <TD> sipa: what i've seen is sometimes it gives a single IP, and sometimes it gives back like 20-30
112 2013-10-14 10:10:53 <TD> apparently at random
113 2013-10-14 10:10:55 <sipa> hmm, that sounds like a bug
114 2013-10-14 10:11:00 <TD> like just running dig over and over, gives that behaviour
115 2013-10-14 10:11:46 <TD> it's hard to reproduce though
116 2013-10-14 10:17:19 <warren> TD: listen for raw responses before the firewall and see if you have a DNS interception attack? =)
117 2013-10-14 10:17:26 <warren> (not kidding)
118 2013-10-14 10:23:08 <TD> "the firewall" where i'm sitting is a large network of border ACLs running on a parallel internet
119 2013-10-14 10:23:21 <TD> not so easy to do what you suggest :)
120 2013-10-14 10:34:48 <TD> 
ACTION untabifies bitcoinj

121 2013-10-14 10:35:21 <TD> it's kind of amazing how java IDE's can't agree on tabs vs spaces, yet make the difference completely invisible, resulting in totally mangled diffs and files which only become apparent when you inspect them using less or via the web
122 2013-10-14 10:37:04 <warren> which java ide do you prefer?
123 2013-10-14 10:40:31 <nkuttler> TD: that sounds more like a user pref though
124 2013-10-14 10:40:44 <TD> intellij. but i guess netbeans is ok too.
125 2013-10-14 10:41:14 <TD> eclipse uses tabs. intellij defaults to spaces, but will treat tabs as the same indent size. so you can't see it. then some other tool assumes 8 spaces instead of 4 and you get a mess
126 2013-10-14 10:49:44 <warren> you can define custom git hooks that could just fail on commit if <condition>
127 2013-10-14 10:49:52 <warren> that could be a "solution"
128 2013-10-14 11:34:13 <TD> amazing. another petahash was added in just one month
129 2013-10-14 11:34:24 <TD> i wonder if 256 bits is enough for how low we're gonna go :)
130 2013-10-14 11:35:05 <sipa> TD: saw my g+ post?
131 2013-10-14 11:35:31 <TD> haha
132 2013-10-14 11:35:32 <TD> wow
133 2013-10-14 11:35:38 <TD> no i hadn't seen that
134 2013-10-14 11:36:54 <TD> the fedora gif is quite awesome too
135 2013-10-14 11:45:33 <sipa> TD: i had no idea fedora was the name of a hat, before that post :)
136 2013-10-14 11:45:46 <TD> heh
137 2013-10-14 11:45:50 <kinlo> :)
138 2013-10-14 11:50:14 <goodbtc> why do I see these in my bitcoin-qt?
139 2013-10-14 11:50:16 <goodbtc> https://blockchain.info/tx/ebceae11b1674250222d567ca6b582fd235279fe2279a23ebc0427aa55630906
140 2013-10-14 11:50:25 <goodbtc> https://blockchain.info/tx/fe03a3530f2d7c56c1d5118e5c11862f18ded91fc1d3f45f30a24ad7e484da99
141 2013-10-14 11:51:02 <goodbtc> Date: 10/14/2013 07:13
142 2013-10-14 11:51:02 <goodbtc> From: unknown
143 2013-10-14 11:51:02 <goodbtc> Status: 83 confirmations
144 2013-10-14 11:51:03 <goodbtc> To: 1C7zdTfnkzmr13HfA2vNm5SJYRK6nEKyq8 (own address, label: zzzdelete this)
145 2013-10-14 11:51:24 <sipa> why would you not?
