Eugen Leitl [ARCHIVE] / is on Nostr

⚠️ This account is not associated with a real person. It's an archival account for mailing list messages.
🗓️ Active from 2013-10-04 to 2014-07-04
💬 Posted a total of 8 messages
📚 Participated in the following categories: Bitcoin-development
🔇 Please do not DM this user as it's used for archive purposes only.

Last Notes

2023-06-07 15:23:34

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2014-07-04
📝 Original message:On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 06:53:47AM -0400, Alan Reiner wrote:
> Something similar could be applied to your idea. We use the hash of a
> prevBlockHash||nonce as the starting point for 1,000,000 lookup
> operations. The output of the previous lookup is used to determine
> which block and tx (perhaps which chunk of 32 bytes within that tx) is
> used for the next lookup operation. This means that in order to do the
> hashing, you need the entire blockchain available to you, even though
> you'll only be using a small fraction of it for each "hash". This might
> achieve what you're describing without actually requiring the full 20 GB
> of reading on ever hash.
Anything involving lots of unpredictable memory accesses to a large
chunk of fast memory is unASICable. That data vector could be derived
by the same means as an one time pad, and loaded and locked into
memory after boot. If you make it large enough it won't profit from
embedded RAM bandwidth/speedup. The only way to speed up would be clustering,
which doesn't offer economies of scale.

2023-06-07 15:21:49

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2014-05-20
📝 Original message:On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:15:44AM +0200, bitcoingrant at gmx.com wrote:
> Recently China has updated its firewall blocking bitcoin sites and pools.
> Whether this is simple blacklist or more sophisticated packet targeting is
> uncertain, however this update did spefically target VPN handshakes.
Could a blockchain fork due to network split happen?

