Messages

481

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: TestNet Testing Thread - Test IPFS Integration (Decentralized IP File System)

« on: August 29, 2018, 10:18:43 PM »

That doesnt make sense; the code either accepts it or rejects it.  I do not think you tested it properly; can you Upload the file into the transaction and double click it, and then paste it, and that means the Single test was performed?  (In contrast to uploading it and forgetting to check on the transaction list message). 

If something fails, you can just post the entire error message here, since this is an atomic test.

So far, I see no flaws in the system except user error and the ipfs gateway going up-down at random times.

There is a third possibility isn't there besides accepts it or rejects it... and that is... it accepts it, processes the upload, but the transaction ID doesn't include the ipfs hash in the transaction details? I wish I was smart enough to understand my 2.4MB file works, but not a 4MB file. 4mb jpeg - can you try to attach this file and see if you can replicate what I've been saying? This is the file: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/Caerte_van_Oostlant_4MB.jpg

So, I was able to upload a 2.4MB file:

Status: 0/unconfirmed, broadcast through 2 nodes
Date: 8/29/2018 20:15
To: klondike testnet yfhc5FdNSyAYyB4Fx4aJ2x4KoXiGuXxhyH
Debit: -106.00000000 tBiblepay
Net amount: -106.00000000 tBiblepay

IPFS Document: Navigate to document QmceXVXDjork9aT2MoVnroYRc3RxLXdJY8UA9872y8o9FV  Transaction ID: e32028e1f1576521540a450b137947c1b690bca598e7660b7bea6e62710d8f43-000



Debug information

Debit: -119 989.49989340 tBiblepay
Credit: 119 883.49989340 tBiblepay

Transaction:
CTransaction(hash=e32028e1f1, ver=1, vin.size=1, vout.size=2, nLockTime=54059)
    CTxIn(COutPoint(77527314927f560414ba52f571fab48f701b34385b22cad00f7db7984b4a635c, 2), scriptSig=483045022100d68ecb44edde, nSequence=4294967294)
    CTxOut(nValue=106.00000000, scriptPubKey=76a914d49b3ddf917fb85e7e39b440)
    CTxOut(nValue=119883.49989340, scriptPubKey=76a914fa9ea914a5d2e9b1e1541102)

Inputs:
yga9M5wSn9zUp8oTi4Yzqom7F7D1rWRApc Amount=119 989.49989340 tBiblepay IsMine=true IsWatchOnly=false


XML:
{PACK}{MT}ATTACHMENT{/MT}{MK}OUT_TX{/MK}{MV}QmceXVXDjork9aT2MoVnroYRc3RxLXdJY8UA9872y8o9FV{/MV}{ipfshash}QmceXVXDjork9aT2MoVnroYRc3RxLXdJY8UA9872y8o9FV{/ipfshash}{/PACK}{PACK}{MT}MESSAGE{/MT}{MK}OUT_TX{/MK}{MV}test 6 big truck video {/MV}{/PACK}{change}1{/change}

but this one 4mb jpeg doesn't show the ipfs hash in transaction details.

Status: 0/unconfirmed, broadcast through 2 nodes
Date: 8/29/2018 20:15
To: klondike testnet yfhc5FdNSyAYyB4Fx4aJ2x4KoXiGuXxhyH
Debit: -107.00000000 tBiblepay
Net amount: -107.00000000 tBiblepay
Transaction ID: 87126350a8ba79a679e66807e0e17b22b1dfdf3d3db64775fd3565ecad9eb2e7-000



Debug information

Debit: -443 465.02000000 tBiblepay
Credit: 443 358.02000000 tBiblepay

Transaction:
CTransaction(hash=87126350a8, ver=1, vin.size=1, vout.size=2, nLockTime=54059)
    CTxIn(COutPoint(45d826b3e6f24da2dd6379fedf10413dc9dab9132b0b1c390110fe6a7667861e, 1), scriptSig=483045022100f73941971aeb, nSequence=4294967294)
    CTxOut(nValue=107.00000000, scriptPubKey=76a914d49b3ddf917fb85e7e39b440)
    CTxOut(nValue=443358.02000000, scriptPubKey=76a914a7c5ca8893336e79620b426b)

Inputs:
yM4cUY5evJmSKJEjbTsgxh6RQbpqk53kYe Amount=443 465.02000000 tBiblepay IsMine=true IsWatchOnly=false


