1 2015-02-01 01:10:27 <maaku> iBog: correct
2 2015-02-01 01:12:12 <iBog> maaku thank you. Will this eventually introduce performance issues? Is the growth sustainable?
3 2015-02-01 01:13:07 <maaku> storage growth is exponential; block chain growth is linear. the problem solves itself
4 2015-02-01 01:13:31 <maaku> but regardless, nodes don't have to store all historical blocks, so long as there is at least one accessible copy on the network at any given time.
5 2015-02-01 01:14:01 <phantomcircuit> storage per dollar growth is exponential
6 2015-02-01 01:14:12 <phantomcircuit> in case anybody else read that as blockchain storage growth is exponential
7 2015-02-01 01:14:13 <phantomcircuit> :P
8 2015-02-01 01:15:20 <moa> cost of storage is exponentially decreasing?
9 2015-02-01 01:15:36 <maaku> right
10 2015-02-01 01:15:49 <moa> or is it logarithmically?
11 2015-02-01 01:16:09 <maaku> cost of storage is exponentially decreasing
12 2015-02-01 01:18:12 <earlz> disk space doesn't concern me. bandwidth does though
13 2015-02-01 01:18:43 <phantomcircuit> earlz, overhead from maintaining the utxo appears to limit throughput to ~50mbps
14 2015-02-01 01:18:56 <phantomcircuit> (ie i disabled signatures and averaged 50mbps)
15 2015-02-01 01:19:07 <phantomcircuit> so i wouldn't worry about that too much
16 2015-02-01 01:44:35 <iBog> has the concept of a certificate autheority for signing bitcoin addresses ever been discussed? I can think of a few ways this might help enable additional (and optional) security for transactions (albeit at the cost of requiring an intermediary step).
17 2015-02-01 01:45:18 <Luke-Jr> iBog: it's been implemented, completely making addresses unnecessary
18 2015-02-01 01:51:55 <iBog> is there something I can google?
19 2015-02-01 01:51:55 <iBog> oh :) forgive me. how is it implemented and how does it make addresses unnecessary?
20 2015-02-01 01:51:56 <iBog> awsome. before I lok it up, the issue I'm trying to see if it can be addressed is in the scenario of a web based wallet... is it possible for the website to verify the recipient is who the sender wants to send money to before it is sent... and in an out of band manner.
21 2015-02-01 01:51:56 <phantomcircuit> iBog, payment protocol
22 2015-02-01 01:52:54 <iBog> such as man-in-the-browser malware modifying the recipients bitcoin address when the user tries to enter a transaction.
23 2015-02-01 01:54:45 <dhill> sipa?
24 2015-02-01 01:55:39 <Luke-Jr> iBog: web based wallets should simply not exist.
25 2015-02-01 01:56:10 <iBog> Luke-Jr it's not prohibited
26 2015-02-01 01:56:55 <Luke-Jr> iBog: it's heavily regulated, a bad idea, and not something anyone today is competent securing.
27 2015-02-01 02:48:02 <Luke-Jr> what is it with this person just showing up to push politics on Bitcoin? what's next? are we going to add anarchist leanings into the code too?
28 2015-02-01 02:50:10 <Luke-Jr> (at least the anarchists have contributed something..)
29 2015-02-01 02:52:57 <Luke-Jr> </rant about how it's disappointing people have ACK'd this>
30 2015-02-01 03:57:40 <sipa> dhill: ?
31 2015-02-01 03:58:51 <dhill> nvm :)
32 2015-02-01 04:00:20 <sipa> Luke-Jr: well, gender neutrality (beyond just the grammatical sense) is considered important for political correctness
33 2015-02-01 04:01:09 <Luke-Jr> sipa: ?
34 2015-02-01 04:01:10 <sipa> Luke-Jr: for example, in dutch, the translation for "girl" has grammatical gender neutral, though obviously you refer to "it" as she :)
35 2015-02-01 04:01:37 <sipa> just an example that grammatical gender and its connotations may differ
36 2015-02-01 04:02:21 <Luke-Jr> well, I don't know Dutch, but in the particular case in that PR, they were better English in the "before"
37 2015-02-01 04:02:55 <sipa> people will disagree about that :)
38 2015-02-01 04:06:15 <Luke-Jr> people who aren't trying to push radical feminism, and have studied or are native English speakers? ;)
39 2015-02-01 04:06:23 <Luke-Jr> maybe some, but not many in my experience
40 2015-02-01 04:12:06 <phantomcircuit> sipa, english lacks gender nonspecific pronouns
41 2015-02-01 04:12:17 <phantomcircuit> so unless you're gonna start using made up words
42 2015-02-01 04:12:19 <phantomcircuit> forget it
43 2015-02-01 04:12:53 <azeteki> 'he' is the gender nonspecific pronoun!