146 2013-10-14 11:53:06 <goodbtc> beacuse are not my addresses
147 2013-10-14 11:53:07 <t7> maybe hes on a fork
148 2013-10-14 11:53:32 <t7> goodbtc: maybe you got someones private key at random :D
149 2013-10-14 11:53:39 <goodbtc> no way
150 2013-10-14 11:54:28 <t7> i dont think it would be unethical to transfer those (if that was the case)
151 2013-10-14 11:55:27 <t7> bitcoin is like a lottery
152 2013-10-14 11:55:42 <c0rw1n> technically, if you can transfer property, it's yours
153 2013-10-14 11:55:43 <goodbtc> the universe will collase if I found a private key by mistake
154 2013-10-14 11:55:55 <TD> you don't recognise the label?
155 2013-10-14 11:56:04 <goodbtc> maybe I forgot the label
156 2013-10-14 11:56:09 <sipa> c0rw1n: also, if your neighbour's house's door is not locked, you can walk in
157 2013-10-14 11:56:11 <_dr> maybe you and him are using the same shitty entropy source ;)
158 2013-10-14 11:56:14 <goodbtc> but i didn't ordered any transaction today
159 2013-10-14 11:56:27 <goodbtc> (I named it zzzdeletethis)
160 2013-10-14 11:56:27 <t7> sipa: no if you found a coin in the desert
161 2013-10-14 11:56:37 <sipa> that's different
162 2013-10-14 11:56:50 <sipa> but saying that ability to transfer implies ownership is ridiculous
163 2013-10-14 11:56:57 <sipa> in some cases it is
164 2013-10-14 11:57:03 <c0rw1n> sipa: don't play dumb, you're not
165 2013-10-14 11:57:25 <goodbtc> 1C7zdTfnkzmr13HfA2vNm5SJYRK6nEKyq8 maybe I used it to pay something
166 2013-10-14 11:57:34 <sipa> c0rw1n: ?
167 2013-10-14 11:57:43 <sipa> i haven't followed all discussion
168 2013-10-14 11:57:46 <TD> yeah
169 2013-10-14 11:57:49 <TD> or it's a change address?
170 2013-10-14 11:58:04 <c0rw1n> i'm saying you're not dumb, so don't try and fake the unability to parse shit
171 2013-10-14 11:58:15 <t7> :|
172 2013-10-14 11:58:33 <goodbtc> i have to focus to remember, then I will come back with conclusion :)
173 2013-10-14 11:58:40 <sipa> c0rw1n: i have no idea what you're talking about, but nevermind :)
174 2013-10-14 12:02:08 <michagogo> From the technical standpoint, as far as the network is concerned, there's no "owner" -- there's just the conditions that need to be met to spend
175 2013-10-14 12:02:44 <sipa> right, ownership is a legal term which doesn't necessarily coincide with the technical side
176 2013-10-14 12:02:59 <sipa> of course, you can agree to let the technical side determine the owner
177 2013-10-14 12:28:16 <jgarzik> mornin'
178 2013-10-14 12:47:35 <goodbtc> thank you, jgarzik
179 2013-10-14 12:47:57 <jgarzik> ?
180 2013-10-14 12:48:12 <goodbtc> for everything
181 2013-10-14 12:50:24 <sipa> ...
182 2013-10-14 12:51:08 <goodbtc> i love sipa too, but his graphs are killing me :) (sorry for off topic)
183 2013-10-14 12:52:41 <phantomcircuit> sipa, i like cookies
184 2013-10-14 12:57:00 <sipa> 
ACTION always accepts cookies from phantomcircuit's domain

185 2013-10-14 13:01:19 <Diablo-D3> sipa: ...
186 2013-10-14 13:05:25 <Darwerft> Hello, question: How can I bypass oclvanitygen's prefix limit?