XML:
{PACK}{MT}ATTACHMENT{/MT}{MK}OUT_TX{/MK}{MV}{/MV}{ipfshash}{/ipfshash}{/PACK}{PACK}{MT}MESSAGE{/MT}{MK}OUT_TX{/MK}{MV}test 7 4mb jpg {/MV}{/PACK}{change}1{/change}

482

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: TestNet Testing Thread - Test IPFS Integration (Decentralized IP File System)

« on: August 29, 2018, 10:01:26 PM »

yfhc5FdNSyAYyB4Fx4aJ2x4KoXiGuXxhyH

I sent you some.

483

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: TestNet Testing Thread - Test IPFS Integration (Decentralized IP File System)

« on: August 29, 2018, 08:09:45 PM »

> Wow, a 21 meg file, thats cool, lets see if it plays from our gateway link, can you paste the link?

File uploaded I think (maybe it is in your hash list), but it doesn't show up in transaction details. Also tried 10 meg jpeg and doesn't show up.

I think ipfs has js wrapper to play videos, but not sure if they play outright. Maybe it is browser dependent.

I tried the following and I seem to be peered with you now:

ipfs pin add QmcbKYZRFGYsmBiEhqjQ4J7uoGY5DSHqs5uQg7fqsW7J1r

484

Archived Proposals / Re: BiblePay-Removing the BOINC Team Requirement for possible future Sustainability

« on: August 29, 2018, 05:22:50 PM »

The biggest impact is removing Team BiblePay requirement. This change brings in more miners, but are they going to stake or sell BBP? GridCoin miners seem the most logical to register their CPID. I feel they will sell BBP & ByteBall. BBP is a Christian crypto niche: highly targeted with a loyal demographic. Others in it for distributed computing will likely not stake BBP. So, it feels like a net loss to me. You lose advertising benefit of highly ranked team on Rosetta@Home/WCG and still have liquidation issues because GridCoin miners sell their BBP.

1MAG= 10 000 RAC=1 dedicated server= 20 new accounts= free mining w/staking

Your current magnitude will plummet due to influx of GridCoin miners. 10 000 RAC for 1 MAG could easily become 30 000 RAC for 1 MAG.

Email registration on Rosetta@Home and WCG is extremely easy.

If I don't have to stake, it'd be easy enough to create multiple instances with separate CPID on one machine:
* datadir to current directory
* biblepay.conf with unique port & rpcport

You can easily run 20 instances on a single machine.

I just created another instance of BBP on my machine just now.

And 20 CPIDS and 20 BoincStats accounts to check and 20 biblepay addresses and 20 wallets, right ?  Thats a lot of usernames and passwords to maintain... 

Why would you need to check stats? Wouldn't PoDC payment be enough (assuming you had the same hardware for each machine). Certainly, there's some upfront configuration time, but once everything is set up, there'd be very little intervention involved. I don't think there'd be that much abuse... just saying it'd be easy to do.

485

Archived Proposals / Re: Proposal - listing BBP on GIN MN platform

« on: August 29, 2018, 04:24:01 PM »

Although I agree with that, investment into project and ecosystem so project can grow is necessary, though. Without that, resources for charity might dry to zero in no time as well.

Its a bear market for everyone since BTC price is down. I do agree BBP liquidation potentially causes more downward pressure especially if the buy orders are not there to balance it out.

486

Archived Proposals / Re: BiblePay-Removing the BOINC Team Requirement for possible future Sustainability

« on: August 29, 2018, 04:03:15 PM »

While the unified goal is to attract more users, the PoDC is too drastic. Could the proposal be broken up into smaller parts? At least one for PoDC and one for PoBH?

> - A new boinc user who is crunching for XYZ discovers they can be compensated for Rosetta cancer mining through Biblepay.

Too drastic of a change, I do not support. Feels desperate. Not confident it will have the desired result. For example, ByteBall is rewarding for WCG crunching. I receive ByteBalls but don't participate in the community much. Sure, I've written a few comments here and there about double dipping. I emphasize poor children ("orphans") being helped with BBP, but the conversation will change to how you can double dip with BBP.

