Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Jeff Garzik
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Raúl Martínez r...@i-rme.es wrote: - Allow users to view the bandwith used by Bitcoin Core: +1 for the sake of transparency HOWEVER, the impact on this feature RE user population is unpredictable. Users may see bigger than expected numbers, and switch off their

Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Justus Ranvier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/19/2014 09:11 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: Meh. I like example configs, perhaps tuned by the distro. If the distro (_not_ Bitcoin Core upstream) chooses to install a bitcoin.conf in the proper location, that's up to them. - bitcoind and

Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Wladimir
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Raúl Martínez r...@i-rme.es wrote: About the small number of bitcoin nodes: Hi, I read the message that Mike Hearn sent to this mailing list some days ago (2014-04-07 11:34:43) related to the number of bitcoin full nodes. As an owner of two Bitcoin Nodes, one

Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Bjørn Øivind Bjørnsen
On 18/05/14 19:43, Raúl Martínez wrote: About the small number of bitcoin nodes: Hi, I read the message that Mike Hearn sent to this mailing list some days ago (2014-04-07 11:34:43) related to the number of bitcoin full nodes. As an owner of two Bitcoin Nodes, one in my home computer and one

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Paper Currency

2014-05-19 Thread Alex Kotenko
Practically I would approach it from a different angle. We need to make sure that notes we're accepting are still loaded, but assuming it's NFC enabled this is still quite easy for the user and is an acceptable usability drawback. Then what we need to make sure is that when someone is redeeming

Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Wladimir
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com wrote: Some hacking with ncurses could quickly make a decent tool here. It could be packaged with bitcoin itself but that's not necessary. For example Tor has the tool 'arm' which is a separate package. Regarding tor-arm, here are

Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Felipe Micaroni Lalli
Is the small number of bitcoin nodes a concern? If yes, why? What kind of attack can the network suffer? And where can we find statistical information about the full nodes running? I guess the only effective incentive to keep a node running would be financial. A kind of proof of stake would be

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Paper Currency

2014-05-19 Thread Mike Hearn
Submitted with humility and some fear of getting laughed out of here... Off topic aside, a bunch of us have lately started to think about the atmosphere on this list and how to improve it. Nobody should have to fear getting flamed or laughed at for proposing ideas, even if they turn out to be

Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Bjørn Øivind Bjørnsen
On 19/05/14 14:15, Mike Hearn wrote: As an interested party not intimately familiar with the bitcoin codebase who also spent some time setting up a node a while ago, I would like to add one thing to the above list - network rate limiting. The problem is that this is easier said

Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Mike Hearn
Does this mean that you can currently actively hurt the network by adding a node with a very slow upstream / downstream? Well, I guess hurting the network is perhaps a bit dramatic. There are already lots of ways the download process can go wrong and take days. Using the torrent is much

Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Wladimir
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Bjørn Øivind Bjørnsen bo.bjorn...@gmail.com wrote: On 18/05/14 19:43, Raúl Martínez wrote: snip some good ideas As an interested party not intimately familiar with the bitcoin codebase who also spent some time setting up a node a while ago, I would like to

Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Mike Hearn
(sure - there are tricks to limit rates anyway, like the script in contrib/qos, but to have it generally available the block download needs to be more robust first) One thing we could consider as a short term solution (if headers first+parallel downloading will take a while, which seems

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Paper Currency

2014-05-19 Thread Sergio Lerner
Alex, I think that what you are talking about more or less something like the Firmcoin Check: http://firmcoin.com/?p=92 On 18/05/2014 08:47 a.m., Alex Kotenko wrote: One problem we couldn't figure out here though - how to protect the notes from unauthorized redeem. Like if someone

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Paper Currency

2014-05-19 Thread Brooks Boyd
2014-05-18 13:14 GMT+01:00 Andreas Schildbach andr...@schildbach.de: One problem we couldn't figure out here though - how to protect the notes from unauthorized redeem. Like if someone else tries to reach your wallet with his own NFC - how can we distinguish between deliberate redeem by owner

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Paper Currency

2014-05-19 Thread Alex Kotenko
Asking random ignorant stranger to care to protect themselves never works. We need solution that requires strictly zero effort. Best regards, Alex Kotenko 2014-05-19 14:06 GMT+01:00 Brooks Boyd bo...@midnightdesign.ws: 2014-05-18 13:14 GMT+01:00 Andreas Schildbach andr...@schildbach.de:

