1 2014-01-11 00:14:38 <ryan-c> andytoshi: hehe, whoops
2 2014-01-11 00:19:55 <jgarzik> Beta testing new bootstrap.dat torrent!
3 2014-01-11 00:19:58 <jgarzik> http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/bootstrap.dat.torrent
4 2014-01-11 00:20:50 <jgarzik> Should successfully re-use ~70% of the old bootstrap.dat
5 2014-01-11 00:57:47 <sipa> i'm trying to create a patch that implements headers-first's per-peer-download-tracking without actually making it headers-first
6 2014-01-11 00:57:51 <sipa> and i
7 2014-01-11 00:58:03 <sipa> 'm still faced with hundreds of orphans being downloaded
8 2014-01-11 01:05:28 <sipa> maybe i should first trying syncing from scratch on head, and not feel bad when it improves but remains horrible for now
9 2014-01-11 01:06:43 <gmaxwell> sipa: how are you doing it without using headers first to know what blocks to get? just using getheaders to read slightly ahead?
10 2014-01-11 01:07:03 <sipa> gmaxwell: no, downloading the blocks as they are now downloaded
11 2014-01-11 01:07:27 <sipa> so every getdata for a block, goes via a per-peer queue, and gets tracked how many are in flight etc
12 2014-01-11 03:20:41 <jgarzik> Beta-testing bootstrap.dat torrent! Updated to block 279,000. http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/bootstrap.dat.torrent
13 2014-01-11 03:21:02 <TheLordOfTime> jgarzik: can I slap you?
14 2014-01-11 03:22:04 <TheLordOfTime> that got posted at the same time in two channels and pinged me as possible amsg spam o.O
15 2014-01-11 03:22:15 <TheLordOfTime> jgarzik: (in #bitcoin, also, there seems to be a temporary ban on URLs)
16 2014-01-11 03:25:54 <jgarzik> TheLordOfTime, well, it's not.
17 2014-01-11 03:26:03 <TheLordOfTime> jgarzik: i realize that, the ping threw me off
18 2014-01-11 03:26:07 <TheLordOfTime> ACTION is editing his notifier now
19 2014-01-11 03:26:36 <TheLordOfTime> jgarzik: kinda instinctual at the moment, there's been a bit of malware spam regarding bitcoins on the channels i watch so i'm kinda on high alert
20 2014-01-11 03:26:44 <TheLordOfTime> so forgive me :/
21 2014-01-11 03:27:22 <TheLordOfTime> bad day for mods in general though, there's more spam today than I've seen in two years of being on IRC :/
22 2014-01-11 05:27:41 <kezu> noob question: what is the best way to get a ticker that auto updates say from gox or bitstamp?
23 2014-01-11 05:27:55 <kezu> i can use php and file_get_contents
24 2014-01-11 05:28:09 <kezu> and decode json to php object
25 2014-01-11 05:28:18 <justanotheruser> kezu: you can check the ticker every second
26 2014-01-11 05:28:20 <kezu> but would i need javascript to get it to update at an interval?
27 2014-01-11 05:29:01 <justanotheruser> kezu: oh, you're referring to updating the users ticker automatically, not your servers.
28 2014-01-11 05:29:18 <justanotheruser> Yeah, javascript and make the user do it, or you do it and serve it to the user using ajax
29 2014-01-11 05:29:22 <kezu> well i want to add it to a webpage
30 2014-01-11 05:29:30 <kezu> ah i see
31 2014-01-11 05:29:42 <kezu> what is the best method?
32 2014-01-11 05:29:56 <kezu> how do ticker sites do it?
33 2014-01-11 05:30:07 <justanotheruser> kezu: check their source, I have no idea
34 2014-01-11 05:30:40 <justanotheruser> most ticker sites probably serve the ticker data from their servers rather than making the user fetch it, but that's just a guess
35 2014-01-11 05:30:40 <kezu> anyone know if i would need to pull it into php to update it regularly with javascript
36 2014-01-11 05:30:47 <kezu> or do I just use javascript
37 2014-01-11 05:51:35 <justanotheruser> What is the top stack item usually after a script executes, 1?
38 2014-01-11 06:12:03 <Gabit> Hi guys, I was trying to understand getwork/stratum and pools and one question: Miners need coinbase address from the pool so they can calculate the block properly?
39 2014-01-11 06:18:34 <lechuga__> they need the coinbase transaction
40 2014-01-11 06:23:16 <Gabit> yes, right =) Thx :)
41 2014-01-11 06:26:41 <Gabit> join /#folding@home
42 2014-01-11 06:26:48 <Gabit> sry...
43 2014-01-11 08:02:00 <wyager> For anyone interested in wallet encryption standards, the discussion on the proposed HD paper wallet encryption standard has gone a little stale. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=258678.100
44 2014-01-11 08:32:58 <jcorgan> wyager: i'm going to be doing an implementation of that soon
45 2014-01-11 08:34:43 <jcorgan> i hadn't seen your post on the bloom filter stuff though
46 2014-01-11 09:05:35 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: http://fastcompression.blogspot.fr/2013/12/finite-state-entropy-new-breed-of.html
47 2014-01-11 09:41:55 <abrkn> im attempting to clean up in vbuterin/bitcoinjs-lib, specifically the bip32 code. feel free to join: https://github.com/vbuterin/bitcoinjs-lib/issues/12
48 2014-01-11 09:50:16 <cr3pe> hi
49 2014-01-11 09:52:29 <cr3pe> So I'm wondering, is it possible to encrypt a message using an address pubkey and decrypt it with the private key? Or can you just sign messages?
50 2014-01-11 09:57:21 <justanotheruser> cr3pe: ECDSA is a signature algorithm
51 2014-01-11 09:58:41 <justanotheruser> so no
52 2014-01-11 10:04:42 <cr3pe> justanotheruser: ok, thanks.
53 2014-01-11 10:07:11 <Luke-Jr> cr3pe: I'd wait for an answer from someone who actually understands the math behind EC, if you want to be sure
54 2014-01-11 10:07:26 <Luke-Jr> (I think justanotheruser is right, though)
55 2014-01-11 10:09:22 <niston> hmm
56 2014-01-11 10:09:29 <niston> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=196378.0
57 2014-01-11 10:10:08 <justanotheruser> Luke-Jr: true. My knowledge is based on search results from possibly uninformed people because I had the same question at one point too.
58 2014-01-11 10:12:30 <justanotheruser> cr3pe: this guy is suggesting that you might be able to use ECIES with ECDSA, but he seems unsure https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=34860.msg437643#msg437643
59 2014-01-11 10:13:29 <cr3pe> niston, justanotheruser: thanks. That's useful info there.
60 2014-01-11 10:14:41 <cr3pe> I think that's what I'm looking for.
61 2014-01-11 10:15:34 <cr3pe> Another question maybe, how do you sign a message on behalf of a multisig address? Is it possible?
62 2014-01-11 10:15:47 <cr3pe> addresses like 35g7wDjkAz8uS6u1nSar1VWjWZMyb8qcym
63 2014-01-11 10:16:38 <Happzz> some testnet coins please? mt23ybmMBJMqGvHquEE8LKUiehnhV2JUMt
64 2014-01-11 10:16:45 <Happzz> thanks ahead.
65 2014-01-11 10:16:54 <cr3pe> Happzz: use a faucet?