187 2013-10-14 13:05:40 <Darwerft> I tried: oclvanitygen.exe -p 1 -d 0 -o outresults.txt 1933phfhK3ZgFQNLGSDXvqCn32k2buXY8a
188 2013-10-14 13:05:51 <Darwerft> But it says prefix is too long
189 2013-10-14 13:07:01 <_dr> maybe you should listen to what it says
190 2013-10-14 13:07:23 <_dr> instead of trying to work around it. there's no way you'll generate this prefix
191 2013-10-14 13:07:40 <sipa> it's not actually "too long"; it would only require a few eons to solve
192 2013-10-14 13:08:15 <Darwerft> Well I know about math and about how I will NEVER EVER Solve it, but I like to think about the chance being there (:
193 2013-10-14 13:08:21 <_dr> sipa: wiki In astronomy an aeon is defined as a billion years (109) :)
194 2013-10-14 13:08:48 <michagogo> cloud|Darwerft: nah, it's impossible and it's saving you from wasting your time
195 2013-10-14 13:09:02 <_dr> Darwerft: like that chance of the air molecules to your side spontaneously turning into jesus?
196 2013-10-14 13:09:12 <Darwerft> Its only impossible as long as no one never tries.
197 2013-10-14 13:09:14 <michagogo> cloud|If you really want to try, patch the source and recompile
198 2013-10-14 13:10:35 <amiller> maaku how is freicoin a colored coin or support an spv colored coin
199 2013-10-14 13:12:29 <sipa> Darwerft: perhaps you should just go stand in front of your house, with your arms open
200 2013-10-14 13:12:29 <sipa> ok, a few aeons is certainly a gross underestimate then
201 2013-10-14 13:12:30 <sipa> the chance for a block of gold windling down with a parachute right in your arms is certainly larger
202 2013-10-14 13:13:19 <sipa> also, change the regexp match to an exact equality test
203 2013-10-14 13:13:26 <sipa> that will be faster
204 2013-10-14 13:14:52 <Darwerft> sipa I know about how higly unlikely it is..  But I still like to think about the chance being there (:
205 2013-10-14 13:15:02 <Darwerft> Right NOW its not no one tries?
206 2013-10-14 13:15:17 <Darwerft> I can do math.
207 2013-10-14 13:15:20 <_dr> unless your name is zaphod and you're piloting a ship with an infinity improbability drive the chance = no chance
208 2013-10-14 13:16:10 <Darwerft> why are you guys so much against me wasting my time?
209 2013-10-14 13:16:18 <Jere_Jones> In at least one universe it would be found on the first try. Why not this universe? :)
210 2013-10-14 13:17:24 <Darwerft> There is only: "no chance" as long as nobody tries, when I start trying, there suddenly is a chance.
211 2013-10-14 13:17:51 <_dr> yeah
212 2013-10-14 13:17:51 <michagogo> cloud|Darwerft: except that there isn't
213 2013-10-14 13:18:05 <_dr> bitcoin considered harmful
214 2013-10-14 13:18:20 <michagogo> cloud|Say you can do a million addresses a second
215 2013-10-14 13:18:38 <Darwerft> I can do 5.5 million addys per sec.
216 2013-10-14 13:19:22 <gribble> 0
217 2013-10-14 13:19:22 <michagogo> cloud|;;calc 365*24*60*60*5500000 / (2**160)
218 2013-10-14 13:19:42 <Darwerft> Why am I not allowed to have a litle fun, come on!?
219 2013-10-14 13:19:45 <michagogo> cloud|The chance of finding it within a year is low enough that gribble rounds it down to 0
220 2013-10-14 13:20:06 <Darwerft> But funny thing is, in real world it is not 0
221 2013-10-14 13:20:31 <michagogo> cloud|;;calc 1000*365*24*60*60*5500000 / (2**160)
222 2013-10-14 13:20:32 <gribble> 0
223 2013-10-14 13:20:33 <_dr> well then just do it already
224 2013-10-14 13:20:59 <Darwerft> Cant somebody set a limit in oclvanitygen
225 2013-10-14 13:21:28 <michagogo> cloud|As is the chance of finding it within a millennium
226 2013-10-14 13:21:53 <_dr> i bet the snprintf of the eta will cause a bof :)
227 2013-10-14 13:22:00 <gribble> 0
228 2013-10-14 13:22:00 <michagogo> cloud|;;calc 1000000*1000*365*24*60*60*5500000 / (2**160)
229 2013-10-14 13:22:30 <Darwerft> I dont care if I never find it, its the tought of it I like.. :P
230 2013-10-14 13:22:48 <_dr> just grep the source for the "too long" part and remove the check
231 2013-10-14 13:22:51 <sipa> stop wasting your time :)
232 2013-10-14 13:23:17 <michagogo> cloud|Same with the chance of finding it within an eon
233 2013-10-14 13:23:43 <michagogo> cloud|You'll end up burning out your GPU
234 2013-10-14 13:23:56 <Darwerft> sipa, im 17 years what better is there to do that wating time?
