Messages

4066

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: November 11, 2017, 09:33:39 AM »

all tutorials doesnt working

0.    installed linux wallet
1.  ./biblepayd -testnet -daemon
2.  ./biblepay-cli -testnet getinfo  if block readed then we can start compilation
3.  ./biblepay-cli -testnet masternode genkey   got it
4.  ./biblepay-cli -testnet getaccountaddress TEST got it
5.  i send 500k from testnet wallet to masternode wallet got it.... i see 500k in da MN wallet and its confirmed 7/7
6.  ./biblepay-cli -testnet masternode outputs  got outputs
7.  im opened masternode.config in tesnet3 folder and addded POKUS IP:40001 93W87RB7sVxu72souCWdHGpTWYFFF84oyRe81hzZcHEzWGdogkR 7b3873de1969b087f63cd287c64694b14250aecf7779c67f68691533a6616f3c 1

7.5   ./biblepay-cli -testnet mnsync status   ASSETID:999   999 its OK

8.   now on testnet wallet in folder biblapaycore im opened config file and added this

testnet=1
rpcuser=hokuspokus
rpcpassword=hokuspokus123
rpcallowip=127.0.0.1
listen=0
server=1
daemon=1
logtimestamps=1
maxconnections=256

Saved it, closed and restarted testnet wallet  WORK

9.on linux the SANCTUARY WALLET STOPED wallet and open biblepay.conf and added this

rpcuser=hokuspokus
rpcpassword=hokuspokus123
rpcallowip=127.0.0.1
listen=1
server=1
daemon=1
logtimestamps=1
externalip=IP:40001
maxconnections=256
masternode=1
masternodeprivkey=93W87RB7sVxu72souCWdHGpTWYFFF84oyRe81hzZcHEzWGdogkR

saved config and run masternode-linux-wallet again


10. in controller windows wallet opened debug win and write this command masternode start-alias POKUS







where is bug on my side? any help guys?

I removed your swear comment.
Please dont swear here. 


Try going to the controller wallet and copy your txid of your collateral to the clipboard, and type

getrawtransaction tx_id_of_collateral 1

Note how nothing comes back.  That means you have no collateral set up for the masternode.

4067

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Biblepay Superblock Final Allocation Breakdown Modification Poll

« on: November 06, 2017, 06:51:58 AM »

So here are my feelings on the whole thing.

Starting with where we are now and what I feel was conveyed to the investors before this poll:

The code contains a promise to transition from 10% via Tithing blocks to 10% for *Charity* via the budget, and 5% for IT.  I added the 5% IT expense in the mix 45 days ago based on experience, knowing that there is a real risk of not succeeding for the very long term without it.  So we know how we got here.  And I think those are good decisions.

I agree, Im not completely sold on Pay To Preach either, or spending any of the possible 2.5% allocation from that. 

However, Im calling Pay To Preach P2P as in Social Media Peer to Peer blockchain reward technology.  This is for absolutely anything that makes us great not just pay to preach.  I wanted to convey that I feel that is what that sliver of the vote is for.

Now Im not against combining the actual Allocation amounts for P2P and PR into one allocation, thats not it.  The poll is very specific because Im trying to sell something very specific to the community.  This is because I want this coin to have the utmost integrity to the investor.  How would you feel if you just invested $25k of someones retirement account one month ago and found out the lead dev was going to add a 5% allocation for Unknown expenses?  Not very good.  Thats why these are labeled.  There is another reason to be specific.  I stated on the other forum that I dont think we should Ever spend $1 from the Charity fund for IT or PR.  We should always spend it on the orphans or on charity.  Someday an exchange will ask us for $10,000 to go live - and we should NOT spend that cash out of the Charity budget for going live on an exchange.  Lets suffer on one.  So, in that respect its important to designate that we have a 10% budget allocation for CHARITY.  Not for this or that or something random.  And we have a 0-5% budget for IT.  I dont want to set a precedent where we deliberately try to fill up the IT budget with PR because we have money available in it.  I would rather set the precedent that we have UP TO $20,000 this superblock for IT related expenses, and have our IT department and Ops search and find the most bang for the IT buck.  (Things like Debit cards for biblepay, Zinc API, ongoing monthly payments to the partnerships, Lightning Network, etc).  Those are all IT related expenses.   E-Commerce integration.  Etc.