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Paper Currency

2014-05-19 Thread Martin Sip
Alex, I think the problem of making paper bitcoins is equivalent to the idea of creating paper implementation of bitcoin sidechain. Hard one in my mind. If we could resolve this one in secure and decentralized way it would be the same breakthrough as bitcoin itself is. Martin Sip On

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Paper Currency

2014-05-19 Thread Alex Kotenko
Hmm, this is firmcoin thing looks like what I mean. They don't have a solution yet, and prices they quote smartcards are unacceptable, but if they will manage to get down in selfcost - that may work. Ok, I'll follow them and see what it will come to. Best regards, Alex Kotenko 2014-05-19 13:55

Re: [Bitcoin-development] About the small number of bitcoin nodes

2014-05-19 Thread Scott Howard
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 3:11 AM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote: On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Raúl Martínez r...@i-rme.es wrote: - bitcoind and Bitcoin Core should be in Linux repos: Agreed with conditions: 1) The distro MUST let bitcoin devs dictate which dependent libs are

[Bitcoin-development] patents...

2014-05-19 Thread Adam Back
someone recently wrote (not pointing fingers, nor demanding a spirited defense from that person, its a generic comment): PS: the device has patents pending btw about patents, I wonder if people who feel the need to do that, would you consider putting those patents into like a linux foundation

Re: [Bitcoin-development] patents...

2014-05-19 Thread Mike Hearn
IMO this list is fine for discussing such topics. Here are some thoughts. I had to deal with patents at Google (my name is on a few, not my choice unfortunately). Many aspects of patent law are deeply unintuitive, so here's the crash course as I was given it. The first rule of patents is *you

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Paper Currency

2014-05-19 Thread Justus Ranvier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/19/2014 02:21 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: Submitted with humility and some fear of getting laughed out of here... Off topic aside, a bunch of us have lately started to think about the atmosphere on this list and how to improve it. Nobody

Re: [Bitcoin-development] patents...

2014-05-19 Thread Peter Todd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 19 May 2014 17:09:07 CEST, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: The first rule of patents is *you do not go looking for patents*. US law is written in a really stupid way, such that if you knowingly infringe, damages triple. Because America uses

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Paper Currency

2014-05-19 Thread Peter Todd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 19 May 2014 20:20:40 CEST, Justus Ranvier justusranv...@gmail.com wrote: You and Gavin could do a lot better by working on a Bitcoin social contract - a promise of what features will *never* be added (or taken away) from Bitcoin, because

Re: [Bitcoin-development] patents...

2014-05-19 Thread Mike Hearn
Meh. The world is much bigger than the USA. Secondly that rule makes it difficult to educate people about why patents are as bad as they are. You can easily find examples that are not relevant to Bitcoin if you want to discuss the patent system in general. Feel free to continue censoring

Re: [Bitcoin-development] patents...

2014-05-19 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: The first rule of patents is you do not go looking for patents. US law is written in a really stupid way, such that if you knowingly infringe, damages triple. Because America uses the patent office as a revenue source, You have

Re: [Bitcoin-development] patents...

2014-05-19 Thread Peter Todd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 19 May 2014 20:43:15 CEST, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: There are other defensive approaches which are interesting than hoping to use patents as a counter attack: For one— filing a patent gets the work entered in the only database

Re: [Bitcoin-development] patents...

2014-05-19 Thread Mike Hearn
Avoiding willfull infringement no longer requires paying off a patent attorney to get a freedom to operate review. This isn't to say that reading patents is always productive That case raised the bar a bit, but the core problem remains - if you learn about a patent you definitely violate

[Bitcoin-development] Working on social contracts (was: Paper Currency)

2014-05-19 Thread Gavin Andresen
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Justus Ranvier justusranv...@gmail.comwrote: You and Gavin could do a lot better by working on a Bitcoin social contract - a promise of what features will *never* be added (or taken away) from Bitcoin, because despite what you say it's not acceptable to

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Working on social contracts (was: Paper Currency)

2014-05-19 Thread Justus Ranvier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/19/2014 09:41 PM, Gavin Andresen wrote: Now I'm really confused. Why would Mike or I have the authority to write a social contract to promise anything about future-Bitcoin? YOU can make promises about YOUR future behavior. So can everyone

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Working on social contracts (was: Paper Currency)

2014-05-19 Thread Mike Hearn
Sorry. I will never agree to the concept of a relevant idea so dangerous it cannot be discussed. That's medieval thinking. If you would like to create a parallel development forum where people have to swear an oath not to think bad thoughts, go right ahead and do so. But I'm glad to see you