44 2015-02-01 04:12:58 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: ^
45 2015-02-01 04:13:45 <phantomcircuit> azeteki, personally im prone to just he/she based on the authors gender
46 2015-02-01 04:14:10 <azeteki> the same, but generally when I see 'he' I just assume 'person'
47 2015-02-01 04:14:20 <azeteki> unless the context dictates otherwise
48 2015-02-01 04:14:37 <azeteki> i missed the first half of the conversation mind
49 2015-02-01 04:18:10 <Luke-Jr> azeteki: some newbie wants to change all "he" in Bitcoin Core to "he or she" and "they"
50 2015-02-01 04:18:25 <azeteki> heh, i wasn't even aware there were instances of 'he'
51 2015-02-01 04:18:30 <azeteki> 'it'
52 2015-02-01 04:18:31 <azeteki> :D
53 2015-02-01 04:18:34 <Luke-Jr> only like 3 of them, so not really a big deal
54 2015-02-01 04:18:41 <Luke-Jr> just annoying to have someone pushing politics into code
55 2015-02-01 04:19:04 <Luke-Jr> at the expense of correct language
56 2015-02-01 04:20:01 <Luke-Jr> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5730
57 2015-02-01 04:22:17 <azeteki> relevant blog post https://www.joyent.com/blog/the-power-of-a-pronoun
58 2015-02-01 04:22:28 <phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, insist that "Attacker" is replaced with "Malory"
59 2015-02-01 04:22:34 <phantomcircuit> proceed to lol when they get pissed
60 2015-02-01 04:22:37 <azeteki> ' if this were the act of a Joyent employee, we wouldâto deliberately use a gender-neutral pronounâfire them'
61 2015-02-01 04:23:30 <azeteki> probably hyperbolic, but i'm thankful not to work in such a toxic workplace, i mean christ. talk to perhaps, but fire?
62 2015-02-01 04:24:54 <Luke-Jr> not sure how relevant the shortcomings/failings of a non-Bitcoin company are
63 2015-02-01 05:12:26 <Luke-Jr> sipa: (PR comments) doh, you're right. >_<
64 2015-02-01 05:27:26 <maaku> sipa: you'll see that daira and I commented on the 'it' issue
65 2015-02-01 05:27:55 <maaku> and while we're at it, i prefer blue for the bikeshed color
66 2015-02-01 05:30:33 <fanquake> maaku thought we agreed on purple
67 2015-02-01 05:32:42 <Luke-Jr> I'm okay with either blue or purple. Maybe stripes?
68 2015-02-01 05:33:52 <azeteki> CVE-2015-1234 Bike shed is bright purple
69 2015-02-01 05:34:16 <azeteki> recommended fix is to colour bike shed camoflage pattern in order to reduce likelihood of intrusion
70 2015-02-01 05:34:26 <Luke-Jr> Unspecified vulnerability in HP System Management Homepage (SMH)? O.o;;
71 2015-02-01 05:34:49 <fanquake> What if we then lose the bike shed due to the camoflage ?
72 2015-02-01 05:39:02 <Arnavion> Narrowly dodged a bullet there with the "master" process...
73 2015-02-01 06:24:44 <Luke-Jr> ACTION wonders if now is a good time to reopen/rebase https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/3901 ? sipa?
74 2015-02-01 06:46:07 <phantomcircuit> fanquake, that's the point
75 2015-02-01 07:21:51 <fanquake> phantomcircuit Clearly I havenât had enough experience with bikesheds :|
76 2015-02-01 10:06:24 <gdm85> azeteki: SMH? I don't run it. for one, doesn't allow to customize which interface it listens on (!!!), forcing you to use some special firewalling
77 2015-02-01 10:07:20 <gdm85> internally it uses a java server from around the age of bronze, no surprise is bugged
78 2015-02-01 10:08:52 <azeteki> ACTION backflips
79 2015-02-01 10:09:28 <azeteki> I have no idea what SMH even is. also no idea where luke got that from. I just pulled a fake cve number out of a hat as a joke. (is there actually a 2015-1234 already? surely not)
80 2015-02-01 10:11:32 <gdm85> ah, right. it was Luke-Jr mentioning that :)
81 2015-02-01 10:11:58 <azeteki> :)
82 2015-02-01 10:12:16 <gdm85> it's a piece of garbage you can install on HP servers. the Linux tools are wayy worse than the Windows tools for these servers
83 2015-02-01 15:26:31 <jonasschnelli> needs GUI tag:
84 2015-02-01 15:26:32 <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5729
85 2015-02-01 16:25:42 <paveljanik> jonasschnelli, will try Qt5 on Mac too. I was not able to get qt5 from macports running...