However, I will bend on combining P2P with PR if that is what the community wants.  I agree that since Dash did not know what they would be doing, they created a general fund for things like ATMs and anything that would popularize the coin.  Thats because they were pioneering an expense system at the time to create the first superblock.  We have more details now.

I wouldnt go as far as making the assumption that just because Dash did something this way, its the best way.  We are a DCO, they are not.  So we are a different animal.  There are things about Dash that are great, that we can model off of.  We are not out to be someones clone.  The differences that should shine through are:
- Effective Charity expenses, making a huge impact in the world
- A Christian community base (IE the light of the world)
- Some brand new technologies that other coins want to copy from US
  and this includes new novel processes that WE create

Regarding burning, burning is actually when you create a burn address and remove money from the money supply by spending it there.  In our case, I think if the community votes for a 5% addl allocation, and it is decided that allocation will not be spent, then what happens is very similar to a burn, because the money is never actually minted.  The block payments are less, but if the budget does not contain the item the money is never spent.  So yes, imo, I like that more than not having the flexibility to built the feature, or spend the PR, or get listed on exchange XYZ.  I believe we have set a precedent where we are frugal.  I dont want to change that one bit. 

4068

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: November 04, 2017, 02:35:36 PM »

 
So I did a test where my controller win wallet is receiving the subsidy for cold sanctuary #1.  I took the windows wallet offline for 30 hours to see if my sanctuary payments were sent by other nodes, and when I came back online sure enough the payments are coming in.  So that tells me we are 98% finished with the actual sanctuary mechanism.

I just created Oct recurring orphan expenses proposal - please vote on it after about an hour it should be available for voting (it has to send itself into the network, and that requires that it sends collateral, then waits 6 blocks, then creates the proposal object, then sends it, etc- the pool does all this for you right now).

Btw, the way I was thinking that pay to preach might work is (that is if P2P is approved in the budget), we create a pool receiving address for P2P, we add a proposal for P2P for say 1Q 2018, when approved, the payment is sent to the pool P2P key.  Then we give the pool the ability to reward "priests" who are on the schedule with subsidies after a successful sermon.  So basically, Priests register on the pool, we set up a biweekly sermon in a chatroom, participants come in, the priest preaches to the biblepay group, then the pool releases the payment after the sermon is over.  We keep doing that until the funds are exhausted, and do not vote on a new P2P campaign until exhausted.  We can add "Priests" and "Sermons" objects to the pool so we can see, and we can add a metric for the P2P balance.

4069

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: Biblepay Superblock Final Allocation Breakdown Modification Poll

« on: November 03, 2017, 12:48:17 PM »

I would feel that the PR budget should be part of the IT 5%.  My thought is 5% is likely to be more than IT needs on a regular basis (as over the long haul, there shouldn't be a lot of new features introduced to a mature coin) and in a lot of ways good IT is good PR.

I feel that 5% possibly will be barely enough funds (maybe not enough), and you severely discount the required IT maintenance expenses (even without considering an elaborate array of new features).

First, let me say that if we dont have IT expenses the whole coin risks dying (because there is a chance that if no one is being paid to maintain the coin everyone walks away) and I really dont want that to happen.  (Thats because the coin cannot live without an active dev.  There are mission critical issues that will arise over the next year that make or break the coin).

