Bitcoin Forum
May 08, 2024, 09:03:45 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 [83] 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 »
1641  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Generating Bitcoins with your video card (OpenCL/CUDA) on: September 24, 2010, 12:53:22 PM
I am not a programmer, so excuse my dumb question: In a future version, can us common folk expect to see the bitcoin program recognize that I have the right video card, and have the option of generating with it, or is this going to be limited to those who can play code?

It depends on what us, the programmers, are willing to do. Some of us will require coins for our effort, some of us just need to manage time, I personally am bound by the latter and would appreciate help in getting the hardware to test outside my laptop. I almost got it, but then puddinpop's ransom was paid and everything is good now... isn't it?? :p
1642  Economy / Marketplace / Re: Introducing: The Amazing Anonymous Bitcoin Lottery on: September 23, 2010, 11:25:30 PM
I prefer the login/pass way, I don't really see how using a bitcoin address is more anonymous than a username.
I made a new address and labeled it lotery so I can find it back in my address book, but I would prefer just to log in when I want, where I want. And because I can't memorize a btc address that's not possible at the moment.

something else:
Pick6   1643.00   81563

Nice pot, I hope I have the right tickets  Grin

Consider this; you set  up an account as things are now, and I'll see '1NiXpzvWedn6iu514oLUxhpeF7cagu6Gw
1643  Economy / Marketplace / Re: Introducing: The Amazing Anonymous Bitcoin Lottery on: September 23, 2010, 11:18:54 PM
Sorry for being dumb. We log in with the address that we sent coins to? I tried a few that I thought were at the right time/ right amount, but no luck yet.

Nope, you log in with the address you provided as the one you want withdrawals to be sent to. Did you have a password set? PM me the password (you can later change it) and the bcin (or a list of possibilities) and I'll dig your bcout.
1644  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: OpenCore has a open-soruce SHA core... on: September 23, 2010, 09:13:54 PM
Problem for me is, I've got the hardware and software(got it to try this) but haven't been good enough with VHDL to figure out how to interface it between that and Bitcoin.

hmmm, for testing I would probably get a UART core and feed the half baked hash, the initial nonce and the 256bit min hash value. It would do one set of parallel hash calculations for incrementing nonces and return the nonce with the lowest hash. This would make interfacing with bitcoin pretty easy, especially after svn r154.
1645  Economy / Marketplace / Re: Introducing: The Amazing Anonymous Bitcoin Lottery on: September 23, 2010, 08:37:06 PM
I was just always logged in before, now I am not. I should be trying to get in with the address that you send coins too, right? That doesn't work though.

Happened to me too. You need your BCout, not BCin.

Would you guys rather have a login/password pair instead? It was just me being paranoid about the anonymous bit that got me to develop things like they are, but that can be changed...


I like the bcout. If I lose it though, am I screwed?

Hmmm,it depends. Will you know anything that allows me to retrieve that information for you? If you know your bcin it's pretty straightforward, and assuming you didn't loose your wallet.dat (*that* would be pretty bad) you'll have at least one transfer to it. But even without it, if you can give me enough information so that I'm sure it is your account, I can probably get it for you, say you password (of which I only store a digest, obviously) and the amount in your account, as well as the number of tickets you bought on some draw.

I think you'd be fine Smiley
1646  Economy / Marketplace / Re: Introducing: The Amazing Anonymous Bitcoin Lottery on: September 23, 2010, 08:14:24 PM
I was just always logged in before, now I am not. I should be trying to get in with the address that you send coins too, right? That doesn't work though.

Happened to me too. You need your BCout, not BCin.

Would you guys rather have a login/password pair instead? It was just me being paranoid about the anonymous bit that got me to develop things like they are, but that can be changed...
1647  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: OpenCore has a open-soruce SHA core... on: September 23, 2010, 08:12:46 PM
I've been meaning to dive into FPGAs for too long now... if there are no takers that have both the hardware and the time/inclination, I can be bribed into doing this in exchange for a dev board donation Smiley

I'm just saying...

