--- Log opened Thu Nov 21 00:00:50 2013
00:42 < petertodd> gmaxwell: no, it's even worse now: looks like anything other than standard nSequence=max and nLockTime=0 just doesn't show up in the wallet at all
00:43 < gmaxwell> petertodd: wow, so setting locktime to other values will hose them, even if the sequence was always max? :-/
00:43 < petertodd> gmaxwell: yup
00:43 < petertodd> gmaxwell: how do people fuck this shit up?
00:43 < petertodd> gmaxwell: the previous behavior was *better* than that
00:46 < gmaxwell> petertodd: thats the kinda question you can only answer by looking at commits.
00:51 < petertodd> gmaxwell: it's probably something to do with edf37998ca6c47c31a72271db136ac94ce2a6a13 in bitcoin
00:52 < gmaxwell> bitcoinj*
00:52 < petertodd> er, right
00:54 < petertodd> gmaxwell: sheesh, it's some new "risk analyzer" thing to try to analyze the risk of double-spends - I should submit a patch that replaces all that stupid code with a single simple calculation that always returns NaN
00:55 < gmaxwell> the logic in the commit message sounds like the bitcoin-qt wallet behavior, its not insane.
00:56 < petertodd> gmaxwell: my point is the thinking behind it
00:56 < petertodd> gmaxwell: anyway, it's probably just that the API changed and somehow it ended up with default off - there's no reference to any of it in bitcoin-wallet
05:18 < TD> gmaxwell: the android wallet? sure. it was multibit that was the problem, right? jim said he fixed that a couple of weeks ago but i didn't try building it since
05:18 < TD> gmaxwell: i had to spend time trying to make bitcoin-qt compile again
05:18 < TD> compiling sucks
05:20 < TD> i guess we should try and keep normal dev stuff in #bitcoin-dev though
05:20 < warren> TD: you use mac?
05:21 < TD> otherwise all we managed is to split one dev channel into two. let's keep #wizards for researchy stuff
05:51  * Luke-Jr facepalms
05:52 < Luke-Jr> I saw my clock, saw the time, assumed I must have been hacked and my clock screwed with, finished locking down, and then realised.. it really *is* almost time for people to wake up
05:52 < Luke-Jr> x.x
05:53 < Luke-Jr> guess I should go to bed
06:06 < Emcy> does sunlight burn you?
06:07 < Emcy> does me, somewhat. My eyes.
07:26 < michagogo|cloud> 01:00:11 <phantomcircuit> im gonna order a bunch of flash drives with the blockchain + bitcoin-qt loaded on them
07:26 < michagogo|cloud> 01:00:25 <phantomcircuit> and include a nice little script to start with -loadblocks
07:26 < michagogo|cloud> Erm, why -loadblocks? Just call the file bootstrap.dat and shove it in the datadir.
09:03 < TD>  there is now a #bitcoinj IRC channel
12:07 < BlueMatt> hmmm...strange spike in the number of nodes which are coming back to dnsseed with a block count too low to be included...any guesses?
12:08 < BlueMatt> I say spike, I mean restarted on a different server and now getting a serious count for LOW_BLOCK_COUNT, which I havent seen very much in the past
12:09 < gmaxwell> BlueMatt: just new nodes being brought up.
12:09 < BlueMatt> ahhh, seems reasonable
12:09 < BlueMatt> lets see how many convert to GOOD
12:15 < TD> BlueMatt: see here: http://getaddr.bitnodes.io/chart/nodes/?category=v
12:15 < TD> huge spike lately. not sure what's going on there. but presumably related to the press cycle
12:15 < TD> i hope the people running bitcoin-qt understand what they're getting in for ....
12:41 < phantomcircuit> TD, im not sure that's accurate
12:41 < phantomcircuit> TD, that number is based on the number of connections to the nodes controlled by bitnodes.io
12:41 < phantomcircuit> it's entirely possible that someone is just fucking witht hem
13:02 < petertodd> phantomcircuit: bandwidth usage on my EC2 node went to 100%, so I turned it off given that costs money...
13:03 < petertodd> phantomcircuit: obviously a lot of new nodes coming up
13:03 < phantomcircuit> heh
13:41 < cfields> so ehm, is anyone else noticing a bunch of unreachable websites today?
13:42 < cfields> probably just local, but i can't get to a bunch of sites I need for dev today :\
13:43 < cfields> http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/packages.ubuntu.com
13:44 < cfields> http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/trac.macports.org
13:44 < cfields> so.. not just me
13:52 < BlueMatt> TD[away]/gmaxwell: yea, I see +- 1/3 of all nodes that are connectable have LOW_BLOCK_COUNT
13:52 < gmaxwell> thats about right.