66 2014-01-11 10:17:00 <lianj> Happzz: http://tpfaucet.appspot.com/
67 2014-01-11 10:17:24 <shesek> cr3pe, not really, now. you could sign it with multiple keys and provide multiple signatures, though
68 2014-01-11 10:17:25 <Happzz> API error 5 (urlfetch: DEADLINE_EXCEEDED)
69 2014-01-11 10:17:26 <Happzz> it's broken
70 2014-01-11 10:17:49 <shesek> Happzz, http://faucet.xeno-genesis.com/
71 2014-01-11 10:18:02 <shesek> s/now/not
72 2014-01-11 10:21:35 <cr3pe> shesek: ok that could be a solution indeed.
73 2014-01-11 10:46:42 <maaku> cr3pe: there isn't a standard mechanism for P2SH signatures, or generic scriptPubKey signatures for that matter
74 2014-01-11 10:47:20 <maaku> it's not hard to think up a mechanism by which it might be done though
75 2014-01-11 13:12:24 <erle-> i have a question regarding transactions
76 2014-01-11 13:12:44 <erle-> how is it secured that you cannot take a transaction and change the output?
77 2014-01-11 13:13:04 <erle-> it looks to me like the ecdsa only secures that the inputs are valid
78 2014-01-11 13:14:06 <erle-> like here:
79 2014-01-11 13:14:08 <erle-> https://en.bitcoin.it/w/images/en/e/e1/TxBinaryMap.png
80 2014-01-11 13:15:49 <shesek> erle-, the data that's signed with the private key includes the outputs
81 2014-01-11 13:16:30 <erle-> ok
82 2014-01-11 13:16:30 <erle-> with each private key?
83 2014-01-11 13:18:01 <shesek> the whole transaction (minus the input scripts) is signed with each private key, yes
84 2014-01-11 13:18:38 <shesek> (that is, with the default SIGHASH_ALL, other types do this differently)
85 2014-01-11 13:21:09 <erle-> shesek, of course i mean in "standard" address-to-address transactions
86 2014-01-11 13:25:09 <erle-> i am wondering why they came up with this complex script thing in the first place, but on the other side it is nice to be able to do a lot of funny transactions
87 2014-01-11 13:28:04 <bitnumus> hey, does anyone have some spare testnet coins ?
88 2014-01-11 13:28:29 <tommygunner> http://tpfaucet.appspot.com
89 2014-01-11 13:28:46 <bitnumus> thanks
90 2014-01-11 13:28:57 <bitnumus> how large is the testnet chain atm ?
91 2014-01-11 13:30:40 <kinlo> my bitcoin directory is about 630 meg
92 2014-01-11 13:30:47 <kinlo> (for testnet)
93 2014-01-11 13:31:01 <bitnumus> kinlo, thankyou, thats up to date ?
94 2014-01-11 13:31:05 <kinlo> yes
95 2014-01-11 13:38:36 <shesek> bitnumus, also see http://faucet.xeno-genesis.com/
96 2014-01-11 13:38:48 <shesek> the appspot one is not always working
97 2014-01-11 13:39:20 <shesek> oh, heh, it seems like the operator just joined a few moments before I pasted the link
98 2014-01-11 14:23:49 <andytoshi> is anyone familiar with using jansson for json encoding? how can i force it to only output 8 decimal places?
99 2014-01-11 14:23:54 <andytoshi> or better, to use decimal numbers
100 2014-01-11 14:43:59 <sipa> andytoshi: iirc Luke-Jr's bfgminer uses jansson
101 2014-01-11 14:44:56 <andytoshi> thx sipa, i'll check it out
102 2014-01-11 14:50:27 <andytoshi> hmm, indeed it does, but it avoids ever encoding decimal values
103 2014-01-11 14:51:05 <andytoshi> i suppose for now it's fine, the error is in the 16th decimal place and bitcoind does the right thing with it
104 2014-01-11 15:07:26 <bitnumus> thanks shesek , yea i didn't get any coins from the other one
105 2014-01-11 15:09:22 <shesek> bitnumus, they're usually sent eventually, but after a long delay
106 2014-01-11 15:10:09 <bitnumus> hmm, am i right in remembering that its worthwhile mining on testnet even with CPU? because the difficulty resets or something ?
107 2014-01-11 15:10:20 <bitnumus> like time delayed reset
108 2014-01-11 15:10:45 <sipa> if you're the only one mining, sure
109 2014-01-11 15:10:50 <sipa> i doubt that's the case now
110 2014-01-11 15:11:24 <bitnumus> "difficulty" : 0.81245429,
111 2014-01-11 15:11:45 <bitnumus> is it something like, if a block isn't found for 60minutes or something ?
112 2014-01-11 15:11:55 <bitnumus> i vaguely remeber was a while since i played with it
113 2014-01-11 15:11:58 <sipa> that makes no sense; it shouldn't ever go below 1
114 2014-01-11 15:12:33 <bitnumus> hmm, thats what it says!
115 2014-01-11 15:12:52 <sipa> this is not regtest mode, right?
116 2014-01-11 15:12:56 <gmaxwell> sounds like someone is trying to get altcoin support and disguise it as bitcoin support⦠:P
117 2014-01-11 15:13:16 <bitnumus> regtest? :S i'm literally running with -testnet
118 2014-01-11 15:13:18 <bitnumus> did i miss something
119 2014-01-11 15:13:30 <sipa> which version?
120 2014-01-11 15:14:28 <gmaxwell> "difficulty" : 1.00000000,
121 2014-01-11 15:15:05 <bitnumus> version of bitcoind is 0.8.5
122 2014-01-11 15:15:20 <bitnumus> i have a feeling i've missed something over the past 2 years then
123 2014-01-11 15:15:31 <bitnumus> regarding testnet
124 2014-01-11 15:15:48 <sipa> regtest is sort of a super-testnet, with even less strict rules
125 2014-01-11 15:15:56 <kinlo> bitnumus: should upgrade I guess
126 2014-01-11 15:16:02 <sipa> which does have sub-1 difficulty blocks
127 2014-01-11 15:16:18 <sipa> but if you're passing -testnet, this does not apply
128 2014-01-11 15:16:35 <bitnumus> 4:26 5:31 /usr/lib/bitcoin/bitcoind -testnet
129 2014-01-11 15:16:40 <bitnumus> thats all i'm doing yes
130 2014-01-11 15:17:02 <gmaxwell> bitnumus: what does blocks say?
131 2014-01-11 15:17:05 <bitnumus> so there are now multiple running versions of testnet
132 2014-01-11 15:17:26 <sipa> regtest isn't public; you won't be on it if you don't know about it; forget what i said
133 2014-01-11 15:17:30 <bitnumus> i'm looking for coins compatible with https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.schildbach.wallet_test&hl=en_GB
134 2014-01-11 15:18:04 <bitnumus> gmaxwell, "blocks" : 52207,
135 2014-01-11 15:18:44 <kinlo> "blocks" : 167739,
136 2014-01-11 15:19:44 <bitnumus> lol i did just jump on an old server, let me make sure i've not been a fool
137 2014-01-11 15:20:22 <bitnumus> hmm
138 2014-01-11 15:20:25 <bitnumus> version" : 32400, sorry guys
139 2014-01-11 15:20:41 <sipa> 0.3.24... why won't you DIE?
140 2014-01-11 15:20:47 <bitnumus> !