In fact, this could be the start of a company selling bitcoin generators Wink
1648  Economy / Marketplace / Re: Introducing: The Amazing Anonymous Bitcoin Lottery on: September 23, 2010, 07:05:19 PM
Just wanted to mention that while the Pick3 hits at least once a day, we've finally had a good pot being given out on the Pick4! If you had bets there, check the site, one of you walked away with 286 coins just now Smiley

And did you notice the announcement for BitcoinSportsBook.com? Smiley
1649  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Internal version number on: September 23, 2010, 06:51:19 PM
I don't think it should cause any problems for version comparisons.  31300 > 312.

obviously, *ahem* just checking if you were paying attention, that's all Wink
1650  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: How divisible are bitcoins - the technical side on: September 23, 2010, 06:10:35 PM
Won't transaction fees make that pointless?

If you are trying to give accurate payouts from the sportsbook I don't think anyone will mind having it rounded off at .01 for now. That is only $0.0006 after all.

Will transaction fees be applied to transfers above 0.01, but with more precision? I wasn't aware of it being that way.

And yes, I am rounding for now, but I like things clean, and I can either allow withdrawal of higher precision amounts, or I can round to 2 decimals the prize handout, I just rather do the former, that's all.

And no, it's not *only* for the sportsbook. I have plans... Smiley
1651  Economy / Digital goods / Re: Poker Stars USD for Bitcoin on: September 23, 2010, 05:45:20 PM
Current offer (9/9): I buy Bitcoins with my Poker Stars at a rate of $.06/BTC, up to $500 for now. $5 minimum.


Hey FreeMoney, sent you a PM. Just thought I would add a little bump here Smiley
1652  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / How divisible are bitcoins - the technical side on: September 23, 2010, 05:35:35 PM
Hey,

So there is another thread asking about bc and decimal places. It is stated that the client(s) only show 2 decimal places, but there are 8 in total. Now, working on stuff, I find that it would be nice if I could transfer at least 4 decimals precision, but the full 8 would be great.

Looking at the code it seems simple enough to remove the rounding from bitcoind, but what about the receiving side? If it's a non UI client, then it will show everything, but would I be making things overly confusing for GUI clients?

Is there any shortcoming in me patching my client to handle full precision?
1653  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: How check address for validity? on: September 23, 2010, 04:51:21 PM
you misunderstood me

the client has already been implemented check, need just the appropriate option
besides, it gives an opportunity to make small changes to the format of the address in the future if needed
and users also need address check without sending coins to make sure that the address they were told the correct

Now I don't understand you Smiley

So, how does the above pieces of code not do what you want? You don't need to send coins to check an address, you don't even need bitcoin at all, just the address. And python being very readable you can easily port that to any other language you need and know (yes, including pgplsql, assuming you have the appropriate crypto calls available)
1654  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Internal version number on: September 23, 2010, 04:48:04 PM
In the next release (0.3.13), I'm going to change the format of the internal version number integer from 313 to 31300, for instance 31305 = 0.3.13.5.  The last number represents changes on the SVN between releases and ought to be properly represented in the version number.  Otherwise, it would be a pain if we had a mistake or something in one of the sub versions that needed to be worked around.

Thanks for the heads up. I'm actually checking version on my web apps, to assert if backupwallet is available, but as my private version is now widespread, it should be very simple to cope with that change.
1655  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: How check address for validity? on: September 23, 2010, 02:46:46 PM
What about this? You need Python, Django and PyCrypto.

