340500+ entries in 0.216s
assbot: Logged on 02-02-2016 06:22:46; mod6: give
these a compile & quick
test if you don't mind and
then upon confirmation, I'll update
the mirror.
BingoBoingo: Just poke someone if you'd like
to
talk once
this voicing expires
Nicknaem: Greatly enjoyed some of
the pieces on
trilema, just wanted
to see whats going on here
Nicknaem: i actually have nothing
to say atm, was just checking out
the channel :)
☟︎ BingoBoingo: mats:
That was a disappointment. I was hoping
to see someone store linux kernel as dead
tree on shelves
assbot: Logged on 02-02-2016 05:08:04; mircea_popescu: so basically polarbeard here's
the
thing : i considered signing
this, and i will consider signing
the next version. as it is however i won't do
that, because a) not all errors have both flags set ; b) occasional ' in error message ; c) occasional losing a valuable datapoint (such as
the hash above) or missing on adding a useful one (nStart).
assbot: Logged on 02-02-2016 04:41:22; mircea_popescu: polarbeard + return error(SBLK "chain
tip %s not found in
the block index", hashBestChain.ToString().c_str()); << any reason
this has only one flag ?
punkman: "coming in at a market cap $558 billion after jumping about 8% after
the company reported its fourth-quarter earnings, and passing Apple, which sits at a market cap of $535 billion."
punkman: "Debt:
the first 5000 years" also discusses
that point iirc
mats: I haven't read
this paper yet, so I may be recalling a discussion of it
mats: also looking for
the discussion re: credit, not barter, being 'invented' first
mod6: give
these a compile & quick
test if you don't mind and
then upon confirmation, I'll update
the mirror.
☟︎☟︎ mod6: asciilifeform: hey, ok posted
those
two
to
the mailing list:
mats: anybody know what i'm
talking about here?
mats: i'm looking for something either on
trilema or
the logs, about advertising fraud
☟︎ adlai: fight leeches with leeching; maybe reserving some capital for post-leech correction mitigates
this
☟︎ adlai: on further
thought,
the risk of doing
this on bitbet is
that "late leeches" will squeeze out your profits from
the bets
that should have covered your losses
adlai doesn't even understand enough probability
theory
to phrase question properly
adlai: shouldn't somebody who understands parimutuel betting better
than
the average bitbettor make nearly risk-free profit if
the outcomes add up
to "over 100%"?
☟︎ BingoBoingo: Anyways I have still not seen any reason
to hedge by BitBet on Rubio winning
the nomination.
BingoBoingo: Anyways,
Trumps future is as a sort of Alternative Pat Buchanan
BingoBoingo: "@HillaryClinton Shouldn't you be in jail for #WhiteWater" << My daily dose of social media
trolling
BingoBoingo: ATM Sanders and Clinton are nearly
tied in Iowa and could
take a while
to sort out
that contest
BingoBoingo: And moar Mormom insurrections in
the west are likely
BingoBoingo: He's going
to pull
the Obama on Clitler again
BingoBoingo: But if
Trump keeps drawing
that large a chunk while Cruz and Rubio fight it out a Brokered convention is still possible.
BingoBoingo: Momentum player, media likes he because
they are mostly Democrats
BingoBoingo: He's going
to continue kicking and screaming consistently drawing 25%-30% until he quits in May or August
mircea_popescu: mommentum player, has little
to offer other
than "nobody can beat me for i'm
the king rarara"
BingoBoingo: But Blizzard keeping
Trumpets at home likely played a part
BingoBoingo: Trump lost
to Bible belt guy and
tied Establishment guy
BingoBoingo: Or in
the numbers
that matter: Convention Delegates > 6
to Cruz 5 each
to
Trump and Rubio, one
to Carson
BingoBoingo: In derplandia: Cruz 28%
Trump 24% Rubio 23%
mircea_popescu: these are both very nice
things, and
the good news is
that it's much easier for you
to become very useful
than it is for alf
to grow another arm. so don't
take
this as a censure per se. does all
that make sense ?
mircea_popescu: as annoying as b c etc might be
they're mostly minor and could be fixed by a further patch. a however is a killer, and colors both b and c in similar
tones, because it betrays
the fundamental problem with
this patch : it doesn't flow from a structured approach given in depth consideration, but merely from your desire
to help and impressive stamina.
mircea_popescu: so basically polarbeard here's
the
thing : i considered signing
this, and i will consider signing
the next version. as it is however i won't do
that, because a) not all errors have both flags set ; b) occasional ' in error message ; c) occasional losing a valuable datapoint (such as
the hash above) or missing on adding a useful one (nStart).
