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 - Rob Andrews

Pages: 1 ... 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 [134] 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 ... 157
1996
I think the best solution is what I tried to convey to you on the reddit  and what 616westwarmoth may have worded better "I'd be more in favor of you charging a fair price for the items and not needing outside compensation."

Also, once your work is done on an item, Zazzle takes care of everything for you so there's no additional work needed for that product and you just get a "royalty" on the BiblePay logo.

Finally, I think the most important point is that it could then set a precedent. Should we pay anyone opening a BiblePay shop on Zazzle, Amazon, Etsy, etc? I can just see how it can be abused and I personally don't think it is a good idea; I think the potential benefits for BiblePay are also questionable.


I think Alex is right, its the precedent we are setting.

If one wants to be an entrepreneur, then they should not ask for starter funds, unless you want to donate all the profits to the orphan fund in the future.

I however like the store overall, but feel we need to kill what I said above in order to have the store.  We shouldnt have anything to do with beer steins, wine mugs, party hats, or beer pong tables, and we should make Jesus look professional, muscular, the King of Kings (and not like hes condoning our sinner behavior down here just for using the BBP currency).

EDIT:  The compassionate side of me says, that if Alt agrees to take the bad stuff out - and we all agree its good for PR for the long term, then I would potentially vote on the proposal just to pay him for the time in starting the store - but in the name of Seed/Starter PR funds.  If he disagrees with all this and feels he is not setting a bad precedent then I would vote No.


1997
So Im thinking about worst case scenario if we raise the magnitude of the Proof-of-loyalty equation.

Right now, it gives one who controls 1% of the money supply the ability to stake approx. once per day.
Its doing this by giving you a 90% level of the hashing required to solve the block (relative to the difficulty at the time).
Meaning that we are probably going to raise the diff in prod by about 50%.

However what I am seeing is that most normal users who leave the stake setting at 10%, will generally see a POL influence of 0.

Im considering raising the influence level 10*.  What I believe this will do is temporarily raise the diff for everyone in prod while all the stakers stake, then, it will start to normalize.  And then that would mean throughout the day, those with lower balances would actually stake with an influence of 2-3%.

I think that ecosystem is healther for the future- and for the propensity to stake on a jamaican cell phone.


Any disagreements to doing this in the next version?

The plan would be to add a constant to the algorithm: number of stakes per day, and basically set it to 10 and re-test.

And, of course I welcome any other recommendations for the next version for testnet.


Btw, if anyone wants to test on additional nodes side by side your prod node if it is a masternode type this:

./biblepay-qt -testnet -masternode=0 -rpcport=40000

That will let you boot side by side your masternode in prod.


1998
Archived Proposals / Re: C++ Blockchain Developer Recruiting
« on: January 26, 2018, 09:26:26 AM »
Ive received about 35 candidates, approximately 80% were underqualified and didnt speak English and primarily looking for a day job and needed funding immediately by the hour.

Out of the remaining 7 candidates, 5 were good but not familiar with blockchain, and I didnt rule them out.  I emailed back and forth and they seemed to not really be into the BiblePay grass roots effort, they just wanted to work hourly.

The two that stuck however, Fabrice and Subrato, seemed to be experts in their field.  Fabrice has his own c++ product, but didnt know blockchain but seemed to be a genius.  He wanted $70 an hour and when I told him $35 to start, he asked his wife and then turned down the project.

Subrato is reviewing the code.
Unfortuntely we have had no Blockchain Devs approach us yet.  In my other community, all 7 of those devs randomly stopped by and posting github commits.  I think eventually we will have that, but we are new.

So Im still optimistic that with Togos help we will continue the interviewing process.


1999
I can see both sides of the argument, Alex makes a good point, 616 makes a good point about choosing to be a free service or not (otherwise its a conflict of interest).  And I guess yet another way to look at it is: If we pay for this proposal in the sense that it is for the startup costs for graphics design, but his profit pays for his stores eternal existence in the future (as long as he doesnt Gouge users) well I guess that is yet another way.

I personally think the store itself is a good addition out in the world at large, but I strongly feel we should delete a few of the items, as I think they have a negative impact on our brand:

Kill:
- Beer Pong Table
- Party Hat
- Keyboard looks like a toy and has bad graphics


Strong Fix:
- The Jesus Value quality shirt with Jesus' thumbs up:  This is not very good looking with Jesus posing as a cartoon character, and I think he looks like a Genie or something- but this particular shirt could be very, very nice with one that is professional
- Use a different image for the womans leggings

Add:
- Hell is Real, somehow tie to BBP

Fix:
- Football Jersey could have a better design, I almost ordered this but I dont like how the logo floats up in the chest, not sure how to fix it, but that caused me to buy the standard Tshirt instead

Good luck, and thank you for your contributions!


