Bible Pay

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
61
Active Discussions / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving
« Last post by MIP on December 11, 2018, 12:36:28 pm »
I'm assuming the repository wont work for bionic? :)

Err:11 http://ppa.launchpad.net/dash.org/dash/ubuntu bionic Release
  404  Not Found [IP: 91.189.95.83 80]
Reading package lists... Done
E: The repository 'http://ppa.launchpad.net/dash.org/dash/ubuntu bionic Release' does not have a Release file.
N: Updating from such a repository can't be done securely, and is therefore disabled by default.
N: See apt-secure(8) manpage for repository creation and user configuration details.

We are not supposed to have any dependencies on dash.org. It must be some remnant left behind on the contrib/depends files. But this didn't show up on mainnet PPA, and nothing has changed about that on 1.1.6.3 from 1.1.6.1.

I'll check it.
62
Active Discussions / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving
« Last post by thesnat21 on December 11, 2018, 11:24:14 am »
Testnet packages ready

sudo add-apt-repository ppa:biblepay-official/testnet
sudo apt-get update

I'm assuming the repository wont work for bionic? :)

Err:11 http://ppa.launchpad.net/dash.org/dash/ubuntu bionic Release
  404  Not Found [IP: 91.189.95.83 80]
Reading package lists... Done
E: The repository 'http://ppa.launchpad.net/dash.org/dash/ubuntu bionic Release' does not have a Release file.
N: Updating from such a repository can't be done securely, and is therefore disabled by default.
N: See apt-secure(8) manpage for repository creation and user configuration details.

63
Active Discussions / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving
« Last post by Rob Andrews on December 11, 2018, 11:16:33 am »
I mean that hash is somewhat random and first legal tithe is ordered by hash. Code does not select for example youngest and smallest transaction to be used for tithe.
Well just to clarify this, the only element of randomness we have is the payment tier that a giver falls into.  If a user tithes, if the tithe is legal (within diff params) it most certainly goes in the pool (when we have no bugs in our code LOL), so there is no uncertainty there - no hash - no ordering - etc.

However the payment tier your tithe ends up in is absolutely uncertain.  No once can predict what tier your tithe_weight will end up in.

Since we pay 12 blocks per 205 it should smooth it out very quickly (as far as even payments) - as long as tiers are pretty packed etc.

Ill take a look at those things in the prior post today and update asap.

64
Active Discussions / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving
« Last post by Rob Andrews on December 11, 2018, 11:11:41 am »
They are send from GUI with version 1163.
I did not see any error messages until I had no more aged coins. Until that I was able to send as many times as I wanted. I cannot recall seeing minimum diff in red.
I just reproduced this behavior and I can pump my tithes up in a very short time.


OK good to know.  So as of yesterday, I logged a couple things that could be bugs (the tithes not entering - sometimes - even though you didnt receive an error in the gui) and another one:  I believe our version of dash has a limited memory of utxo age; and I have a suspicion that some nodes are seeing a different memory utxo set - this is all really technical so what I need to do for the next version is create our own BBP map of these, so there is no chance of this "difference" and I believe this will also kill the possibility of a tithe not entering when it meets the parameters.  (On a side note I plan on adding a transaction fee to donations that increases by 1 bbp per donation - and giving that to the miner - I think this would stave off single block tithe attacks.  Although I do want to clarify to everyone, a legal tithe is a legal tithe, so dont get the idea that when one hogs a block they are doing something bad - if the coins are aged its legal - what Im trying to do is discourage it and make it financially unfeasible for someone to want to hog a single block and raise diff up for everyone at once by a massive amount).


Just to clarify on the fee:  It makes no difference what address or wallet # you tithe from, it would be like this:  Miner checks global memory pool, how many tithes on bbp network in this block?  If < 10, no extra fee to tithe.  If > 10, the tithe fee is 1 bbp for tithe #11, 2 bbp for tithe #12, ... etc.  Next block we start over at 0 again.  Also the tithing fees goes to the reaper.   The giver loses the tx fee.  This discourages tithe attacks by one "hog".



65
Active Discussions / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving
« Last post by Rob Andrews on December 11, 2018, 11:07:21 am »
I know we have a small sampling size, but this still seems odd, how are we ending up duplicating tiers so easily?

Also, i'm curious what happens when a tier is empty  the rewards just go to the miner?

"0": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "1": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "2": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "3": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "4": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "5": "Count: 2, Total: 4054.0000",
  "6": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "7": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "8": "Count: 2, Total: 1450.0000",
  "9": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "10": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "11": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "12": "Count: 2, Total: 3567.0000",
  "13": "Count: 1, Total: 869.0000",
  "14": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "15": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",

When a tier is empty it pays 100% to the miner.  Not a problem in prod - we would easily fill up the tiers.

The clashing of tiers is not a problem; it is correct - the algorithm does not have a bug in it.

66
Active Discussions / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving
« Last post by Rob Andrews on December 11, 2018, 11:05:15 am »
In exec pogpool I see BBP address twice. Is there a reason for this?

Is nickname required? Why is it there?

Yes, the address is the Key, so it listed once as the JSON key, then the rest of the row has all kinds of things in it.  This isnt really intended for prod, as I think prod would have 500 rows of data, so this is temporary.

The nickname is optional.  Its there so you can see your tithes in testnet.  I recommend using it.

For prod we can use it for the leaderboard.

67
Production Proposals / Re: New Exchange Fund (recoup fronted BTC December 2018)
« Last post by Rob Andrews on December 11, 2018, 10:51:00 am »
Great job Jaap, thanks for completing the coinexchange mission and for making a great web site.

68
Active Discussions / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving
« Last post by sunk818 on December 11, 2018, 10:50:02 am »
In exec pogpool I see BBP address twice. Is there a reason for this?

Is nickname required? Why is it there?
69
Active Discussions / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving
« Last post by mint on December 11, 2018, 07:11:10 am »
I know we have a small sampling size, but this still seems odd, how are we ending up duplicating tiers so easily?

Also, i'm curious what happens when a tier is empty  the rewards just go to the miner?

"0": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "1": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "2": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "3": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "4": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "5": "Count: 2, Total: 4054.0000",
  "6": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "7": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "8": "Count: 2, Total: 1450.0000",
  "9": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "10": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "11": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "12": "Count: 2, Total: 3567.0000",
  "13": "Count: 1, Total: 869.0000",
  "14": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "15": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",

I wonder this duplicate too. There is small bias in each 205 block window, but it is travelling so it does not matter on long run.
There has been mention that empty blocks goes to miner totally,
 
70
Active Discussions / Re: Testnet - Test Proof of Giving
« Last post by thesnat21 on December 11, 2018, 06:19:05 am »
I know we have a small sampling size, but this still seems odd, how are we ending up duplicating tiers so easily?

Also, i'm curious what happens when a tier is empty  the rewards just go to the miner?

"0": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "1": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "2": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "3": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "4": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "5": "Count: 2, Total: 4054.0000",
  "6": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "7": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "8": "Count: 2, Total: 1450.0000",
  "9": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "10": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "11": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "12": "Count: 2, Total: 3567.0000",
  "13": "Count: 1, Total: 869.0000",
  "14": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
  "15": "Count: 0, Total: 0.0000",
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10