233600+ entries in 0.162s
mircea_popescu: ben_vulpes managed
to fish it out. so : incorrect
txn validation leading
to improper coin generation was found on august 6th 2010 ;
the fixing version is 0.3.10 (15 aug). because block validation rules change
there, i'd expect all blocks prior
to
that date
to not work in any sane eatatron.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: anyway, you should see
the early versions, with bitmaps and shit.
ben_vulpes: asciilifeform: actually do you
think stuffing entire www-dir behind webserver > gzipped ball?
ben_vulpes: asciilifeform: if you'd like a copy i can get you a link later
today
ben_vulpes: if anyone wants copies, you know where
to write.
the recipe, however, is
tres simple: wget -mpr www-cgi>
a111: Logged on 2016-12-07 22:27 phf: ben_vulpes:
that archive has like dozen of access points, half of
them regularly disappearing, a project for a lisp aficionado would be
to archive it before it disappears completely
mircea_popescu: yes but you're also experimenting with "interesting objects
these people" and it's gonna get you in hot water with 'em.
ben_vulpes: i just demoted
the entirety of my
todo list in favor of
this mining
thing, which is actually a subtask on a
thing for mod6
mircea_popescu: he's seen it in others and is fascinated by
the process ; have you noticed he spent
the past few weeks
trying
to commit people
to
things ?
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform nobody did
this publicly EVER afaik ;
the non-donedness of which is a variable i keep
track of in mah own models.
ben_vulpes: produced blocks
that it wouldn't validate itself?
throw me a bone here
ben_vulpes: mircea_popescu: what was
the root of
this fork?
mircea_popescu: in
typical style, poorly documented (satoshi made,
too)
mircea_popescu: ben_vulpes bear in mind
that
there was a non-compatible fork cca v2.0
ben_vulpes: still no mining, and my nose points at
the initialblock check
ben_vulpes: i acquiesed
to
the inanity and made 2 nodes happen
mircea_popescu: because i'm supposed
to have been born as stupid as
they are or wtf.
mircea_popescu: somehow
this bunch of idiots wants me
to believe
that a bovine constituency
that doesn't give a shit about
turned off subway somehow actually goes out and protests
the government.
mircea_popescu: and not like
there was an angry crowd at
the entryways prepared
to set
them on fire, either.
mircea_popescu: this isn't after a fire.
this is because... well...
the subte employees are protesting.
mircea_popescu: in other unrelated lulz, buenos aires, one of
the largest urban (well, "urban", whatever) agglomerations in
the world ... closed down its subway system
today. all of it. probem ???
mod6: mircea_popescu recalls publishing
the correct value somewhere (it's not exactly 21mn "bitcoin", it's a satoshi count.) << iirc was a
trilema post
mircea_popescu recalls publishing
the correct value somewhere (it's not exactly 21mn "bitcoin", it's a satoshi count.)
mircea_popescu: more's
the point, notwithstanding we got a reprieve from "get it done by summer", we still don't have actual alternative we're happy with, so... what's
the rush.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform it's in "give
them rope" phase of my give
them rope
to hang
themselves with procedure.
mircea_popescu: it also doesn't work for any individual
transaction, just for
the whole windows abomination
taken
together.
mircea_popescu: by
tallying up
the segwit inputs and outputs. well, sure, but it can be verified is
the point.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform you can deterministically verify
that segwit doesn't create coins without accessing
their proprietary binary blob.
mod6: mircea_popescu: ah. now
that's an interesting argument.
mircea_popescu: "if your coinbases do not
trace
to a block subsidy, you did not pay." sort of
thing.
mircea_popescu: tracing all payments
to
the coinbase will be useful if/when we decide
to not accept "segwit" payments.
mod6: pwalletMain->ScanForWalletTransactions(pindexStart,
true);
mod6: my vpatch essentially utilizes
this function, which exists in
the vpatch
that was already sent
to
the ML:
mod6: i don't love
this feature as it introduces complexity and an edge-case
that mig-pilot needs
to be aware of in
the first place. but i'll consider it based on
the idea
that
the complexity can be contained.
mod6: however,
this requires further code changes
than are actually necessary.
mod6: we've discussed
this.
mod6: But certainly a step in
the right direction. Will update again as
they are available. Salud!
mod6: There are some cosmetic changes I may still make
to
the handling of
the parameters of
this function, and further
testing, auditing, and validation are still required by
third-parties.
BingoBoingo: <mircea_popescu> do
they pump white smoke off
the chimney if his dick is on
the right side ? << Election by
Throckmorton's Sign!
a111: Logged on 2016-12-10 19:49 mod6:
This edge case being: If pub/priv keypair A, have been sent 1.0 bitcoins on say,
tx 123456789, on block 200`000.
Then sent 0.5 bitcoins from pub/priv keypair A
to pubkey address B on block 250`000. If
the uesr only scans back from 300`000,
the balance in
the wallet may not reflect
the 0.5 output still
there for
that pubkey (from keypair A).
mod6: An update on progress
towards
the privkey
tools feature added [ import private key with scanning from a specified beginHeight ]: I have proven out
the edge case previously mentioned,
twice, as expected. It can be resolved by doing a -rescan at any
time. So far at least.
BingoBoingo: <asciilifeform> netflix has hardware box?! << Usually "netflix box" is built into newer, shittier
tvs
mod6: i look forward
to ben_vulpes's investgation on
this.
mircea_popescu: its not altogether a bad idea
to do
this ; on
the contrary, it is
the sort of
thinking process
that denotes a healthy, functioning intellect.
mod6: And yah,
that union is scary.
mod6: (still
trying
to catch up, as you can see haha)
a111: Logged on 2016-12-19 16:00 asciilifeform: as i currently understand it, you need a 'binary star' system of
two lan nodes for either
to actually mine
mod6: and if it is required
to be attached
to at least one other node,
then
that may be a problem. We could still
test on a lan, but you'd have
to have
two
trb nodes on
that lan
to get past
that line of code.