The other thing that people are obviously extremely shortsighted about are security commits and breaking changes.  If you want to be a piece of crap coin, where you dont take security seriously, then you dont need to worry about this.  Software TCO is 20% for the creation and 80% maintenance.  Here are two examples:  We are live 1 year, and 11 months in a new version of BEAST is in the wild.  This requires a patch in OpenSSL.  And, bitcoin merges a patch for SegWit that becomes the industry standard (sort of like JSON).  Lets say SegWit is not something you can just merge the class in and go live.  Lets say it requires an expert to integrate the constants and understand biblepay.  So thats $10000 right there.    Then we have testnet and the release schedule.  Since BiblePay went live there are probably already 40 bitcoin commits already that our devs have a backlog to potentially merge in.

Anyway, I feel that it is barely enough and we need it, and if we do not spend it, then it will just increase BBPs value because more money will stay in the coinbase which is a good thing.   Its better to error on the safe side than risk creating a timebomb that might die off for everyone.

We need 5 full time developers to make it in the top 50.  Thats going to cost us $50 an hour for good developers- if we compensate them.  Here is a good point for argument sake.  5 full time devs is over 500 hours of development per month.  I stipulate that we need at least 500 per month - forever.  Im already putting in 120 of them now for free.  So lets tackle that one, if you think we need less than 500 per month.

4070

TestNet Discussion Archive / Biblepay Superblock Final Allocation Breakdown Modification Poll

« on: November 03, 2017, 11:37:28 AM »

All,

Around Christmastime, we will be going live with Sanctuaries.  At that time, the automatic 10% tithing block (for our Orphans) stops, BUT, with our superblocks and sanctuaries, we will continue to vote to fund the budget to pay for the orphans. 

The current breakdown for each Biblepay block is as follows: (With each block paying between 5000 and 20000 BBP, depending on network Difficulty and the deflation level):

5% is allocated from each block for IT expenses (such as payroll, web hosting fees, partner integration expenses etc).
10% is allocated from each block for Charity (this is where the budget will come from to pay for Compassion for example).

We currently do not have a budget for PR (public relations campaigns) or for P2P features (Features such as orphan letter writing, Pay To Preach, Pay to be a Priest, FAQ writers, Social Media functions, etc).

Since I personally do not wish to change the allocation breakdown now for integrity reasons, I will not make any adjustments at this point to the permanent breakdown. 

     However, with all of the recent good ideas that have been floating around, such as rewarding members for being Discipleship Leaders, or Pay for Priesting, or Pay for Orphan writing fees, etc, and with the positive impact of PR campaigns, I do not wish for us to miss the opportunity to vote  for the possible inclusion of PR budgets or P2P budgets permanently in our superblock reward ecosystem.

Hence the reason we are brought here for the poll.

The poll runs for 31 days (Ending 12-4-2017).

Please vote on potentially changing the superblock budget to include PR and/or P2P expenses on a regular basis.

 If the community decides to include a PR budget or a P2P budget, we will make the necessary adjustments in the Christmas Sanctuary mandatory release, and they will become a permanent part of BIblePay.

Thank you for participating!

4071

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: November 03, 2017, 09:41:29 AM »

Thanks guys, well we seem to be relatively stable now in testnet.

We really need to test this stuff thoroughly - as the last thing we need is go live at Christmas and find something didnt work as intended.

Has anyone decided to test blockchain news?

As far as f8000 goes, lets share some info on it.  Can we please test to see if the HPS in the miner is now more consistent across OS flavors and bitness, and prevents multiple copies from exploiting any increase? 

Here is my hashps using f8000:
Windows 64 bit - 6 core desktop : 4000 hps
Debian 64 bit - 1 core $10 per month vultr vm: 1000 hps

We should also circle back around, and have someone create a real budget item (please create one below 30000 bbp since superblocks in testnet are only 74000 bbp).  Create a thread for it also please.   Lets make one that we all will vote yes on?  I just want to see if this works for someone other than me.

4072

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: November 01, 2017, 09:43:46 AM »

Looks like our masternodes are coming back online now; the list is re-filling.  Things looking a lot better.  Ill wait for your opinions.

4073

Archived Proposals / Re: New Logo Contest

« on: November 01, 2017, 09:40:56 AM »

Hows it going, whats he doing for us next?

