110800+ entries in 0.853s
gribble: Error: "mtbf" is not
a valid command.
assbot: Logged on 29-02-2016 21:52:34; ben_vulpes:
http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=25-02-2016#1415503 << mount her on
a bicycle, pilfer
a bottle from the office, mash around the city on bikes, break onto the in-decomissionment sellwood bridge and fuck on it? iono man what does one do with random girls anyways
pete_dushenski: punkman: for living, all day. for
a-->b, depends on road quality!
punkman: pete_dushenski: the chiron is basically as close as one can come to riding in the atomic dirigible of land travel. << I'd take
a UNICAT over the bugatti
mircea_popescu: with tools like these, who needs
a horde of stampeding bulls on ecstasy.
trinque: I will need at least
a sendrawtxn command soon lest I go mad with deedbot-, will most likely take
a crack at it soon
shinohai: Now it works ok as
a wallet if you use the generated keys, but that isn't practical on
a live node.
shinohai: It isn't very useful as
a wallet unfortunately.
trinque: the whole wallet is severely fucked in
a number of ways
shinohai: I have
a UPS that runs node. My problem occured today when I attempted to import
a private key into wallet.dat
mircea_popescu: but yes, what trinque said is
a very useful protective measure.
trinque: never
a bad thing to have
a weekly cron which stops trb gently, rsync's blockchain elsewhere, restarts
mircea_popescu: next the two meet him, they ask for
a cigarette. which he gives them. so they ask for
a light. rabbit is all like "sure, what'd you like, match, ligther ?"
mircea_popescu: so wolf and fox walk around the forest and they see
a rabbit. fox : "let's beat the shit out of this loser" wolf : "we need
a reason..." fox : "we'll ask him where's his beret... and if he has none, we beat the shit out of him!"
mircea_popescu: recall the case of that woman that had
a child with the dead ?
mircea_popescu: wasn't there some guy with
a lucrative eth contract that lost his key ?
ben_vulpes: that'd be
a contract between you and your broken, no?
PeterL: put the dispensation of your shares into
a will, stick it in deedbot?
PeterL: wasn't the bitcoin foundation going to produce
a protocol spec at some point, or is that on the list after the reference implementation is more developed?
mircea_popescu: spiders in 1st case you handle on
a case by case basis. organized spider hive, you bring out
a flamethrowing tank and sear it.
assbot: The IRS is using
a system that was hacked to protect victims of
a hack—and it was just hacked - Quartz ... (
http://bit.ly/1nietXu )
mircea_popescu: there's
a significant difference between "this cave is infested with spiders" and "this cave is home to
a spider queen the size of
a camper van". at least to my eyes.
ben_vulpes: mircea_popescu: did you pay to have
a block mined including your transaction before sending the dup?
mircea_popescu: i'm sure you could live with it. but that's
a different question.
mircea_popescu: i don't want
a fucking big-brother-bitcoin-from-china-san to pray to.
PeterL: but if there is wait-time-weighting being done by miners, then sitting for
a week would make the transaction viable when it was not before
mircea_popescu: which, youj know... also many people make
a living on.
mircea_popescu:
http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=02-03-2016#1420457 << this is specifically NOT the assumption. bitcoin being
a working protocol however DOES mean that you should be able to assume that if
a transaction is rejected, or not included, or delayed, or in any way treated or not treated it is solely on the basis of data COMPLETELY contained in that transaction.
☝︎ ben_vulpes: so far none of the bag^H^H^Hshareholders seem to give
a shit
PeterL: I'm just
a minor shareholder, my opinion doesn't count for much
danielpbarron:
http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=02-03-2016#1420349 << perhaps my holdings aren't significant enough to have any weight on the issue, but nontheless I as
a BitBet shareholder agree with the decision to draw attention to whatever issue at the expense of
a few months of dividends. At the very least it can be seen as
a marketing expense, BitBet being the catalyst to war against something truly rotten in bitcoin, something th
☝︎ BingoBoingo: jurov: If it makes you feel any better as an embedded reporter in this conflict I sometimes wonder if, like those reporters Bush sent into Iraq and coming away with
a polished view because I am not yet made to sleep in the hills with nagant and donkey.
jurov: for example the ddos was solved leveraging aws infrastructure. but if the ddosers had half
a brain, they'd have drowned me in aws bills
jurov: *shrug* i know you want some insights as to the actual war, but whatever ricocheted shots came my way (ddos, tx problems), i solved myself in anti-#b-
a ways without learning anything about the enemy
mircea_popescu: and now, if teh esteemed peerage may excuse me for
a bit, i really gotta eat and make this smg report. so bbs.
mircea_popescu: but i'm first in line to say i'd much prefer
a bitcoin protocol that was actually specified, and actually worked.
mircea_popescu: jurov> it's business is much closer to this goal than bitbet << the argument, while in itself respectable, very much sadly not how things work. the jew on
a ship, should the ship catch fire, will be
a fireman whether he signed up for voyage as jew or as fireman.