13:52 < gmaxwell> actually a bit low, ... must mean they're catching up.
13:52 < gmaxwell> (I'm saying it's right on the basis of the bitnodes.io growth)
13:53 < gmaxwell> went from about 5000 to about 11000.
13:53 < BlueMatt> yea, could also be that the seeder is still bootstrapping and the newest nodes may not have propagated as far in addr messages
13:53 < BlueMatt> though that seems unlikely, I'd have to reread the addr code
14:00 < phantomcircuit> uhh
14:00 < phantomcircuit> i have a node with 70 open connections
14:01 < gmaxwell> warren: I guess IsStandard is enforced on litecoin?
14:01 < phantomcircuit> im pretty sure i started this yesterday too
14:01 < phantomcircuit> yeah i did
14:01 < phantomcircuit> that's probably not good
14:02 < gmaxwell> warren: I was contemplating setting up a coinswap based decenteralized bitcoin/ltc trade script. but it will need hash and sig locked transactions made IsStandard on both chains.
14:03 < petertodd> gmaxwell: namecoin doesn't enforce IsStandard
14:04 < gmaxwell> petertodd: namecoin doen't have the raw transactions api, so a bunch more coding. :(
14:07 < petertodd> gmaxwell: yeah, if you're not using a library like python-bitcoinlib that's an issue
14:08 < gmaxwell> even to use that, I'd have to make it fully support namecoin, .. vs in bitcoind I can getrawtransaction to do all the block exploring needed to confirm the txn went through.
14:09 < petertodd> gmaxwell: well, the block structure is the same, so provided you can get raw blocks you'd be good
14:09 < petertodd> gmaxwell: heck, read them direclty off the blockdata file
14:09 < gmaxwell> petertodd: hm, I would have assumed the MM would goof that up.
14:09 < petertodd> gmaxwell: true, I've never actuallly looked into how that works... probably not hard to deal with though
14:10 < petertodd> gmaxwell: or... trade BTC and testnet BTC :P
14:10 < gmaxwell> I could ... hah jinx
14:10 < gmaxwell> well.. hm. it's not isstandard in bitcoin yet either.
14:11 < petertodd> gmaxwell: sure, but eligius
14:11 < petertodd> no other coin has a miner like that
14:11 < wizkid057> what'd I do now? :P
14:11 < petertodd> wizkid057: you've been useful
14:12 < gmaxwell> you'll mine non-standard txn.
14:12 < wizkid057> gmaxwell: namecoin-qt has the *rawtransaction RPC stuff
14:12 < phantomcircuit> wizkid057, is there a namecoin version that actually works?
14:12 < wizkid057> phantomcircuit: seems so, I compiled the latest namecoin-qt and it seems to work fine
14:14 < wizkid057> if you mean that actually works as far as fixing that bug that totally breaks what makes namecoin namecoin, then I dont think so.  Not until the hard fork at block 150k
14:14 < petertodd> wizkid057: didn't they implement it as a soft-fork?
14:15 < petertodd> wizkid057: not that it's terribly relevant given no-one actually uses namecoin almost...
14:15 < wizkid057> petertodd: I think the now to hardfork at 150k fix is in place which is a soft fork of sorts
14:15 < gmaxwell> I think it must be a hardfork, as they're fixing the stolen names.
14:15 < wizkid057> but needs a hard fork to fix
14:15 < wizkid057> since someone could mine a block with an exploiting txn til then
14:16 < petertodd> gmaxwell: ah, yeah you're right
14:16 < wizkid057> gmaxwell: how are they doing that, actually? I didnt read enough into it
14:16 < wizkid057> i know they're blocking the exploit with the hardfork, but I didnt know about fixing the damage
14:18 < petertodd> wizkid057: yeah, just blocking would be a softfork, fixing is the hardfork
14:18 < gmaxwell> I can only guess they'll reindex the chain and ignore the invalid spends.
14:24 < midnightmagic> I use namecoin. :)
14:25 < midnightmagic> The current fix ignores bad outputs which are still legal. The hardfork will correct it so the bad outputs aren't allowed in the blockchain anymore.
14:25 < midnightmagic> But namecoin is ultimately prunable, so, we can just put it off.
14:26 < midnightmagic> The exploiting txn can be mined but it is ignored. That's why d/wav doesn't have "ha ha I stole your domain in it" right now.
