1 2015-02-14 00:52:30 <Harrowed> Azelphur: Or you could save yourself a lookup and use an API call to something like blockchain.info ; https://blockchain.info/q/addressbalance/addresss Can even specifiy to include only transactions that have greater than x confirmations /q/addressbalance/1address?confirmations=6
 2 2015-02-14 00:53:06 <Azelphur> Harrowed: I'm actually using the blockchain websockets api, I am after notification of when payments come in, but on ~100 addresses, so those calls are probably bad
 3 2015-02-14 00:53:20 <Azelphur> I wouldn't want to poll for 100 different addresses, which is why I'm using the websockets api
 4 2015-02-14 00:53:53 <Harrowed> https://www.blocktrail.com/api/docs <- can add address' and have it use websockets to alert you on transactions
 5 2015-02-14 00:55:05 <Azelphur> Harrowed: could do, although I'm already mostly done with the blockchain API, I just had that one question, which is why I asked it :)
 6 2015-02-14 00:55:42 <Harrowed> You might even just want to set up a local blockexplorer and use it's API/Webhooks..
 7 2015-02-14 00:56:48 <Harrowed> https://github.com/bitpay/insight or something similar
 8 2015-02-14 00:57:38 <Azelphur> Harrowed: indeed, but again, all I really want to know for now is if just iterating over the outputs value and amount is a reasonable trigger for payment received
 9 2015-02-14 00:57:47 <Azelphur> since I already have all that code done, and there's not much point in rewriting it to use some other API
10 2015-02-14 01:57:54 <PRab> How do you stop gitian builder (gbuild)? I tried Ctrl+C but its still running.
11 2015-02-14 02:01:14 <PRab> nm, I did it the violent way. (Kill ssh session and reconnect)
12 2015-02-14 02:20:02 <Luke-Jr> Azelphur: an address should only receive once. just verify the amount is correct
13 2015-02-14 02:26:50 <Luke-Jr> Harrowed: please never recommend something as stupid as using blockchain.info :/
14 2015-02-14 03:24:39 <Harrowed> Why not?  I admit it'd be easier to get getaddressbalance on startup and update on new blocks if they contain a transaction from one of the address' in the list..  But at least they wouldn't have a 20+ gig folder with open connections both in and out
15 2015-02-14 03:29:05 <brand0> Harrowed, if your concern is chain size, there are other solutions (like only storing account remainders) to reduce storage size and efficiency that doesn't include centralization
16 2015-02-14 03:29:54 <Harrowed> I'm guessing it's just a Bitcoin wallet monitoring app, so it's not really about storing...
17 2015-02-14 03:30:57 <brand0> yeah, thin client realities are still pretty harsh
18 2015-02-14 03:30:58 <Harrowed> Big difference in a VPN > 24+ gigs storage and a VPN/Account that can grab all that data easily and store it in a simple MySQL database
19 2015-02-14 03:50:04 <cfields> sipa: why was MAX_BLOCKS_IN_TRANSIT_PER_PEER reduced so much with headers-first ?
20 2015-02-14 03:53:38 <sipa> cfields: because we're downloading in parallel now
21 2015-02-14 04:14:24 <cfields> sipa: ah, of course. thanks.
22 2015-02-14 04:27:13 <fanquake> ;;blocks
23 2015-02-14 04:27:15 <gribble> 343378
24 2015-02-14 08:05:02 <Rong__> hi
25 2015-02-14 08:05:40 <Rong__> have people?
26 2015-02-14 08:06:16 <Rong__> hi
27 2015-02-14 08:06:42 <Rong__> i just test.
28 2015-02-14 08:08:40 <Rong__> Bye Bye
29 2015-02-14 11:28:20 <Azelphur> Luke-Jr: thanks :)
30 2015-02-14 14:33:58 <afk11> Hi all. I proposed the BIP around deterministic multi-signature addresses the other day (given m, and a set of keys). Figure IRC is where the cool kids hang, I'd love to discuss more here or on the mailing list
31 2015-02-14 15:08:47 <leakypat> afk11: the proposal to sort the pub keys?
32 2015-02-14 15:09:42 <afk11> leakypat: yes
33 2015-02-14 15:10:10 <leakypat> Yes, it makes sense to have a standard I think
34 2015-02-14 15:10:36 <leakypat> Opt in
35 2015-02-14 15:11:04 <leakypat> The only problem I can think of is that people already have bip32 multisig chains
36 2015-02-14 15:11:29 <leakypat> And the wallets have used their own logic
37 2015-02-14 15:12:10 <fuc> Question...how hard would it be to seperate the coins i bought from coinbase from my mined coins?