235 2013-10-14 13:24:07 <Darwerft> *than
236 2013-10-14 13:24:10 <Darwerft> *wasting
237 2013-10-14 13:24:19 <michagogo> cloud|You're better off solo mining and hoping to get a dozen blocks in a row
238 2013-10-14 13:24:49 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1.67 Mhps, given difficulty of 189281249.281, is 15436 years, 30 weeks, 0 days, 14 hours, 33 minutes, and 35 seconds
239 2013-10-14 13:24:49 <jgarzik> ;;gentime 1.67
240 2013-10-14 13:24:59 <jgarzik> go go go cpu mining
241 2013-10-14 13:25:15 <michagogo> cloud|Darwerft: waste it on something fun, like a free copy of Sid Meier's Civilization V or Mafia II, delivered by Steam after you vote in the golden joystick awards
242 2013-10-14 13:25:41 <_dr> too bad for you i've got a LUCKY cpu!
243 2013-10-14 13:25:55 <Darwerft> Ive got the lucky gpu!
244 2013-10-14 13:27:15 <Darwerft> Are you not afraid that as the m/t hash on the asic rise, we will se the keys per sec. rise too?
245 2013-10-14 13:27:36 <Darwerft> One day it might only take 100.000 years to take on a whole addy?
246 2013-10-14 13:27:40 <_dr> no. because asics do sha. and keys require ecc
247 2013-10-14 13:27:41 <michagogo> cloud|Darwerft: well
248 2013-10-14 13:27:49 <michagogo> cloud|An ASIC doesn't really help
249 2013-10-14 13:28:03 <michagogo> cloud|You need to randomly generate privkeys
250 2013-10-14 13:28:15 <Darwerft> what about qbits? what about quantum computing?
251 2013-10-14 13:28:29 <Darwerft> surely computers will get stronger?
252 2013-10-14 13:28:35 <_dr> what about richard stallman's beard?
253 2013-10-14 13:28:41 <michagogo> cloud|And then convert those to ecdsa pubkeys
254 2013-10-14 13:29:11 <michagogo> cloud|And then take the ecdsa pubkeys and hash them with (sha256 and then?) ripemd160
255 2013-10-14 13:29:36 <michagogo> cloud|(And then convert to base58 and check for a match)
256 2013-10-14 13:31:12 <_dr> modify the protocol?
257 2013-10-14 13:31:17 <michagogo> cloud|So an ASIC wouldn't really be helpful -- at least any ASIC that's been made so far
258 2013-10-14 13:31:45 <michagogo> cloud|Current Asia's are only useful for double sha256
259 2013-10-14 13:31:51 <michagogo> cloud|ASICs*
260 2013-10-14 14:42:40 <jgarzik> orphan block during testnet sync?  Surprising.
261 2013-10-14 14:42:47 <jgarzik> headers-first sync cannot come too soon...
262 2013-10-14 14:51:18 <sipa> jgarzik: been working on redoing it from scratch, with semantics that match the current mechanism better (hopefully to make pulltester happy, but there were some generic problems with it)
263 2013-10-14 14:51:40 <sipa> jgarzik: and extracting as many patches from it before the actual change
264 2013-10-14 14:51:44 <jgarzik> sipa, anything I can help with?