Aren't there other strategies to use before making such a change? Increase advertising, marketing, and Public Relations effort? Erode the compassion.com cushion? Reduce/remove sponsorship to other charities? Reduce number of children sponsored? Ask our BBP holders to research their company's charitable programs to see if they offer matching gifts and compassion.com is eligible: https://www.compassion.com/donate/matching-gifts.htm <- that could reduce BBP giving but net giving is matched. Less liquidation, higher BBP price?

Its a bear market and everyone is hurting. Have faith and patience. I believe the tide will rise for all boats.

> - ** Remove the UTXO stake requirement for magnitudes less than ONE

This seems okay.

I'd support the PoBH changes.

487

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: TestNet Testing Thread - Test IPFS Integration (Decentralized IP File System)

« on: August 28, 2018, 10:23:36 PM »

Wow, it actually works pretty good.
Windows 10 64-bit.

> Test attaching a document to a new QT Send Transaction

Looks like c:\ is prefixed to the URL.

For example, if I want to upload a file located in --
C:\temp\GatewayArchNP_EN-US13744808809_1366x768.jpg , QT actually looks for
c:\c:\temp/GatewayArchNP_EN-US13744808809_1366x768.jpg

When I attach file, the URL is file:///C:/temp/GatewayArchNP_EN-US13744808809_1366x768.jpg

QT wallet responds with IPFS Attachment Failed. IPFS File not found.

If I remove c:/ then the send button works: file:///temp/GatewayArchNP_EN-US13744808809_1366x768.jpg

I don't know code, but found the error message in src/rpcblockchain.cpp , around line 6400 , something about sPath...