38 2015-02-14 15:12:20 <fuc> or even coins from exchanges
39 2015-02-14 15:12:25 <leakypat> So thy wouldn't be able to switch over (well, easily anyway)
40 2015-02-14 15:12:38 <belcher> fuc the easiest way is to just keep them in a different wallet
41 2015-02-14 15:12:44 <fuc> YEah, too late
42 2015-02-14 15:12:49 <belcher> maybe not
43 2015-02-14 15:13:01 <belcher> the thing you want to avoid is the two groups of coins being used in the same transaction
44 2015-02-14 15:13:03 <fuc> they are all in cold storage
45 2015-02-14 15:13:12 <belcher> combined inputs, thats the thing that kills privacy
46 2015-02-14 15:13:28 <fuc> nothing has been spent in cold storage
47 2015-02-14 15:13:31 <belcher> well the issue is only when you spend them
48 2015-02-14 15:13:33 <afk11> leakypat: yeah, that is true. I'd be interested in what those cases are trying to achieve. naively before, I used to do pubkeys = [site, merchant, buyer]. But that's confusing, and mightnt be obvious to merchant and buyer, who would like to finalize the transaction if the service went offline.
49 2015-02-14 15:13:35 <belcher> so its fine
50 2015-02-14 15:14:03 <fuc> When the time comes though, would i beable to find someone that can do that kind of work?
51 2015-02-14 15:14:07 <leakypat> Yeah, I build Ninki wallet, a hd multisig wallet
52 2015-02-14 15:14:12 <belcher> what work?
53 2015-02-14 15:14:23 <leakypat> I so online key, offline key, Ninki key
54 2015-02-14 15:14:25 <fuc> sperating coinbase coins from the other
55 2015-02-14 15:14:28 <leakypat> In that order
56 2015-02-14 15:14:37 <belcher> fuc did you send all the coins to the same address?
57 2015-02-14 15:14:39 <afk11> leakypat: You are right, people who have done it their own way would need to upgrade somehow. changing conventions does NOT help with recovering wallets, which is what we want to address
58 2015-02-14 15:14:46 <fuc> yeah
59 2015-02-14 15:14:49 <fuc> well not me
60 2015-02-14 15:14:50 <belcher> oh yeah then its too late
61 2015-02-14 15:14:50 <leakypat> Yeah, exactly
62 2015-02-14 15:14:52 <fuc> but someone iknow did
63 2015-02-14 15:14:57 <fuc> they are all in cold storage
64 2015-02-14 15:14:59 <fuc> alright
65 2015-02-14 15:15:02 <fuc> thats what i figured
66 2015-02-14 15:15:44 <afk11> I have wondered is there any privacy implications in doing that.. depending on how much you know, it could make it easier to profile services for volume.
67 2015-02-14 15:16:00 <leakypat> Yep, there def is information leak
68 2015-02-14 15:16:48 <leakypat> If you know a transaction came from the service you could tell from the signatures what combination of sigs was used to spend
69 2015-02-14 15:16:58 <leakypat> So that is one advantage to your proposal
70 2015-02-14 15:17:57 <leakypat> There would be nothing to stop us implementing he standard for new users
71 2015-02-14 15:18:40 <afk11> I wondered if themarketplace.i2p might shoot itself in the foot doing 2-of-3 multisig AND locktime when I think that was a very unique thing to be doing at the time (plus a default fee of 0.0002]. and if they did [adminkey, sellerkey, buyerkey], you know even more than they'd like you to really.
72 2015-02-14 15:19:33 <afk11> I will have a look at ninky
73 2015-02-14 15:19:41 <afk11> does it allow multisigs between other wallets?
74 2015-02-14 15:19:43 <leakypat> Ninki
75 2015-02-14 15:19:50 <afk11> ah, sorry :)
76 2015-02-14 15:20:05 <leakypat> What do you mean by between other wallets?
77 2015-02-14 15:20:29 <leakypat> Like import a pub key?
78 2015-02-14 15:21:30 <leakypat> It doesn't do that , however it does some unique things , you can build an network and exchange nodes on your HD chain via PGP
79 2015-02-14 15:22:36 <afk11> yes - a user of a different service wants to give a user of your service their xpub. can your user import it and use your service for this 2-of-2 wallet even though only one is a user of yours?