1 2018-01-19 01:01:26 <d3h> echo=10usd fee? sweep*
  2 2018-01-19 01:05:41 <d3h> I actually wanna fucking kill you guys after that fee
  3 2018-01-19 01:08:06 <contrapumpkin> ?
  4 2018-01-19 01:08:17 <contrapumpkin> no threats plsthx
  5 2018-01-19 01:08:57 <d3h> sorry dude. its just you took 10usd off my balance without asked ng or notifying.
  6 2018-01-19 01:09:25 <d3h> on the sweep function with private keys
  7 2018-01-19 01:12:46 <d3h> it was 30usd balance. now 20 heh
  8 2018-01-19 01:15:13 <S-Nake> i need web site i can stay update on crypto witch one is the best
  9 2018-01-19 01:15:59 <d3h> I don't make a lot of money. Most of my money goes towards what I believe in. I'm unemployed at the moment and a long way away from being able to throw 10usd away, its actually a lot of money for most people. Please adjust the fee notices on the sweep wallet function. I wouldn't pay the fee if you notified me before the sweep. please just don't let this happen again.
 10 2018-01-19 01:16:50 <d3h> Thank You and good luck
 11 2018-01-19 01:18:01 <S-Nake> crypto news
 12 2018-01-19 01:33:18 <d3h> it says "all coins will be moved"
 13 2018-01-19 01:33:58 <d3h> 10usd is a lot without notice
 14 2018-01-19 01:34:13 <d3h> you guys get an at with that?
 15 2018-01-19 01:34:20 <d3h> get away*
 16 2018-01-19 01:34:37 <S-Nake> d3h you have web site to news on crypto
 17 2018-01-19 01:34:51 <d3h> cointelegraph?
 18 2018-01-19 01:35:02 <d3h> coindesk?
 19 2018-01-19 01:35:13 <S-Nake> i go check
 20 2018-01-19 01:35:16 <S-Nake> thank
 21 2018-01-19 01:35:57 <d3h> no where in the world takes your money without asking/notifying. that's theft
 22 2018-01-19 01:36:12 <d3h> I thought my parents generation stopped that?
 23 2018-01-19 01:36:53 <d3h> before and after photo of a wallet sweep with convention rates
 24 2018-01-19 01:37:06 <d3h> conversion
 25 2018-01-19 01:37:19 <d3h> to usd
 26 2018-01-19 01:37:44 <d3h> who can I speak to about this? reverse transaction?
 27 2018-01-19 01:38:12 <d3h> at least to the wallet where the funds originated from. that's outrageous.
 28 2018-01-19 01:40:26 <d3h> I'll sink their Azimut.
 29 2018-01-19 01:41:12 <d3h> and watch a moroccon laugh
 30 2018-01-19 01:41:58 <d3h> I'd swiss insure that
 31 2018-01-19 01:43:36 <zendainc> Christ
 32 2018-01-19 01:43:42 <zendainc> If I pay you $10 will you go away?
 33 2018-01-19 01:44:01 <d3h> if you reverse the transaction
 34 2018-01-19 01:44:25 <zendainc> I have zero to do with anything related to bitcoin-dev, but you are annoying and should go away
 35 2018-01-19 01:44:26 <d3h> otherwise I'll kill your fucking daughter.
 36 2018-01-19 01:46:20 <d3h> hahahhahahahhahhahha
 37 2018-01-19 01:46:45 <d3h> does that come with jack and coke?
 38 2018-01-19 01:46:57 <d3h> you sick fuck
 39 2018-01-19 01:47:42 <d3h> I'll drive that thing over your mums face
 40 2018-01-19 01:48:19 <d3h> =P
 41 2018-01-19 01:48:30 <zendainc> zzzzzzz
 42 2018-01-19 01:48:42 <d3h> speedy
 43 2018-01-19 01:49:27 <zendainc> Troll more. Clearly you are bored.
 44 2018-01-19 01:51:00 <d3h> go get some more freckles.
