| 00:01:15 | jtimon: | does this make any sense? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=430705.msg4715291#msg4715291 |
| 00:01:39 | jtimon: | isn't getBlock template the same thing as GBT ? |
| 00:02:03 | sipa: | yes |
| 00:03:30 | sipa: | i assume it's a typo, but i've no idea for what |
| 00:25:54 | andytoshi: | ;;later tell nsh i did the talk, didn't get to any wizards stuff, it was very boring, sorry |
| 00:25:54 | gribble: | The operation succeeded. |
| 04:10:14 | tt_away: | It's late and I'm tired and going through ProtoShares source code; does PTS only use SHA512 as a hash function? It mentions sCrypt in the white paper, but I'm not seeing it. |
| 04:10:54 | tt_away: | Also these indentations ahhhhhHHHH |
| 05:02:01 | Luke-Jr: | tt_away: this is #Bitcoin-Dev |
| 08:55:32 | adam3us: | tt_away: i believe the momentum pow in the code diverges from what they said in the paper |
| 09:02:30 | super3: | adam3us, how so? |
| 09:04:30 | super3: | while it certainly is better, memory hard doesn't work as intended |
| 10:34:09 | adam3us: | tt_away: in fact momentum was never to my tastes described anywhere clearly and simply. the actual mechanism is simple. compute small hashcash collisions (25-bits i recall?) with a constrained nonce search-space (also 25-bits) to control the maximum amount of memory you can usefully use for it |
| 11:31:39 | sbbodhtimrj: | sbbodhtimrj is now known as jrmithdobbs |
| 11:54:44 | dlidstrom: | dlidstrom has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 13:00:33 | gavinandresen: | gavinandresen has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 14:42:34 | _ingsoc: | _ingsoc is now known as Guest6990 |
| 14:51:34 | tt_away: | tt_away is now known as tacotime |
| 15:06:26 | wavedigit_: | hi I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I'm apparently banned in #bitcoin(-otc) |
| 15:06:44 | wavedigit_: | I need a VPS which accepts BTC, which is not BitVPS |
| 15:06:51 | vbuterin: | microtronix |
| 15:07:09 | wavedigit_: | thanks, I'll take a look at that |
| 15:07:52 | sipa: | oh hi, vbuterin |
| 15:08:18 | vbuterin: | hey sipa |
| 15:08:33 | sipa: | nice to see you on irc |
| 15:10:53 | gavinandresen: | gavinandresen has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 15:14:49 | pigeons: | wavedigit_: #bitcoin-hosting |
| 15:15:15 | wavedigit_: | thanks pigeons :) |
| 15:31:54 | wavedigit_: | vbuterin: do you perhaps know any good VPS provider with servers in the EU? I also can't find any good information on what kind of processors those VM's run on there. |
| 15:32:15 | sipa: | i have a vps with cloudvps, in .nl |
| 15:34:05 | wavedigit_: | sipa: do they accept BTC? |
| 15:35:04 | sipa: | don't think so |
| 15:38:18 | wavedigit_: | oh hey I found this - https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Virtual_private_server and - http://www.exoticvps.com/ (search for bitcoin there) |
| 15:38:31 | wavedigit_: | but I have really no idea which one has a good track record |
| 15:41:30 | jgarzik: | wavedigit_, offtopic for this channel. There are a bunch listed at https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade |
| 15:41:47 | wavedigit_: | ah yeah forgot, sorry |
| 15:58:39 | gavinandresen_: | the core dev machine (hosts bitcoincore.org, the pull-tester, and a couple other VMs) is paid for with bitcoin, hosted at snelserver.com… |
| 16:10:23 | wavedigit_: | gavinandresen_: you guys should consider letting them advertise that they accept BTC, also it seems they're doing dedicated stuff only. |
| 16:11:25 | gavinandresen_: | wavedigit_: "letting them advertise" ??? they don't need permission |
| 16:12:26 | wavedigit_: | right, I meant letting them know to place a bitcoin logo or otherwise announce that they accept BTC |
| 16:13:21 | sipa: | that's their business |
| 16:13:27 | sipa: | #bitcoin please |
| 16:21:13 | TD: | gavinandresen_: so, any thoughts on doing the fee drop for a 0.9.1 release? or maybe including it in a rc2? as now we know, 0.9 will ship without smartfees |
| 16:28:29 | gavinandresen_: | I want to get smartfees done for 0.9.1 |
| 16:28:48 | TD: | would that not make it a 0.10? :) |
| 16:29:13 | gavinandresen_: | I don't think so… I'd consider smartfees a bugfix, not a new feature |
| 16:29:38 | gavinandresen_: | it is a bug that you can (today) send a free transaction that might take a long time to confirm |
| 16:30:09 | gavinandresen_: | … or you can send a fee-paying transaction that takes a long time to confirm |
| 16:30:28 | jgarzik: | agree with latter |
| 16:30:33 | TD: | i guess i see it as more of a new feature, as i'm still hoping it will add to the p2p protocol so bitcoinj can use it. but there's no reason there can't be a fast turnaround on a 0.10 |
| 16:30:48 | jgarzik: | free transactions are always a gamble, depending on network burstiness |
| 16:31:12 | gavinandresen_: | the free transaction threshold is just wrong these days. |
| 16:31:12 | jgarzik: | agree that smartfees are a bugfix |
| 16:31:14 | TD: | i mean the software is working "as designed", right, so it's not a bug in that sense. perhaps a design fault |
| 16:31:24 | jgarzik: | the user experience sucks |
| 16:31:26 | jgarzik: | is the core problem |
| 16:31:27 | TD: | but if smartfees are a bugfix, then is chain pruning a bug fix? |
| 16:31:36 | TD: | jgarzik: lol. you can sum up all of bitcoin that way :) |
| 16:31:42 | jgarzik: | ;p |
| 16:32:02 | gavinandresen_: | sure, chain pruning could be considered a "uses too much disk space" bug fix… the line is fuzzy |
| 16:32:42 | jgarzik: | Two of my years-long wishes for basic bitcoin usability have been: (1) Get fees right 95% of the time, (2) Deterministic lifetime: if user guesses wrong, most nodes forget TX after 24-48 hours |
| 16:33:05 | jgarzik: | I consider those longstanding "bugs" |
| 16:33:13 | jgarzik: | and smartfees gets us a long way towards fixing #1 |
| 16:34:25 | gavinandresen_: | I wonder if we should skip 0.10 and go to 0.11… 0.10 looks too much like 1.0 |
| 16:34:39 | gavinandresen_: | and eleven is such a nice number |
| 16:34:50 | jgarzik: | you and 11 ;p |
| 16:35:48 | jgarzik: | we could always put an 8 in any version (0.11.8, 0.12.8) because the Chinese consider 8 a lucky number |
| 16:36:22 | gavinandresen_: | Then 88 would be even better |
| 16:37:40 | jgarzik: | Our local Chinese take-out place is named 888 for this reason. |
| 16:37:42 | TD: | you're going to take it to 11? |
| 16:37:56 | jgarzik: | Because 888 is even better than 88. :) |
| 16:44:25 | gavinandresen: | gavinandresen has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 17:44:16 | holyboot: | holyboot has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 19:56:18 | gavinandresen: | gavinandresen has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 20:13:46 | gavinandresen: | gavinandresen has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 22:59:30 | gavinandresen: | gavinandresen has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 23:23:10 | michagogo|cloud: | Luke-Jr: No, it's not :P |