1 2014-04-27 00:29:57 <bawse> Please dont kick me guys... :(  Bitcoin miner for sale, Cointerra 1.6th  1583GH steady on the pools. $4800. killacronin@gmail.com   PM's ok too. Thank you guys.
  2 2014-04-27 00:30:39 <bawse>  just got scammed out of $5000
  3 2014-04-27 00:30:43 <Diablo-D3> kick him!
  4 2014-04-27 00:31:04 <bawse> :(
  5 2014-04-27 00:31:25 <Diablo-D3> seriously though, this is the wrong channel for that
  6 2014-04-27 00:34:27 <skinnkavaj> petertodd about sidechains
  7 2014-04-27 00:34:29 <skinnkavaj> https://soundcloud.com/mindtomatter/ltb-e104-tree-chains-with
  8 2014-04-27 00:34:32 <skinnkavaj> Great talk
  9 2014-04-27 00:39:56 <bawse> i get it diablo-d3 just desperate   lost 6400 in scams in the last 1.5 weeks
 10 2014-04-27 01:08:43 <petertodd> skinnkavaj: thanks!
 11 2014-04-27 01:09:30 <petertodd> skinnkavaj: and kudo's to andreas antonopoulos - he really helped ask the right questions and keep me on track in explaining mode
 12 2014-04-27 01:30:16 <splitting> i'm using authserviceproxy with python and dogecoind, When I call "self.walletProxy.sendtoaddress(self.walletAddress, sendAmount)" the call fails with "socket.error: [Errno 104] Connection reset by peer"
 13 2014-04-27 01:30:21 <splitting> *bitcoind
 14 2014-04-27 01:30:39 <splitting> im able to make other calls
 15 2014-04-27 01:30:44 <splitting> like getinfo and getbalance
 16 2014-04-27 01:30:51 <splitting> but sendtoaddress doesnt work for some reason
 17 2014-04-27 01:31:39 <Arnavion> It *is* dogecoind isn't it :P
 18 2014-04-27 01:42:22 <_alp_> splitting: Shibian slip?
 19 2014-04-27 01:42:56 <splitting> lol yeah
 20 2014-04-27 01:43:07 <splitting> i mean im working with multiple coins
 21 2014-04-27 01:43:18 <splitting> i figure the rpc is the same for each so im in here too since its a larger channel
 22 2014-04-27 01:43:52 <petertodd> splitting: I succesfully used https://github.com/petertodd/python-bitcoinlib w/ dogecoind RPC a few weeks ago; give it a try
 23 2014-04-27 01:44:20 <splitting> alright
 24 2014-04-27 01:44:28 <splitting> thanks
 25 2014-04-27 03:56:03 <warren> Strange behavior ... bitcoind occasionally gets stuck and stops syncing blocks ... until you kill insight and stop using RPC, then it recovers.
 26 2014-04-27 04:04:07 <sipa> insight?
 27 2014-04-27 04:12:51 <MananP> How do I debug transactions that I send to the testnet blockchain? They aren't even showing up on the blockchain. I'm using bitcore's TransactionBuilder to make the raw transactions.
 28 2014-04-27 07:02:00 <xdotcommer> which branch should I use... when I use main branch I get this "This is a pre-release test build - use at your own risk - do not use for mining or merchant applications"
 29 2014-04-27 07:10:44 <wumpus> xdotcommer: use tag v0.9.1
 30 2014-04-27 07:11:22 <xdotcommer> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/0.9.1 ?
 31 2014-04-27 07:11:44 <fanquake> xdotcommer https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases
 32 2014-04-27 07:11:46 <wumpus> you can use that one as well, but for consistency it's best to build a tag
 33 2014-04-27 07:12:02 <wumpus> (as the same tag is used to build the distributed executables)
 34 2014-04-27 07:52:53 <xdotcommer> wumpus: thanks that build went nicely
 35 2014-04-27 08:34:36 <michagogo> cloud|05:17:26 <warren> anyone have the 1st generation USB mining sticks?
 36 2014-04-27 08:34:59 <michagogo> cloud|warren: I don't know if what I have is a "1st generation", but I have one of the 330 Mh/s block erupters
 37 2014-04-27 08:35:34 <michagogo> cloud|Aluminum heatsink attached with plastic screws, bright green LED that's off when mining and on when not, requires a silicon labs driver,
 38 2014-04-27 08:35:51 <michagogo> cloud|uses a chip marked BE100
 39 2014-04-27 08:35:55 <michagogo> cloud|Why do you ask?
 40 2014-04-27 08:35:57 <gribble> warren was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 4 hours, 39 minutes, and 54 seconds ago: <warren> Strange behavior ... bitcoind occasionally gets stuck and stops syncing blocks ... until you kill insight and stop using RPC, then it recovers.
 41 2014-04-27 08:35:57 <michagogo> cloud|;;seen warren
 42 2014-04-27 08:41:23 <michagogo> cloud|;;later tell warren 05:17:26 <warren> anyone have the 1st generation USB mining sticks? <-- I don't know if what I have is a "1st generation", but I have one of the 330 Mh/s block erupters. Aluminum heatsink with a Bitcoin logo, attached with plastic screws, bright green LED that's off when mining and on when not, requires a silicon labs driver, uses a chip
 43 2014-04-27 08:41:24 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
 44 2014-04-27 08:41:24 <michagogo> cloud|marked BE100. Why do you ask?
 45 2014-04-27 08:41:39 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
 46 2014-04-27 08:41:39 <michagogo> cloud|;;later tell warren ...marked BE100. Why do you ask?