141 2014-01-11 15:30:54 <bitnumus> oo fast :D
142 2014-01-11 16:15:42 <shamoon> in testnet, when i do: getrawtransaction 4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b 1
143 2014-01-11 16:15:53 <shamoon> i get No information available about transaction (code -5)
144 2014-01-11 16:16:04 <shamoon> but somehow, these peeps got it: http://testnet.btclook.com/txn/4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b
145 2014-01-11 16:17:33 <Apocalyptic> do you have -txindex ?
146 2014-01-11 16:25:05 <andytoshi> shamoon: set 'txindex = 1' in your bitcoin.conf, reindex, and be prepared to hold another couple gig
147 2014-01-11 16:25:27 <andytoshi> actually, i don't have it either..
148 2014-01-11 16:25:52 <andytoshi> oh, derp, testnet
149 2014-01-11 16:27:31 <shamoon> andytoshi: thanks
150 2014-01-11 16:46:36 <shamoon> what's a "locktime" in a tx?
151 2014-01-11 16:49:39 <bitnumus> my testnet3 coins still haven't arrived from the faucets, don't suppose anyone has 1 spare? mrFQpcpXYvFGSFu1Gcw9QZAGWT9yduPgwz
152 2014-01-11 16:52:29 <andytoshi> bitnumus: sent 1, a6126608f8d8f7b6c5e3beb71a6a6c5095e1199554bea7546fe37626b820ed6a
153 2014-01-11 16:52:34 <bitnumus> andytoshi, thanks a lot
154 2014-01-11 16:52:58 <matjeh> bitnumus: sent 2750
155 2014-01-11 16:52:59 <bitnumus> see it, guess faucets aren't working today!
156 2014-01-11 16:53:14 <bitnumus> matjeh, lol
157 2014-01-11 16:54:00 <bitnumus> that'll keep the testing pot going!
158 2014-01-11 16:54:35 <matjeh> :)
159 2014-01-11 17:26:43 <sipa> so, it seems that the high amounts of orphans while syncing are the result of basically downloading from two peers at once
160 2014-01-11 17:27:37 <sipa> the patch i'm working on now does prevent duplicate requests (every block is only requested from one peer, and only resent elsewhere if the connection is broken - perhaps because we detect the peer isn't responding
161 2014-01-11 17:28:15 <sipa> it doesn't prevent orphans (=blocks received in incorrect order) though
162 2014-01-11 17:28:34 <sipa> and if i limit the maximum number of orphans, the download gets stuck (it recovers on a new block, though)
163 2014-01-11 17:35:25 <shamoon> can a scriptPubKey have more than 1 addresses*?
164 2014-01-11 17:36:56 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: https://en.bitcoin.it/w/index.php?title=Pooled_mining&curid=144&diff=43647&oldid=41153 <-- I find this historically/technologically interesting; why remove it?
165 2014-01-11 17:37:24 <Luke-Jr> shamoon: scriptPubKey is a low-level concept, and address is a high-level concept. it doesn't make sense to mix them.
166 2014-01-11 17:37:56 <Luke-Jr> shamoon: either scriptSig or scriptPubKey can use a number of related or unrelated ECDSA verifications
167 2014-01-11 17:38:44 <sipa> bitcoind's decoding of scriptPubKey does make it seem that there can be multiple
168 2014-01-11 17:38:49 <sipa> i think this is a historic mistake
169 2014-01-11 17:39:12 <shamoon> https://gist.github.com/anonymous/9bbff7734ad2aaf51e4f
170 2014-01-11 17:39:14 <shamoon> as an example
171 2014-01-11 17:39:26 <sipa> a scriptPubKey is always the exansion of a single address or something that isn't representable as one
172 2014-01-11 17:39:27 <shamoon> this says that 50 btc were sent to mpqkcrDEmx4NjWLuTN9mu7P9FMnAy5V9VN
173 2014-01-11 17:39:52 <sipa> it is however true that a single scriptPubKey can represent an operation that needs signatures from multiple keys
174 2014-01-11 17:39:58 <shamoon> if there were multiple addresses, what would that mean?
175 2014-01-11 17:40:09 <sipa> and the "addresses" of those individual keys can be known sometimes
176 2014-01-11 17:40:21 <sipa> ... again a historic confusion of key ids with addresses
177 2014-01-11 17:40:32 <sipa> shamoon: multisig
178 2014-01-11 17:40:55 <shamoon> so if there were 2 addresses, it means 50 went to either of those addressses?
179 2014-01-11 17:41:03 <Luke-Jr> no
180 2014-01-11 17:41:20 <Luke-Jr> it could mean it needs approval from the owner of BOTH
181 2014-01-11 17:41:32 <Luke-Jr> (it could also mean what you said)
182 2014-01-11 17:41:58 <shamoon> i see
183 2014-01-11 17:42:02 <Luke-Jr> if the length of Array is != 1, I'd consider it a bug and ignore it
184 2014-01-11 17:42:02 <shamoon> interesting
185 2014-01-11 17:42:09 <Luke-Jr> the Array*
186 2014-01-11 17:42:22 <Luke-Jr> as sipa said, it was probably a mistake
187 2014-01-11 17:42:25 <shamoon> for addresses?
188 2014-01-11 17:42:34 <Luke-Jr> yes
189 2014-01-11 17:42:47 <shamoon> so if i find an tx with multiple addresses, i can just ignore it?
190 2014-01-11 17:43:42 <sipa> if you haven't created any multisig addresses, you can ignore them
191 2014-01-11 17:44:15 <shamoon> well - i'm parsing the blockchain
192 2014-01-11 17:44:20 <shamoon> so i'd need to track them
193 2014-01-11 17:45:09 <sipa> you can consider them as a separate address
194 2014-01-11 17:45:18 <sipa> or rather, as a separate "destination" for coins
195 2014-01-11 17:45:34 <shamoon> so ['address1', 'address2'] can be treated as a unique destination
196 2014-01-11 17:45:37 <sipa> indeed
197 2014-01-11 17:45:38 <shamoon> separate from address1 and address2
198 2014-01-11 17:45:42 <shamoon> interesting
199 2014-01-11 17:45:42 <sipa> correct
200 2014-01-11 17:45:49 <sipa> it will happen almost never
201 2014-01-11 17:45:56 <shamoon> has it happened yet?
202 2014-01-11 17:45:57 <sipa> but there are probably some occurrances
203 2014-01-11 17:45:58 <sipa> yes
204 2014-01-11 17:46:24 <shamoon> how can i find such an example?
205 2014-01-11 17:46:37 <sipa> but the most common way of doing actual multisig now, is using p2sh
206 2014-01-11 17:46:46 <shamoon> p2sh?
207 2014-01-11 17:46:49 <sipa> in which case you'll see a single p2sh address in that array
208 2014-01-11 17:46:55 <sipa> pay-to-script-hash
209 2014-01-11 17:47:05 <sipa> a p2sh address is an address starting with a 3
210 2014-01-11 17:47:14 <shamoon> interesting
211 2014-01-11 17:47:21 <shamoon> what about on testnet?
212 2014-01-11 17:47:26 <sipa> and represents a payment to a complex (but typically unknown) complex destination
213 2014-01-11 17:47:52 <sipa> but the actual script (with the pubkeys in it) is only revealed when spending from it
214 2014-01-11 17:50:45 <andytoshi> ;;cjs
215 2014-01-11 17:50:46 <gribble> Coinjoin Status: current session is open for 20 more minutes. There are currently something like 6 transactions in the pot. The most popular output value is 0.15. To participate, visit https://www.wpsoftware.net/coinjoin/ or http://xnpjsvp7crbzlj3w.onion/ .
