Messages

1

Active Discussions / Re: TestNet - PODC 2.0 (Proof of Distributed Computing)

« on: Today at 01:43:48 pm »

Please see the help docs for the exec associate:  Please remove the word 'wcg' before sunk818.

I submitted a pull request to reflect the actual command you have to type when I run exec rac now


thanks.

2

Active Discussions / Re: TestNet - PODC 2.0 (Proof of Distributed Computing)

« on: Today at 11:04:01 am »

Please see the help docs for the exec associate:  Please remove the word 'wcg' before sunk818.

when I typed exec rac in debug console, it says to use wcg . I'll look for wiki docs, I guess?





09:01:41

exec rac




09:01:41

{
  "Command": "rac",
  "Error": "Sorry, you do not have a CPK.  First please create your CPK by typing 'exec cpk your_nickname'.  This adds your CPK to the chain.  Please wait 3 or more blocks after adding your CPK before you move on to the next step. ",
  "Step 1": "Log into your WCG account at 'worldcommunitygrid.org' with your WCG E-mail address and WCG password.",
  "Step 2": "Click Settings | My Profile.  Record your 'Username' and 'Verification Code' and your 'CPID' (Cross-Project-ID).",
  "Step 3": "From our RPC console, type, exec associate wcg your_username your_verification_code",
  "Step 4": "Wait for 5 blocks to pass.  Then type 'exec rac' again, and see if you are linked!  ",
  "Step 5": "Once you are linked you will receive daily rewards.  Please read about our minimum stake requirements per RAC here: wiki.biblepay.org/PODC"
}

3

Discussion and Suggestions / Social media login for forum

« on: November 10, 2019, 11:38:38 pm »

If we have a social media login feature for this forum, more people can communicate easily.


https://docs.oneall.com/plugins/guide/social-login-smf/

4

Active Discussions / Re: TestNet - PODC 2.0 (Proof of Distributed Computing)

« on: November 10, 2019, 10:15:01 pm »

20:12:23 exec associate wcg sunk818 verification_code
20:12:24 Unable to find wcg.  Please type exec rac to see helpful hints to proceed.  (code -1)

5

Active Discussions / Re: TestNet - PODC 2.0 (Proof of Distributed Computing)

« on: November 06, 2019, 04:23:00 pm »

no, does not help
still mining one by one block...

biblepay-qt --erasechain to start over


make sure biblepay.conf has gen=0 when you start.


Get peers and sync up to latest block height. You can make it gen=1 after you are synced to blockchain. If you mine blocks at block 0, you will never join peers on testnet since blockhash will not match.


this is only way I can get testnet to sync up. you will eventually find testnet peers.

6

Production Proposals / Re: BBP per RAC requirement for PODC2.0?

« on: November 03, 2019, 12:39:39 am »

yes, but keep in mind that botnet probably will be below 5000rac /computer... so it will be supercool for him then

I wonder if a botnet would bother to create unique cpid for each computer? It could be something lower like 1000 RAC but if you require BBP to stake right away, this makes it harder for people to join.

7

Production Proposals / Re: BiblePay Evolution 2.0 Changes for Future Growth

« on: November 01, 2019, 08:55:14 pm »

What does crypto need for mass adoption?
https://decrypt.co/10896/what-crypto-needs-for-mass-adoption-industry-leaders-explain


cryptocurrency is the currency of choice for illegal trades, and sending currencies across borders is enough to get large banks on board. But Guiterrez’ second criteria is far more difficult to satisfy: “Crypto needs to be easy and cost-competitive to get their hands on and use. The larger the problem crypto is solving for users, the more trouble they will be willing to go through, obviously with some limits.”

8

Production Proposals / Re: BBP per RAC requirement for PODC2.0?

« on: October 31, 2019, 08:43:19 am »

Do you think we could use an exponential function (i.e., not a static coefficient) in the calculation of the requirement?

Small crunchers would then have to stake very little for their RAC, while farmers would have to undertake serious investment.

If you're going to make PoDC the main GSC contract, I would consider not starting the exponential stake until after you go past a certain RAC like 5k RAC. So, from 1 RAC to 5,000 RAC no stake is required. Why do this? If you create zero barrier to entry, you will get more BBP members. That's also where zero (0) fee registration comes in. You should be able to participate in PoDC 2.0 with 0 BBP in your wallet.


Otherwise, you will need to do airdrop or faucet like last time to get people to BBP. That created a lot of support work and we're just repeating the same scenarios from PoDC 1.0 all over again. Let's learn from the previous pain points.

9

Production Proposals / Bounty for BBP participant Q&A, external miner hash rates, scripts, documentatio

« on: October 30, 2019, 07:08:05 pm »

I wanted to propose an ongoing selective bounty/tipping for various content to promote BiblePay members, wallet features, scripts to automate process, or web sites that are useful for BiblePay members.

17,500 BBP Q&A (member feature)
 2,000 BBP external miner hash rates. Bonus 1,000 BBP for picture of their rig.
 5,000 BBP scripts, documenting steps


Asking for 100,000 BBP as initial seed, then will ask to top up each month if funds are considered well spent by the community. I hope this provides value for BiblePay in terms of marketing, member growth, search engine visibility, word of mouth, content creation, etc.



