log☇︎
25000+ entries in 0.052s
mod6: first make it work, then we make it pretty
mod6: first, we just wanted to bypass the wedge block so we can catch up to the main chain.
mod6: well, aside from that, i think the goal is still to rip out BDB eventually anyway.
mod6: :D
mod6: it's just old school, thats all.
mod6: jurov: nice work on your Nov. statement btw. ty!
mod6: np :]
mod6: ok: http://f9beb4d9.org/ml/btc-dev/2014-December/000021.html
mod6: *nod* sorry, forgot that the orig wasn't wrapped.
mod6: ok thanks Jurov
mod6: lemme see if i can arm-wrestle with 'fing-gmail
mod6: f
mod6: yeah
mod6: ok
mod6: is it because it wasn't wrapped at 80 cols or whatever?
mod6: I sent it... hmm isn't showing up for me in the archive yet
mod6: ok
mod6: jurov: http://dpaste.com/0GS2ZEQ
mod6: <+mircea_popescu> jurov http://thebitcoin.foundation/ << got a signed copy of teh declaration thingee you can put up there ? << i've got a copy of mine with SHA512
mod6: lel
mod6: nice! i like btc.yt too, just because it's short.
mod6: <+mircea_popescu> the one with the nice tits. << indeed.
mod6: State Of Bitcoin Address: http://f9beb4d9.org/ml/btc-dev/2014-December/000017.html
mod6: tough call
mod6: heheh
mod6: ah. ok. rithm, you do realize that gavin & the power-rangers derpation thingy is different than ours tho right?
mod6: ;;gpg info jcpham
mod6: ;;gpg info rithm
mod6: PinkPosixPXE: tyvm!
mod6: No problem. Thank /you/ for putting that together. :]
mod6: ;;rate PinkPosixPXE 2 Wrote a script for The Bitcoin Foundation contained in this document: http://f9beb4d9.org/ml/btc-dev/2014-December/000015.html
mod6: ;;rated PinkPosixPXE
mod6: !b 3 ✂︎
mod6: great work ben_vulpes
mod6: ;;later tell PinkPosixPXE check PM
mod6: PinkPosixPXE: Hi! Yup, thanks! Check PM.
mod6: thestringpuller: thx!
mod6: that was weird.
mod6: ;;seen ben_vulpes
mod6: ;;later tell PinkPosixPXE Thanks for coming up with that in short-order! I took a look, check PM.
mod6: <+mircea_popescu> that;s right : i have more empathy for the god damned coins than for the derps involved. << this.
mod6: haha
mod6: decimation: from the other night, this is what sticks out in my mind: http://log.bitcoin-assets.com//?date=25-11-2014#934115 ☝︎
mod6: *shrug*
mod6: maybe it just calcs that once every 24 hours or something.
mod6: or thereabouts
mod6: it's behind on 30d by: 46`295 on vol & 36 btc
mod6: this one must be behind a bit.
mod6: $vwap s.mpoe
mod6: :]
mod6: let's go over to stewert's houes and break stuff
mod6: pop goes the weasel
mod6: ah, then the last one looks like it only spiked above .4G briefly.
mod6: so first one was with locks=500000?
mod6: nice kakobrekla
mod6: then dude, don't be an irc-hero, go get your shaft fixed.
mod6: ^
mod6: log format makes my eyes bleed
mod6: mircea_popescu: maybe an idea to make a proper list ? << Yup. I'll start a list of proper list. Will let you know when I've got something to show.
mod6: im not using one
mod6: mircea_popescu: eh yeah, just making sure i guess, those wern't posted to the mailing list.
mod6: asciilifeform: are you the author of these patches? : rm_rf_upnp.tar.gz https-snipsnip.tar.gz turdmeister-alert-snip.tar.gz goodbye-win32.tar.gz ?
mod6: mircea_popescu: My plan for now is to just post a summary of the on-goings to the mailing list once per month. This seems like a good start. I can even coordinate with jurov to post the summary before the statement so he can link it in there.
mod6: ben_vulpes: heheh
mod6: cazalla: huh. ok. didn't see that one in the list. maybe i missed it?
mod6: cazalla BingoBoingo would either of you guys mind tweeting out a link to this? http://qntra.net/2014/11/bitcoin-declaration-of-sovereignty-filed/
mod6: ah, yeah +1
mod6: anyway, there is a bunch of stuff obv. just another thing for clean up at some point.
mod6: you know, incase you'd like to have a binary that isn't bloated with debug symbols?
mod6: so has anyone else noticed that the makefile doesn't provide a way to build /without/ debug flags? lol
mod6: mp also, thx for the tip about "personal-digest-preferences"
mod6: ^ with the 512 for good measure
mod6: .deed http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=jv7pPT8p
mod6: *nod* ok, thanks mp
mod6: well, i guess there isn't anything I can do now, other than sign it again with 512 ://
mod6: pete_dushenski: ah, yah, overlooked the flag *grumble*
mod6: <+asciilifeform> gotta sign, so we 'all hang together or separately' (as, i think, were the words of the americans.) << As true today as it was for Benjamin Franklin at the signing of the Declaration of Independence in 1776
mod6: .deed http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=N4G424fA
mod6: But I'll be rejecting these outright unless they directly impact, positivly, the development of the reference implementation.
mod6: jurov: None so far that I know of, other than perhaps a bounty or something for testers as suggested by ben_vulpes.
mod6: If and when we ever decide to utilize those funds, we'll let you know.
mod6: jurov: My vote is that you simply hold the Foundation's BTC.
mod6: s/bc/bv
mod6: m6 & bv --sigs-> A & B signed charter ; treasurers sub-doc contains links to A & B to be signed by j & mod6 & bc
mod6: just was hoping for a daisy-chained document sigs in the public record
mod6: ok. just was hoping for distinct links.
mod6: any errors in this thinking?
mod6: (since we didn't submit them on the same bundle)
mod6: and as far as "[R.1]" it should probably encompass both of our signed submissions of the charter to deedbot
mod6: so there should be a R.1 secion to the submission to deedbot for the charter, and an R2 that ties back to his submission of the Treasurer's contract to the deedbot
mod6: just jurov's submission to the deedbot
mod6: the problem is here, that "[R.1] doesn't tie back to the specific Charter document
mod6: and if both ben_vulpes and I sign that exact document with our keys, there is a tie back to the deed submitted by jurov
mod6: (to deedbot)
mod6: ok so this http://therealbitcoin.org/treasurer_contract.html is the contract with jurov's submission
mod6: hrm
mod6: yeah.
mod6: anyone whom already submitted might need to re-submit, not sure if there is a way to pull previously submitted deeds.
mod6: we need the three of us to sign that contract with the REFERENCES section in there
mod6: is there a way for someone to revoke their signed deed?