86 2015-02-01 16:26:27 <paveljanik> BTW - the progressbar in the installer looks strange, the same as the progressbar in our UI - "three lines"...
87 2015-02-01 16:26:37 <paveljanik> so it looks like Qt5 bug
88 2015-02-01 16:42:13 <xabbix> I'm getting a 'No block source available' displayed, I'm 18 weeks behind, running v0.9.3. Looking at the debug.log I can see that I'm connecting to a few nodes (seeing 'receive version message:..., us=... them=...). One thing looks strange: UPnP: ExternalIPAddress = 10.0.0.1. Also seeing this: P2P peers available. Skipped DNS seeding. Wondering how can I clear the peer cache.
89 2015-02-01 16:43:15 <sipa> quit, delete peers.dat, start again
90 2015-02-01 16:43:26 <sipa> but just quitting and restarting should already help
91 2015-02-01 16:43:51 <xabbix> sipa tried restarting several times, didn't help. will try removing the peer cache
92 2015-02-01 16:46:31 <xabbix> Getting a few of these: ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool : nonstandard transaction: non-final
93 2015-02-01 16:46:33 <xabbix> relevant?
94 2015-02-01 16:46:39 <sipa> those don't matter
95 2015-02-01 16:49:39 <raj_> any bitcoin developers?
96 2015-02-01 16:51:05 <sipa> raj_: sure
97 2015-02-01 16:51:33 <raj_> I need to develop a perfectmoney to bitcoin exchange site
98 2015-02-01 16:51:37 <raj_> any one can help?
99 2015-02-01 16:52:07 <akstunt600> raj_, Checkout alphapoint.com
100 2015-02-01 16:52:28 <akstunt600> I think they might have what you are looking for
101 2015-02-01 16:53:37 <raj_> I need to develop a site as p2pchange.is
102 2015-02-01 16:56:31 <sipa> not here please, that has nothing to do with bitcoin development
103 2015-02-01 17:50:24 <Luke-Jr> bleh, down to -dbcache=10
104 2015-02-01 18:40:53 <michagogo> Luke-Jr: I thought the minimum is 25?
105 2015-02-01 18:41:18 <michagogo> xabbix: binary from Bitcoin.org, or compiled?
106 2015-02-01 18:42:22 <Luke-Jr> michagogo: -? says min is 4
107 2015-02-01 18:42:29 <Luke-Jr> 25 OOM'd
108 2015-02-01 18:54:23 <jonasschnelli> paveljanik, i would recommend you to use homebrew instead of macports.
109 2015-02-01 18:54:40 <paveljanik> I know
110 2015-02-01 18:55:09 <paveljanik> The best way would be to use the original Qt5 for Mac distribution
111 2015-02-01 18:55:23 <paveljanik> but it has the same issue as Macports' Qt5.
112 2015-02-01 18:55:47 <paveljanik> pkgconfig *.pc files contains nonsenses... :-(
113 2015-02-01 18:56:28 <paveljanik> To me it looks like they are in the middle of Mac-port and pkgconfig files do not reflect the location of files...
114 2015-02-01 18:56:57 <jonasschnelli> paveljanik, if you like to test a build which is most like the one who are distributed on https://bitcoin.org/bin/ you might try gitian (linux cross build).
115 2015-02-01 18:57:26 <jonasschnelli> for local builds on osx i got best results with homebrew.
116 2015-02-01 18:58:02 <paveljanik> it is not about to find some way to test some app, but to correct the current local env to be able to build the app.
117 2015-02-01 18:59:11 <jonasschnelli> lol at the gender-text-discussion. It that worth the effort? I mean we are talking about devs-documentation of devs comments...
118 2015-02-01 18:59:43 <paveljanik> ;-)
119 2015-02-01 19:00:08 <paveljanik> just back fro a three days off and just finished reading it too...