2000
Archived Proposals / New Exchange Proposal - Add new Biblepay Exchange
« on: January 25, 2018, 06:46:01 PM »
Zthomasz, Tom, has spearheaded the initiative to get us listed on a new exchange, possibly Yobit, SouthXchange, or NEXT, or one of the top 50 bitcoin exchanges.

Yobit has a policy where they will list a new coin for .10BTC within 7 days - but we have since discovered they are NOT honoring this agreement.



Tom has started a campaign that accepts USD funds for a new exchange here:
New Exchange Fee Fund Link:

https://activara.net/yobit/


Please post here if you would like to donate in BBP, post the amount so we can keep track of how much we raised.


2001
I just fired up testnet (1.0.8.6 on Windows), and in the wallet I see an old transaction which is unconfirmed now and the wallet shows 0 available balance (look at the pic in the attachment). TX ID: 4eb9ab75a914da64afdbe7c79c5118bdd07c76a2d69a9c8f6151058fd4782172

My latest block is 6120 and this is its hash: 1079b5b08ef1719c066856a65b7401c8104f46bbd9d12727bee556c8cc5874cc

Btw, I have 5 active connections and I see blocks are being mined, it's not stuck. So am I on a fork or something else?

Nope you are on the right chain; the balance is 0 because we erased the chain.
Sweet, you are synced.

Whats your address Ill send you some?

EDIT: To remove your orphaned transactions, just restart with -zapwallettxes


2002
Are we all still on the same chain, please everyone check:


08:14:27

getblockhash 5920


08:14:27

662a54eefc26dea8333f8758c70551116b03c025afa1d07c32c0497447a752fe




2003
87 its me and my POS working perfect now

stakebalance will be raise or?  my stake balance falling


"StakeBalance": 15696
"StakeBalance": 9372


Stakebalance drops after you stake a POL block (run the ./biblepay-qt -testnet gui version to see the tx list), then it slowly rises as coin-age accrues again.

If you want to see the effect better, set your polpercentage=0, restart, then watch it rise, then go back and set it to =100 then watch it get hammered down.


Stakebalance is just your mature stakeable coins with > 24 hours of coin-age.


2004
Are we on the same chain:


19:24:18

getblockhash 4437


19:24:18

5f4a1003c7fff57dbb52bd774a2ecdec696755ba5bf0a0b382f9c2245e98a8bf


Btw, if anyone cant sync up to 4437, I pushed an optional linux upgrade (1084c) out that grandfathers the testnet client up to block 4437.

Windows unfortunately is hosed for tonight (unless you already synced past 4400 then you are OK).


2005

1.0.8.4-Leisure for Prod
Mandatory for TestNet
Mandatory for Pool Miners to upgrade before block 27500

Production:
- Enhanced pool protocol required for submitting pool solutions (goes live on block 27500)

Test:
- Money Supply estimate fixed to include sanctuaries
- POL StakeMiner verbose errors
- More granular POL weight
- 16 minute late block threshhold (for future 7 min blocks in prod)
- Fix for superblock budget amount to be based on 1.5 Diff






2006

 why proof of loyalty weight dropped   from 153108 to 131920 ??

  "StakeBalance": 605039  didnt change .


Code: [Select]
09:43:26
  "proof_of_loyalty_target_percentage": 0.3,
  "proof_of_loyalty_weight": 153108,
  "proof_of_loyalty_influence_percentage": 0,
  "proof_of_loyalty_errors": ""
}


10:27:01

getmininginfo


10:27:01
  "proof_of_loyalty_target_percentage": 0.3,
  "proof_of_loyalty_weight": 131920,
  "proof_of_loyalty_influence_percentage": 0,
  "proof_of_loyalty_errors": ""
}


10:27:11

exec stakebalance


10:27:11

{
  "Command": "stakebalance",
  "StakeBalance": 605039
}


Weight = coin_age * amount.


If you look at your last POL block, using showblock blocknumber, you can then read the internal characteristics of the age and the amount.



2007
Jaap,

I thought about it and maybe your right- I think the issue is exec stakebalance shows coins over 24 hours old, but the stakeminer requires 202 confirms + over 24 hour old.