14:28 < midnightmagic> I guess as long as people are there to fix it, and the issue is corrected, even with a hardfork, it turns out killing a coin isn't just a question of releasing an exploit.
14:30 < sipa> is namecoin prunable? i always heard it wasn't
14:36 < petertodd> sipa: nope
14:36 < midnightmagic> There's lots of dead-end data and expired names which are prunable.
14:37 < midnightmagic> Coins are actually destroyed in the process of registering names.
14:37 < petertodd> Well, I should clarify, I mean usefully prunable w/ non-full-node proof; you're right I'm not using my terms correctly.
14:38 < petertodd> bbl
14:38 < gmaxwell> midnightmagic: does that mean it will someday run out of coins and be unusuable?
14:38 < midnightmagic> gmaxwell: Yep.
14:38 < midnightmagic> gmaxwell: Procrastination saves us from worrying about that.
14:39 < midnightmagic> well. that and the stupid cheap names that that dork vince left us with.
14:39 < midnightmagic> (term used affectionately)
14:40 < gmaxwell> midnightmagic: I dunno if you noticed but nmc surged on btc-e for some reason.
14:42 < midnightmagic> i didn't notice, I don't sell my names. I calculated how long I have before I can't maintain my own name registrations anymore and selling them it out of the question.
14:42 < midnightmagic> er.. *coins
14:48 < phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, against BTC or against USD?
14:48 < phantomcircuit> they have both markets
14:48 < gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: both.
14:48 < phantomcircuit> i've actually seen it before that there was an arbitrage opportunity between the three all on btc-e
14:48 < phantomcircuit> which is bizarre
14:49 < jtimon> I thought the registering destruction of coins ended after some time...
15:37 < midnightmagic> jtimon: No, names will never be free. Only some things.
15:38 < jtimon> I'm not saying that names will be free, but I thought at some point you just paid to miners instead of destroying the coins
15:40 < jtimon> http://dot-bit.org/FAQ#How_much_does_it_cost_to_register_a_domain_.28a.k.a._a_name.29.3F
15:43 < jtimon> hmm, name_new appears to cost 0.01 NMC at any block height...
16:09 < midnightmagic> jtimon: Lemme double-check. Something went free lately..
16:10 < gmaxwell> first update
16:21 < midnightmagic> My mistake. Sorry about that. Looks like GetNetworkFee() is free now. I keep forgetting that. I don't think we're destroying coins anymore.
16:22 < midnightmagic> We're past this point: if ((nHeight >> 13) >= 60) { return 0; }
16:24 < midnightmagic> jtimon: So all that's left is paying miners, you are correct.
16:24  * midnightmagic gets there eventually.
16:25 < jtimon> thanks for checking it midnightmagic
16:52 < warren> gmaxwell: IsStandard is the same as bitcoin 0.8.5 except we disabled IsDust
16:53 < warren> wow.  bitcoin-qt.exe worked in wine on mac too.
17:07 < sipa> warren: you should test whether it also causes corruption :p
17:13 < Luke-Jr> anyone here with some free time? :x
17:18 < sipa> unlikely!
17:18 < jgarzik> :)
17:18 < K1773R> Luke-Jr: is there a faucet for free time or can it be mined?
17:20 < jgarzik> The only way to create new free time, bending the space-time continuum, is to stumble across an enormous distraction when multiple separate deadlines are looming.
17:20 < jgarzik> like a bear in a lambourghini
17:21 < warren> sipa: it doesn't corrupt with native mac on 10.6.8 AFAICT
17:22 < K1773R> jgarzik: lol
17:24 < warren> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=337294.msg3668245#msg3668245
17:25 < warren> sipa: win32 binary works on Linux and Mac, so we could distribute just one build for all platforms. =P
17:25 < warren> bad joke
17:30 < gmaxwell> virtualbox plus the linux binary.
17:30 < gmaxwell> :P
19:44 < michagogo|cloud> Maybe some stripped down, boot-to-Bitcoin Linux distro?
19:45 < michagogo|cloud> I'd guess warren's got experience creating Linux distros...
19:45 < michagogo|cloud> That has the added bonus of allowing people to boot up into it
19:46 < michagogo|cloud> (Non-VM)
21:33 < cfields> heh, i _seriously_ underestimated how much building qt for osx in linux would suck
21:33 < cfields> that was no fun at all
21:37 < phantomcircuit> lol
22:55  * n0g hugs all the wizards <3 <3 <3
22:56 < n0g> I am honored to be in your presence.
23:57 < warren> gmaxwell: EFI bitcoin?
--- Log closed Fri Nov 22 00:00:56 2013