 45 2018-01-19 01:51:41 <d3h> is that a lookalike? oh no wait, her face got ran over.
 46 2018-01-19 01:53:03 <d3h> its as easy as right click edit
 47 2018-01-19 01:54:12 <d3h> and I still can't import those keys into core from jaxx wallet
 48 2018-01-19 01:54:23 <d3h> so I'll have to do it again or send.
 49 2018-01-19 01:54:47 <d3h> how many siblings have you got?
 50 2018-01-19 01:55:44 <d3h> can you fix the fees or import from wallet to core with keys.
 51 2018-01-19 02:00:01 <d3h> if I lose 2/3 of my balance I won't be happu
 52 2018-01-19 08:03:08 <eugenes1__> hi
 53 2018-01-19 09:22:16 <thrasos> hi
 54 2018-01-19 09:23:39 <thrasos> I am thinking of coding an open source wallet for iOS, does anyone know of any easy API's that output data in JSON?
 55 2018-01-19 09:48:59 <thrasos> I got disconnected, did anyone repond?
 56 2018-01-19 10:02:41 <arubi> thrasos, no.  but the channel is logged (topic) so if you drop you can check there
 57 2018-01-19 10:03:19 <thrasos> I see thanks
 58 2018-01-19 10:04:21 <meshcollider> thrasos: there are probably lots of APIs, I can see multiple from just google search
 59 2018-01-19 10:09:38 <thrasos> @meshcollider : Which one would be the most popular? Also I'll be coding in Swift, most of the API's have their own libraries in other languages. I am looking  something cleaner like  POST requests queries  and JSON responses
 60 2018-01-19 10:10:16 <meshcollider> thrasos: no idea sorry, I wouldn't trust a third party API for a wallet in general anyway
 61 2018-01-19 10:12:25 <thrasos> @meshcollider, OK how would you go about it?
 62 2018-01-19 10:13:08 <meshcollider> well ideally it would be a standalone SPV wallet I guess
 63 2018-01-19 10:14:05 <meshcollider> because if you're going to trust an API like blockchain.info one, you might as well just use blockchain.info's app
 64 2018-01-19 13:02:38 <dansmith_btc> Hi, I was in the middle of -reindex-chainstate when I had to Ctrl+C it, now if I run -reindex-chainstate again, it starts from the very beginning. Is there a way to resume it from where it left off?
 65 2018-01-19 13:47:53 <rav3nn> hi, do I need synced node first to use zeromq on my daemon ?
 66 2018-01-19 17:54:20 <arubi> anybody knows how to load a modified firmware image on the digital bitbox?  I built the binary but (no surprise) it doesn't like how it's unsigned
 67 2018-01-19 17:55:24 <arubi> there's also a "debug" option for firmware loading, but still : "ERROR: invalid firmware signature"
 68 2018-01-19 18:00:32 <arubi> there is also an undocumented "-noreadsig" flag in the dbb-cli application.  when trying to append the "debug" signature (all zeros) to my unsigned firmware and loading it with that flag set to true using the -cli, then it doesn't show the signature on screen when it tries the upgrade, but still fails the same
 69 2018-01-19 18:01:25 <arubi> in "load_firmware.py" there is a comment "Invalid firmware cannot be run." , right, but how am I supposed to test stuff then?
 70 2018-01-19 18:34:44 <arubi> ^ needs special bootloader.  :(
 71 2018-01-19 19:02:59 <dansmith_btc> Hi, why does -reindex-chainstate consume about 2ghz of my cpu? does it verify signatures or something? I thought there shouldnt be anything CPU-intensive
 72 2018-01-19 19:04:21 <mahamoti> when a node solves a POW problem, how is the completed block forwarded around to all other nodes in the network?  The node can send to all its known peers, and every peer could forward to all their known peers, but how does this not result in an infinite propagation through the network?