 47 2014-04-27 09:55:37 <arubi> guys, I'm scared. I see a lot of "ResendWalletTransactions()" in debug.log between 3 days and two days ago
 48 2014-04-27 09:58:49 <arubi> anyone knows what could be going on? I didn't send any bitcoin
 49 2014-04-27 10:00:37 <arubi> nothing seems to be missing.. I'm also seeing ResendWalletTransactions() in litecoin's debug.log, and also some "Flushing walet.dat" + "Flushed wallet.dat"
 50 2014-04-27 10:01:12 <azariah4> Hi, where can I find documentation on exactly what parts of the tx struct the tx hash is over?
 51 2014-04-27 10:01:16 <arubi> the messages in litecoin's debug log started two days earlier, but they also stopped on the 25th like bitcoin
 52 2014-04-27 10:02:31 <IndigoMan1> Hi .. does anyone know how to get the BTC per Block from the blockchain.info api ? I can't seem to figure it out
 53 2014-04-27 10:14:19 <michagogo> cloud|arubi: seeing that is normal
 54 2014-04-27 10:14:30 <arubi> really? oh man
 55 2014-04-27 10:15:11 <arubi> I thoght that function broadcasts tx's that were not confirmed by a block after some time
 56 2014-04-27 10:15:19 <michagogo> cloud|Yes, it does
 57 2014-04-27 10:15:31 <arubi> I have none of these..
 58 2014-04-27 10:15:40 <michagogo> cloud|I think that line is printed to the log whenever the function is triggered
 59 2014-04-27 10:15:51 <michagogo> cloud|Whether or not it's actually doing anything
 60 2014-04-27 10:15:52 <arubi> I mean, I haven't sent any in a while
 61 2014-04-27 10:16:24 <arubi> so the function will trigger even if there are no unconfirmed broadcasted tx's?
 62 2014-04-27 10:16:28 <michagogo> cloud|If it's actually doing anything, you'll see something like this:
 63 2014-04-27 10:16:30 <michagogo> cloud|2014-04-26 20:39:42 Relaying wtx 75461a28aff1d30b43747631beea11b96e2ff40a09ae943f2c0205053cb25203
 64 2014-04-27 10:16:30 <michagogo> cloud|2014-04-26 20:39:42 ResendWalletTransactions()
 65 2014-04-27 10:17:40 <arubi> Ah, so if I don't see the "Relaying wtx.." bit, then nothing is actually being done?
 66 2014-04-27 10:18:00 <arubi> like running the function with an empty queue?
 67 2014-04-27 10:18:04 <michagogo> cloud|Exactly.
 68 2014-04-27 10:18:10 <arubi> phew
 69 2014-04-27 10:18:20 <michagogo> cloud|One sec, I'll grep for it
 70 2014-04-27 10:20:13 <arubi> yea I see on line 909 in wallet.cpp
 71 2014-04-27 10:20:28 <arubi> well in 0.9.1 that is
 72 2014-04-27 10:21:14 <michagogo> cloud|Oh, I just found it at line 914
 73 2014-04-27 10:21:25 <michagogo> cloud|Not sure what I'm checked out at, though
 74 2014-04-27 10:21:29 <michagogo> cloud|probably master
 75 2014-04-27 10:21:36 <arubi> ohhh so it even takes care of other tx's, not my own
 76 2014-04-27 10:21:45 <michagogo> cloud|Transactions to or from you.
 77 2014-04-27 10:21:53 <michagogo> cloud|So, any unconfirmed transactions in your wallet
 78 2014-04-27 10:22:04 <arubi> oh okay
 79 2014-04-27 10:22:53 <michagogo> cloud|Yeah, so it looks like it prints that as soon as it decides to rebroadcast, before it even looks at the wallet
 80 2014-04-27 10:23:42 <arubi> Yea, and only runs RelatWalletTransaction() for each tx
 81 2014-04-27 10:23:45 <arubi> in my case, none
 82 2014-04-27 10:24:05 <arubi> well, that was a scary morning. thanks michagogo|cloud
 83 2014-04-27 14:40:53 <modyn> I need somebody who are good in Linux . I gonna pay you /msg me
 84 2014-04-27 14:41:11 <arubi> what do you need modyn?
 85 2014-04-27 15:40:49 <ThickAsThieves> question, has it ever been considered to remove the decimal place from Bitcoin altogether? Just using satoshis in all displays and such? I know that the software mostly works as satoshis, but would changing COIN to 1 be okay? If this has been discussed, what were the best arguments for not doing it?
 86 2014-04-27 15:46:13 <sipa> ThickAsThieves: is there any good reason for doing that?