216 2014-01-11 17:51:06 <andytoshi> I submitted that from my gtk tool :) by end-of-day i should have something publishable
217 2014-01-11 17:51:14 <shamoon> thanks sipa
218 2014-01-11 18:05:59 <petertodd> ;;cjs
219 2014-01-11 18:06:00 <gribble> Coinjoin Status: current session is open for 5 more minutes. There are currently something like 7 transactions in the pot. The most popular output value is 0.15. To participate, visit https://www.wpsoftware.net/coinjoin/ or http://xnpjsvp7crbzlj3w.onion/ .
220 2014-01-11 18:06:32 <jakov> oh nice
221 2014-01-11 18:07:55 <jakov> "something like"
222 2014-01-11 18:08:45 <jakov> so i should make an unspent output with 0.15btc + 3000 satoshi ?
223 2014-01-11 18:09:29 <shamoon> sipa: Luke-Jr https://gist.github.com/anonymous/8e2f9fc9055b4c51974e
224 2014-01-11 18:09:33 <shamoon> what would something like that indicate?
225 2014-01-11 18:09:43 <gmaxwell> jakov: you take whatever inputs you have, and create a transaction creating one or more .15 btc outputs and a 3000e-8 output and whatever change and hand it to the webpage
226 2014-01-11 18:09:54 <gmaxwell> jakov: but its about to close so probably too late unless you're very quick about it. :)
227 2014-01-11 18:10:17 <jakov> ill do it next time, id like to do it slowly to not fuck it up
228 2014-01-11 18:10:30 <jakov> spend much more than planned on miners fees or something
229 2014-01-11 18:10:50 <gmaxwell> jakov: yea, the site itself prevents you from making that particular mistake.
230 2014-01-11 18:10:57 <jakov> i presume ;;cj-bump would open a dos vulnerability
231 2014-01-11 18:10:59 <gmaxwell> you do have time during signing to review it though.
232 2014-01-11 18:11:18 <gmaxwell> jakov: it increases the risk that people forget about it or have to leave without signing.
233 2014-01-11 18:11:36 <jakov> ok
234 2014-01-11 18:11:46 <jakov> nah its gone
235 2014-01-11 18:12:23 <jakov> in the signing phase now i guess, wouldnt mind seeing the txid later when its done
236 2014-01-11 18:12:48 <gmaxwell> you can see some past ones.
237 2014-01-11 18:13:28 <petertodd> andytoshi: oh, you haven't added SIGHASH_NONE/ANYONECANPAY yet?
238 2014-01-11 18:13:41 <petertodd> andytoshi: I thought you did for dust
239 2014-01-11 18:14:10 <gmaxwell> jakov: e.g. https://blockchain.info/tx/a94e83ea68716aeccd82dbe3e42e0eaf472ebb2897d974f399a5f71bcf6d7ffc
240 2014-01-11 18:14:18 <jakov> ty
241 2014-01-11 18:14:31 <petertodd> andytoshi: tried to add this tx: http://0bin.net/paste/IGGCSBnw5Y6tqRQq#HOFr0QFP6Xfjc8jzgoaDRSpeiS95D2IK1dqI+0lQSqE=
242 2014-01-11 18:17:43 <jakov> gmaxwell so in that tx you linked, the addresses 0.18991BTC 0.6497BTC were change addresses?
243 2014-01-11 18:17:52 <jakov> or fees to the coinjoiner
244 2014-01-11 18:18:29 <gmaxwell> jakov: presumably. Thats assuming that none of the CJ users were also transfering value at the same time.
245 2014-01-11 18:20:20 <gmaxwell> petertodd: shouldn't have shared that txn here in a pastbin as someone might have sent it and sent the coins off to that 1ForFeesAndDonationsSpendHerdtWbWy blackhole. No worries: I've decreased the chances of that...
246 2014-01-11 18:21:10 <andytoshi> petertodd: oh, cool
247 2014-01-11 18:21:24 <andytoshi> my gtk tool doesn't detect when it needs to sign yet
248 2014-01-11 18:21:55 <gmaxwell> andytoshi: doh
249 2014-01-11 18:23:15 <andytoshi> i'll bug you guys in a couple hours, it's close
250 2014-01-11 18:25:53 <petertodd> andytoshi: cool
251 2014-01-11 18:25:56 <andytoshi> here is a screenshot: http://imgur.com/3iaPRSz
252 2014-01-11 18:26:23 <petertodd> andytoshi: nice!
253 2014-01-11 18:26:26 <andytoshi> (i need to add more information about the current joiner status)
254 2014-01-11 18:29:36 <jakov> just so i totally understand, this address https://blockchain.info/address/1H1aQNKRwSHQhQy2SKhM5W3g7Ee9CEX6sQ has just one unspent output with txid 0f84e92566..
255 2014-01-11 18:30:49 <jakov> and vout would be 0.006
256 2014-01-11 18:30:55 <gmaxwell> andytoshi: should probably have a tree view so that it's easy to spend all the coins connected to a single scriptpubkey at once.
257 2014-01-11 18:31:12 <jakov> or 600000, the number of satoshi
258 2014-01-11 18:31:37 <gmaxwell> jakov: you linked to an address, not a transactionâ so your questions are kinda confusing.
259 2014-01-11 18:31:51 <andytoshi> gmaxwell: oh, good call
260 2014-01-11 18:31:54 <gmaxwell> also, we need to find something to link in here that isn't always forcing "US DOLLARS" display.
261 2014-01-11 18:32:20 <gmaxwell> andytoshi: thats how the coincointrol thing in bitcoin QT works.
262 2014-01-11 18:32:27 <andytoshi> blockexplorer is caught up again
263 2014-01-11 18:32:39 <jakov> the address has just one tx going to it
264 2014-01-11 18:32:45 <andytoshi> ACTION ought to open bitcoin-qt one of these days
265 2014-01-11 18:32:57 <sipa> ACTION too
266 2014-01-11 18:33:31 <jakov> ACTION should download it at some point
267 2014-01-11 18:34:00 <jakov> electrum has the console for making raw tx though
268 2014-01-11 18:34:09 <lechuga__> sipa: is bitcoin-seeder what supports the DNS seeding in bitcoind?
269 2014-01-11 18:34:26 <lechuga__> s/in/for/g
270 2014-01-11 18:34:28 <gmaxwell> andytoshi: does your tool dumpprivatekey the involved keys so it will have them for signing? or do you need to be around to provide the password when its time to sign?
271 2014-01-11 18:34:34 <sipa> lechuga__: it's one implementation
272 2014-01-11 18:35:15 <andytoshi> gmaxwell: you'll need to be around
273 2014-01-11 18:35:22 <shamoon> can someone explain this insanely complex testnet transaction to me please? 0ce7e5238fbdb6c086cf1b384b21b827e91cc23f360417265874a5a0d86ce367
274 2014-01-11 18:35:34 <shamoon> the vout's are "non standard"
275 2014-01-11 18:35:50 <andytoshi> gmaxwell: well, the UI is not really set in stone, it would be better for usability to dumpprivkey
276 2014-01-11 18:36:19 <gmaxwell> shamoon: looks like a testcase.