 73 2018-01-19 19:15:51 <reardencode> mahamoti: just like you said, every node sends it to every peer, unless they know for sure that peer already has it (because nodes keep track of their peers' heights)
 74 2018-01-19 19:20:42 <mahamoti> reardencode: so...whenever a node creates (or receives) a new block, it then queries all known peers for their height, and forwards to any peer with height < the new block number?
 75 2018-01-19 19:24:16 <reardencode> mahamoti: it already knows its peers' heights because they tell each other that regularly AFAIK otherwise, yep
 76 2018-01-19 19:27:20 <mahamoti> reardencode: so are you saying that every X seconds, a peer PUSHES its last known block to all other peers -- and whenever it receives/creates a new block, it then PULLS the last known block from any peer that hasn't reported its block-no in the last Y seconds?
 77 2018-01-19 19:32:44 <reardencode> mahamoti: I don't know the exact protocol messages that are involved
 78 2018-01-19 19:33:03 <reardencode> I know that blocks are propagated by receiving nodes to any of their peers who don't already have it
 79 2018-01-19 19:33:21 <mahamoti> ok
 80 2018-01-19 19:34:01 <mahamoti> its strange to me that nobody seems to know the basic network architecture
 81 2018-01-19 19:34:57 <reardencode> mahamoti: what do you mean? many people (myself included) know the network architecture, few know the exact protocol messages, because not many people need to know that
 82 2018-01-19 19:39:14 <mahamoti> reardencode: dont care about the exact protocol messages...but whether this information is communication via push model or pull model, based on a frequency or based on a trigger, etc, seem to be the basic architecture concepts
 83 2018-01-19 19:39:21 <mahamoti> communicated*
 84 2018-01-19 19:39:36 <reardencode> it's pushed, and whenever a new block is received
 85 2018-01-19 19:40:19 <reardencode> that may be done by the node that receives a new block knowing which peers need it already, or it may be done by it asking those peers if they want it
 86 2018-01-19 19:41:08 <mahamoti> you said blocks are pushed based on the peer heights, but peer height is basically equivalent to knowledge of last known block...so is peer height communicated via push or pull
 87 2018-01-19 19:42:16 <reardencode> so now you're back to asking about the specific protocol messages and sequences used to maintain the peer data on each node...
 88 2018-01-19 19:43:13 <mahamoti> push vs pull is network architecture
 89 2018-01-19 19:44:14 <mahamoti> i mean you no offense.  honestly, im just trying to understand at a conceptual level how information is communicated efficiently and without redundancy
 90 2018-01-19 19:45:11 <reardencode> yes, I figured that part out - the point is that exactly how a node knows which of its peers need a specific block isn't particularly important compared to the fact that it immediately sends the block to any peers who need it
 91 2018-01-19 19:46:02 <reardencode> I just looked up the protocol documentation and related BIPs, so it looks like on receipt of a new block the node sends a message to each of its peers announcing that it has a new block, and those peers can then request the block data if they don't already have it.
 92 2018-01-19 19:46:47 <reardencode> (and this is why people don't need to _know_ the specifics of the protocol, because it's documented for when they do need it
 93 2018-01-19 19:47:11 <mahamoti> reardencode: thank you for that info.  where is the link that you found it from?
 94 2018-01-19 19:47:22 <reardencode> https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0152.mediawiki was most helpful
 95 2018-01-19 19:49:40 <mahamoti> thanks!
 96 2018-01-19 19:53:38 <mahamoti> reardencode: im still a little confused though.  if, upon receipt of a new block, a node sends a message to all known peers announcing it has a new block, then this would trigger an infinite chain reaction of messages.  to make it not infinite, it would have to NOT send the message to peers it knows already have it, which brings us back to the question of how it knows which peers already have it.