 87 2014-04-27 15:46:42 <sipa> software can work.with multiple denominations, if BTC is too inconvenient to use
 88 2014-04-27 15:46:58 <sipa> you can choose mBTC or uBTC to display values as
 89 2014-04-27 15:47:37 <sipa> changing COIN would break compatibility in tje RPC interface
 90 2014-04-27 15:48:01 <ThickAsThieves> well the reason is that i think moving the denomination more than once is silly
 91 2014-04-27 15:48:29 <ThickAsThieves> and
 92 2014-04-27 15:48:40 <sipa> i don't think of it as changing denominations
 93 2014-04-27 15:48:42 <ThickAsThieves> that the actual users have a lot of trouble with mbtc and ubtc
 94 2014-04-27 15:49:07 <sipa> there is a long discussion going on about that on the mailing list, take it there
 95 2014-04-27 15:49:09 <ThickAsThieves> mbtc seems toally arbitrary
 96 2014-04-27 15:49:28 <ThickAsThieves> i know nothing of the mailing list
 97 2014-04-27 15:49:47 <sipa> but changing COIN is very different from changing tje default denomination in user interfaces
 98 2014-04-27 15:50:23 <sipa> in any case, that sort of thing requires.community consensus, not developer attention
 99 2014-04-27 15:50:23 <ThickAsThieves> my concept would be to just remove the usage of decimals altogether
100 2014-04-27 15:50:46 <sipa> especially not developers for one client that is hardly used by end users
101 2014-04-27 15:50:54 <ThickAsThieves> and more likely implemented in Altcoin (ATC)
102 2014-04-27 15:51:50 <ThickAsThieves> bitcoin probably approaching the point where "community consensus" = paralyzation
103 2014-04-27 15:52:30 <sipa> perhaps, but i don't see what we can do about it
104 2014-04-27 15:53:01 <sipa> changing how the reference client presents thogs will just break compatibility, and hardly any user would see it
105 2014-04-27 15:53:26 <sipa> *things
106 2014-04-27 15:53:31 <ThickAsThieves> indeed
107 2014-04-27 15:53:39 <ThickAsThieves> kinda why i wanna try it on atc f
108 2014-04-27 15:54:00 <sipa> try as you.may
109 2014-04-27 16:18:04 <ndak> hi i need to install openvpn server with PEM. I gonna pay you for the help /msg me
110 2014-04-27 17:10:25 <hearn> integrated Tor support in bitcoinj - merged! \o/
111 2014-04-27 17:34:47 <sipa> ProfMac: i'm confused
112 2014-04-27 17:35:19 <sipa> submitblock will call Process block from main to validate and store the block locally
113 2014-04-27 17:35:41 <sipa> which calls AddToBlockIndex, AcceptBlock, ... and several others
114 2014-04-27 17:36:37 <sipa> (from mobile, i can't read the source now, i may miss things)
115 2014-04-27 17:36:37 <sipa> if the new blocks happens to end up being the new best block, one of those functions will call SendMessage or Inventory or something on all peers to announce the new block
116 2014-04-27 17:40:43 <jgarzik> Source code exists so I don't have to remember details precisely ;p
117 2014-04-27 17:45:36 <ProfMac> I'm confused too.  I think I'm interested in path submitblock ---> processblock ---> pushgetblocks ---> CNode::pushmessage   (then the block goes out the net & to a peer)  when that block shows up on a connection at the peer, I want to pick up reading the source code there.
118 2014-04-27 17:49:06 <ProfMac> is it an rpc call on 8332?  or something else on the peer-peer connection that is already established?
119 2014-04-27 18:05:17 <arubi> ProfMac, maybe you mean UpdateTip?
120 2014-04-27 18:06:05 <jgarzik> ProfMac, at a high level, when a new block is pushed via RPC submitblock, it is processed by the local node.  If the local node verifies the block, the local node adds the block's hash to the inventory lists for each connected node.  This triggered an "inv" P2P message to connected peers, which then determine if they are interested in that hash.
121 2014-04-27 18:06:15 <jgarzik> ProfMac, it is a flood-fill algorithm, similar to Usenet
122 2014-04-27 18:06:24 <sipa> ProfMac: in net.cpp, there is a netwoek handler thread thay receives data and puts it in CNode receive biffers
123 2014-04-27 18:06:52 <sipa> ProfMac: there there is a message handler thread in net.cpp that deals with these, which calls ProcessMessages in main for the actual ahndling
124 2014-04-27 18:07:00 <sipa> whih calls ProcessMessage and ProcessBlock
125 2014-04-27 18:07:31 <sipa> sorry for typing
126 2014-04-27 18:10:17 <ProfMac> Thanks guys.  I'll go track these hints down and see if it comes together for me.
127 2014-04-27 18:11:08 <sipa> the big thing to understand is how the two threads work together
128 2014-04-27 18:11:33 <sipa> one which does communication between the network and node's send and receive buffers
129 2014-04-27 18:11:35 <ProfMac> lol.  Yes, that is the big (elusive) thing.
130 2014-04-27 18:11:52 <sipa> and another that deals with actually processing/constructing the messages
131 2014-04-27 18:12:18 <sipa> the reason to split them up is that send/receive don't requite locking the core data structures
132 2014-04-27 18:13:34 <sipa> it's quite symmetrical, with the handler thread calling SendMessages or ProcessMessages alternatingly on peers
133 2014-04-27 18:15:22 <ProfMac> All these comments make sense to me.  I think I'm almost there.  A decade ago I wrote SMTP receiver / processors, but in a different language.  The explanation you're giving has the right "feel" to me, I just am not fluent in C++
134 2014-04-27 18:25:01 <ProfMac> this?   --->  bool CNode::ReceiveMsgBytes(const char *pch, unsigned int nBytes)
135 2014-04-27 18:26:24 <sipa> that's part of.it yes
136 2014-04-27 18:26:53 <Luke-Jr> so wizkid057 and I were discussing how to handle transaction fees in GBT when the pool isn't providing transactions; thinking miners adding fees beyond what is claimed by the pool should automatically go to whoever the miner wishes (and when fees overtake subsidy, pools can require miners add X fees to particpate)
137 2014-04-27 18:26:56 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: lechuga_: ^
138 2014-04-27 18:26:58 <Luke-Jr> thoughts?
139 2014-04-27 18:28:15 <wizkid057> what is technically "claimed by the pool" though?
140 2014-04-27 18:28:36 <wizkid057> if the miner is doing txn processing with a full node, the txns could potentially be completely different
141 2014-04-27 18:28:41 <wizkid057> not that they should
142 2014-04-27 18:29:16 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: pool-provided coinbase spends X amount :P
143 2014-04-27 18:29:29 <wizkid057> and if they dont have enough txns to cover that?
144 2014-04-27 18:29:34 <wizkid057> *txnfees
145 2014-04-27 18:30:32 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: I think it probably makes sense to do the pooling calculations seperately for fees and subsidy, since the options available to each are different.
146 2014-04-27 18:30:54 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: then they cannot participate in the pool?
147 2014-04-27 18:31:39 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: thats a bit lame. Or at least it strongly encourages the pool to always do nearly zero tx blocks on its own.