2023-06-07 15:20:31

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2014-04-29
📝 Original message:I've put up some bitcoind nodes after the network is
in need of some, and would like some feedback in that
the nodes are fully operational and doing something
useful. Please check the logs and tell me whether
I'm doing good.
debug.log from a node that has been running for a day:
2014-04-29 08:06:18 ERROR: CheckTransaction() : vin empty
2014-04-29 08:06:18 ERROR: AcceptToMemoryPool: : CheckTransaction failed
2014-04-29 08:06:18 Misbehaving: 122.224.182.248:23159 (0 -> 10)
2014-04-29 08:07:00 receive version message: /getaddr.bitnodes.io:0.1/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=88.198.51.132:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=148.251.238.178:63657
2014-04-29 08:07:19 receive version message: /bitcoinseeder:0.01/: version 60000, blocks=230000, us=[2a01:4f8:131:13ed::2]:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=[2a02:348:5e:5a29::1]:53921
2014-04-29 08:09:37 receive version message: /Snoopy:0.1/: version 60001, blocks=0, us=88.198.51.132:8333, them=192.33.90.253:8333, peer=192.33.90.253:43104
2014-04-29 08:09:37 socket recv error 104
2014-04-29 08:10:26 receive version message: /getaddr.bitnodes.io:0.1/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=[2a01:4f8:131:13ed::2]:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=[2a01:4f8:202:81b1::2]:50624
2014-04-29 08:10:32 receive version message: /bitcoinseeder:0.01/: version 60000, blocks=230000, us=88.198.51.132:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=217.78.0.153:37275
2014-04-29 08:10:50 receive version message: /getaddr.bitnodes.io:0.1/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=88.198.51.132:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=148.251.238.178:50788
debug.log from a node that I just restarted:
2014-04-29 08:06:16 Opening LevelDB in /home/bitcoind/.bitcoin/blocks/index
2014-04-29 08:06:17 Opened LevelDB successfully
2014-04-29 08:06:17 Opening LevelDB in /home/bitcoind/.bitcoin/chainstate
2014-04-29 08:06:19 Opened LevelDB successfully
2014-04-29 08:06:22 LoadBlockIndexDB(): last block file = 135
2014-04-29 08:06:22 LoadBlockIndexDB(): last block file info: CBlockFileInfo(blocks=631, size=128154379, heights=297633...298263, time=2014-04-25...2014-04-29)
2014-04-29 08:06:22 LoadBlockIndexDB(): transaction index disabled
2014-04-29 08:06:22 LoadBlockIndexDB(): hashBestChain=0000000000000000162f5f571eef4742b70204d983bda3c4b18fc1496ac27f86 height=298263 date=2014-04-29 08:00:23 progress=0.999981
2014-04-29 08:06:22 init message: Verifying blocks...
2014-04-29 08:06:22 Verifying last 288 blocks at level 3
2014-04-29 08:07:42 No coin database inconsistencies in last 289 blocks (111189 transactions)
2014-04-29 08:07:42 block index 86284ms
2014-04-29 08:07:42 init message: Loading wallet...
2014-04-29 08:07:42 nFileVersion = 90100
2014-04-29 08:07:42 Keys: 101 plaintext, 0 encrypted, 101 w/ metadata, 101 total
2014-04-29 08:07:43 wallet 108ms
2014-04-29 08:07:43 init message: Rescanning...
2014-04-29 08:07:43 Rescanning last 39 blocks (from block 298224)...
2014-04-29 08:07:43 rescan 204ms
2014-04-29 08:07:43 init message: Loading addresses...
2014-04-29 08:07:43 Loaded 14015 addresses from peers.dat 84ms
2014-04-29 08:07:43 mapBlockIndex.size() = 298264
2014-04-29 08:07:43 nBestHeight = 298263
2014-04-29 08:07:43 setKeyPool.size() = 100
2014-04-29 08:07:43 mapWallet.size() = 0
2014-04-29 08:07:43 mapAddressBook.size() = 1
2014-04-29 08:07:43 AddLocal(213.239.218.20:8333,1)
2014-04-29 08:07:43 IPv4 eth0: 213.239.218.20
2014-04-29 08:07:43 AddLocal([2a01:4f8:a0:74c8::2]:8333,1)
2014-04-29 08:07:43 IPv6 eth0: 2a01:4f8:a0:74c8::2
2014-04-29 08:07:43 ext-ip thread start
2014-04-29 08:07:43 dnsseed thread start
2014-04-29 08:07:43 Loading addresses from DNS seeds (could take a while)
2014-04-29 08:07:43 net thread start
2014-04-29 08:07:43 upnp thread start
2014-04-29 08:07:43 opencon thread start
2014-04-29 08:07:43 addcon thread start
2014-04-29 08:07:43 dumpaddr thread start
2014-04-29 08:07:43 msghand thread start
2014-04-29 08:07:43 init message: Done loading
2014-04-29 08:07:43 GetMyExternalIP() received [213.239.218.20] 213.239.218.20:0
2014-04-29 08:07:43 GetMyExternalIP() returned 213.239.218.20
2014-04-29 08:07:43 AddLocal(213.239.218.20:8333,4)
2014-04-29 08:07:43 ext-ip thread exit
2014-04-29 08:07:44 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.8.6/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=213.239.218.20:44169, them=166.78.243.104:8333, peer=166.78.243.104:8333
2014-04-29 08:07:44 Added time data, samples 2, offset +8 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:07:51 No valid UPnP IGDs found
2014-04-29 08:07:51 upnp thread exit
2014-04-29 08:07:53 connect() to 71.23.29.162:8333 failed after select(): No route to host
2014-04-29 08:07:53 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.9.1/: version 70002, blocks=298263, us=213.239.218.20:46921, them=91.238.134.58:8333, peer=91.238.134.58:8333