 97 2018-01-19 19:54:18 <adiabat> nodes use inv messages
 98 2018-01-19 19:54:21 <reardencode> no, because only peers who don't already have it would actually get the new block and announce it further down
 99 2018-01-19 19:54:22 <adiabat> for blocks and txs
100 2018-01-19 19:54:49 <adiabat> you also won't send inv messages about things they've told you about, since obviously they've seen it
101 2018-01-19 19:55:05 <adiabat> also you keep track of what inv messages you've sent to nodes, so you don't repeat yourself
102 2018-01-19 19:58:14 <adiabat> wiki is a bit old but has the idea: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_documentation#Inventory_Vectors
103 2018-01-19 19:58:15 <mahamoti> reardencode: ok, i think i see what you mean
104 2018-01-19 19:58:26 <adiabat> There are also now witness_tx types
105 2018-01-19 19:59:43 <mahamoti> adiabat: are these inv messages separate from the messages reardencode  was talking about?
106 2018-01-19 20:00:05 <adiabat> inv messages are what reardencode mentioned
107 2018-01-19 20:00:14 <adiabat> it applies not just to blocks, but also txs
108 2018-01-19 20:00:22 <adiabat> there are some gotchas though
109 2018-01-19 20:00:34 <adiabat> there's a way for nodes to say "send headers!"
110 2018-01-19 20:00:45 <mahamoti> you mean for valid transactions that have yet to be included in a block?
111 2018-01-19 20:01:02 <adiabat> yes, those are the only transactions which get sent
112 2018-01-19 20:01:17 <adiabat> if they're invalid, you can't send them to other nodes, and if they're already in a block, you can't send them either
113 2018-01-19 20:01:43 <adiabat> if you've told other nodes "send headers" then they won't send a block inv message, they'll send the block header instead.
114 2018-01-19 20:02:05 <adiabat> it's not too big at 80 bytes, and lets you check the work on it without requesting the whole block
115 2018-01-19 20:02:30 <mahamoti> adiabat: so if a wallet sends a transaction to one node, that node will notify all its known peers that it has a new transaction?
116 2018-01-19 20:02:42 <adiabat> in general, yes
117 2018-01-19 20:02:50 <adiabat> however there are new models where it won't
118 2018-01-19 20:02:58 <adiabat> called dandelion
119 2018-01-19 20:03:07 <adiabat> also it will delay things a bit
120 2018-01-19 20:03:28 <adiabat> both of those techniques are to make it harder to track the origin of transactions
121 2018-01-19 20:04:11 <mahamoti> adiabat: it seems that it would be against the peers own interests to forward transactions to other nodes, because if it doesnt forward this info, theres a chance that the other nodes won't have enough transactions to fill a block, which would delay their ability to start POW, and increase probability that the first node would beat them to solving the next POW problem
122 2018-01-19 20:05:13 <adiabat> ah, for mining nodes you mean
123 2018-01-19 20:05:18 <mahamoti> yes
124 2018-01-19 20:05:39 <adiabat> yes, if there's a particularly juicy (high fee) tx, mining nodes wouldn't want to let other mining nodes know
125 2018-01-19 20:05:59 <adiabat> in practice, most of the nodes on the network with public IPs are not mining
126 2018-01-19 20:06:14 <mahamoti> oh really?  what is their incentive for operation then?
127 2018-01-19 20:06:27 <adiabat> To run bitcoin :)
128 2018-01-19 20:06:44 <adiabat> yeah you could be more of a leech and only accept blocks / txs
129 2018-01-19 20:06:53 <adiabat> the forwarding part is a bit altruistic
130 2018-01-19 20:07:03 <mahamoti> is there an actual different executable for mining nodes vs. non-mining nodes?
131 2018-01-19 20:07:09 <adiabat> as a transaction signer however, you want to get your tx out to as many nodes as possible
132 2018-01-19 20:07:15 <adiabat> no, same software
133 2018-01-19 20:07:31 <adiabat> well.  Miners may recompile, change things, who knows.  There's some evidence that they do
134 2018-01-19 20:08:13 <mahamoti> so you're saying the majority of bitcoin nodes are running mining software, with the actual mining part disabled, so that they just forward transactions around?