And what about this, which is a slightly tweaked version of that, to just depend on Python 2.5+?
Code:
#
# Stolen from gavinandresen's django field validator
#  http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026.0
#

import re
from hashlib import sha256
import math

__b58chars = '123456789ABCDEFGHJKLMNPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijkmnopqrstuvwxyz'
__b58base = len(__b58chars)

def b58encode(v):
  """ encode v, which is a little-endian string of bytes, to base58.   
  """

  long_value = 0L
  for (i, c) in enumerate(v[::-1]):
    long_value += (256**i) * ord(c)

  result = ''
  while long_value >= __b58base:
    div, mod = divmod(long_value, __b58base)
    result = __b58chars[mod] + result
    long_value = div
  result = __b58chars[long_value] + result

  # Pad front with Base58-encoded-0 for leading zeros:
  nPad = int((len(v)*8 / (math.log(58,2))) - len(result))

  return (__b58chars[0]*nPad) + result

def b58decode(v, length):
  """ decode v into a little-endian string of len bytes
  """
  long_value = 0L
  for (i, c) in enumerate(v[::-1]):
    long_value += __b58chars.find(c) * (__b58base**i)

  result = ''
  while long_value >= 256:
    div, mod = divmod(long_value, 256)
    result = chr(mod) + result
    long_value = div
  result = chr(long_value) + result
  if len(result) < length:
    n_pad = length-len(result)
    result = chr(0)*n_pad + result
  return result

def get_bcaddress_version(strAddress):
  """ Returns None if strAddress is invalid.  Otherwise returns integer version of address. """
  addr = b58decode(strAddress,25)
  version = addr[0]
  checksum = addr[-4:]
  vh160 = addr[:-4] # Version plus hash160 is what is checksummed
  h3=sha256(sha256(vh160).digest()).digest()
  if h3[0:4] == checksum:
    return ord(version)
  return None

def isvalid(value):
  value = value.strip()
  if re.match(r"[a-zA-Z1-9]{33,35}$", value) is None:
    return False
  return get_bcaddress_version(value) is not None
1656  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Generating Bitcoins with your video card (OpenCL/CUDA) on: September 23, 2010, 01:53:39 AM
I think that part of the problem is greed on the part of the few people who currently have functional cuda/opencl bitcoin clients.
About those who keep advantages to themselves, I wouldn't consider it outright greed, even if that is the motivation. It's using skills to gain a technical advantage. The ability to strike such advantages (at least regarding Bitcoin) shouldn't be encumbered.

Greed is hardly a problem, as troll puddinpop demonstrates. It's there but it doesn't f'n do anything. Though this particular one keeps winning against your trollfeeders. As I am a troll at heart, it's kinda win to see...

Greed is, in fact, the smallest of problems. Take this exact situation, where puddinpop walked out with 10k bc for something that he will not maintain (well, he might, but doesn't have to) and most other technically capable bitcoiners have probably created their own solution, so they will neither share nor help in balancing the board, as they fear they will loose the edge.

So probably for 10k I would have, asked nicely, made the effort to make my approach more user friendly, or usable. But I'm not greedy, so I didn't ask. In fact, I was going to make a linux package in exchange for a couple of graphics cards, but since puddinpop received 10k and open sourced his half-way solution, the card donation got aborted.

And understand 10k coins don't pay for the time I already put in the code I disclosed, I just mentioned that value because it a real price tag, paid once in the past.

And what really tickles me, to the point I find myself laughing as I type, is that when puddinpop received the donation/ransom, the threads got a bunch of "great!", "finally!", "what a great thing for the community" comments, when in the end there was already code for free, and open sourced, and although not as polished it is pretty much in the same need for a maintainer, so just as usable. Really, I said it before, I'll say it again; very well played, puddinpop! You were the sole winner in this.

So I think that this is more of a sociological problem than it is a technical. Got 10k coins for me to hack up an opencl version? Probably puddinpop already has one and will opensource it, for the right fee, and then abandon it in whatever state it is :p
1657  Bitcoin / Mining / Re: A slightly more open approach to bitcoin on the GPU on: September 22, 2010, 10:14:46 PM
I just tried your latest patch.  I noticed a few things:

  • Your post, and the patch name, makes it seem like the patch is against revision 157, which does not yet exist.  Upon looking at the content of the patch, it is obvious the patch is against revision 155.
  • You have an extraneous curly brace on line ~3077 when FOURWAYSSE2 is not defined
  • I get about 6200 khash/s with your patch using the GPU only (limit set to 1 CPU).  However without the CPU limit, and using 2 CPUs, I only get 6500 khash/s according to the counter.  That can't be right.