Let me adjust exec stakebalance, and the error message to be clear when user has no coins to stake.  That wont pollute anything and it will make it clearer.


Disregard most of what I said except the part the reveals the issue.

Thanks for pointing out the problem.



2008
Rob ,  do you need test wallets running  for now or we can shut them down until the next  test build ?


my current status :

exec stakebalance
{
  "Command": "stakebalance",
  "StakeBalance": 605039
}


  "proof_of_loyalty_target_percentage": 0.3,
  "proof_of_loyalty_weight": 46178,
  "proof_of_loyalty_influence_percentage": 0,




I would go ahead and review how many POLs you got but then just shut it down.

Ive got the new version about 95% ready, but I need to finalize a pool feature to address the naysayers in prod with that, then release it all at the same time.  The ETA is before the end of the day today.

Thanks for testing!


2009
My staking seems to be buggy again:

Code: [Select]
"Command": "stakebalance",
  "StakeBalance": 477233

Code: [Select]
{
  "walletversion": 61000,
  "balance": 477233.94799278,
  "retirement_account_balance": 23732,
  "unconfirmed_balance": 0.00000000,
  "immature_balance": 33875.89999999,
  "txcount": 4447,
  "keypoololdest": 1508425662,
  "keypoolsize": 1001,
  "keys_left": 1000,
  "paytxfee": 0.00000000
}

Code: [Select]
"blocks": 3796,
  "currentblocksize": 1000,
  "currentblocktx": 0,
  "difficulty": 1.077559275214575,
  "errors": "",
  "genproclimit": 1,
  "networkhashps": 594220480.0499583,
  "hashps": 139.3632057089721,
  "minerstarttime": "01-21-2018 20:10:06",
  "ratio": 1,
  "hc1": 18143777,
  "bhc2": 31148577,
  "hashcounter": 18143777,
  "competetive_mining": true,
  "competetivemining_hash_counter": 17091120,
  "global_competetive_mining_tithe": 1246,
  "competetive_mining_ratio": 0,
  "pooledtx": 0,
  "testnet": true,
  "chain": "test",
  "biblepay-generate": true,
  "poolinfo1": "",
  "poolinfo2": "",
  "poolinfo3": "",
  "miningpulse": 3859,
  "poolmining": false,
  "pool_url": "",
  "poolmining_use_ssl": false,
  "proof_of_loyalty_target_percentage": 0.3,
  "proof_of_loyalty_weight": 0,
  "proof_of_loyalty_influence_percentage": 0,
  "proof_of_loyalty_errors": "INSUFFICIENT FUNDS, ENSURE WALLET IS UNLOCKED"


Its not really buggy though, well, let me explain the logic.  Im apprehensive about taking the message out "insufficient funds ensure wallet is unlocked", because we are going to have people out there with encrypted locked wallets.  Thats going to at least cause them to try to unlock the wallet for 900,000 seconds and attempt to stake.  Thats a different subject.

Your client attempts to stake 30% of your coin-age.  When it finds that percent of your wallet, 140,000 BBP over 202 confirms old, it then goes through and clears the error and makes a POL transaction inside the block. 

So its just basically trying once every minute to do that, and reporting the insufficient funds error.  I dont know Im sure we can make that a little clearer but I also dont want to pollute the code.

So technically its working as soon as it has enough age.  If you go through your 24 hour history you will probably find one POL every so many hours.

Not sure if you all are using the biblepay-qt wallet for this, but its easier to see the tx list with POL in QT.  In the next version I do label the listtransactions with POL.


2010
So Im going through the punchlist, checking to make sure I have everything for the next testnet release:

Money supply to take Locked coins from Sancs into account (making POL easier)
Remove decimal formatting problem in Tx List
Make POL boost more granular (IE not jump from 2% to 5%)
Make 16 min late block threshhold (to move us from 10 min to 7 min block targets)
Ensure POL age is correct to not ddos each other
Add ability to see POL in listtransactions for the daemon
Superblock budget based on a 1.5 diff (in contrast to 750,000 diff)



I was going to add a feature to diagnose POL inability to stake and then I realized, in coin control you can already see how old all of your inputs are.  This makes it easy enough for a 3 year old to do it.  Just look at your inputs and make sure they are over 24 hours old.  Then do an exec stakebalance.  I dont want to pollute the code base for something so simple. 

Anything else we need in this next release?



Pages: 1 ... 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 [134] 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 ... 157