Bible Pay

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - 616westwarmoth

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Update on the PODC project:

I have not found any new bugs.  The CPID signature rule seems to be working correctly.
The chain is syncing from zero correctly.  The quorum votes are behaving correctly.
The headless version is filtering the files correctly.
Any concerns or feature requests?

Last night I added an in-wallet leaderboard (exec leaderboard).  It shows CPID, Magnitude by magnitude descending.
Im holding off to check it in until we team it up with another change.

So far, this looks very promising for Prod on March 15th....

EDIT: I also added two reports to the pool:  Once per day, we gather the data.  Rosetta Machine Leaderboard and Rosetta Project Leaderboard.
Its gleaning the data from the Biblepay team, so if you arent in the team the leaderboard misses you. 

(We still allow Rosetta crunchers outside of the team, to receive compensation and this is for future PR.  Im envisioning that we make a post in the
 Rosetta forums eventually and invite those users over.  Or pay for a banner ad out of our PR budget on the boincstats site.  (There are some veteran Rosetta crunchers with billions of credits who belong to a certain team - so they may not want to drop their team - but if they are not required to, they may join us and become part of our community - and be part of our community in other ways).

One request that I would like to see considered.  Require team Biblepay to receive rewards.

Currently, we are open to exploit by a botnet.  Its believed we are losing a large and measurable percentage to botnet(s) and it's not inconceivable it could exceed 50% with little difficulty, since this is what Monero, the hybrid CPU/GPU coin is suspected to be at.

Right now, Team Biblepay is 76th, with RAC of 30K, the top team is Team Gridcoin with 4.8M RAC.  I understand the desire to reach out and open the door for more users, but I worry that the current proposal of allowing anyone to receive rewards regardless of team, allows for Gridcoin users to effectively get credit at Gridcoin as well as at Biblepay for no more work (since they can be Team Gridcoin for Gridcoin rewards, and use just their user Account Key to get BBP).  Since Gridcoin users are on some level participating in [email protected] for Cryptocurrency rewards, it seems reasonable to think many, if not most, will gravitate to BBP since they can buy 1 BBP to receive rewards.  If, and I say IF, they are there solely for the reward and we cannot minister to them, then they are no better to our core users than the botnet.  If we reached the 1% ranking, we'd have roughly 100K RAC, if 25% of the Gridcoin users started with BBP, they'd have 1M RAC, and so if we could not convert them as genuine users, we'd be back to a 10% - 90% split with the majority of the coins going to people outside our user base.  Additionally, by not requiring team Biblepay membership, we lose a valuable asset which is the PR benefit from the overall ranking on [email protected] which could very easily be top 10 to maybe top 5 in a very short period of time.  Because without requiring to be a part of team Biblepay, most of our users I believe will end up on team Gridcoin as that would make the most financial sense.

I believe the goal to move to PoDC is a good one.  This particular piece of the puzzle however, I am concerned about and think needs addressed before the implementation.

In the end, the question to me boils down to, are there many [email protected] users we can reach out to that would not join us if they had to leave their current teams.  If so, can we reach more users with our own higher ranking team?

One concern brought up in Slack was "double dipping" with Gridcoin and Biblepay.  After looking around, it appears that is thankfully not easily done, and may be impossible.

One other thought that did come up on Slack was the reduction in hash power needed to do a 51% attack on PoW.  I'm not saying it is correct, since Gridcoin manages to secure their block chain with just the BOINC hashing.  My question then is would it be possible or practical to take the PoL work and instead of using Coin Age as a hash rate modifier (or difficulty modifier), would it be practical to use the RAC somehow to perform that function?  My thought is it would build upon the PoL work that has been done, might not diminish the number of blocks created by PoW and thus might preserve the high barrier for a 51% attack. 

The other concern brought up was if there might be a project similar in mission to BOINC but strictly for Christian researchers?  I was unaware of any.  However, it made me ponder the possibilities that some point down the road, if BBP becomes a major force where we sponsor thousands of orphans and do the miraculous, feeding widows and orphans from the virtual proceedings...think about the loaves and the fishes and you see where my mind picks up this as analogous, then perhaps this coin can merit some standing to create a portal for scientists who are Christians and doing Godly research.

Just some thoughts on the matter as things move forward.  It's tremendously exciting!

I installed lubuntu-core and was able to open the BOINC Manager GUI and set my Options >>> Computing Preferences

Is 4GB RAM enough for [email protected]?

Also other than those crazy $3k server processors it looks like the AMD Threadripper 1950X for $900 is the best CPU to use, not sure how it plays out budget wise when you also factor in a more expensive motherboard and liquid cooling though. Curious how the power usage/electricity costs play out as well.

