448200+ entries in 0.293s
mircea_popescu: gotta explain
to
the masses 1) how irresponsible it is
to empower scammers, whjether
they call
themselves "pirate", "Gavin" or anything else
ben_vulpes: "Except BIP 66 received 95% support from
the relevant group (miners). " << ehuehuehehueeueueueueueeeee
mircea_popescu: anyway, foundation ppl : plox
to make a statement on
this matter
mircea_popescu: ben_vulpes wait,
the usg dept of stupid is now on
the record
that miners don't, after all, decide ?
ben_vulpes: simple rehash of
the "let's probe network cohesion strength" fork
☟︎ ben_vulpes: "The majority of hashing power is mining an invalid chain - it's not going
to "win" -
they're just wasting
their effort." << euheuheuheuheuheheehueheuheuheehu
decimation: when
they put
the IsSuperMajority code check in
decimation: yeah but
this apparently happened awhile ago
ben_vulpes: my position being "if your notion of a valid block has
to patch 0.5.*, get fucked."
ben_vulpes: "However,
this also means
they're not checking
the new BIP66 rule, and are now mining invalid blocks because of it. (another miner happened
to create an invalid, non-BIP66 respecting block) If you're not using Bitcoin Core, you might be accepting
transactions
that won't be on
the longest valid chain when all
this is fixed." << curious
to see if 0.5.whatever comes out on
top at
the end of
this
mircea_popescu: anbd how
teh fuck does it continue on an orphan block anyway
mircea_popescu: i dun see another peer other
than
the 148 above
that claims
to have 738
mircea_popescu: i guess
they eventually settled on pretending it's an accident or what ?
mircea_popescu: none of my nodes verify
the imaginary 737-738 blockchain.info claims
to exist.
assbot: Logged on 04-07-2015 03:50:47; mircea_popescu: <asciilifeform> ben_vulpes, mod6, mircea_popescu, et al: anybody interested in multiprocessorizing bitcoin sig check ? << i don't see
the benefit.
decimation: yeah I
think we were forked a long
time ago actually
mircea_popescu: <ben_vulpes> of
the active users. << well, like a dozen or so people, spent a month in game last month. so like, 2 hrs / day or somesuch
mats: looking forward
to seeing
the post mortem in
the morning
mircea_popescu: <assbot> Raising Darwin's Consciousness << all
this "consciousness" bs reads
to me like direct pastiche from "class consciousness" or however
that nonsense was
translated
to english
decimation: do
they reject 0.5.3.1 blocks because
the nVersion = 1?
mircea_popescu: <asciilifeform> ben_vulpes, mod6, mircea_popescu, et al: anybody interested in multiprocessorizing bitcoin sig check ? << i don't see
the benefit.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: <asciilifeform>
they'd just all happen
to be employees of
the house. << if you only divulge winning
tickets you get
the natural occurence of winners + extras.
decimation: so
this 'IsSuperMajority' code is
totally absent in 0.5.3.1
decimation: and apparently several folks fucked it up
too
mats: so you're saying now is
the
time
to fleece bitpay
punkman: "SPV nodes and Bitcoin Core prior
to 0.10.0 may get false confirmations, possibly >6 blocks long, until
this is resolved."
punkman: "BIP66 protocol rule changes have gone active in part
thanks
to Antpool and F2Pool's support of it - but
their pool appears
to not actually be enforcing
the new rules, and is now mining invalid blocks."
decimation: it does seem blockchain.info and insight.bitpay.com have
two different chains
assbot: F2Pool is not properly validating blocks,
their fork is winning
temporarily. SPV clients and Blockchain.info are inaccurate : Bitcoin ... (
http://bit.ly/1Kzrh5m )
decimation: the egypt
thing appears
to have limited support for C++
mod6: <+asciilifeform> mod6, ben_vulpes ^^^ who wants
to
try << i might be able
to give it a go later
this weekend ... maybe.
decimation: I
think you can massage valgrind
to dump callgraph
decimation: to be clear, my experience is mainly with feeding dot such
things, not from codeviz
decimation: what comes out of 'dot'
tends
to be fucktarded with complex graphs
decimation: sure, but you gotta spend
time massaging
the graph into something legible even at
that size
decimation: plotter is usually limited
to 4 ft rolls I
think
decimation: asciilifeform: I've
tried printing such
things before, even on a big plotter
the results are disappointing
punkman: didn't
those guys want 8mb blocks?
decimation: 5 blocks. 4 are attributed
to f2pool, one
to antpool by blockchain.info
decimation: asciilifeform: maybe
the naked blocks are a counterpoint :)
decimation: it would sure make it simpler
to devise a big asic machine
to find hashes if it doesn't need
to bother with
transactions
decimation: I guess as long as
they find a block
that matches difficulty it will be valid
decimation: weird,
the last four blocks had no
transactions
decimation: unfortunately with
the effective bandwidth needed by
the current blockchain makes global synchronization quite expensive
decimation: at any rate, I'm imagining ways
to sew parachutes before
they are needed
decimation: imagine
three frequencies with
three different nodes around
the world, all with agreement on headers
decimation: I suppose if a peer is available, you could do
that. but
then you are only
trusting one node's say
decimation: it would be useful
to know when a new block is found, so you can ask your peers for a copy
decimation: for
the headers
thing, I'm imagining a scenario where someone is waiting for a
transaction
to clear
decimation: yeah okay,
that would be useful for double-checking chain integrity yes
decimation: one wonders why
this hasn't been done already, seems an obvious fix
to 'node
takes forever
to sync'
decimation: aye,
that would be useful for a 'starter pak' node
decimation: For something like shortwave broadcast,
this is what you would want
decimation: it occurs
to me
that it would be useful
to broadcast a digest of a block in addition
to
the actual block data