☟︎ mircea_popescu: + strError += strprintf("tx requires a
tx fee of at" <<
this is logging exempt ?
mircea_popescu: + return error(SBLK "pow %s work below minimum (%u)", hash.ToString().c_str(), nBits); << bunches of
these.
mircea_popescu: + return error(SBLK "block %s doesn't match index", GetHash().ToString().c_str()); << it really doesn't work if you don't use
the flags!
mircea_popescu: "a man pretending
to be a woman pretending
to be a man pretending
to be..."
adlai: ;;later
tell ben_vulpes see what happens when commenters can't find
the comment box!
mircea_popescu: i wonder if
this is a step up or a step down from power ranger.
mircea_popescu: well what can you do, when
the "real cryptographers" are involved, you're stuck.
adlai: mircea_popescu: biggest derpitude is
that we're discussing on irc a reddit conversation about a
tweet linking
to a blog
mircea_popescu: + printf(SINF SBLK "loading block index\n"); <<
this should show
the nStart value ; so should all
these
timed items. like + printf(SINF SADR "loading addresses\n");
mircea_popescu: i had forgotten
that was in
there. suddenly got flashbacks of ancient debug.log layout.
mircea_popescu: + printf(SWAR SWAL "repairing
tx version %d\n", wtx.fTimeReceivedIsTxTime); << any reason
this lost
the hash ?
mircea_popescu: + return error(SBLK "block loading from disk failed"); <<
this soulds like SERR and so does + printf(SWAR SBLK "found bad block %s at height %d\n",
mircea_popescu: polarbeard + return error(SBLK "chain
tip %s not found in
the block index", hashBestChain.ToString().c_str()); << any reason
this has only one flag ?
☟︎ assbot: nullc comments on Paul Sztorc on
Twitter: "It seems
that [Mircea Popescu] has internalized Bitcoin's full node externality. Initial reaction: "Wow."" ... (
http://bit.ly/1SA2hxm )
mircea_popescu: kinda lulzy how
this got all
the self-important know-nothings off
their ass and flailing wildly.
mircea_popescu: also BingoBoingo maybe redirect
the fellow
to
trilema comments where
the matter of "jiggling
the merkle
tree" is well set
to rest.
assbot: Logged on 02-02-2016 02:03:04; jurov: generally, wot should ignore expiration dates. like, if alf dies, we're going
to
throw everything out?
adlai: part of
the just beauty is
that spamming extension blocks is cheaper
than spamming Bitcoin
mircea_popescu: but
that aside, should
they somehow find
the money/mit
to pull an ethereum : spam is easy and cheap.
mircea_popescu: adlai
this fear is part of why ln bla bla stays vaporware.
adlai: (there'd go all
the
talk about capacity cliffs...)
adlai: ben_vulpes: fwiw i still believe it's a bad idea
to discourage
this kind of "speculative soft fork"... it makes it easier for experimenters
to put
their money where
their mouth is, and puts on a good show for "conservatives" who remain in plain good old Bitcoin
ben_vulpes: jurov: i committed violence
to asciilifeform's original v in a harebrained attempt
to add
tests, was roundly caned for
the violence, left his implementation
to him and hared off
to reimplement in cl.
ben_vulpes: yeah i never followed
that stupidity in depth
adlai: correct, same as how extension block (adam back's original name for what morphed into
the "segwit softfork") payments don't /count/ until you withdraw
them
to cold, hard, bitcoin
ben_vulpes: i believe
that i understand how it could be implemented softly, adlai, but it doesn't /count/ until it's verified.
assbot: The necessary prerequisite for any change
to
the Bitcoin protocol on
Trilema - A blog by Mircea Popescu. ... (
http://bit.ly/1PvfxSY )
ben_vulpes: i do not
think i've gotten
to your comment yet adlai. on
trilema?
adlai: ben_vulpes: did you see my comment?
this could be implemented
today by miners already and you wouldn't have known of it
ben_vulpes now actually very curious as
to how
this sort of
thing would work at
the code level in practice. if blockheight < forkheight, use old validation rules, else use new?
ben_vulpes not
terrifically intimate with fork dynamics in practice, having flatly ignored proposals
to do so until now
ben_vulpes: is
this
the sort of
thing
that *must* be implemented as a fork of
the existing chain?
mod6: lemme compile &
test with
the new patches + shiva 1 & 2 + fix
mod6: actually, i
think we're ok here because
the only parts
that changed in
the new patches are main.cpp and serialize.h
mod6: be back in a few
to sort out
the patches
that need re-grind after I submit
the integrated programmable-version-strings vpatch and
the reground mikehearn one
mod6: ok so pressed out shiva with V -- used what is currently in
the mirror (including alfs PVS) + what is stated above: shiva 1 & 2 + shiva fix, compiles and works:
jurov: guess i should stop wasting
time with it and approach v from completely other direction
mod6: you know, im pretty sure
that my v ignores expired keys.
jurov: i just happened
to stumble upon it cuz vulpes'
test data has only one - alf's signature per patch
jurov: and
there were
two popes and whatnot