The member Q&A will be a pre-selective process (finding members which I think may be a good fit).
External miner hash rates would be based on willing participants providing accurate info.
Scripts & documentation would also depend on quality, usefulness, etc.


I will post monthly updates here on how funds are spent.


I will also send bounty from the receive address that will be its own wallet and used only for bounty purposes. This will not be used for other campaigns (podc, pog, healing, etc).

10

Production Proposals / Re: BiblePay Evolution 2.0 Changes for Future Growth

« on: October 25, 2019, 10:46:41 am »

Sounds good, thanks for taking the time to reply in detail. I know you're a busy guy.

11

Production Proposals / Re: New Exchange - Coinsbit

« on: October 25, 2019, 10:39:25 am »

Togo just made us all aware that Coinsbit does not support US citizens.

Lets discuss what should we do, offer .10 btc for the listing, or cancel the deal until they offer services to US citizens?

Time is of the essence so that we can either vote this down, or change the terms;

Community, what should we do?

Not being able to serve USA is a pretty big deal killer IMO. SouthXchange is nice because it seems to be welcome person from anywhere.


I believe crex24 has been requested before but they do not serve USA nor Canada either.

12

Production Proposals / Re: BiblePay Evolution 2.0 Changes for Future Growth

« on: October 25, 2019, 12:30:32 am »

That's a good analysis of Lynx Rob. The remainder BBP after PoDC will not use ABN. In lieu of ABN, what are the alternatives? How can you implement a way that uses existing blockchain data to diversify the miners and further mitigate 51% attacks? Recall that in the coinbase transaction, miners specify their own address. This change will propagate up causing all the Merkle hashes to change ensuring that no two miners are hashing the same inputs. In this scenario, I'm not sure how you can game the last two hex digits for coinbase address and block hash. I'm not married to this idea -- I'm just saying without ABN, I'd like to see a blockchain based scheme (no oracle) that will diversify who mines the reward..


If nothing changes, then it'll be a few hardware whales that mine all the blocks and discourage new members from mining. Already, I see difficulty spiking. This person only mined 1 block a day when ABN was on. Now, s/he is 2nd next to pool.biblepay.org and mines over 10% of the blocks daily: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/bbp/extraction.dws?1725459.htm

13

Production Proposals / Re: BiblePay Evolution 2.0 Changes for Future Growth

« on: October 24, 2019, 04:49:19 pm »

You also have less predictable times between blocks when difficulty is higher. This is not good for perception. Is there a blockchain problem? Why is my transaction not confirming? Is my wallet okay? If you can keep difficulty low the time between blocks should be more predictable. That's a win-win there.

14

Production Proposals / Re: BiblePay Evolution 2.0 Changes for Future Growth

« on: October 24, 2019, 02:03:23 pm »

Matching the last hex digit (sha256 of receiving address and sha256 of block hash) means you only have a 6.25% chance (1 out of 16) even after submitting an acceptable nonce. This by design allows other miners to submit a candidate block too. The white paper mentions other rules involved, but matching the hash of receiver address and candidate block will spread the reward around a bit more than it does now. Certainly, CPK (PoG) and CPID (PoDC) is a better way to identify miners but it comes at the cost of anonymity and depending on centralization (CPK) or anonymity (CPID).


If you consider what is required for a miner to keep mining is the reward. Someone who mines 1 block a day will keep mining versus someone finding a block only every 14 days. Already you can see that with ABN off, only a smaller handful of miner get block. At least with 125k ABN, you had more diversity since high hash power was choked out by ABN. This 1/16 idea is like in that is diversifies who gets the block.


I realize you're going with PoDC which will take the bulk of rewards, but if the remainder goes to geokats or bbp41b, that is very discouraging to the other smaller miners.


Sources:


Code is here: https://github.com/getlynx/Lynx/blob/b0ccb859ee03ee89b18d1db72ec4d4a7f4fcff77/src/lynx_rules.cpp#L280


See page 21-22 http://cdn.getlynx.io/2019-03-17_Lynx_Whitepaper_v1.1.pdf


Is the last digit value found in the coinbase address (as a hash) different from the last digit value found in the candidate block hash? If yes, the candidate block is not confirmed and not propagated to peers.

15

Production Proposals / Re: BiblePay Evolution 2.0 Changes for Future Growth

« on: October 21, 2019, 05:48:39 pm »

- Lower ABN fees:  Although counter intuitive that with a rising diff, you would expect a *higher* abn, we actually want a higher diff (to make each currency unit more expensive), and we want a lower abn, to bring in as many users as possible.

I've been working on a graph of CPK miner. I can show you that 8 ppl are mining more than 33% of the blocks per day.


148 unique cpk. On average, only 20 CPK have gotten 3 blocks or more blocks per day.


If you want more miners (and keep them mining), more "luck" needs to be introduced into the mix. Hash power & a little a ABN can not be the sole determinants for mining a block. That's why I still feel matching hash of miner reward address to block hash will be more effective in recruiting miners and keeping miners with BiblePay. 1 in 16 chance to mine the block means another miner will get an opportunity to mine the block. This allows for block distribution to more miners and provides the positive feedback that single computer miners need. True decentralization of miners will be a big selling point (as opposed to Bitcoin, DASH, etc).