BingoBoingo: asciilifeform: I've been hanging out at the hospital with Grandpa while he rehabs from his stroke. I think I might have
a touch of sympathy cognitive impairment.
mircea_popescu: jurov companies fold all the time. this is
a thing. if in the course of their business they fail to make money, they'll lose exactly as much money as they lost.
mircea_popescu: or whatever, give away
a grand to the general public so that buffet can pretend like there are no berkshire shorts. or other stuff.
BingoBoingo: <punkman> so bitbet has to resolve 1800 btc of bets to cover the damage? << MP would only have to bet
a few hundred "No" on Trump to likely get money coming out of the woodwork to match it.
thestringpuller: asciilifeform: re: reactor test << like how they tested the reactor in Chernobyl with
a "stress test"
mircea_popescu: you know how it sometimes happens that
a platoon gets sent on
a random patrol, ends up surprising
a moving contingent of enemy,
a flurry of radioing and reinforcing and whatnot happens and suddenly the front is in
a new place ?
☟︎ mircea_popescu: consider it
a sort of coke machine for miner rigs. inasmuch as you do exactly what they'd have done, you can keep it. else - reorg.
mircea_popescu: and you're
a poopynose!! ha-HA!!! calling names is how you solve problems you don't wish to consider! YAY KINDERGARTEN
jurov: no, you constructed and pushed forward your notion of "bitcoin protocol" wich led to stupid actions with
a money that was not even yours
mircea_popescu: jurov looky, this thing whereby in reaction to
a "this guy is accused of having killed that guy and here's the smoking gun" you come up with
a "hey, i fired
a gun once, and the smoke went so and so" is
a waste of time. you wish to construct an alternate theory, please, by all means, i would wish to hear it. but you must take ALL the points, and show that your path crossing them is cheaper than the one detailed on qntra
mircea_popescu: lmao. why the fuck would you, or anyone else, expect me to spend my own money to resolve bitbet's problems ? what is this company,
a charity conduit ?
assbot: Logged on 02-03-2016 17:15:50; mircea_popescu: kakobrekla yes, by the time the 4th txn trying to pay out bitbet vanished without
a trace, i was sort-of expecting it.
PeterL: so the lesson here is "don't send 0 fee txen if you are not patient enough to wait
a few weeks"
PeterL: t1 is after t2 makes sense since tx1 had 0 fee, while tx2 had
a fee and was therefore included faster
PeterL: tx1 was sent, included in
a block at t1, tx2 was sent, included in
a block at t2, the fact t1 and t2 are close together is just
a coincidence, not
a problem
mircea_popescu: kakobrekla yes, by the time the 4th txn trying to pay out bitbet vanished without
a trace, i was sort-of expecting it.
☟︎☟︎ PeterL: I don't see
a problem, you signed two transactions and they both were mined, where is the problem?
kakobrekla: becase i assume you know once you put out
a signed statement of spending some outputs those can actually be spent at
a later time if they are still there.
kakobrekla: anyway paying out the bet with
a different set of inputs after you have made
a broadcast of the signed tx from the first inputs even to
a single node, without moving those inputs elsewhere first, is
a noobish mistake. why you were unable to do that is
a different matter.
mircea_popescu: other than the obvious "they're getting sloppy" there is, of course, the alternative explanation that the current crop of miners roughly speaking stopped giving
a shit.
mircea_popescu: which aren't, at the present time, trb-tethered. it's
a goal, but into the future.
mircea_popescu: kakobrekla> one thing that goes through my mind is that trb/mps << this is true, but let me clarify that An set of txn were broadcast through
a set of > 1k distinct peers. most of which i don't regard as peers in any sense, but nevertheless they did get to hear about them from my own nodes.
BingoBoingo: Ok, will remove bad one once I make
a pot of coffee and identify it
BingoBoingo: <mircea_popescu> historically i thought this is just random variance between divergent implementations, but now i think it's
a single unit behaviour modulated somehow << Could be turdacious relay network or it's replacement's evil
mircea_popescu: which at the time i did buy as
a sufficient explanation.