BIBLEPAY -TESTNET TESTING THREAD-Proof-Of-Distributed-Computing(Cancer Research)

[Rob Andrews]

Ok so my MN in prod has been on latest version for 12 hours. I just got a payment. But looks like blockchain is divided because I see payment on Togo's block explorer but not Alex's. Also block numbers are different. Anyway main point is that we seem to be confirming transactions. I now have stakebalance!

Code Select Expand

"Command": "stakebalance",
  "StakeBalance": 110000

In my config file I have

so should be using over 50% of my 110k stake...

But!!!!

exec getboincinfo

My UTXO is only 25. Should be 100, correct?

We are moving in the right direction!
By the way, the 33400 block number is the one on the old version? Then we are only hours away!

It could be at the time, the exec stakebalance was low (due to the issue where we cant see that our chain depth is increasing (because our prior utxo confirmation height is so miniscule).

[Rob Andrews]

I would say that bot is already out of the "official" PoDC chain because we are getting our own confirmations (finally) and bot is 30 blocks ahead on its own chain. It can go on like that forever.

If bot tries to upgrade and hook to the "official" PoDC chain, he will mine by PoW until 33400 is reached (not likely as we are pretty close now).

I think the botnet was winning through 80% of the night, then we hosed them up for about 10 blocks around 5AM US time, now they appear to be hosing us up again.  (90% of my tx from last night were confirmed, but the PODC sent a few hours ago wont confirm).  I think we are going to be OK though in the long run!

[T-Mike]

You can also just go to dos prompt and type:

cd c:\program files\biblepaycore
biblepay-qt -zapwallettxes=1

Etc.

Thank, yup that's what I did.

[Rob Andrews]

The active chain is always the longest chain.  Somebody was smart and saw the only thing preventing upgraded node from connecting to old nodes was to check the version number (which can be changed easily).

The "old chain" was the longest/chain with the most work so it became the active chains. Upgraded nodes are now on that chain or stuck depending on circumstances.

On top of that, I haven't been following PoDC much I guess PoBH seems to still be accepted by "upgraded" nodes so they're accepting these blocks.

Not correct - the active chain is the chain with the most chain-work that has not violated any business logic rules.

Thats why the POBH chain (shorter) was the official chain for a while. 

[Rob Andrews]

The protocol version is just a number. It can't really be enforced.

Yes, it can be enforced.  If I enabled my switch to reject blocks from prior versions, it would have been enforced.  We also could have enforced the block version in a hard fashion.

As far as the botnet definition goes, let me clarify it for you:
A botnet in Biblepay is a POW mining organization that is producing more than 51% of the hashpower on the network and refuses to upgrade the client in a timely manner.

Now there is no "confusion" about the terminology here.

[Rob Andrews]

As you can see from you own quote of my post, I did say with the most work.

Not correct - you said in two places on the prior page the active chain is always the Longest Chain.

"Looks like somebody was "smart" and connected to an upgraded node from the "other chain". Since it's the same protocol but is/was/has the longest chain, the upgraded nodes now took all these blocks in or may be stuck I guess depending on your situation."

I'm clarifying its Not the longest chain.  Its the chain with the most chain-work.

[T-Mike]

canopus - Today at 10:07 AM
HEALTH NODES
addnode "54.37.156.244" "add"
addnode "139.99.101.222" "add"
addnode "47.93.223.203" "add"
addnode "45.32.7.66" "add"
addnode "80.211.203.45" "add"
addnode "45.76.56.211" "add"
can you post it in testnetforum....for add

These nodes are on 33384 I believe, I didn't check them. Just reposting.

Question: If another chain wins, how do I switch over. How do I check which chain is winning?

[jaapgvk]

canopus - Today at 10:07 AM
HEALTH NODES
addnode "54.37.156.244" "add"
addnode "139.99.101.222" "add"
addnode "47.93.223.203" "add"
addnode "45.32.7.66" "add"
addnode "80.211.203.45" "add"
addnode "45.76.56.211" "add"
can you post it in testnetforum....for add

These nodes are on 33384 I believe, I didn't check them. Just reposting.

Question: If another chain wins, how do I switch over. How do I check which chain is winning?

Can someone confirm it is the 'right thing' to use these nodes and be on that chain?

[T-Mike]

I'm going to sleep and wish everyone the best while you all figure out that situation.

Should keep me awake throughout the day.

[jaapgvk]

Should keep me awake throughout the day.

Haha! Me too. Been on the computer many hours in the past couple of days 

[Rob Andrews]

1) You're the only with that definition of what a botnet is so I think there is confusion. Just google what a "botnet" is I guess..?

2) The version number cannot be enforced as it is not a change of protocol but just changing a number in the code. You can easily just change the Biblepay client version you're advertising to be anything...

If you have a line of code saying only accept block version > 3....I can just advertise my block version > 3 and it will be accepted if there is no other checks. The number alone can't be enforced...

There are a lot of things in certain niche businesses, such as Crypto, that differ from industry standard and run of the mill development.  This is called "domain knowledge".  If Im the leader of the group and hire 5 devs to work with me, and want to hold daily scrum meetings, and I tell you what a certain term means for our business, then its your responsibility to use it - so we can communicate in a more efficient way.  Its not your job to argue with the head of development about things, thats non productive and is a net negative - it also wastes everyones elses time, and is embarassing.

Next, I know its true that certain soft rules - such as a protocol version - when implemented in a way where another node will hang up and refuse to comunicate based on that version, is not a hard rule, and it can be circumvented by a hacker.  But apparently what you have a hard time grasping, is there are also hard rules in the client, that have been programmed by both Dash and Me in both of my communities, that do enforce soft rules.  For example, we have a piece of code in our biblepay version right now that adds up what percent of blocks were solved by prior versions in the last 100 in the chain, and it does take into account the protocol version.  I could have easily enabled that feature and allowed the chain to fork if *any* blocks were solved by a version below the greatest in the chain.  I didnt, because I felt at the time we would have a smoother transition to the cutover block by letting everyone play.  You need to understand every algorithm in the code before making misleading statements to our community.    I am still maintaining that anyone who deliberately compiles a fraudulent version and detracts from the prod experience is a dangerous and semi-untrustworthy individual, when we are all here trying to get past the block number without forks and as much integrity as possible.

[Rob Andrews]

Can someone confirm it is the 'right thing' to use these nodes and be on that chain?

Its useless.  Its more beneficial to rebuild your chain once we get past 33440.

The wallet picks its own addnodes and puts them in peers.dat, and only needs one addnode: the one compiled in.

[T-Mike]

Is everyone's magnitude at zero or is it just me? (Been at zero for 12 hours or so.)

[Rob Andrews]

Is everyone's magnitude at zero or is it just me? (Been at zero for 12 hours or so.)

Yeah, thats normal until we create the first superblock - then the system assigns everyone a magnitude for the first time.

That reminds me, I need to see whats stopping us from creating a testvote in prod, let me check.

[Ichthus220]

My wallet says 33360, my 1BBP transaction now has confirmations, my utxo show 0 and my stakebalance shows 0, my CPID now shows up in exec getboincinfo. Is all this correct? I change polpercentage in the dat file to 100.