135 2018-01-19 20:08:40 <adiabat> that's not how I'd phrase it...
136 2018-01-19 20:09:01 <mahamoti> :)
137 2018-01-19 20:09:07 <adiabat> also depends on your definition of nodes... if you count SPV clients as "nodes"
138 2018-01-19 20:09:21 <adiabat> then that would be the majority
139 2018-01-19 20:10:46 <adiabat> but yeah, nodes can mine if you tell them to; mining is "easy" once you've got a fully sync'd node; syncing is the hard part
140 2018-01-19 20:16:26 <mahamoti> it seems like a node exists either to be mining, or to act as a wallet.  if they are mining, then i dont see the incentive for forwarding uncomfirmed trsnsactions to anyone else, because they would want to save for themselves.  if you're a wallet, I also dont see incentive, because once you know your balance, you dont really care about wasting network bandwidth to send stuff to others...assuming everyone isgreedy
141 2018-01-19 20:17:08 <adiabat> yeah on first order, there isn't a *direct* incentive to forward txs
142 2018-01-19 20:17:14 <adiabat> however, lots of inderect reasons
143 2018-01-19 20:17:20 <mahamoti> if you're a wallet, and you generated a transaction, then you'd have an incentive to forward that to all known mining nodes
144 2018-01-19 20:17:33 <adiabat> as a wallet, you don't want people to know that your txs came from your node, and your IP address
145 2018-01-19 20:17:57 <adiabat> if you only send txs that you signed, it's really obvious which are yours
146 2018-01-19 20:18:06 <mahamoti> ah ok, interesting point
147 2018-01-19 20:18:10 <adiabat> if you forward everything, then your own txs get lost in the noise
148 2018-01-19 20:18:57 <mahamoti> i see
149 2018-01-19 20:19:52 <mahamoti> so would you say its commonplace that mining software does not forward uncomfirmed transactions to known peers, but wallet software does?
150 2018-01-19 20:20:21 <adiabat> I think most mining nodes are not on the public network, with global listening IPs
151 2018-01-19 20:20:40 <adiabat> miners don't want that risk
152 2018-01-19 20:21:13 <adiabat> DDoS, etc.  So they might run a node behind various firewalls.  Also they connect to each other directly with fibre, etc
153 2018-01-19 20:21:42 <mahamoti> for the purpose of this discussion, lets ignore mining nodes operating under a mining pool
154 2018-01-19 20:21:59 <adiabat> workers like that aren't even nodes generally
155 2018-01-19 20:22:15 <adiabat> they just get some work to do and do it, with no knowledge of the blocks or txs
156 2018-01-19 20:23:16 <mahamoti> interesting.  so what you're saying seems to be confirming what i just said: that mining nodes are greedy, receive transactions but never forward, while the wallet softwares do the major forwarding of the network.  yes?
157 2018-01-19 20:32:29 <mahamoti> adiabat: whats the general concept behind synching a new full node to the network?
158 2018-01-19 20:33:18 <mahamoti> i presume that a node might be able to request blocks from a known peer, but any particular peer would not want to provide an excessive amount of data to synch a new node up
159 2018-01-19 20:33:44 <mahamoti> so im curious how that data load would be distributed in practice
160 2018-01-19 20:43:40 <adiabat> it's probably power law; I have good internet at MIT and run a node that serves a lot
161 2018-01-19 20:44:11 <adiabat> I send out about 100GB / day, 3TB / month.
162 2018-01-19 20:44:46 <adiabat> that's too much for most home users but I doubt MIT even notices
163 2018-01-19 20:45:54 <mahamoti> from a protocol level i mean
164 2018-01-19 20:46:36 <adiabat> nodes have a lot of control over how much they send / receive
165 2018-01-19 20:47:05 <mahamoti> so do you request specific blocks individually, or do you request a batch of blocks?