277 2014-01-11 18:36:24 <andytoshi> the question is, am i making people uncomfortable
278 2014-01-11 18:36:34 <shamoon> gmaxwell: so are most of those coins sent useless?
279 2014-01-11 18:36:52 <gmaxwell> shamoon: why would they be useless?
280 2014-01-11 18:36:56 <shamoon> who got them?
281 2014-01-11 18:37:09 <sipa> shamoon: forget that bitcoins are sent to a person
282 2014-01-11 18:37:11 <sipa> or to a key
283 2014-01-11 18:37:20 <shamoon> well - i mean wwhat is the recipient?
284 2014-01-11 18:37:23 <gmaxwell> yea, man, that misunderstanding is so attractive.
285 2014-01-11 18:37:29 <shamoon> 7.6685 were sent
286 2014-01-11 18:37:33 <sipa> gmaxwell: they are sent to a script, which defines the conditions for it to be consumed later
287 2014-01-11 18:37:37 <gmaxwell> shamoon: bitcoin transactions don't really have _a_ 'recipient'.
288 2014-01-11 18:37:37 <sipa> eh
289 2014-01-11 18:37:40 <sipa> shamoon: they are sent to a script, which defines the conditions for it to be consumed later
290 2014-01-11 18:37:56 <sipa> usually, that script says "someone who can sign with the key corresponding to address A"
291 2014-01-11 18:38:03 <sipa> but it can be much broader than that
292 2014-01-11 18:38:11 <shamoon> okay, so the first one: http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/tx/0ce7e5238fbdb6c086cf1b384b21b827e91cc23f360417265874a5a0d86ce367
293 2014-01-11 18:38:12 <shamoon> the first output
294 2014-01-11 18:38:19 <shamoon> is being sent to: OP_NUMEQUAL
295 2014-01-11 18:38:38 <gmaxwell> shamoon: it has a scriptPubKey of OP_NUMEQUAL. Correct.
296 2014-01-11 18:38:40 <sipa> so, anyone who can provide two identical numbers can spend that script
297 2014-01-11 18:38:46 <sipa> eh, spend that output
298 2014-01-11 18:38:49 <shamoon> any 2 numbers?
299 2014-01-11 18:38:54 <sipa> any 2 numbers
300 2014-01-11 18:39:18 <shamoon> okay - so how would i spend that?
301 2014-01-11 18:39:44 <sipa> you'd construct a transaction with a txin which has a scriptSig "<number1> <number2>"
302 2014-01-11 18:39:54 <gmaxwell> write a transaction where the scriptsig pushes two numbers. you can do it just by manually tweaking the hex of a createrawtransaction output.
303 2014-01-11 18:39:56 <sipa> where number1 and number2 are equal
304 2014-01-11 18:40:10 <shamoon> interesting
305 2014-01-11 18:40:17 <shamoon> is there a list of all of the paremeters somewhere?
306 2014-01-11 18:40:21 <Luke-Jr> shamoon: nothing special
307 2014-01-11 18:40:23 <sipa> ;;google bitcoin script
308 2014-01-11 18:40:24 <gribble> Script - Bitcoin: <https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script>; Contracts - Bitcoin: <http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/contracts>; BIP 0016 - Bitcoin: <https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0016>
309 2014-01-11 18:40:32 <shamoon> awesome
310 2014-01-11 18:40:33 <shamoon> thanks
311 2014-01-11 18:40:55 <sipa> note that it's not entirely up to date, and potentially lacking some details
312 2014-01-11 18:41:27 <lechuga__> i need to get a better handle on the script language
313 2014-01-11 18:42:03 <lechuga__> wish there was a game i could play on my phone to produce crazy txns and try to figure out how to claim them :)
314 2014-01-11 18:42:23 <Luke-Jr> shamoon: addresses, destinations, etc are really an abstraction on top of things
315 2014-01-11 18:42:32 <shamoon> so complex
316 2014-01-11 18:42:46 <Luke-Jr> lechuga__: lol
317 2014-01-11 18:43:12 <Luke-Jr> lechuga__: more fun to try to write an automated solver
318 2014-01-11 18:43:19 <Luke-Jr> :D
319 2014-01-11 18:43:23 <lechuga__> that is interesting
320 2014-01-11 18:44:03 <lechuga__> i feel liek im always going to be perpetually behind u guys
321 2014-01-11 18:44:31 <lechuga__> i guess i should be happy if i can at least shorten the gap
322 2014-01-11 18:44:36 <justanotheruser1> sipa: Is there an up to date list anywhere but the source?
323 2014-01-11 18:45:36 <sipa> changes the past two years are in BIPs
324 2014-01-11 18:45:42 <sipa> before that, source code, indeed
325 2014-01-11 18:47:36 <gmaxwell> andytoshi: you could make keeping the private keys a checkbox you can set at submit time "automatically check and sign transaction when ready"
326 2014-01-11 18:49:59 <jcrubino> can anyone explain this testnet tx http://testnet.btclook.com/txn/6cc2c832e3449745b735ba19309442ce19a5bbca40bb7bed1d8a46f495b17c97# ?
327 2014-01-11 18:50:10 <jcrubino> I made it using the rawtransactions routines
328 2014-01-11 18:50:48 <jcrubino> my intest was to mix all inputs from listunspent by inlucding them in the createrawtransaction with one output
329 2014-01-11 18:51:12 <jcrubino> the out put was supposed to be for 1.09870000
330 2014-01-11 18:51:19 <jcrubino> but all the coins in the wallet got sent
331 2014-01-11 18:51:46 <sipa> you need to add a change address if you want change
332 2014-01-11 18:51:56 <sipa> otherwise, the difference between outputs and inputs becomes fee
333 2014-01-11 18:54:02 <sipa> jcrubino: not sure how you intended to only have a 1.0987 output, if you were consuming all coins in your wallet
334 2014-01-11 18:54:08 <sipa> what did you expect to happen with the rest?
335 2014-01-11 18:54:17 <sipa> (just like to understand the thinking)
336 2014-01-11 18:54:22 <lechuga__> hmm just reading the scripts which redeemed those crazy txns is very helpful
337 2014-01-11 18:54:52 <jcrubino> Its not often i user raw-transactions and I forgot the change address
338 2014-01-11 18:55:33 <jcrubino> lechuga__: how are you doing that, via the site or via bitcoind?
339 2014-01-11 18:55:37 <gmaxwell> Did you just forget one, or did you not know one was needed?
340 2014-01-11 18:55:58 <lechuga__> sorry i was speking baout the txns shamoon dumped
341 2014-01-11 18:56:02 <jcrubino> gmaxwell: I have read about it but it isn't until there is a little pain that there is memory
342 2014-01-11 18:56:10 <lechuga__> i was using blockexplorer
343 2014-01-11 18:56:26 <gmaxwell> sipa: perfect! the posted parallel pull patch passed pulltester.
344 2014-01-11 18:56:49 <sipa> gmaxwell: it doesn't do parallel downloads (well, it ends up accidentally doing that sometimes)
345 2014-01-11 18:57:00 <sipa> but yes, wiii1
346 2014-01-11 18:57:06 <sipa> wiii!
347 2014-01-11 18:57:57 <gmaxwell> how does 'too slow' work, e.g. if I'm on slow link?