2014-04-29 08:07:53 Added time data, samples 3, offset +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:07:54 106 addresses found from DNS seeds
2014-04-29 08:07:54 dnsseed thread exit
2014-04-29 08:08:16 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.8.6/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=213.239.218.20:50533, them=98.218.92.212:8333, peer=98.218.92.212:8333
2014-04-29 08:08:16 Added time data, samples 4, offset +2 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:08:22 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.8.5/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=213.239.218.20:35016, them=108.3.172.22:8333, peer=108.3.172.22:8333
2014-04-29 08:08:22 Added time data, samples 5, offset +3 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:08:22 nTimeOffset = +2 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:08:27 receive version message: /bitcoinseeder:0.01/: version 60000, blocks=230000, us=213.239.218.20:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=178.18.90.41:52783
2014-04-29 08:08:27 Added time data, samples 6, offset +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:08:31 connect() to 24.136.254.2:8333 failed after select(): No route to host
2014-04-29 08:08:37 connect() to 187.15.64.129:8333 failed after select(): Connection refused
2014-04-29 08:08:38 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.8.5/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=213.239.218.20:37793, them=209.99.52.77:8333, peer=209.99.52.77:8333
2014-04-29 08:08:38 Added time data, samples 7, offset -1 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:08:38 nTimeOffset = +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:08:50 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.9.0/: version 70002, blocks=298263, us=213.239.218.20:54044, them=69.23.94.246:8333, peer=69.23.94.246:8333
2014-04-29 08:08:50 Added time data, samples 8, offset -15 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:08:50 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.8.6/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=213.239.218.20:45277, them=84.126.227.120:8333, peer=84.126.227.120:8333
2014-04-29 08:08:50 Added time data, samples 9, offset -1 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:08:50 nTimeOffset = +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:08:51 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.8.6/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=213.239.218.20:55627, them=91.66.153.44:8333, peer=91.66.153.44:8333
2014-04-29 08:08:51 Added time data, samples 10, offset -2 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:09:05 receive version message: /bitcoinseeder:0.01/: version 60000, blocks=230000, us=[2a01:4f8:a0:74c8::2]:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=[2a02:348:5e:5a29::1]:39788
2014-04-29 08:09:05 Added time data, samples 11, offset +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:09:05 nTimeOffset = +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:09:35 receive version message: Dain 0.0.1: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=213.239.218.20:8333, them=162.242.155.221:8333, peer=162.242.155.221:53878
2014-04-29 08:09:35 Added time data, samples 12, offset +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:09:38 receive version message: /Snoopy:0.1/: version 60001, blocks=0, us=213.239.218.20:8333, them=192.33.90.253:8333, peer=192.33.90.253:34143
2014-04-29 08:09:38 Added time data, samples 13, offset +5 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:09:38 nTimeOffset = +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:10:16 receive version message: /bitcoinseeder:0.01/: version 60000, blocks=230000, us=213.239.218.20:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=192.3.11.20:49902
2014-04-29 08:10:16 Added time data, samples 14, offset +36 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:10:36 receive version message: /getaddr.bitnodes.io:0.1/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=213.239.218.20:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=148.251.238.178:13436
2014-04-29 08:10:36 Added time data, samples 15, offset +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:10:36 nTimeOffset = +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:11:11 receive version message: /bitcoinseeder:0.01/: version 60000, blocks=230000, us=213.239.218.20:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=108.18.18.4:46999
2014-04-29 08:11:11 Added time data, samples 16, offset +36 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:11:23 receive version message: /getaddr.bitnodes.io:0.1/: version 70001, blocks=298263, us=[2a01:4f8:a0:74c8::2]:8333, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=[2a01:4f8:202:81b1::2]:54634
2014-04-29 08:11:23 Added time data, samples 17, offset +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-04-29 08:11:23 nTimeOffset = +0 (+0 minutes)