265 2013-10-14 14:51:54 <sipa> jgarzik: i've pullreq'ed a few :)
266 2013-10-14 14:52:08 <jgarzik> cool
267 2013-10-14 14:53:11 <jgarzik> yeah, for major linux projects, the workflow often looks like this:  (1) write new feature, (2) go back and figure out sequence of patches that make merging easiest, with least breakage and maximal early testing.
268 2013-10-14 14:53:20 <jgarzik> sometimes #2 winds up almost rewriting #1
269 2013-10-14 14:55:40 <sipa> after the current ones, i'll probably write one to just reorganize the block handling code (adding ProcessBlockheader and AcceptBlockHeader in addition to ProcessBlock and AcceptBlock, but several helper methods change as well)
270 2013-10-14 14:56:06 <sipa> then one to have CNode track which blocks their peers know
271 2013-10-14 14:56:17 <sipa> and then one to switch the actual syncing
272 2013-10-14 14:56:29 <TD> why wasn
273 2013-10-14 14:56:32 <TD> wasn't the pull tester happy?
274 2013-10-14 14:56:40 <sipa> it doesn't support getheaders :p
275 2013-10-14 14:56:59 <sipa> matt wrote a patched version that does, but there's some bugs in it apparently
276 2013-10-14 14:57:07 <sipa> anyway, the reason to rewrite it isn't pulltester really
277 2013-10-14 14:57:28 <sipa> it's that the semantics weren't always sane (you can make a node reorganize back, without it knowing the new best block already)
278 2013-10-14 14:59:22 <thermoman> after starting with -txindex=1 and -reindex=1 *once* (as written in the docs) i have to start the client afterwards with -txindex=1 otherwise the txindex isn't updated
279 2013-10-14 14:59:36 <sipa> that is not correct
280 2013-10-14 14:59:39 <thermoman> that's not what i read from the docs that says "just run this once"
281 2013-10-14 14:59:49 <sipa> you don't need to specify -txindex after building
282 2013-10-14 14:59:55 <sipa> only when you start a new database
283 2013-10-14 14:59:57 <thermoman> that's strange
284 2013-10-14 15:00:13 <sipa> look in debug.log
285 2013-10-14 15:00:20 <sipa> does it say "Transaction index enabled" ?
286 2013-10-14 15:00:23 <thermoman> mate queried my bitcoind and got no answer for a txid
287 2013-10-14 15:00:29 <thermoman> after txindex and reindex it's found
288 2013-10-14 15:00:53 <thermoman> sipa: will check tomorrow
289 2013-10-14 15:00:54 <sipa> if you've reindexed since setting txindex, yes
290 2013-10-14 15:01:10 <thermoman> i'm confused
291 2013-10-14 15:01:15 <thermoman> i started with both params
292 2013-10-14 15:01:18 <sipa> -txindex sets whether the transaction index needs to be enabled or not
293 2013-10-14 15:01:18 <thermoman> stopped the client
294 2013-10-14 15:01:23 <thermoman> started it without
295 2013-10-14 15:01:26 <thermoman> then tx not found
296 2013-10-14 15:01:30 <thermoman> started again with both
297 2013-10-14 15:01:31 <sipa> for the database being *created*
298 2013-10-14 15:01:32 <thermoman> then stopped
299 2013-10-14 15:01:39 <sipa> it can't be changed once the database is created
300 2013-10-14 15:01:40 <thermoman> then started with only txindex=1
301 2013-10-14 15:01:43 <sipa> -reindex recreates it, though
302 2013-10-14 15:01:43 <thermoman> tx is found
303 2013-10-14 15:02:10 <sipa> anyway, you can just set txindex=1 if you want it, it's always safe
304 2013-10-14 15:02:12 <thermoman> then how could this behaviour be explained?
305 2013-10-14 15:02:20 <thermoman> anyway, have to go
306 2013-10-14 15:02:25 <sipa> and it will fail in case the database doesn't have an index
307 2013-10-14 15:02:29 <sipa> rather than silently disable it
308 2013-10-14 15:03:10 <sipa> that sounds impossible
309 2013-10-14 15:03:20 <sipa> so there's a bug, or it's not exactly as you're saying :)
310 2013-10-14 17:54:25 <Luke-Jr> warren: why are you asking to close pull requests that aren't merged yet?