348 2014-01-11 18:58:56 <sipa> at least one block in flight, every in-flight block at least 2 minutes ago requested, and no block received in the past two minutes
349 2014-01-11 18:59:16 <sipa> eh, no block received in the last minute
350 2014-01-11 18:59:22 <jcrubino> sipa: I understood the format as createrawtransaction [{"txid":txid,"vout":n},...] {address:amount,...}, the wiki (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Raw_Transactions) should probably add the change address
351 2014-01-11 18:59:38 <sipa> jcrubino: a 'change address' concept doesn't exist at that level
352 2014-01-11 18:59:44 <sipa> it's just a regular output
353 2014-01-11 19:00:15 <sipa> that said, there was a suggested to be able to specify a special 'change' destination for an output, which would automatically pick a new address for you, and send the change there
354 2014-01-11 19:00:53 <sipa> gmaxwell: so if you on average are able to receive one block per minute, the disconnect logic shouldn't trigger
355 2014-01-11 19:01:06 <sipa> (well, for both sender and receiver)
356 2014-01-11 19:01:29 <gmaxwell> sipa: I wonder if every time it triggers it shouldn't increase the trigger threshold, so that a suffienctly slow link doesn't find itself constantly disconnecting?
357 2014-01-11 19:01:32 <jcrubino> sipa: so how can I reasonably create raw-transactions with rpc?
358 2014-01-11 19:01:42 <gmaxwell> (if so, it could probably start with a lower threshold)
359 2014-01-11 19:01:47 <lechuga__> has anyone actually written a scriptpubkey solver?
360 2014-01-11 19:02:09 <gmaxwell> jcrubino: by using createrawtransaction.
361 2014-01-11 19:02:12 <sipa> jcrubino: call getnewaddress and send the change there
362 2014-01-11 19:02:21 <jcrubino> that is how I created the tx and it moved all the coins in the wallet
363 2014-01-11 19:02:27 <saizai> http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/20362/how-can-i-tell-whether-transactions-were-not-made-via-bitpay-coinbase
364 2014-01-11 19:02:28 <sipa> well you didn't include a change
365 2014-01-11 19:02:41 <gmaxwell> sipa: ( or getrawchangeaddress )
366 2014-01-11 19:02:50 <sipa> gmaxwell: does that exist?
367 2014-01-11 19:02:55 <gmaxwell> sipa: in git at least
368 2014-01-11 19:03:06 <sipa> jcrubino: the basic rule is that the difference between outputs and inputs is fees
369 2014-01-11 19:03:17 <sipa> jcrubino: if you use createrawtransaction, you know the value of all inputs and all outputs
370 2014-01-11 19:03:36 <sipa> if you have more value in input than you intend to send somewhere, you need to send it back to yourself
371 2014-01-11 19:03:49 <jcrubino> how do I specify the change address?
372 2014-01-11 19:03:52 <gmaxwell> the createrawtransaction rpc doesn't inherently know the value of all the inputsâ it works even for inputs its never seen before (which can be useful).
373 2014-01-11 19:03:58 <sipa> jcrubino: it's a normal output!
374 2014-01-11 19:04:02 <jcrubino> got it
375 2014-01-11 19:04:10 <jcrubino> so its just another address to send to
376 2014-01-11 19:04:10 <sipa> there's nothing special about it, except you use an address of your own
377 2014-01-11 19:04:13 <sipa> indeed
378 2014-01-11 19:04:17 <jcrubino> ok
379 2014-01-11 19:04:42 <jcrubino> I am going to clarify that in the wiki sooner or later
380 2014-01-11 19:04:48 <sipa> please do!
381 2014-01-11 19:04:56 <jcrubino> thanks
382 2014-01-11 19:07:57 <sipa> gmaxwell: 1 block per minute (and it should be able to go down to 0.5 block per minute for some periods of time) is only 133 kbit/s ...
383 2014-01-11 19:09:30 <sipa> (i don't disagree that hardcoded constants here are a Really Bad Idea(tm), but this is hopefully temporary anyway)
384 2014-01-11 19:17:40 <lechuga__> scriptpubkey is kinda cool
385 2014-01-11 19:17:57 <lechuga__> having the forsight to put it in v1 of bitcoin is pretty impressive
386 2014-01-11 19:18:09 <sipa> in v0 you mean :
387 2014-01-11 19:18:11 <lechuga__> seems like it couldve functioned for the most part without it
388 2014-01-11 19:18:18 <lechuga__> tru
389 2014-01-11 19:18:23 <sipa> it certainly could have functioned without
390 2014-01-11 19:19:51 <sipa> ;;later tell jgarzik your bootstrap.dat bitcointalk post still says "through height 250000"
391 2014-01-11 19:19:52 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
392 2014-01-11 19:20:37 <jgarzik> sipa, fixed
393 2014-01-11 19:20:51 <sipa> it also mentions 237000 a bit further...
394 2014-01-11 19:21:03 <sipa> 238000, sorry
395 2014-01-11 19:21:24 <sipa> ;;blocks
396 2014-01-11 19:21:25 <gribble> 279949
397 2014-01-11 19:21:50 <sipa> once we hit 281016 (2016 blocks after the torrent), i suggest we add a new checkpoint too
398 2014-01-11 19:21:58 <jgarzik> agree
399 2014-01-11 19:22:07 <sipa> should be in a week
400 2014-01-11 19:22:20 <jgarzik> Bitcoin blockchain torrent updated, 70% of previous bootstrap.dat is re-used. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=145386.0
401 2014-01-11 19:23:41 <jcrubino> jgarzik: how often is it updated?
402 2014-01-11 19:23:52 <sipa> "whenever deemed necessary"
403 2014-01-11 19:26:45 <jcrubino> sipa: how tough would it to automate a monthly or every two month update?
404 2014-01-11 19:27:35 <sipa> easy enough, but i'd rather focus on fixing the block download mechanism in bitcoind itself, so it doesn't need such workarounds
405 2014-01-11 19:30:58 <jgarzik> jcrubino, +1 what sipa said. The torrent, in fact, should -not- be updated too often. The blockchain data is pretty much static. Each new torrent simply adds data onto the end of the old torrent. If you update the torrent too often, you lose seeders.
406 2014-01-11 19:31:33 <jcrubino> got it
407 2014-01-11 19:31:33 <sipa> in that light, see #3514
408 2014-01-11 19:33:48 <lechuga__> i wonder if there would be many more nodes if bitcoin supported nat traversal
409 2014-01-11 19:34:17 <andytoshi> what's the best way to tell over RPC whether or not the wallet is currently unlocked?
410 2014-01-11 19:35:10 <jgarzik> andytoshi, getinfo has unlocked timeout, IIRC
411 2014-01-11 19:36:22 <jgarzik> sipa, yep, had queued #3514 up for reading. looked tasty.
412 2014-01-11 19:36:53 <andytoshi> jgarzik: it does indeed, thanks!
413 2014-01-11 19:40:32 <jgarzik> http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1uz6mp/bitcoin_blockchain_torrent_updated_to_block/
414 2014-01-11 19:47:19 <jgarzik> excellent. a few peers on the new torrent appeared with 70% completion. makes seeding the new torrent quite easy.
415 2014-01-11 19:49:04 <lechuga__> jgarzik: what r you doing exactly? is this so nodes can get the blockchain via bittorrent?