166 2018-01-19 20:47:43 <adiabat> you send a getdata message with the block hash
167 2018-01-19 20:47:59 <adiabat> you can send getdata with a bunch of block hashes I guess, then they'll send a bunch of blocks
168 2018-01-19 20:48:11 <mahamoti> if i start up a new full node, whats the algorithm that this node would likely use to try to download all the blocks it needs.  does it make a bunch of requests in parallel to all known peers, or go sequentially or what
169 2018-01-19 20:48:37 <adiabat> I'm not sure, it's implementation dependent, and it's changed a bunch
170 2018-01-19 20:48:43 <adiabat> basic idea is get all the headers first
171 2018-01-19 20:49:16 <mahamoti> well new headers are being added all the time, so you cant exactly get all headers first
172 2018-01-19 20:49:19 <adiabat> check all the PoW, then go through each header, request the block, parse all the txs, modify utxo set, and continue to next block
173 2018-01-19 20:49:30 <adiabat> you can get all the headers in a few seconds
174 2018-01-19 20:49:51 <mahamoti> oh really
175 2018-01-19 20:50:14 <mahamoti> so the header contains just what...the block hash and the prev hash?
176 2018-01-19 20:51:07 <adiabat> most of this is in the wiki
177 2018-01-19 20:51:35 <adiabat> er, bitcoin reference
178 2018-01-19 20:51:36 <adiabat> https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-reference#block-chain
179 2018-01-19 20:52:55 <mahamoti> thanks, looks like a good reference for me
180 2018-01-19 21:22:20 <contrapumpkin> https://blockchain.info/block-index/229771/00000000000002dc756eebf4f49723ed8d30cc28a5f108eb94b1ba88ac4f9c22 is supposedly the only block that violates bip16, but I can't find any information on how/why it violates it
181 2018-01-19 21:22:49 <contrapumpkin> (going by https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11739/files)
182 2018-01-19 22:28:37 <thelazycoder> I am working on building a pretty sizeable bitcoin management system, And I needed to get some testnet bitcoins from someone. Does anyone know an easy way to get a lot of tBTC ? Thanks in advance.
183 2018-01-19 22:29:06 <contrapumpkin> thelazycoder: there are faucets
184 2018-01-19 22:32:03 <thelazycoder> Yeah, most only give out a bit at a time… Unfortunately my developer lost the private key of the wallet he had been playing with and we had accumulated into. He didnt think it would be a big issue until he mentioned to me that he got rid of it, and  now he want to test the larger transaction logistics, and have only a few btc
185 2018-01-19 22:32:07 <thelazycoder> tbtc*
186 2018-01-19 22:47:47 <mahamoti> do full nodes synchronize in reverse order?
187 2018-01-19 22:48:26 <mahamoti> ie, do they wait to hear a report of a block, then request the block with hash mentioned from the previous block, etc, all the way back?  or do they synchronize from the start forward?
188 2018-01-19 22:52:20 <mahamoti> i guess not
189 2018-01-19 22:54:21 <mahamoti> but im confused: suppose there is a node that was fully synched up to block N.  For some reason, it doesn't get a report of block N+1, but then it gets a report of block N+2.  When it looks at the prevous hash of block N+2, it clearly does not block N.  Whats the process to catch up?
190 2018-01-19 23:11:05 <luke-jr> thelazycoder: address?
191 2018-01-19 23:32:47 <reardencode> mahamoti: it can request the next block by hash from any of its peers
192 2018-01-19 23:42:23 <thelazycoder> luke-jr: mhGBQCsTPxdhHE7DzgGzLL5wosRJ6sgugy
193 2018-01-19 23:42:34 <thelazycoder> Thank you for whatever you can spare :) Much appreciated.
194 2018-01-19 23:59:53 <luke-jr> thelazycoder: when/if you decide you're done and plan to destroy the wallet, you can return any funds left to 2N2U9wWjQvzqTwwmeZTAuUqA6fR2rQkS3Vz