311 2013-10-14 18:42:36 <warren> Luke-Jr: your particular PR was favored earlier but clearly wouldn't be merged, and was redundant, I also wasn't the first to suggest it be closed.
312 2013-10-14 18:53:12 <Luke-Jr> warren: I was thinking of the other one mainly
313 2013-10-14 18:55:21 <warren> Luke-Jr: i don't remember which?
314 2013-10-14 18:56:03 <Luke-Jr> me either XD
315 2013-10-14 18:56:55 <Luke-Jr> also, I don't see why it wouldn't be merged. if no-wallet is merged, that one would need to be to make it useful for pools
316 2013-10-14 18:57:15 <Luke-Jr> aha, the other one was block blacklisting RPC
317 2013-10-14 18:57:36 <warren> Luke-Jr: oh because it was also in the headers first pull
318 2013-10-14 18:58:00 <Luke-Jr> …
319 2013-10-14 19:12:31 <gmaxwell> I've had a testnet node running (on tor) for 2.5 hours without successfully connecting to the network. It managed one connection but it must have been to a broken node, since it didn't stay connected or pull any blocks.
320 2013-10-14 19:18:46 <MC1984> ive seen testnet not connect for ages even without tor
321 2013-10-14 19:27:33 <BlueMatt> MC1984: really? a testnet node using dnsseed should pretty quickly find my seednode
322 2013-10-14 19:27:35 <BlueMatt> if nothing else
323 2013-10-14 19:28:01 <MC1984> yeah one or twice
324 2013-10-14 19:28:22 <MC1984> i just assumed there are probably only like 20 testnet nodes
325 2013-10-14 19:34:25 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: your testnet seed returns a lot of non-working addresses, which really gums up connecting over tor.
326 2013-10-14 19:35:07 <BlueMatt> my testnet seed returns 1 address...
327 2013-10-14 19:35:12 <BlueMatt> which I know to be working
328 2013-10-14 19:35:23 <BlueMatt> its on my todo list to eventually fix that...
329 2013-10-14 19:36:34 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: interesting, well then it seems to return an address which I can't reach over tor.
330 2013-10-14 19:41:03 <Luke-Jr> re staging altcoin - I wonder if it would make sense to have one setup that can be manually re-org'd to mainnet regularly, and uses the same transactions
331 2013-10-14 19:41:20 <Luke-Jr> so we'd get the full load of mainnet, but have an altchain to fork experiments with as much as needed
332 2013-10-14 19:41:41 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: can you double-check if you can reach testnet-seed.bluematt.me ?
333 2013-10-14 19:41:44 <BlueMatt> over tor or not?
334 2013-10-14 19:42:48 <BlueMatt> 
ACTION -> lunch

335 2013-10-14 19:43:04 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: :-/ connected now, of course. Irritating.
336 2013-10-14 19:56:14 <shamoon> i haven't c++'d in a while and figure it's time to get back into it. might as well start with bitcoin!
337 2013-10-14 19:56:15 <shamoon> w00t w00t!
338 2013-10-14 19:56:52 <shamoon> so is it possible to "execute" the source without building?
339 2013-10-14 19:59:22 <Luke-Jr> ..
340 2013-10-14 19:59:36 <Luke-Jr> if you have such a thing for C++, I guess?
341 2013-10-14 20:00:59 <shamoon> trying the build instructions for unix
342 2013-10-14 20:01:00 <shamoon> configure: error: libdb_cxx headers missing
343 2013-10-14 20:02:05 <Luke-Jr> shamoon: did you install them?