Hey puddinpop, I'm curious. On what OS are you compiling this? If it's not OSX, care to share the makefile? Also, what is you graphics card and how does my patch compare to your version on it? I got about 20% increase on mine compared to yours, but then again some things like the threads per block or the total number of blocks have a huge impact on the overal performance, and I didn't try to optimize your version.
1658  Bitcoin / Mining / Re: A slightly more open approach to bitcoin on the GPU on: September 22, 2010, 10:02:03 PM
I just tried your latest patch.  I noticed a few things:

  • Your post, and the patch name, makes it seem like the patch is against revision 157, which does not yet exist.  Upon looking at the content of the patch, it is obvious the patch is against revision 155.
  • You have an extraneous curly brace on line ~3077 when FOURWAYSSE2 is not defined
  • I get about 6200 khash/s with your patch using the GPU only (limit set to 1 CPU).  However without the CPU limit, and using 2 CPUs, I only get 6500 khash/s according to the counter.  That can't be right.

Thanks for trying it out, finally some feedback Smiley

You are correct about the revision number being wrong. It was actually against r154. The fact I did a hacky job at including the miner means that problems do exist. I find that using all the cores + the GPU actually slows everything, and that reducing the number of mining threads on the fly doesn't do the right thing. One has to, as best as I can understand, start with 1 and up to 2 or more, but reducing threads leaves the system in unexpected states.

As for using a limit of -1 slowing things down, it makes some sense, as the CPU still is at 100% when using the GPU, doing memcpy's and finding nonces that are potential winners.

I'm attaching a new version that unrolls pretty much everything and nets me an extra 1MH/s, but this is finely tuned for my own system. This comes from a slightly more patched code base, so I hope I didn't leave any extra stuff.
1659  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Generating Bitcoins with your video card (OpenCL/CUDA) on: September 22, 2010, 01:52:38 PM
Unfortunately, waiting for an OpenCL client...

It's in my todo list, but as all 'just for fun' projects, it depends on me having the time... I will, however, post all sources if I get to do it Smiley
1660  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Generating Bitcoins with your video card (OpenCL/CUDA) on: September 22, 2010, 12:37:50 AM
Yeah, when do we get anything out of the code puddinpop opensourced?

You can't be seriously asking what you get out of open source code.

Quote
Well, puddinpop?

Well what?  It's open source.  Do whatever you want with it under the MIT or GPL license.  Don't wait for me.  If you're not willing to put any work into getting it working, why should you expect it to benefit you?

Quote
Now that you got the hefty donation, are you to do any support? Is anyone up to take this?

Anyone can maintain this, create build files, release binaries, etc.  It is open source.  You wanted it open source, you got it.

The sense of entitlement here is just astonishing.  It seems like very few want to do the dirty work and everyone else wants to benefit from the work of others without giving anything themselves.

Hehe, my ironic tone went completely unnoticed... I know what we get from open source, I didn't mean to imply you should continue to support this, at least not that it was your responsibility.  It really strikes me as awkward that you would feel that I was pointing a finger.

Remember me? I'm the guy that *did* implement a CUDA miner, and *did* release it as open source before you ever got your "ransom".

As it seems obvious that my joking tone is not understood, let me be very serious and say that the problem as I see it is that everyone assumes that something being open sourced means that a huge geek community will just jump in and support it. Not in my world, it doesn't. I can certainly do that, sure, but why should I? My personal version works on my only CUDA enabled computer, and performs better than yours. Sure, all the work you did in detecting the hardware I don't have, I just fine tuned it to my machine, hard coded.

The thing is everyone wants it, but no one knows how to go about it. And frankly you came out as the only real winner, so congrats! No sarcasm or irony here, you played your cards right and won.

I just hope some coder gets annoyed or bored and steps in, I just don't have the need right now that justifies the time expenditure. I did my part...
Pages: « 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 [83] 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!