I've been playing around with it but right now my T3500 with an X5650 is doing pretty decent although your I7-2600K looks like its a monster by comparison (which I wouldn't have guessed by comparing the two CPU on CPUBoss)

I was able to setup Linux machine with BOINC with 3 commands!

togoshigekata BOINC:

sudo apt install boinc-client boinc-manager
boinccmd --lookup_account EMAIL PWD
boinccmd --project_attach ACCOUNTKEY

and I used top command to look at CPU usage, and the CPU was auto used up by BOINC

Thanks Luke!

Boinccmd tool:

You're better off going to the website at, click on the link by Account Keys that says "View" and copy your "weak" password.  Then use that "weak" password on shared computers or really everywhere!

I have just tried running boinc on ARM. Not successful though, I'm not getting any tasks :

11-Feb-2018 15:15:24 [[email protected]] Sending scheduler request: To fetch work.
11-Feb-2018 15:15:24 [[email protected]] Requesting new tasks for CPU
11-Feb-2018 15:15:27 [[email protected]] Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks
11-Feb-2018 15:15:27 [[email protected]] This project doesn't support computers of type aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

Anyone  else tried ARM (e.g. Raspberry?)

The first machine I tried was an ARM (aarch64) and didn't work.  This is because, I believe, Rosetta does not craft their work units to process correctly in ARM.

Well, my oddball ARM64 machine won't support BOINC or at least not the rosetta project.

That said, one point that has been brought up on Slack is why do we not have separate Development and Production branches of Biblepay?  The heartache of the PoL payments showing up in main net would not occur, and rapid fire upgrades in Development aren't going to look bad on us like they do in Production.

I'm not sure if you saw the question related to the variance in blocks reward.

I agree that the botnet is an issue and I think you and I talked about it extensively in slack at some point.

Now i think you're the one who doesn't know what he is talking about if you think there is such a thing as a single "un-hackable" system.  Even if there was, the people controlling that system are not! The more (financial) incentives you add to corrupt said system and the more likely someone is going to find a way to corrupt that system. That's the beauty of blockchain and decentralisation; you're not relying on a single system, entity, person.

Now we can argue about the probabilities for something like that to happen (which are higher than what you think they are) but I find it highly dangerous to dismiss that risk altogether. Also, it doesn't fix the centralisation issue of a powerful botnet, it is merely shifting it to BOINC which we can argue might be a better option...but it is still centralised.

The issue is not about PoDC going down or not, but PoDC potentially being corrupted.

As I said, we can argue if the risk is worth the potential reward which is a possible argument.

I don't think it is bashing but merely raising concerns about something so that we can all find a solution together.

Point taken on having to find a new community .

I think the real answer is which is more likely hackable?  A small coin with really only one or two principle coders and gatekeepers or a massive system already in use by thousands times more users with hundreds more developers?  Put another way, Gridcoin has a marketcap of $23 M, we have a market cap of <$1 M.  Gridcoins problems have not been due to BOINC but their own software.  BOINC gathers research which in private hands has the potential to be worth millions to billions in the hands of big pharma.  Yet, so far, no major issue with BOINC, Gridcoin is faltering due to their vulnerabilities and we're suffering with a botnet.   Right now we basically rely on Rob, if he put out a mandatory that drained everyone's wallets in 30 days, we'd likely not catch it.  So really, right now, we're far more vulnerable than BOINC.

The only other viable option is right now is PoL and I cannot see a way where it would effectively hamper the botnets without severely affecting new or small users (or really why it should be used with PoW and not just throw in the towel and move to pure PoS).  The problem is a CPU coin is too tempting a target to botnets, but is too important a goal to merely abandon.  PiVX tried to hamper the botnets and failed, and decided to shift to PoS.  Most other CPU coins quickly jump to GPU or fall into disuse before their value is enough to be targeted.  PoDC is the major chance to not have to be PoS (or de facto PoS) without making a central "mining hub" that is overseen by the Masternodes and protected through non-open source obfuscation.

I'm currently compiling on a fairly unique situation with an ARM64 processor.  I hope to have enough notes to walk through the process (and hope it is applicable to other ARM platforms) including using the BOINC command line tool exclusively.

Support and Troubleshooting / Re: Help with Mining Set Up
« on: February 04, 2018, 01:37:49 pm »
Hi could someone please clarify the correct config commands for solo mining

On the official mining guide it says:

on other forum posts it says:


is the addnode necessary?  Does it do it do anything? or was it part of an older wallet version?