344 2013-10-14 20:02:15 <shamoon> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/build-unix.md
345 2013-10-14 20:02:17 <shamoon> i ran through this
346 2013-10-14 20:02:40 <shamoon> when i try sudo apt-get install libdb4.8++-dev
347 2013-10-14 20:02:46 <shamoon> i get E: Package 'libdb4.8++-dev' has no installation candidate
348 2013-10-14 20:03:29 <deego> When I bitcoind getaccountaddress foo the second time, sometimes I get the same address as last time, but sometimes I get an entirely new address. Why the variation?
349 2013-10-14 20:07:53 <shamoon> i get E: Package 'libdb4.8++-dev' has no installation candidate
350 2013-10-14 20:07:55 <shamoon> anyone?
351 2013-10-14 20:16:42 <Luke-Jr> shamoon: what OS?
352 2013-10-14 20:16:46 <shamoon> ubuntu
353 2013-10-14 20:16:56 <Luke-Jr> shamoon: add the Bitcoin PPA
354 2013-10-14 20:17:37 <shamoon> Luke-Jr: thanks
355 2013-10-14 20:18:41 <warren> gmaxwell: can't exit nodes define any reachability policy they want?
356 2013-10-14 20:18:45 <shamoon> Luke-Jr: E: Package 'libboost1.37-dev' has no installation candidate
357 2013-10-14 20:18:57 <shamoon> nevermind
358 2013-10-14 20:18:58 <shamoon> usng all
359 2013-10-14 20:19:34 <gmaxwell> warren: I can't figure out what you're getting at with your question.
360 2013-10-14 20:20:51 <Subo1977> shamoon: wich ubuntu?
361 2013-10-14 20:20:55 <shamoon> 12.04
362 2013-10-14 20:21:07 <shamoon> it's building now
363 2013-10-14 20:21:09 <shamoon> rather.. making
364 2013-10-14 20:21:14 <shamoon> takes a while, eh?
365 2013-10-14 20:23:38 <Subo1977> a few minutes, depending on maschine
366 2013-10-14 20:23:42 <shamoon> if i want to make changes to the code, do i need to make again every time?
367 2013-10-14 20:23:47 <shamoon> or is there a faster way to test small changes
368 2013-10-14 20:23:57 <Subo1977> yep. every time
369 2013-10-14 20:24:06 <shamoon> so if i want to make a small text change or something, gotta rebuild
370 2013-10-14 20:24:18 <Subo1977> on second complie it goes faster. only changes
371 2013-10-14 20:24:44 <Subo1977> if you having misterios probs, make a make clean
372 2013-10-14 20:25:17 <shamoon> gotcha
373 2013-10-14 20:30:24 <shamoon> can i make without upnp?
374 2013-10-14 20:31:54 <Luke-Jr> yes
375 2013-10-14 20:32:01 <Luke-Jr> it should do that by default if you don't have the headers
376 2013-10-14 20:32:29 <shamoon> was giving me an error: net.cpp:18:32: fatal error: miniupnpc/miniwget.h: No such file or directory
377 2013-10-14 20:32:38 <shamoon> so i installed miniupnpc
378 2013-10-14 20:34:04 <Subo1977> ./configure --disable-upnp-defaul
379 2013-10-14 20:34:17 <Subo1977> ./configure --disable-upnp-default
380 2013-10-14 20:36:22 <Subo1977> sudo apt-get install libminiupnpc-dev
381 2013-10-14 20:38:48 <shamoon> when the software runs, what's the first file / fucntion taht runs?
382 2013-10-14 20:40:21 <shamoon> is it main.cpp?
383 2013-10-14 20:41:11 <Subo1977> i dont know
384 2013-10-14 20:44:56 <shamoon> i guess AppInit
385 2013-10-14 20:53:25 <Luke-Jr> shamoon: report a bug
386 2013-10-14 20:53:45 <shamoon> Luke-Jr: will do
387 2013-10-14 21:20:33 <jgarzik> http://op-co.de/blog/posts/android_ssl_downgrade/
388 2013-10-14 22:20:58 <skinnkavaj> jgarzik: Is SSL broken by NSA?