120 2015-02-01 19:01:12 <paveljanik> side note: My native language is Czech. I never understood the preference of 'she' when there was NOT any evidence of a woman there... And this is similar to me.
121 2015-02-01 19:01:21 <paveljanik> NO
122 2015-02-01 19:06:56 <wumpus> let's just give the issue a rest, it's been resolved
123 2015-02-01 19:20:07 <Luke-Jr> jonasschnelli: probably not. just sets a bad/dangerous precedent to introduce bugs to appease some controversial political movement's agenda.
124 2015-02-01 19:23:21 <jonasschnelli> hmm... it was wondering why there where so many ACKs on a gender-text-pull-request (maybe it has something to do with the github nickname from the author).
125 2015-02-01 19:24:50 <jonasschnelli> wumpus, regarding 5711 (rpc locks), is this still required? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5711/files#diff-c2c990fee1c3381462640e80ae7db0d0L444
126 2015-02-01 19:25:39 <Luke-Jr> lol, I didn't even notice it was a different person commenting than submitted the PR
127 2015-02-01 19:30:22 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: that link doesn't work here
128 2015-02-01 19:30:38 <wumpus> what file/ line is it supposed to link to?
129 2015-02-01 19:50:41 <jonasschnelli> wumpus, rpcmining.cpp line 451
130 2015-02-01 19:53:43 <wumpus> the loop in getblocktemplate? well it could be written differently now that the lock is taken in the function, but I'd like to leave that to later pulls to clean up
131 2015-02-01 19:54:55 <wumpus> ie, I just want to push down the locks one step, which is easy to review
132 2015-02-01 20:13:31 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: The software should generally avoid triggering 'badness' even from people whom we might personally disagree with. It's like making sure the software works on windows: it doesn't mean we agree with windows' design. At most it means we know that windows' exists and has some properties. 99.9% of the time you can satify everyone's politics with a little though without taking any accuracy hit an
133 2015-02-01 20:13:37 <gmaxwell> d the result is usually superior for it; just like with a little thought you can write software which is portable to almost all systems, even dumb ones, and the result is better for it. Of course, we won't actually break the software for portability, nor should we for political correctness (of whatever kind), but that almost never comes up.
134 2015-02-01 20:15:12 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: plus we do want everyone to contribute, so we should tolerate their own personal 'interests' as much as we reasonably can. Some people no doubt think tonal is stupid, but if you were complaining that the language in the software was especially hostile to the exististance of other systems, we should probably twiddle it to stop irritating you, at least... even if we think your view is silly, b
135 2015-02-01 20:15:13 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: it did in this case, although it looks like we finally ended up with a reasonable solution (though I still need to check with my wife if it's gramatically correct in that one case remaining)
136 2015-02-01 20:15:18 <gmaxwell> ecause we want to be inclusive.
137 2015-02-01 20:16:34 <Luke-Jr> (although even if it isn't technically correct grammar now, at least it's close enough that I can't see it bothering anyone, so I might not bother to ask her about it)
138 2015-02-01 20:18:52 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: the drama on this PR made people behave unoptimally... many of the cases were outright wrong to begin with, e.g. refering to computers as 'he' instead of it.
139 2015-02-01 20:19:40 <Luke-Jr> agreed
140 2015-02-01 20:20:51 <gmaxwell> In some other cases, a plural noun is fine. E.g. attackers are of unknown number, they can be they just fine. Usually text can be refactored to avoid the gendered pronoun and be clearer for it in other cases, e.g. repeating "the user" "the recipent" etc. instead of using "he" or "they".
141 2015-02-01 20:25:29 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: in any case, please if you could in the future, about this kind of trivial stuff, see if you could help direct it productively rather than make a debate over it. I'm sorry Gavin's response to you was so harsh, I think it was out of line. At the same time, I think we can handle things just by being inclusive and finding solutions that don't bother anyone, and can do so in a positive and produ
142 2015-02-01 20:25:35 <gmaxwell> ctive way.
143 2015-02-01 20:25:54 <gmaxwell> If we do, there will be less pressure to be overly hasty for fear of things blowing up.
144 2015-02-01 20:32:06 <wumpus> I am a bit disappointed that this issue got so much attention, whereas mine is still the only ACK on the bip66 code
145 2015-02-01 20:32:26 <sipa> agree...