2023-06-07 15:09:42

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2013-11-15
📝 Original message:On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:45:41AM +0100, Wladimir wrote:
> Good point - For me its too much clutter to show multiple boxes everywhere
> (we already support unit conversion by changing the dropdown box in the
> amount widget), but I'm going to make the verification dialog show the
> totals in all three units. This will make people learn about other units
> without having to choose them consciously.
That sounds like a good idea.

2023-06-07 15:09:41

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2013-11-15
📝 Original message:On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 01:37:56AM -0800, Alex Kravets wrote:
> Hi guys,
Alex, you're top-posting and not trimming your replies.
> I've seen many many non-geeks be utterly intimidated and confused by
> 0.000XXXXX quantities and/or mBTC & uBTC notation
Yes, people really can't tell any difference between
mm, cm, m, dm and km. Not.
>
> Yes, $10 being rougnly 10,000 Won in South Korean is a great example where
> large amounts of units work very well in a major economy.
You're trying to invent a new symbol for the same unit, instead
of using an established, generic system of prefixes.
That's pretty insane.
>
> FWIW, I would prefer the entire switch-over be done *once* *and *at the
> same time switching both BTC to XBT and using the following
I would prefer that nobody does any such silly thing.
>
> Currency Code *: *XBT
> Unit Definition *: *1 Bit = 100 Satoshis
>
> Addition benefit is splitting the term Bitcoin/bitcoin (as in Network and
> currency unit) into Bitcoin (network) and Bit (the unit).
Bitcoin is not measured in bits. Bits are units of information, and
are measured in bits, kbits, Mbits, Gbits, Tbits, Pbits etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate
>
> Perhaps this project/process should have a name and be listed on a road map
> somewhere
What would a sane person think if he saw that on the roadmap, you think?
> *BRCS: *Bitcoin Re-denomination and [Currency] Code Standardization project
Ever heard of SI unit prefixes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_prefix
>
> Cheers ...
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:23 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 05:53:16PM -0500, Alan Reiner wrote:
> > > I really like the XBT idea. It makes a lot of sense to match the ISO
> >
> > I really don't. Just use the SI prefixes.
> >
> > > currency symbol (though the ISO guys will have to adjust the way they've
> > > defined the "XBT"). And I do agree that going right to uBTC and
> > > skipping mBTC makes sense, too.
> >
> > The display units should be choosable by the user.
> >
> > > I'd prefer them not be called "micro bitcoins." I really want to call
> > > them "microbes" ... but I'm not sure that has the right flavor for money
> >
> > Why on earth?
> >
> > > transfer :) "Please give me 872 microbes". Perhaps we just call them
> > > "bits." Or even "micros" or "microbits". As I write this, I realize
> > > there's probably 872 threads on the forums about this already...
> > >
> > > But we would want to promote a consistent term, to avoid further
> > > confusion when people use different names for the new unit. It's not
> > > guaranteed to be successful, but if we pick a good name, and build it
> > > into the interface on the first release pushing the new unit, we have a
> > > chance to make the transition even easier.
> >
> > The reason SI prefixes were invented is exactly to preven that case.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps
> > OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access
> > Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server.
> > Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native!
> > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Alex Kravets <http://www.linkedin.com/in/akravets> def redPill = '
> Scala <http://www.scala-lang.org/>
> [[ brutal honesty <http://goo.gl/vwydt> is the best policy ]]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps
> OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access
> Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server.
> Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

2023-06-07 15:09:40

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2013-11-15
📝 Original message:On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 05:53:16PM -0500, Alan Reiner wrote:
> I really like the XBT idea. It makes a lot of sense to match the ISO
I really don't. Just use the SI prefixes.
> currency symbol (though the ISO guys will have to adjust the way they've
> defined the "XBT"). And I do agree that going right to uBTC and
> skipping mBTC makes sense, too.
The display units should be choosable by the user.
> I'd prefer them not be called "micro bitcoins." I really want to call
> them "microbes" ... but I'm not sure that has the right flavor for money
Why on earth?
> transfer :) "Please give me 872 microbes". Perhaps we just call them
> "bits." Or even "micros" or "microbits". As I write this, I realize
> there's probably 872 threads on the forums about this already...
>
> But we would want to promote a consistent term, to avoid further
> confusion when people use different names for the new unit. It's not
> guaranteed to be successful, but if we pick a good name, and build it
> into the interface on the first release pushing the new unit, we have a
> chance to make the transition even easier.
The reason SI prefixes were invented is exactly to preven that case.

2023-06-07 15:09:40

- reply

2023-06-07 15:09:37

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2013-11-15
📝 Original message:On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 04:07:58PM -0600, Allen Piscitello wrote:
> Obviously the answer is to just display all fees and trading rates as BTC
> or MBTC (.0000005 MBTC fee? how cheap!). On a more serious note, the
> transition should definitely be thought out well as it could be very
> damaging to have this confusion, but I would prefer to do it only once
> rather than twice.
Why not just using SI prefixes, as God intended.
MBTC mega 10^6
kBTC kilo 10^3
- - 10^0
mBTC milli 10^-3
uBTC micro 10^-6
nBTC nano 10^-9 (at all possible?)

2023-06-07 15:07:21

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2013-10-04
📝 Original message:On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 02:14:19PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote:
> One advantage of using github is that they're an independent third
> > party; we should think carefully about the risks of furthering the
> > impression that Bitcoin development is a closed process by moving the
> > code review it to a server that we control with explicit review groups.
> >
>
> I guess anyone would be able to sign up and comment.
It's a long shot, but have any of you looked into Fossil?