148 2014-04-27 18:31:45 <Luke-Jr> of course, we could also extend GBT so the miner gives the pool a hint on fees it is willing to share
149 2014-04-27 18:32:04 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: huh? the miner can *always* add transactions with this idea
150 2014-04-27 18:32:14 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: if there are fees beyond what the pool is claiming for itself, the miner just gets them himself
151 2014-04-27 18:32:41 <wizkid057> well, looking way forward to fees>subsidy times, fees will need to be included in the pool reward system in some fashion for distribution to all miners
152 2014-04-27 18:33:21 <wizkid057> for now though, I would think a GBT miner should just get fees if they are not using any txn data from the pool
153 2014-04-27 18:33:53 <ndak> hi anybody who could help me install bitcoind with rpcserver. i pay you for doing this /msg me
154 2014-04-27 18:35:39 <arubi> ^^ this looks like a scam, someone with a different 4 letter nickname was here before suggesting the same deal
155 2014-04-27 18:37:28 <UserGodCoin> The future of hashing is here - http://goo.gl/a9vHRc  Start Mining Now!
156 2014-04-27 18:55:59 <ndak> hi anybody who could help me install bitcoind with rpcserver on debian 7. i pay you for doing this /msg me
157 2014-04-27 19:21:22 <ndak> configure: error: Found Berkeley DB other than 4.8, required for portable wallets (--with-incompatible-bdb to ignore)
158 2014-04-27 19:21:24 <ndak> how to fix it?
159 2014-04-27 19:22:46 <michagogo> cloud|ndak: do what it tells you
160 2014-04-27 19:22:54 <michagogo> cloud|Add --with-incompatible-bdb
161 2014-04-27 19:23:12 <gmaxwell> michagogo|cloud: I guess we need to remove that advice because that is _not_ what its telling you to do there.
162 2014-04-27 19:23:17 <michagogo> cloud|Also, run `./configure --help` and read that, it will tell you all the options
163 2014-04-27 19:23:34 <michagogo> cloud|ndak: if you're willing to have incompatible wallets, that is
164 2014-04-27 19:23:52 <michagogo> cloud|(it's usually okay)
165 2014-04-27 19:23:54 <gmaxwell> If you do that your wallet will forever be incompatible, bdb >4.8.x is also not well tested. If it were a free choice it would do it for you.
166 2014-04-27 19:24:22 <ndak> is it better to use bdb?
167 2014-04-27 19:24:26 <michagogo> cloud|gmaxwell: I wouldn't advise that people do it, if it weren't for the fact that downgrading is very easy
168 2014-04-27 19:24:39 <michagogo> cloud|ndak: you must use BDB if you want the wallet functionality
169 2014-04-27 19:24:49 <michagogo> cloud|The question is the version
170 2014-04-27 19:24:50 <gmaxwell> Downgrading is impossible once you've done it.
171 2014-04-27 19:24:58 <michagogo> cloud|gmaxwell: huh?
172 2014-04-27 19:25:20 <ndak> michagogo|cloud: so how do i fix it? should i update bdb?
173 2014-04-27 19:25:21 <michagogo> cloud|db5.1_dump wallet.dat | db4.8_load wallet.dat.4.8
174 2014-04-27 19:25:22 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: not impossible, just requires explicitly doing so..
175 2014-04-27 19:25:32 <michagogo> cloud|ndak: No.
176 2014-04-27 19:25:50 <michagogo> cloud|ndak: Either get BDB 4.8, or use --with-incompatible-bdb to use whatever BDB you have
177 2014-04-27 19:26:04 <ndak> michagogo|cloud: how do i get bdb 4.8?
178 2014-04-27 19:26:08 <gmaxwell> michagogo|cloud: I'd not even heard of anyone testing that. Didn't have any idea that worked.
179 2014-04-27 19:26:24 <gmaxwell> Also this shouldn't be in #bitcoin-dev, I'd previously answered him in #bitcoin
180 2014-04-27 19:26:46 <michagogo> cloud|gmaxwell: ah, didn't see that
181 2014-04-27 19:27:12 <michagogo> cloud|gmaxwell: idk, I've seen others (sipa?) telling people that a lot
182 2014-04-27 19:48:56 <ndak> do i need to do `make -f Makefile.unix bitcoind`??
183 2014-04-27 19:49:57 <netg_> without bitcoind
184 2014-04-27 19:50:12 <Luke-Jr> and makefile.unix is lowercase
185 2014-04-27 19:50:19 <Luke-Jr> also, that is for only old versions
186 2014-04-27 19:53:46 <michagogo> cloud|ndak: get the latest version of the source
187 2014-04-27 19:54:06 <michagogo> cloud|git clone https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin;cd bitcoin;git checkout v0.9.1
188 2014-04-27 19:54:12 <michagogo> cloud|Then read doc/build-unix
189 2014-04-27 20:00:29 <sipa> gmaxwell, michagogo|cloud: i believe i've tried the db5.1_dump | db4.8_load trick myself
190 2014-04-27 20:01:55 <Diablo-D3> http://gizmodo.com/new-vulnerability-found-in-every-single-version-of-inte-1568383903
191 2014-04-27 20:03:43 <GAit> Diablo-D3: sigh
192 2014-04-27 20:04:22 <midnightmagic> love those insane stock photos
193 2014-04-27 20:04:25 <GAit> you have have remote desktop without having to give any bloody permission, just click this link
194 2014-04-27 20:06:53 <GAit> i wonder if it can be used even without internet explorer as default on windows by using some different extention that is normally handled by IE but still embed the exploit (if possible)
195 2014-04-27 20:08:00 <GAit> doesn't say if MS outlook is at risk or embedded webviews
196 2014-04-27 20:09:27 <uiop> are there any altcoins that do something equivalent to (or at all resembling): their transactions transfer a quantity of their unit (like bitcoin) *and also* record a transfer "in the reverse direction" (although rev target address need not be == to fwd src) of a quantity of some other unit ?