Replied in your other post, but will say again, addnode is not required but will help you find peers faster.  It won't hurt you that much if you exclude it but I'd keep it in there.

Mining - General / Re: solo mining config file
« on: February 04, 2018, 01:36:07 pm »
addnode isn't strictly necessary but gives your miner a place to look and quickly find other peers.  It won't hurt to include it and will likely help a little bit.

Support and Troubleshooting / Re: Masternode setup help
« on: February 03, 2018, 11:17:43 am »
So i've begun the process of setting up my masternode and all I can say is this is VERY complicated. Are there any video guides available?

I'm not sure where you are, but I'm in the US, shoot me a PM and I'll walk you through anything.  I am working on some other videos, the issue for me is the MN video will require me to kill my MN and restart it, so I want to make sure all my ducks are in a row before doing that.  Meanwhile, I've set up another users MN about a month ago, so I'll make the same offer to you (although trust is a bit of an issue since I'd need your login info on the VPS but your coins would be safe on your main wallet)

Production Proposals / Re: New Charity Organization - BLOOM
« on: January 28, 2018, 11:34:10 pm »
I realize parts 2 & 3 of the IT integration may not be possible (the letter writing interface).  But - I need a person who says Yes, meaning that someone will find a way to accept a typed letter in the mail, and we can have you and 616 mail them out personally once per month.

I'd be more than happy to set up a PO Box to allow for physical mailings.  I've got a pair of MFP machines, can print in color or B/W and would be honored to be the physical point of contact for such items.

Production Proposals / Re: PR, Communications, Marketing Proposal
« on: January 28, 2018, 11:09:55 am »
I like the idea West stated in another thread, about forming a sort of 'Foundation'. It kinda maybe defeats the purpose of the whole 'being decentralised', but it would really give us something palpable in the world.

My thought is a Foundation is basically what DASH has.  The governance of it is still decentralized, but it gives a place for storing IP, maybe even electing a director for a term and the like.   I think you can retain the important aspects of decentralized (proposal governance being the prime one) while having an official entity to oversee other aspects.

Togo, Alex, you guys along with Rob have been HUGE and are making this coin.  I'm trying to do my part too, sorry in advance on the slowdown in video production.  Part of the issue I see is there are a lot of coins where this kind of work has no budget, so the work comes along slowly by those passionate about the coin.  We're passionate here, don't get me wrong, and we've got a budget so we can use it.  That's why I felt it important to start and maintain the "monthly" budget thread.  So we can see where we're at.

But the thing is decisions we make now, set a pattern.  Losing Alt-J is a bad deal, but part of being passionate is accepting criticism.  I've taken my fair share (thankfully mostly in PMs) and it's discouraging.  But I really didn't see the critique here being a personal attack on Alt-J but rather worry about the future and how we handle this now opening the door to non-passionate users trying to cash in.  So while I don't question Alt-J's motives at all, I do fundamentally think we should not be subsidizing a for-profit venture.   Either make it non-profit (by reducing the margin to zero or by donating the profits in their entirety to the Orphan Fund) in which case I'd be inclined to vote in favor of, or run it for-profit, use our logo without fee and charge enough to make it worth your while so as to not require funding.  Again, there could be certain things in a for-profit venture that trigger funding in my mind, such as if I were to run a pool and start making coding changes.  Yes this would help me, but this is also a benefit to the coin if the coding is contributed back to the community.

We've still go 15 days at least in this cycle.  Webster is talking about a new proposal, Rob hasn't submitted much on the coding side minus PoL.  But it may very well be that we are TOO well funded at this point and the best thing to do is to sluff most of it to the Orphan Fund while the coin is young and hopefully at some of it's lowest valuations.  The danger of setting too many customs or common practices for minimally valued things is, to me, a far worse use of the funds than shifting them to charity or even burning them.

In practice the coin needs to develop a legitimate legal charter.  That way I can transfer ownership of the logos to the Foundation, someone like Alt-J can do the legwork of setting up a Zazzle shop but turn the ownership and profits to the Foundation and perhaps the Foundation can grow beyond the coin to actually be a destination for donations.

Production Proposals / Re: New Charity Organization - BLOOM
« on: January 27, 2018, 11:13:50 pm »
If we really want the IT integration, maybe we could fund the development of something that any charity could just install to do  to integrate with us?

I was thinking something along the same line, such as building /revising the core components of orphan sponsorship into API, and then documenting how to utilize them.  That way a small or large organization would be able interface with us without an undue burden on either party.

That would actually lead to a good line I've talked about several times, which is to separate the pool software from the governance side (which would be both the proposals as well as the charity).

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8