389 2013-10-14 22:24:21 <gmaxwell> skinnkavaj: yes, and they use that power to create an endless sea of sockpuppets to ask offtopic black helecoptor questions in #bitcoin-dev for the purpose of disrupting community access to actual discussion about development.
390 2013-10-14 22:27:18 <nsh> 
ACTION is so tempted to repaste the last 1h of join and quit lines 

391 2013-10-14 22:29:47 <nsh> i've got a better idea, i'll start emailing random questions for irc channels to the dev mailing list instead
392 2013-10-14 22:29:51 <nsh> if we're going to be dicks about it
393 2013-10-14 22:29:53 <nsh> :)
394 2013-10-14 22:29:56 <nsh> *from
395 2013-10-14 22:34:41 <skinnkavaj> welcome gavinandresen, how are you? when is 0.9 coming? whats going to be in it? what do you need to test first?
396 2013-10-14 22:35:27 <gavinandresen> I'm good, I don't know, I don't know, and I don't know.  It's early here, my brain hasn't started yet.
397 2013-10-14 22:37:18 <sipa> 
ACTION boots gavinandresen

398 2013-10-14 22:37:44 <ecoloco> Hello. Can you recommend a good web hosting that accept Bitcoin? /msg me
399 2013-10-14 22:39:13 <skinnkavaj> gavinandresen: thank god sipa booted you then. jgarzik posted this minutes ago http://op-co.de/blog/posts/android_ssl_downgrade/
400 2013-10-14 22:45:06 <sipa> 
ACTION nags annoyingly for ACKs on 2784, 2840, 2933, 3077, 3083, 3087

401 2013-10-14 22:45:58 <sipa> gmaxwell, jgarzik, gavinandresen, wumpus: ^
402 2013-10-14 22:46:09 <gmaxwell> sipa: I acked 2784 already I thought? :P
403 2013-10-14 22:46:17 <sipa> pre-implementation!
404 2013-10-14 22:46:26 <gmaxwell> oh you implemented. cool.
405 2013-10-14 22:46:40 <gavinandresen> sipa: I'll test your spiffy github-merge script on those this morning
406 2013-10-14 22:47:27 <sipa> gavinandresen: i've used it myself on 2937, worked fine
407 2013-10-14 22:47:55 <sipa> i should add something that makes it compare the local merge with github's merge
408 2013-10-14 22:51:09 <michagogo> Would you mind also merging 3086?
409 2013-10-14 22:51:49 <sipa> michagogo: let me have a look!
410 2013-10-14 22:53:23 <gavinandresen> sipa: 2840 needs rebase?
411 2013-10-14 22:53:48 <sipa> yup; willdo
412 2013-10-14 23:03:51 <michagogo> (BTW, speaking of 3086, I noticed that the version of Luke's key in the repo is expired...)
413 2013-10-14 23:04:24 <gmaxwell> sipa: so on 2784 implementation. If a tcp connection stays up but a peer just never sends anything at all (other than tcp acks of course), will it never get disconnected?
414 2013-10-14 23:04:39 <gmaxwell> (we seem to have lost all comparisons with nLastRecv)
415 2013-10-14 23:06:12 <sipa> gmaxwell: there is still a disconnect after 60s of nothing
416 2013-10-14 23:08:39 <gmaxwell> sipa: I don't believe you. :P There is a disconnect if there is nothing in the first 60 seconds, but if you get something and then is forever mute I don't see where it gets disconnected.
417 2013-10-14 23:09:36 <sipa> gmaxwell: it should immediately send a ping
418 2013-10-14 23:10:02 <sipa> and 5 minutes later disconnect if no pong arrives
419 2013-10-14 23:10:10 <sipa> maybe that needs some comments
420 2013-10-14 23:10:22 <sipa> hmm, that ping is probably only sent after version/verack are completed
421 2013-10-14 23:12:03 <sipa> actually, there must be another bug