Also, if we if attach file from non C: drive, what will happen. Will need to test again (e.g. attachment is from e: drive)

~~~

I uploaded a 21MB video. BiblePay took the file, but there was no progress indicator.

> Test double clicking the transaction list and viewing the attached IPFS file hash

Works with no checkboxes ticked on.

Is there a file size limit or file type restriction? I tried uploading 21MB video. It uploaded okay it seems, but doesn't show up in Transaction Details.

If after ipfs.exe uploads the file, what happens to the file if I decide to not send the transaction. Is the file deleted on the server? Worried about DDoS type of issue where files are uploaded, but no transaction sent.

> Test Opening the IPFS document link

IPFS Document: Navigate to document QmanVaVYE1phtQeQqp23SZk6FM5nWBRu2KD9d6eaGZHV1P 
Transaction ID: ce930cf4b4794964ca69129c7ef51ba99601ba588f055b717036645c34cf2869-000

IPFS Document: Navigate to document QmcUr2WpiEg6ZWwTdHRDfxNVZzwpns7pdoYSQyt46wMHyX 
Transaction ID: 45d826b3e6f24da2dd6379fedf10413dc9dab9132b0b1c390110fe6a7667861e-000

* Make blue link clickable as well under Transaction Details?
* Make a newline so Transaction ID is in its own line after IPFS document
* Maybe instead of blue checkmark icon on left column (for confirmed), have a clickable paper clip icon to indicate there is attachment with transaction?

> Test the fee charged for BiblePay storage

What fee?> Assess exact root cause of IPFS instability; IPFS.io links are down right now, but ipfs.biblepay.org worked. Are you going to make ipfs.biblepay.org HTTPS?

488

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: TestNet Testing Thread - Test IPFS Integration (Decentralized IP File System)

« on: August 28, 2018, 06:31:02 PM »

So, if sender & recipient can view attachment only... is this like an extension of signed messages? Does that mean public content will be hosted via IPFS but not required to be peers by BiblePay sanctuaries? Making attachments only visible to sender & recipient is very low utility and limited use case don't you think?

IPFS handles illegal content by blocking the hash. I think people will use attachment feature more if content has option to be public. Maybe a checkbox to opt-in making attachment private & encrypted, so only sender & recipient can view. I think if we have issues with illegal content due to higher adoption, this is a good issue to have and can be dealt with if we ever cross that bridge. For now, getting people to join BBP due to innovative feature is important for BBP's survival...

I can't reach the site either, but I was able to see your hi.txt containing hello by using ipfs directly.

C:\>ipfs ls /ipfs/QmPVMkWe7976YH22quBotbrDMV9tP4qCz9P5tndveKdeGs/
QmSkYzY65dGXo8q6kjrsj1erH4bLZmyQoHDd8wwoAKpG8V 15 hi.txt

C:\>ipfs cat /ipfs/QmPVMkWe7976YH22quBotbrDMV9tP4qCz9P5tndveKdeGs/hi.txt
hello

489

Archived Proposals / Re: Proposal - listing BBP on GIN MN platform

« on: August 27, 2018, 10:15:47 AM »

I can rent a reliable VPS for $1/mo. See lowendbox or lowendtalk. DIY is certainly less expensive route, but maybe for financial types that don't want to deal with the technical aspects (just want payout to wallet), its not a bad idea. If we do something in-house, then we could charge a fee but receive it as BBP and sent it all to donation for charities. This will be a marketing advantage because revenue is not for profit and goes to charity.   Whatever direction is taken, this would open a new marketing angle to churches where they set up a recurring donation vehicle. You could support compassion ongoing with the payouts from the masternode (sanctuary).

490

Archived Proposals / Re: Proposal - listing BBP on MCT+ p2p trading platform

« on: August 21, 2018, 12:44:15 PM »

I feel like we have enough presence on multiple exchanges where adding yet another exchange is not meaningful nor helpful. I think there's enough venues to liquidate. I think BBP efforts should either save up for a big exchange with high market volume like Bittrex or focus investment in advertising, marketing, and/or public relations to bring more users to BBP. More users, more trading volume. I worry adding another exchange will spread BBP too thin. IMHO. How do others feel?

491

Archived Proposals / Re: Legal Formation of The BiblePay Foundation

« on: August 20, 2018, 11:03:45 AM »

Just to clarify, "boardmember with least seniority" means lowest age? lowest rank? least amount of time involved?

I would think last person to join the board. If you came on the board, then stepped down, and then rejoined... does your seniority age start at 0 day again?

492

Archived Proposals / Re: Pre-Proposal: Twitter Advertising - @tehmoonwalker

« on: August 15, 2018, 11:34:18 AM »

Read what is tweeted and retweeted. I think a lot of crypto is not aligned with Jesus, so I rarely see a good fit for BiblePay's mission and the rest of the cryptosphere

493

Enhancements in Development / Twitter summary cards

« on: August 01, 2018, 11:23:56 AM »

It has come to my attention that the images auto-selected by Twitter for https://biblepay.org is not ideal.

You will see BiblePay's default is a money bag. See attachment. Not a good look on Twitter.

If you look at Compassion.com as an example, they have a filipino girl as the card image.

We can set a different image for Twitter to use. This is explained in more detail here: https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/tweets/optimize-with-cards/overview/summary.html

This is what Compassion.com's code looks like. You put the meta tags in the head section before the body tag:

<meta name="twitter:card" content="summary_large_image" />
<meta name="twitter:description" content="Make helping the poor part of your legacy. Start by sponsoring a child today." />
<meta name="twitter:title" content="Sponsor a Child - Compassion International" />
<meta name="twitter:site" content="@compassion" />
<meta name="twitter:domain" content="www.compassion.com" />
<meta name="twitter:image:src" content="http://www.compassion.com/multimedia/sponsor-a-child-smiling-filipino-girl.jpg" />
<meta name="twitter:creator" content="@compassion" />

Worse case, an image like this is certainly better than the money bag: http://pool.biblepay.org/images/180180.png

Ideally, a custom image that fits the square and summarizes the goal of BiblePay would be better. An image that conveys Jesus call to help the poor.

494

Archived Proposals / Re: BLOOM Sustainable Farm to Feed Orphans - Uganda

« on: July 31, 2018, 10:43:58 AM »

Thank you for your response. It reminds me of Ben Franklin, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."  Please point me to web sites with further research. I can educate myself and hopefully use it as a way to counter others if this point is brought up. Prevention is a difficult area because you can't quantitatively say x number of children were saved from being orphaned, as opposed to helping orphans after the fact. I believe using the term "poor children" is better understood outside of the industry and is inclusive of orphans.

495

Archived Proposals / Re: BLOOM Sustainable Farm to Feed Orphans - Uganda

« on: July 30, 2018, 12:03:23 PM »

Is the farm a community project? This helps to lift the entire group (children included, but not exclusively?). I question whether the focus of helping poor children (in the charities supported thus far) may be diluted by supporting this specific project. I realize poor children need the help of adults to grow physically, emotionally, and spiritually... I just wonder if the focus of helping poor children is diluted by support this project as well. Thoughts?