197 2014-04-27 20:10:22 <uiop> (the motivation being to record a "sale" of a given quantity of something for a given quantity of xxxcoins)
198 2014-04-27 20:10:40 <uiop> 
ACTION was pondering this earlier

199 2014-04-27 20:11:16 <arubi> uiop, but how can you send something back? to where?
200 2014-04-27 20:11:20 <belcher> you mean trading coins between chains
201 2014-04-27 20:11:30 <midnightmagic> short OP_RETURN don't have priority in the free txn list by default do they?
202 2014-04-27 20:11:58 <sipa> uiop: what's the point?
203 2014-04-27 20:12:06 <uiop> belcher: that could be an application, sure (modulo having some way to translate from xxxcoin addresses and that altcoin's addresses)
204 2014-04-27 20:12:23 <belcher> there is a way to do that, somewhere on the bitcoin wiki
205 2014-04-27 20:12:33 <uiop> 
ACTION responds to arubi then

206 2014-04-27 20:12:36 <uiop> ...then sipa
207 2014-04-27 20:12:47 <sipa> uiop: and a chain does not know or care about another chain
208 2014-04-27 20:12:51 <uiop> <arubi> uiop, but how can you send something back? to where?
209 2014-04-27 20:13:07 <uiop> sipa, right, i didn't have a cross-chain transfer application in mind
210 2014-04-27 20:13:39 <sipa> so what would you be sending back? from the perspective of one chain, the only unit is that chain's currency
211 2014-04-27 20:14:15 <arubi> hehe good point
212 2014-04-27 20:14:25 <uiop> arubi: good point. so a transaction that "sells" some yyy's for some xxxcoins is the same as a transaction that "buys" some yyy's for xxxcoins
213 2014-04-27 20:14:30 <sipa> if you're talking about multiple units within one chain (colored coins, ...), you can make transactions that do both at the same time, at the transactors's discretion
214 2014-04-27 20:14:56 <sipa> i don't understand what you're doing, and i certainly don't think it applies to bitcoin
215 2014-04-27 20:15:01 <uiop> arubi: if that's isn't what you were getting at, then what do you mean?
216 2014-04-27 20:15:11 <uiop> sipa:
217 2014-04-27 20:15:41 <arubi> uiop, nothing is being sent anywhere in bitcoin. everyone knows the same stuff
218 2014-04-27 20:16:12 <arubi> only difference is which transactions can you sign. those are your coins\
219 2014-04-27 20:16:26 <uiop> sipa: my goal would be to allow recording not only of transfers of the coin's coin, but also the (symbol::String, quantity) of items exchanged for those coins
220 2014-04-27 20:17:02 <sipa> uiop: so you are trading something else, which means color coins/smart property/... that's all very possible and doesn't need any special arrangements
221 2014-04-27 20:17:08 <uiop> sipa: so one example would be that you could implement a distributed "stock" (where stock := symbol::String) exchange
222 2014-04-27 20:17:21 <sipa> uiop: if you want to create a transaction that moves X from a to b, and Y from b to a, you already can
223 2014-04-27 20:17:27 <sipa> but it's offtopic here
224 2014-04-27 20:17:53 <uiop> sipa: right, exactly. it's the same idea as colored coins, but with the "coloring" data stored within the blockchain of the coin itself
225 2014-04-27 20:18:15 <sipa> ...
226 2014-04-27 20:18:26 <uiop> sipa: sry i know it's offtopic, but i thought i would get the most intelligent responses (if any) in here :)
227 2014-04-27 20:19:40 <uiop> arubi: right, i know that nothing is being "sent" with bitcoins, but allow the simplicity of using the word "transfered" for brevity while (trying to) introducing other concepts with precision ;)
228 2014-04-27 20:19:44 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: they'll have higher priority than long ones, by virtue of being smaller.
229 2014-04-27 20:20:13 <uiop> anyways, thx for teh responses
230 2014-04-27 20:21:07 <uiop> sipa: (i hadn't thought of it in the context of colored coins, mainly because i'm not read up on them)
231 2014-04-27 20:21:23 <arubi> uiop, I still can't understand, from bitcoin's perspective what does it mean to send "back". I know what you mean by "send", but now by "back"
232 2014-04-27 20:21:37 <arubi> but talk to me in private so we can stay on topic here :)
233 2014-04-27 20:21:43 <uiop> arubi: a concrete exam..
234 2014-04-27 20:21:45 <uiop> ok
235 2014-04-27 20:25:25 <sipa> gmaxwell, wumpus, Luke-Jr: any objections that we remove midstate/hash1 from getwork() ?
236 2014-04-27 20:26:38 <gmaxwell> sipa: fixing the psycho half-implementation of sha256 in the codebase?
237 2014-04-27 20:27:01 <sipa> gmaxwell: removing it :)
238 2014-04-27 20:27:18 <gmaxwell> I don't. (I'd be in favor of removing getwork entirely.)
239 2014-04-27 20:27:29 <sipa> that'd be even easier :)
240 2014-04-27 20:28:39 <gmaxwell> last time we discussed it IIRC jgarzik squaked some— though I think with cgminer and bfgminer both supporting solo mining from gbt, maybe his objections are gone— and doublec sqaked some but said he was moving off of it.