4074

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: November 01, 2017, 09:22:03 AM »

I was able to get further on one linux node even though this did not work this morning the environment has changed:

stop the node
cd testnet3
rm blocks -R
rm chainstate -R
rm *.dat (except wallet.dat)
restart

Then after the next block came in After resyncing, mnsync status went to 999, and I was able to finally start one hot masternode.

Now I am able to mine on the hot masternode in linux.

4075

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: November 01, 2017, 09:15:01 AM »

im again stuck with sync 

Ive got a few pieces of info now.

Overall things are looking a little better, as I think about 80% have synced to the right block but we seem to have fractured the masternode network and that part of it will need tackled next, but first we need to get over one more hump.

The miner will not run unless the miner thinks the blockchain is synced.
We are having an issue where the wallet thinks its not synced.  If you type mnsync status, see the row that says IsBlockChainSynced?  That prevents the miner from running.
The reason I can mine on a couple nodes, is because those are not masternodes, and the connected peers are synced.

The other problem we are having is you can not broadcast a masternode to be started unless its mnsync status reaches 999.  It cant reach 999 unless its chain is synced.  Its chain cant sync in the current environment. 

You can set masternode=0 if you want, and go down a level and try to get your chain synced first.  (Synced not only to the tip but synced with mnsync status 999).

Im working on that next on my end; Im taking the nodes that arents synced and rebuilding the chain from 0.

4076

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: November 01, 2017, 08:01:34 AM »

no result with mining:
may be this help you where is bug

Yes, that helps.  I think the code is OK though.  I see a few guys just upgraded.  Let me see if I can start a hot sanctuary.

Im hoping we can all get synced and rebootstrapped today, and hopefully we dont need any code changes.

Let me do some testing.

4077

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: October 31, 2017, 03:37:42 PM »

Robert,nice synced: but can i mining on testnet? cos doesnt working
i set in my config this:

testnet=1
genproclimit=24
gen=1

thanks for help

Something does appear to be hanging - but I dont see a problem with the code.  It could be the remaining nodes who havent upgraded yet.  I see that you and I are the only ones that upgraded (I have 3 nodes).

Anyway, I would recommend starting at threadlimit 3 with the new algorithm.  I can mine on 2 of my boxes.  Try 'setgenerate true 3' to see if you get any hashps in getmininginfo.

4078

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: October 31, 2017, 11:30:28 AM »

Ok Windows is out for download (1.0.5.4) please delete all your .dat files including mnpayments.dat and mncache.dat, resync your chain, upgrade, and if you have a masternode, set masternode=0 before resyncing then back to masternode=1 after syncing then we should all be able to bootstrap our sanctuaries again.

4079

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: October 30, 2017, 12:19:13 PM »

Alright 1.0.5.4 is out there, please upgrade.  Windows is still compiling.

Note that after we all get together with 1054, we have a little work to do on the masternodes.  Part o the reason we couldnt sync is some have banned each other and whats really exact with MNs, is they have an iterative payment schedule depending on who was paid last.  Meaning that if one node knows of A&B, and another B&C, those schedules will not agree.  So please delete your peers.dat, banlist.dat, mncache.dat, and blocks and chainstate and database and resync, we will need to re-seed the mncache data after we all upgrade.

PS Temples have been removed.  You can still have a 10 MM sanctuary right now, but it will not pay you any more than the 500k sanctuary so it is of no benefit. 

4080

TestNet Discussion Archive / Re: BIBLEPAY - TESTNET THREAD - TESTING SANCTUARIES FOR GO LIVE AT CHRISTMAS

« on: October 30, 2017, 11:36:22 AM »

All,

I have discovered one issue with Temples related to security that I dont really like, and although we could probably work through it, I think at this point it would be stronger for us to roll back the temples out of the code and cancel them, and consider other options such as paying for the specific service through a budget in the future.

Sorry for the inconvenience guys, but I think this will be more straightforward.  Please hold off on testing until the new version is available.