416 2014-01-11 19:50:04 <sipa> yes
417 2014-01-11 19:50:08 <sipa> see link
418 2014-01-11 19:50:48 <lechuga__> interesting
419 2014-01-11 19:52:17 <lechuga__> is bitcoind going to link with libtorrent and manage this automatically?
420 2014-01-11 19:53:00 <sipa> no
421 2014-01-11 19:53:11 <lechuga__> is that a bad idea?
422 2014-01-11 19:53:28 <sipa> it's a workaround for the fact that the block downloading logic in bitcoind is crappy
423 2014-01-11 19:53:35 <sipa> if we fix that, there's no need to use bittorrent for this
424 2014-01-11 19:53:59 <lechuga__> but downloading a lot of blocks efficiently is something theyve solved already
425 2014-01-11 19:55:15 <sipa> it's not sequential (which means you first have to download everything before validating it), it doesn't use the knowledge of block validity we have
426 2014-01-11 19:55:26 <sipa> and we already need a mechanism to distribute blocks anyway
427 2014-01-11 19:56:24 <lechuga__> libtorrent doesnt have a --contiguous switch? :)
428 2014-01-11 20:16:45 <lechuga__> noob question: can i run a real node while a testnet node is running as the same user? it looks like yes but im not %100 sure of the state segregation in ~/.bitcoin
429 2014-01-11 20:17:43 <maaku> lechuga__: yes
430 2014-01-11 20:17:48 <lechuga__> k thx
431 2014-01-11 21:16:00 <zone117x> gmaxwell: is https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=6.0 the most appropriate board to post my node stratum server?
432 2014-01-11 21:16:40 <zone117x> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=42.0 doesnt seem right for the server software
433 2014-01-11 21:18:30 <kanzure> is this node-stratum?
434 2014-01-11 21:30:46 <kinlo> zone117x: I'd recommend https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=14.0
435 2014-01-11 21:31:23 <lechuga__> has any1 completely implmented a node in html5?
436 2014-01-11 21:31:49 <lechuga__> storing block chain would be hard but could use blockchain.info maybe?
437 2014-01-11 21:32:23 <lechuga__> dont see much of a point to it
438 2014-01-11 21:32:29 <sipa> is html5 turing complete?
439 2014-01-11 21:32:35 <lechuga__> would be a hell of a learning exercise
440 2014-01-11 21:33:02 <lechuga__> sipa: heck yeah
441 2014-01-11 21:33:18 <sipa> are you talking about javascript or html?
442 2014-01-11 21:33:22 <lechuga__> javascript
443 2014-01-11 21:33:42 <kinlo> isn't javascript a part of html5?
444 2014-01-11 21:34:03 <sipa> orly?
445 2014-01-11 21:34:09 <lechuga__> ya
446 2014-01-11 21:34:15 <lechuga__> well
447 2014-01-11 21:34:22 <lechuga__> im not sure what the pedantic delineation is
448 2014-01-11 21:34:30 <lechuga__> but effectively yes its part of html5
449 2014-01-11 21:35:16 <sipa> ok then
450 2014-01-11 21:35:21 <lechuga__> :)
451 2014-01-11 21:35:55 <lechuga__> wish i could think of 1 practical use for a browser-based bitcoind
452 2014-01-11 21:35:59 <lechuga__> then id be inclined to do it
453 2014-01-11 21:36:27 <kinlo> wasn't one of the selling points of html5 to standardize the javascript interaction with the dom and such so js would be more cross-platform ? :)
454 2014-01-11 21:36:52 <lechuga__> yeah cross platform wrt browser
455 2014-01-11 21:36:58 <sipa> lechuga__: i think reimplementing a fully bug-for-bug compatible bitcoind is pretty much impossible with current engineering standards
456 2014-01-11 21:37:09 <sipa> lechuga__: let alone doing it in javascript
457 2014-01-11 21:37:30 <kinlo> sipa: don't underestimate javascript
458 2014-01-11 21:37:30 <lechuga__> why is that?
459 2014-01-11 21:37:44 <sipa> s/javascript/differing language/
460 2014-01-11 21:39:18 <maaku> kinlo: it's hard to get bug-for-bug compatability when you also have to contend with differing behavior between js vendors...
461 2014-01-11 21:39:21 <lechuga__> you think bitcoind is just too complex?
462 2014-01-11 21:39:46 <lechuga__> does it really need to have all of the same bugs? :)
463 2014-01-11 21:39:49 <sipa> YES
464 2014-01-11 21:39:56 <maaku> yes, yes it does
465 2014-01-11 21:39:59 <sipa> no, i think bitcoind is unique in the fact that implementing a full node requires being compatible with every other node on the node... consistency is more important than correctness
466 2014-01-11 21:40:03 <kinlo> maaku: nowadays differences between js vendors is like differences between compilers... they exist, but they are no longer that big
467 2014-01-11 21:40:11 <maaku> see: march 2013
468 2014-01-11 21:40:15 <sipa> and i believe this principle makes it pretty much impossible to correctly reimplement it from scratch
469 2014-01-11 21:40:18 <lechuga__> most differences in js ar ein higher level APIs
470 2014-01-11 21:40:36 <sipa> which doesn't mean that there is a problem with implementing a p2p node in other languages
471 2014-01-11 21:40:46 <sipa> just don't try to imitate the network consistency part
472 2014-01-11 21:41:18 <sipa> and yes, bitcoind is bloated, too complex, and not cleanly written
473 2014-01-11 21:41:40 <lechuga__> eh ive seen worse codebases on all of those accounts
474 2014-01-11 21:41:56 <sipa> i'm sure about that :D
475 2014-01-11 21:41:59 <lechuga__> haha
476 2014-01-11 21:43:36 <maaku> it's far less bloated and unclean than it used to be
477 2014-01-11 21:43:48 <sipa> i'd say it's more bloated and more clean :)
478 2014-01-11 22:14:06 <DBordello> Does bitcoinj not implement a full node?
479 2014-01-11 22:14:38 <sipa> it has a mode where it does, but afaik it's not complete
480 2014-01-11 22:14:45 <DBordello> (nevermind, apparently it doesn't by default)
481 2014-01-11 22:16:34 <DBordello> What about btcd, implemented in go
482 2014-01-11 22:16:53 <sipa> that's a full node implementation, yes
483 2014-01-11 22:17:11 <kinlo> how complete is that btw?
484 2014-01-11 22:17:26 <kinlo> I've looked at the source, but it wasn't fully released yet
485 2014-01-11 22:17:31 <sipa> gmaxwell probably is more up to date
486 2014-01-11 22:17:52 <kinlo> sipa: are you going to fosdem btw?
487 2014-01-11 22:18:01 <sipa> uncertain, but i doubt it
488 2014-01-11 22:18:22 <kinlo> kinda surprised not to see anything about bitcoin
489 2014-01-11 22:26:34 <sipa> damn, i was surprised to see 0.150ms/txin for verification when running under valgrind
490 2014-01-11 22:26:53 <sipa> as that's much faster than what i believed openssl could do, running natively
491 2014-01-11 22:27:06 <sipa> ... turns out signature verification is disabled...
492 2014-01-11 22:27:07 <gmaxwell> cached
493 2014-01-11 22:27:12 <gmaxwell> yea. that too.
494 2014-01-11 22:29:22 <sipa> valgrind is so slow that stalled download detection is triggering, just while processing orphans
495 2014-01-11 22:31:03 <lechuga__> sipa: are you just using valgrind to profile?