241 2014-04-27 20:29:07 <Luke-Jr> sipa: AFAIK, midstate/hash1 were deprecated in 0.8
242 2014-04-27 20:29:40 <Luke-Jr> +1 to removing getwork
243 2014-04-27 20:30:09 <sipa> so, what i'm doing: i'm adding a native sha256/sha512 implementation, wrapped in a C++ type that encapsulates its state
244 2014-04-27 20:30:45 <sipa> which means the built-in miner could be implemented by taking such an object, writing all but the nonce to it, and iterating by copying state state, writing the nonce, and getting the result
245 2014-04-27 20:31:00 <sipa> probably a bit less efficient, but certainly more readable for a reference implementation
246 2014-04-27 20:32:39 <Luke-Jr> why keep the built-in miner? <.<
247 2014-04-27 20:33:12 <sipa> i don't object to having a reference implementation
248 2014-04-27 20:33:24 <sipa> if enough people don't mind it being gone, that's even easier :)
249 2014-04-27 20:36:24 <gmaxwell> I think we do need to ship a miner, otherwise testnet / regtest is not so useful. It doesn't need to be in the process proper.
250 2014-04-27 20:53:33 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: why does everything have to be shipped together?
251 2014-04-27 20:53:40 <Luke-Jr> regtest does not need a miner at all..
252 2014-04-27 20:54:41 <Luke-Jr> we have BFGMiner. there's no reason that cannot be used when people need to mine.
253 2014-04-27 20:59:36 <gmaxwell> Because Bitcoind should be a complete implementation of a bitcoin node.
254 2014-04-27 20:59:46 <gmaxwell> It is not complete without the mining functionality.
255 2014-04-27 21:08:15 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: sure it is, mining is not a node thing
256 2014-04-27 21:10:34 <midnightmagic> +1, complete functionality
257 2014-04-27 21:11:07 <midnightmagic> even if only as a functional reference
258 2014-04-27 21:11:27 <belcher> if it ever breaks, how long until someone notices?
259 2014-04-27 21:11:30 <TYDIRocks> Hello I'm running an ubuntu liveCD. I copied over the bitcoin core .tar.gz, extracted it to my documents and when I attempt to open the bitcoin-qt I get: There is no application installed for "shared library" files.
260 2014-04-27 21:11:53 <belcher> it would be used for testnet, so pretty soon i realise
261 2014-04-27 21:12:04 <Luke-Jr> belcher: it's not wise to use it for testnet
262 2014-04-27 21:12:15 <Luke-Jr> it's like 1000 times slower than any decent CPU miner
263 2014-04-27 21:16:01 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: midnightmagic: keep in mind that a dirt-simple reference miner is included with libblkmaker (where it makes sense)
264 2014-04-27 21:16:37 <TYDIRocks> Can someone please help me with the error
265 2014-04-27 21:17:46 <arubi> TYDIRocks, are you trying to double click the "bitcoin-qt.pro" file?
266 2014-04-27 21:17:48 <arubi> or what?
267 2014-04-27 21:18:08 <TYDIRocks> arubi, the file extension isn't shown. I'm trying to double click it though yes.
268 2014-04-27 21:18:22 <arubi> alright, can you tell me the path of the file?
269 2014-04-27 21:18:35 <arubi> is it in a folder called bin?
270 2014-04-27 21:18:40 <TYDIRocks> arubi, it's in the /bin/32 folder
271 2014-04-27 21:18:54 <TYDIRocks> same error with the 64
272 2014-04-27 21:19:06 <arubi> ubuntu you say, right?
273 2014-04-27 21:19:13 <arubi> try right clicking the file
274 2014-04-27 21:19:24 <arubi> then properties
275 2014-04-27 21:19:43 <arubi> permissions -> "allow executing file as program"
276 2014-04-27 21:19:51 <arubi> then try to double click again
277 2014-04-27 21:20:07 <TYDIRocks> arubi, it is already checked
278 2014-04-27 21:21:16 <arubi> it sounds like you're missing some libraries
279 2014-04-27 21:21:45 <arubi> I don't know which though. can you try running "ldd bitcoin-qt" from terminal? (in the bitcoin-qt folder that is)
280 2014-04-27 21:22:22 <TYDIRocks> arubi, it "not a dynamic executable"
281 2014-04-27 21:22:52 <arubi> I know it should be
282 2014-04-27 21:23:00 <arubi> i mean, should be static
283 2014-04-27 21:24:02 <TYDIRocks> that's all it came up with
284 2014-04-27 21:24:13 <arubi> TYDIRocks, try executing the file from terminal
285 2014-04-27 21:24:16 <arubi> not from the gui
286 2014-04-27 21:24:21 <TYDIRocks> ./bitcoin-qt right?
287 2014-04-27 21:24:26 <arubi> yea
288 2014-04-27 21:24:36 <arubi> it might work, and might give a better error
289 2014-04-27 21:24:46 <TYDIRocks> I've been trying to do that but it says no such file or directory
290 2014-04-27 21:25:05 <arubi> you have to cd into the directory you extracted the tar.gz to
291 2014-04-27 21:25:17 <TYDIRocks> I am in it
292 2014-04-27 21:25:20 <arubi> so "cd ~/Documents/bitc<TAB>"
293 2014-04-27 21:25:28 <TYDIRocks> I know, I'm in the directory
294 2014-04-27 21:25:36 <arubi> type ls
295 2014-04-27 21:25:40 <arubi> what do you see then?
296 2014-04-27 21:25:59 <TYDIRocks> I see all the normal files (bitcoin-qt, bitcoind, etc)
297 2014-04-27 21:26:24 <arubi> what do you mean all? there should be 2 files in the ./bin directory
298 2014-04-27 21:26:50 <TYDIRocks> bitcoin-cli, bitcoin-cli.static, bitcoind, bitcoind.static, bitcoin-qt, test_bitcoin, test_bitcoin.qt
299 2014-04-27 21:27:31 <arubi> well, I haven't used the binary in a long time, but it seems only bitcoind and bitcoin-cli are static?