146 2015-02-01 20:32:31 <wumpus> if we want to move on with 0.10, that's where we should spent attention, not silly word debates
147 2015-02-01 20:38:20 <earlz> Is there anything in bitcoin core that parses a script as a string into actual opcodes and bytes?
148 2015-02-01 20:38:37 <earlz> like in the code or library or something
149 2015-02-01 20:41:29 <wumpus> yes, there is
150 2015-02-01 20:42:42 <wumpus> ParseScript in core_read.cpp
151 2015-02-01 21:16:12 <maaku> wumpus: sipa: I've seen this stuff end up on the front-page of HN, dividing communities and causing out-of-scale backlash. hence, I think, the rapid response
152 2015-02-01 21:17:31 <gmaxwell> maaku: great, well the 'rapid response' almost guarentees it now, because the change was incorrect.
153 2015-02-01 21:17:49 <maaku> gmaxwell: something I pointed out :(
154 2015-02-01 21:17:54 <wumpus> thou shalt not anthromorphise code objects
155 2015-02-01 21:18:05 <wumpus> 'he' was also wrong :)
156 2015-02-01 21:18:21 <wumpus> anyhow, let's just leave this be
157 2015-02-01 21:22:23 <wumpus> the bip66 pull needs attention as well as https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+milestone%3A0.10.0
158 2015-02-01 21:41:44 <Luke-Jr> wumpus: eh, I thought I ACK'd BIP66 code
159 2015-02-01 21:42:23 <Luke-Jr> yeah, cfields did too (pending changes)
160 2015-02-01 21:43:21 <sipa> oh, let me have a look
161 2015-02-01 21:48:45 <earlz> I've often wondered why there isn't an RPC call for constructing "raw" vouts, but having the vin coin selection, change address, signing, etc taken care of
162 2015-02-01 21:55:49 <Luke-Jr> earlz: that sounds like it ought to be a library function, not RPC
163 2015-02-01 21:56:04 <sipa> there's a proposal for that even
164 2015-02-01 21:56:26 <sipa> look up fundrawtransaction
165 2015-02-01 21:57:15 <Luke-Jr> sipa: that's the opposite?
166 2015-02-01 21:58:03 <sipa> well what earlz is asking for would be createrawtransaction + fundrawtransaction + signrawtransaction
167 2015-02-01 21:58:59 <Luke-Jr> sipa: I think he wants to pass a raw tx with everything *except* vout
168 2015-02-01 21:59:09 <Luke-Jr> come to think of it, I bet bitcoin-tx can do something like that
169 2015-02-01 21:59:49 <sipa> i don't understand
170 2015-02-01 22:00:06 <earlz> hmm.. well, just RPC is much easier to use than the library, since RPC works in all languages pretty easily
171 2015-02-01 22:00:32 <sipa> i think he wants something like createrawtransaction, but without having to select or specify or sign the inputs
172 2015-02-01 22:00:45 <sipa> that would be createrawtransaction + fundrawtransaction + signrawtransaction
173 2015-02-01 22:01:03 <Luke-Jr> hm, I suppose there are multiple ways to interpret him. I took "taken care of" to mean his external software already did it
174 2015-02-01 22:01:21 <earlz> and no Luke-Jr I want to be able to say like "send 10 BTC to `op_return 1234` using whatever coins I ahve in my wallet"
175 2015-02-01 22:01:42 <Luke-Jr> earlz: ah, ok, then sipa's answer is appropriate
176 2015-02-01 22:02:54 <earlz> like if you could do like.. `sendrawvout ["nop checksigverify":10, "op_return 1234": 1]" and it construct, sign, and transmit a transaction for me
177 2015-02-01 22:03:30 <earlz> Well, it'd make testing stuff out on testnet fun.. but you'd need na equivalent for scriptSigs too... eh
178 2015-02-01 22:03:31 <Luke-Jr> so you want an assembler as well
179 2015-02-01 22:03:48 <earlz> There already is one
180 2015-02-01 22:05:30 <earlz> it'd be neat to have an equivalent vin mechanism `receiverawvin "[txid:"12345"]"`
181 2015-02-01 22:05:43 <earlz> replacing txid with an actual txid, and 12345 with a scriptsig for redemption
182 2015-02-01 22:05:56 <earlz> use case for that seems pretty narrow though
183 2015-02-01 22:06:28 <Luke-Jr> earlz: would need to know the amount too
184 2015-02-01 22:06:59 <earlz> ah. yea, for the vout.. ugh
185 2015-02-01 22:07:05 <earlz> raw transactions are hard