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Working on social contracts (was: Paper Currency)

2014-05-19 Thread Gavin Andresen
Okey dokey: I hereby promise and solemnly swear on pain of atomic wedgie that I will never ever work on or endorse any changes to the Bitcoin system that would enable any person or group to confiscate, blacklist, or devalue any other person or group's bitcoin. RE: writing an RFC: go for it. I

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Working on social contracts (was: Paper Currency)

2014-05-19 Thread Justus Ranvier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/19/2014 10:06 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: Sorry. I will never agree to the concept of a relevant idea so dangerous it cannot be discussed. That's medieval thinking. If you would like to create a parallel development forum where people have to

Re: [Bitcoin-development] DNS seeds unstable

2014-05-19 Thread Alex Kotenko
Hmm, I've mostly setup what's promised, testing DNS seeds now. There is one problem I see that I can't really solve myself. This dnsseed daemon cannot serve more than one name at once, which means that I cannot serve testnet and mainnet seeds off one daemon instance which means I need to buy two

Re: [Bitcoin-development] DNS seeds unstable

2014-05-19 Thread Alex Kotenko
Well, it's possible theoretically, but will need another piece of custom software that will understand DNS protocol and proxy it correctly based on actual incoming DNS queries. On 19 May 2014 21:22, Michael Wozniak m...@osfda.org wrote: I’m not familiar with how the daemon works, however could

Re: [Bitcoin-development] DNS seeds unstable

2014-05-19 Thread Michael Wozniak
I’m not familiar with how the daemon works, however could you set up two daemons listening local on different ports and with a separate daemon or normal dns server that proxies incoming queries to either domain? I don’t know if standard DNS servers would support that, or if you would need a

Re: [Bitcoin-development] DNS seeds unstable

2014-05-19 Thread Robert McKay
It should be possible to configure bind as a DNS forwarder.. this can be done in a zone context.. then you can forward the different zones to different dnsseed daemons running on different non-public IPs or two different ports on the same IP (or on one single non-public IP since there's really

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Working on social contracts (was: Paper Currency)

2014-05-19 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Justus Ranvier justusranv...@gmail.com wrote: YOU can make promises about YOUR future behavior. So can everyone else. The rest of the community can keep track of which developers will and will not make promises about what changes they will and will not attempt

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Working on social contracts (was: Paper Currency)

2014-05-19 Thread Justus Ranvier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/19/2014 11:07 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: I promise that if bad people show up with a sufficient pointy gun that I'll do whatever they tell me to do. I'll make bad proposals, submit backdoors, and argue with querulous folks on mailing lists,

Re: [Bitcoin-development] patents...

2014-05-19 Thread Bernd Jendrissek
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote: Most companies (Google certainly included) have therefore banned their staff from reading patents, Bitcoin is not Google though, and applying the same patent protocols to Bitcoin as in Google is drawing a false equivalence

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Developer documentation on bitcoin.org

2014-05-19 Thread Saïvann Carignan
A quick update on the project: More reviews and feedback on the pull request are very welcome: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/pull/393 This pull request will be merged on May 24th and hopefully will be accurate as much as possible. Reporting any inaccuracy / mistake on the pull request

Re: [Bitcoin-development] DNS seeds unstable

2014-05-19 Thread Jeff Garzik
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Robert McKay rob...@mckay.com wrote: It should be possible to configure bind as a DNS forwarder.. this can be done in a zone context.. then you can forward the different zones to different dnsseed daemons running on different non-public IPs or two different

Re: [Bitcoin-development] DNS seeds unstable

2014-05-19 Thread Michael Wozniak
You would set it up as a forwarder, not as a zone transfer to bind. That should proxy the request every time and only cache based on any TTL that’s set in the response. Here’s an example of how it could work:

Re: [Bitcoin-development] DNS seeds unstable

2014-05-19 Thread Robert McKay
On Mon, 19 May 2014 19:49:52 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Robert McKay rob...@mckay.com wrote: It should be possible to configure bind as a DNS forwarder.. this can be done in a zone context.. then you can forward the different zones to different dnsseed

Re: [Bitcoin-development] DNS seeds unstable

2014-05-19 Thread Robert McKay
On Tue, 20 May 2014 01:44:29 +0100, Robert McKay wrote: On Mon, 19 May 2014 19:49:52 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Robert McKay rob...@mckay.com wrote: It should be possible to configure bind as a DNS forwarder.. this can be done in a zone context.. then you can