300 2014-04-27 21:28:11 <arubi> type "file bitcoin-qt"
301 2014-04-27 21:28:30 <arubi> and tell me the output
302 2014-04-27 21:32:11 <TYDIRocks> bitcoin-qt: ELF 32-bit LSB shared object, Intel 80386, version 1 (SVSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.24, BuildID(sha1)=0x3de6890ffd5151d3bc7fdb4f9bcacc54a04796bf, stripped
303 2014-04-27 21:32:17 <TYDIRocks> Sorry had to type that all out by hand
304 2014-04-27 21:35:45 <arubi> TYDIRocks, I'm not a linux guru or anything, but that doesn't seem like a static binary
305 2014-04-27 21:35:56 <arubi> what if you try to "file bitcoind.static" ?
306 2014-04-27 21:36:20 <arubi> for example : /bin/busybox: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, for GNU/Linux 2.6.24, BuildID[sha1]=0x3aa5...
307 2014-04-27 21:36:29 <TYDIRocks> Same thing but it says it is statically linked
308 2014-04-27 21:36:57 <arubi> so I'm guessing you need some libraries to get qt to work
309 2014-04-27 21:37:09 <arubi> try running ./bitcoind.static from command line
310 2014-04-27 21:37:12 <arubi> see if that runs
311 2014-04-27 21:37:49 <TYDIRocks> It talks about the config file and stuff
312 2014-04-27 21:38:08 <arubi> so it runs normally. use "ldd bitcoin-qt" to see which libraries you're missing
313 2014-04-27 21:38:22 <arubi> and "apt-get" them. should be no problem even on a livecd
314 2014-04-27 21:38:48 <TYDIRocks> You already had me run that remember? It just says "not a dynamic executable"
315 2014-04-27 21:39:00 <arubi> oh I didn't catch that
316 2014-04-27 21:39:13 <arubi> hmm
317 2014-04-27 21:39:55 <arubi> and what happened when you tried running "./bitcoin-qt" from shell?
318 2014-04-27 21:40:00 <arubi> what was the error that is
319 2014-04-27 21:40:12 <TYDIRocks> Said the file didn't exist for some odd reason
320 2014-04-27 21:40:38 <arubi> can you try "ls -l bitcoin-qt" ?
321 2014-04-27 21:43:48 <TYDIRocks> -rxwr -xr -x 1 ubuntu ubuntu 12168128 Apr 8 16:22 bitcoin-qt
322 2014-04-27 21:44:38 <arubi> that's so weird... try to "apt-get install" another shell, like 'csh', and run bitcoin-qt through that...
323 2014-04-27 21:44:50 <ADHD> Is there a good community anywhere for altcoin dev?  /msg alis list *altcoin* led to dead ends.
324 2014-04-27 21:45:39 <Luke-Jr> ADHD: altcoins, in general, don't have dev; they're just copy/paste/rename pump and dump scams.. the few exceptions tend to have dedicated channels
325 2014-04-27 21:46:34 <TYDIRocks> it says unable to locate package csh
326 2014-04-27 21:46:47 <TYDIRocks> is it called something else?
327 2014-04-27 21:46:59 <arubi> did you "sudo apt-get update" before that?
328 2014-04-27 21:47:27 <Luke-Jr> TYDIRocks: I'd suggest trying a .. normal shell .. if you're going to try another one
329 2014-04-27 21:47:33 <Luke-Jr> like BASH or dash
330 2014-04-27 21:47:34 <TYDIRocks> yes
331 2014-04-27 21:47:35 <Luke-Jr> or busybox
332 2014-04-27 21:47:41 <arubi> he is on bash right now
333 2014-04-27 21:48:13 <arubi> busybox has ash, that could work
334 2014-04-27 21:48:19 <ADHD> Luke-Jr: Bummer.  I'm hopping to develop something legit and would like a group that I could ping my code & ideas off of.
335 2014-04-27 21:48:19 <Luke-Jr> [21:40:11] <TYDIRocks> Said the file didn't exist for some odd reason <-- this suggests wrong architecture/platform to me
336 2014-04-27 21:48:27 <arubi> he's trying both
337 2014-04-27 21:48:30 <ADHD> *hoping*
338 2014-04-27 21:48:33 <Luke-Jr> ADHD: why would it be an altcoin, if it's legit? ;)
339 2014-04-27 21:48:37 <TYDIRocks> Luke-Jr, why wouldn't it work with Ubuntu?
340 2014-04-27 21:48:46 <Luke-Jr> TYDIRocks: 32-bit on 64-bit or vice-versa
341 2014-04-27 21:49:06 <arubi> TYDIRocks, run "/bin/busybox ash"
342 2014-04-27 21:49:17 <ADHD> Luke-Jr: ... that's one way to look at it :-).
343 2014-04-27 21:49:25 <arubi> then navigate to "./bin/64/ or 32 and try to run ./bitcoin-qt
344 2014-04-27 21:49:32 <TYDIRocks> Wow I feel like an idiot...it worked with 64
345 2014-04-27 21:49:47 <arubi> you said you tried them both :P
346 2014-04-27 21:49:59 <TYDIRocks> I tried double clicking them both not running from terminal lol
347 2014-04-27 21:50:22 <arubi> so double clicking the 64 binary presents an error, but it runs from terminal?
348 2014-04-27 21:50:32 <TYDIRocks> yup
349 2014-04-27 21:50:40 <arubi> what silly file explorer are they using in ubuntu now?
350 2014-04-27 21:51:31 <TYDIRocks> I'm not sure heh
351 2014-04-27 21:52:33 <arubi> ubuntu docs say nautilus. well, silly nautilus then :)
352 2014-04-27 21:53:04 <ADHD> Luke-Jr: I guess I can always ping quesitons about the bitcoin source here :)
353 2014-04-27 21:53:42 <Luke-Jr> ADHD: this is appropriate
354 2014-04-27 22:34:53 <jcorgan> sipa: i've just looked at Haltingstate's go wrapper for your libsecp256k1, and he's including an internal copy of the source.  I'm just curious how quickly this would diverge from you actual library.