496 2014-01-11 22:31:27 <sipa> no, to detect memory problems
497 2014-01-11 22:31:35 <lechuga__> ah k
498 2014-01-11 22:31:41 <sipa> mostly a sanity check before submitting a pullreq
499 2014-01-11 22:35:22 <evan82> Is there a list somewhere of all of the active inputs?
500 2014-01-11 22:35:27 <evan82> in the bitcoin source
501 2014-01-11 22:35:40 <sipa> "all active inputs" ?
502 2014-01-11 22:36:02 <evan82> Yeah, does it keep track of all of the addresses that have value assigned to them
503 2014-01-11 22:36:24 <sipa> no
504 2014-01-11 22:36:35 <sipa> it keeps track of all unspent transaction outputs
505 2014-01-11 22:36:43 <sipa> but they are not indexed by or aggregated by address
506 2014-01-11 22:36:50 <evan82> oh, maybe that's what I'm looking for
507 2014-01-11 22:36:55 <sipa> (addresses are a high-level concept that isn't useful for verification)
508 2014-01-11 22:36:57 <evan82> where is that in the codebase?
509 2014-01-11 22:37:19 <sipa> see txdb
510 2014-01-11 22:37:25 <evan82> thx!
511 2014-01-11 22:37:28 <sipa> that's the database interface
512 2014-01-11 22:37:38 <sipa> coins.h contains the data structure definitions
513 2014-01-11 22:37:58 <sipa> and there's a runtime cache on top of it, see pcoinsTip in main
514 2014-01-11 22:38:33 <evan82> cool thanks
515 2014-01-11 23:28:17 <shamoon> getrawtransaction 4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b 1 yields no information about this transaction
516 2014-01-11 23:28:19 <shamoon> for some reason
517 2014-01-11 23:28:28 <shamoon> other transactions work
518 2014-01-11 23:28:33 <shamoon> but that's the first tx in the testnet block chain
519 2014-01-11 23:29:59 <sipa> shamoon: the genesis coinbase transaction is not processed anywhere
520 2014-01-11 23:30:04 <gmaxwell> shamoon: the transaction created in the genesis block doesn't really exist as far as the system is concerned.
521 2014-01-11 23:30:48 <shamoon> http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/rawtx/4a5e1e4baab89f3a32518a88c31bc87f618f76673e2cc77ab2127b7afdeda33b
522 2014-01-11 23:30:53 <shamoon> how did they get that raw transaction?
523 2014-01-11 23:31:00 <sipa> it's part of the blockchain
524 2014-01-11 23:31:21 <sipa> just not used really, so bitcoind doesn't index it
525 2014-01-11 23:31:33 <sipa> its output can also not be spent either, for example
526 2014-01-11 23:31:51 <shamoon> if it's part of the blockchain, then how can i view it?
527 2014-01-11 23:32:08 <sipa> it's hardcoded in the bitcoind client
528 2014-01-11 23:32:13 <sipa> or you can look at the block files
529 2014-01-11 23:33:08 <shamoon> i see
530 2014-01-11 23:33:09 <shamoon> thanks sipa
531 2014-01-11 23:35:13 <Polyatomic> bitcoind 0.8.6-saucy : Should I hear a beep when receiving coin. Im sure I heard a beep ?
532 2014-01-11 23:35:29 <sipa> ?
533 2014-01-11 23:35:33 <sipa> there is no beeping...
534 2014-01-11 23:35:42 <Polyatomic> ok
535 2014-01-11 23:35:58 <sipa> unless you pass -walletnotify=beep :P
536 2014-01-11 23:49:08 <swulf--> sipa: around?
537 2014-01-11 23:49:33 <sipa> no, i'm quite non-around
538 2014-01-11 23:49:38 <sipa> :)
539 2014-01-11 23:49:40 <swulf--> ah, too bad :P
540 2014-01-11 23:49:48 <swulf--> would love to know what you think of my new site, bip32.org
541 2014-01-11 23:50:36 <sipa> what derivation do you use for the passphrase
542 2014-01-11 23:50:46 <swulf--> 50,000 rounds of hmac-sha256
543 2014-01-11 23:51:27 <sipa> you should document that somewhere, at least
544 2014-01-11 23:51:45 <swulf--> yeah
545 2014-01-11 23:51:59 <sipa> maybe have separate top buttons for the slow and fast hash, and document what they are
546 2014-01-11 23:52:15 <swulf--> might be more intuitive that way
547 2014-01-11 23:53:15 <sipa> also, can you put the same key info for the derived key, instead of just the master?
548 2014-01-11 23:53:17 <swulf--> weak hash is just a single sha256, the same that brainwallet.org uses
549 2014-01-11 23:53:21 <sipa> pretty nice to experiment with!
550 2014-01-11 23:53:56 <sipa> also, why does derivation path turn red when choosing custom?
551 2014-01-11 23:53:56 <swulf--> hmmm, key info on the derived keys would be nice... but it'd take up a lot of room
552 2014-01-11 23:54:18 <sipa> ok
553 2014-01-11 23:54:18 <swulf--> the custom box should be red, no?
554 2014-01-11 23:54:30 <sipa> why?
555 2014-01-11 23:54:42 <sipa> or that's meant as some warning?
556 2014-01-11 23:54:44 <swulf--> when you select custom, the 'custom' box is empty, which is an invalid derivation path
557 2014-01-11 23:54:49 <sipa> it seems like i've done something wong
558 2014-01-11 23:54:56 <swulf--> ah
559 2014-01-11 23:54:59 <swulf--> good point
560 2014-01-11 23:55:00 <sipa> aaah!
561 2014-01-11 23:55:09 <sipa> when i do input something it does turn into a normal color
562 2014-01-11 23:55:14 <swulf--> i'll let the empty box be a special case
563 2014-01-11 23:55:18 <swulf--> and not error
564 2014-01-11 23:55:27 <sipa> yeah, it's confusing because it's not the derivation path box that's invalid
565 2014-01-11 23:55:50 <swulf--> yeah
566 2014-01-11 23:55:54 <swulf--> i'll fix that up today
567 2014-01-11 23:56:12 <sipa> hmm, xpub and xprv should be around the same length
568 2014-01-11 23:56:22 <swulf--> use a monospace font?
569 2014-01-11 23:56:43 <sipa> it seems xpub is consistently longer
570 2014-01-11 23:56:51 <sipa> but i haven't checked whether that's due to the font or not
571 2014-01-11 23:56:59 <swulf--> pretty sure it's the font:)
572 2014-01-11 23:57:02 <swulf--> at least, i hope
573 2014-01-11 23:57:35 <sipa> oooh nice, and you can even input an xpub as master
574 2014-01-11 23:57:41 <swulf--> yup
575 2014-01-11 23:58:01 <sipa> deriving an account from that doesn't work though
576 2014-01-11 23:58:13 <sipa> (it shouldn't work, but boxes stay empty)
577 2014-01-11 23:58:28 <swulf--> because "accounts" as described in the BIP use private key derivation, which you dont have with an xpub
578 2014-01-11 23:58:34 <swulf--> right
579 2014-01-11 23:58:42 <swulf--> what should the boxes contain?
580 2014-01-11 23:59:11 <sipa> also, when you input a non-root as base, the predefined derivations don't really make sense
581 2014-01-11 23:59:25 <swulf--> this is true
582 2014-01-11 23:59:29 <swulf--> kinda