355 2014-04-27 22:35:10 <jcorgan> *your
356 2014-04-27 22:35:43 <sipa> i'm fine with merging wrappers for other languages
357 2014-04-27 22:35:56 <sipa> (though i won't maintain them myself if it's nontrivial)
358 2014-04-27 22:36:49 <jcorgan> i'm not sure that would work, it seems go modules depend on a certain directory layout that might not fit with yours
359 2014-04-27 22:37:11 <jcorgan> but in any case, is there much change in your library these days?
360 2014-04-27 22:37:28 <sipa> i'm planning to change the api quite significantly
361 2014-04-27 22:37:37 <sipa> it's too lowlevel now
362 2014-04-27 22:37:40 <jcorgan> i guess that would be yes :)
363 2014-04-27 22:38:50 <Luke-Jr> sipa: will it support multiple bignum libs in the same build?
364 2014-04-27 22:39:07 <sipa> no plans for that
365 2014-04-27 22:39:27 <Luke-Jr> how about bignum-less? <.<
366 2014-04-27 22:39:45 <sipa> you mean with a native bignum implementation?
367 2014-04-27 22:39:58 <sipa> s/native/built-in/
368 2014-04-27 22:40:07 <Luke-Jr> maybe
369 2014-04-27 22:40:24 <Luke-Jr> sipa:  is it possible to divide a 256-bit number by a fractional number in under 100 LOC?
370 2014-04-27 22:40:39 <sipa> define fractional number?
371 2014-04-27 22:41:09 <Luke-Jr> eg 0.9999847412109375
372 2014-04-27 22:42:06 <sipa> in what representation?
373 2014-04-27 22:42:30 <Luke-Jr> ideally uint8_t[32] and double
374 2014-04-27 22:43:08 <sipa> i think the easiest way is to convert that byte array to a double, divide, and convert back :)
375 2014-04-27 22:43:16 <Luke-Jr> sipa: then you lose the precision :P
376 2014-04-27 22:43:16 <sipa> you can't have better precision anyway
377 2014-04-27 22:43:26 <sipa> the double only has limited precision
378 2014-04-27 22:43:33 <sipa> so the result won't have more
379 2014-04-27 22:43:45 <Luke-Jr> sipa: it will, because the 256-bit number will have higher precision :P
380 2014-04-27 22:43:48 <Luke-Jr> actually..
381 2014-04-27 22:43:50 <sipa> no
382 2014-04-27 22:43:59 <sipa> well, it depends
383 2014-04-27 22:44:21 <Luke-Jr> 
ACTION ponders

384 2014-04-27 22:44:21 <sipa> if you mean "divide a 256-bit number by the *exact* real value of a given double", yes
385 2014-04-27 22:44:32 <Luke-Jr> sipa: I do! :P
386 2014-04-27 22:44:33 <sipa> but likely, that double is only an approximation for some other number already
387 2014-04-27 22:44:42 <Luke-Jr> that's not my problem.
388 2014-04-27 22:45:05 <Luke-Jr> but the 256-bit number is always 2^224-1 anyway
389 2014-04-27 22:45:17 <Luke-Jr> I could just do it with 2^224 in FP, and then subtract 1
390 2014-04-27 22:45:19 <Luke-Jr> close enough
391 2014-04-27 22:45:19 <maaku> Luke-Jr: convert the double into an integer fraction
392 2014-04-27 22:45:29 <maaku> multiply, divide
393 2014-04-27 22:45:50 <Luke-Jr> maaku: then the integer is too large
394 2014-04-27 22:46:09 <sipa> what range will the double be in?
395 2014-04-27 22:46:22 <maaku> sipa: 53-bit integer
396 2014-04-27 22:46:38 <Luke-Jr> >0
397 2014-04-27 22:46:41 <Luke-Jr> maaku: non-integer
398 2014-04-27 22:47:01 <maaku> Luke-Jr: you can decompose an IEEE double into an integer fraction with 53 bits of precision
399 2014-04-27 22:47:13 <sipa> Luke-Jr: do you already have some uint256 implementation, with subtraction/comparison/bitshift?
400 2014-04-27 22:47:15 <Luke-Jr> oh that
401 2014-04-27 22:47:19 <Luke-Jr> sipa: no
402 2014-04-27 22:47:30 <sipa> then i think it may be a bit over 100 lines, but not much
403 2014-04-27 22:49:55 <sipa> though very large or very small double exponents may need several edge cases to deal with
404 2014-04-27 23:57:03 <jgarzik> gmaxwell, sipa: remove getwork, but leave internal miner and GBT
405 2014-04-27 23:57:23 <ndak> hi
406 2014-04-27 23:57:24 <ndak> "errors" : "This is a pre-release test build - use at your own risk - do not use for mining or merchant applications"
407 2014-04-27 23:57:26 <ndak> what does this mean?
408 2014-04-27 23:57:40 <jgarzik> it will break some ancient setups, but given the modern state of mining, that's OK
409 2014-04-27 23:57:57 <jgarzik> getwork probably still exists in various fallback modes of modern software
410 2014-04-27 23:58:22 <jgarzik> so the most likely case is nothing changes, until a fallback mode is needed
411 2014-04-27 23:58:37 <jgarzik> (on the miner side)
412 2014-04-27 23:58:46 <jgarzik> cpuminer is obsoleted alas
413 2014-04-27 23:58:53 <jgarzik> no more using it on testnet, without mods
414 2014-04-27 23:59:50 <sipa> jgarzik: my PR keeps getwork, but drops the deprecated fields (they're more work to port)