BiblePay-Removing the BOINC Team Requirement for possible future Sustainability

[Rob Andrews]

All,

  We have 329 orphans sitting at risk currently with a questionable future.  I not only want to avoid attrition, I want to see growth! 

So heres an idea.  I really think we need to consider removing all the roadblocks inside Biblepay (IE Opening the Floodgates) for cancer mining.  We can consider doing this by:  Removing the Boinc team requirement (being the first cryptocurrency to not require a team for boinc), and making it easier to heat-mine.  (IE doing away with the last 4 block rule).  (We can leave in the signed by CPID rule as a lateral move preserving heat-mining security).

I feel with this change, we can test the theory that more miners = more adoption = higher price = more monthly orphan sponsorships.

Also, as Noxpost suggested, I dont see why we cant write our own boincstats report (as we will still have records of our Biblepay participating CPIDs, RAC, TotalRAC etc).  So we really only lose the "BiblePay BOINC Team" statistics in boincstats, but instead we have our own stats page.  Maybe that internal stats website is something T-Mike would like to take on for us?

So, as you can see I'm pretty zealous for success here, and want us to make a comeback.  Therefore I believe its in our best interests to vote on this change.

Proposed Changes:

- Remove Boinc Team Requirement for users participating in BiblePay PODC (this compensates users for Rosetta or World Community Grid on ANY team)
- Refactor Heat Mining Block acceptor to help minimize the possibility of forks
- Still require signed cpid per block, and CPID must not be within 3 solved blocks
- Remove the rule requiring CPID to be in the last superblock
- Work with a team member to help create our own stats report for a website and/or the pool
- Leave in UTXO requirement for Boinc Miners

Desired Outcome:

- A new boinc user who is crunching for XYZ discovers they can be compensated for Rosetta cancer mining through Biblepay.
The new user loads our wallet, syncs, and associates their XYZ cpid with our wallet. 
(The new user still must have a required balance shown in exec totalrac to PODC mine).

- The user is able to heat mine with the signed cpid immediately, as long as the CPID has RAC > 100.

This removes most of the strange pool errors in pool.biblepay.org and purepool.


One notion is that in general, I assume BOINC users to have enough disposable income to afford expensive computers for volunteer computing, therefore I come to the conclusion they may become biblepay investors through this process.

And, to counter the theory that we are "giving away free money", consider the fact that the ones who do not become investors will sell off the coins cheap on the market and make us more rare.  So imo, this is an economic decision worth considering.

If the idea is a success, all credit to Jesus.

[sunk818]

While the unified goal is to attract more users, the PoDC is too drastic. Could the proposal be broken up into smaller parts? At least one for PoDC and one for PoBH?

> - A new boinc user who is crunching for XYZ discovers they can be compensated for Rosetta cancer mining through Biblepay.

Too drastic of a change, I do not support. Feels desperate. Not confident it will have the desired result. For example, ByteBall is rewarding for WCG crunching. I receive ByteBalls but don't participate in the community much. Sure, I've written a few comments here and there about double dipping. I emphasize poor children ("orphans") being helped with BBP, but the conversation will change to how you can double dip with BBP.

Aren't there other strategies to use before making such a change? Increase advertising, marketing, and Public Relations effort? Erode the compassion.com cushion? Reduce/remove sponsorship to other charities? Reduce number of children sponsored? Ask our BBP holders to research their company's charitable programs to see if they offer matching gifts and compassion.com is eligible: https://www.compassion.com/donate/matching-gifts.htm <- that could reduce BBP giving but net giving is matched. Less liquidation, higher BBP price?

Its a bear market and everyone is hurting. Have faith and patience. I believe the tide will rise for all boats.

> - ** Remove the UTXO stake requirement for magnitudes less than ONE

This seems okay.

I'd support the PoBH changes.

[klondike]

 

sunk Remove the UTXO stake requirement for magnitudes less than ONE ... yes i can make 100 new machines for free= super,i agree 

[Rob Andrews]

I'm on the fence about the team removal,  I do see benefits (now folks could double-dip mining on gridcoin + bbp for example..  Definately would open more people to the coin)

As for the 4-block heat-mining cpid restrictions...  This I have some concerns over, perhaps lower it to 2 instead?

During the monthly superblock issues we were having,  heat mining was impacted drastically by allowing multiple consecutive winners.

Yes, I agree with you - to clarify, Im all for making the code fork-free, and as long as we can do this in a hard deterministic way (IE check for duplicate CPID in block-1 , Im for keeping that part in).  Ill double check this asap.  So to clarify, you can heat mine with a signed CPID that has RAC > 100, but does not need to be in prior superblock, but - this cpid could not have solved the prior block (pending my analysis for fork prevention).

[Rob Andrews]

sunk Remove the UTXO stake requirement for magnitudes less than ONE ... yes i can make 100 new machines for free= super,i agree 

Naaaa, its not that easy to maintain 100 boinc accounts cpids.  So yes, we thought of that already.    Those boinc guys dont like having multiple cpids; what would be the use of having stats??

Its to prevent a boinc superuser who is not on our team yet from roaming in and taking over the superblock budget. 

[klondike]

1MAG= 10 000 RAC=1 dedicated server= 20 new accounts= free mining w/staking

[Rob Andrews]

Fair enough.   With POBH being lower (been averaging 500kh-1mh) we should retain some security.

Hmm interesting thought,  I could see some folks abusing it..  If you're looking for pure profit and have a mining shed of 100 machines one time boinc account creation is no big deal.

Currently mag <1 is somewhere between 8-10k RAC

Though if we get flooded with new researchers,  then it could increase drastically(but less payout per)

Just to clarify, I would not propose to do something with Low security.  I feel DGW + the signed cpid + prior 2 or 3 rule is very high security.  I took a look at the code, and I think we can keep our current prod rule (requiring cpid to have not solved the N-1 through N-4).  The main change is to remove the rule where we require the cpid to be in a superblock with a payment; thats not only the biggest hassle for them but the biggest fork risk.

I updated the proposal to consider a RAC threshhold < 15000 to be our zero UTXO  requirement (IE we moved to a rac threshhold instead of magnitude based on Capulo's suggestion).

[Rob Andrews]

1MAG= 10 000 RAC=1 dedicated server= 20 new accounts= free mining w/staking

And 20 CPIDS and 20 BoincStats accounts to check and 20 biblepay addresses and 20 wallets, right ?  Thats a lot of usernames and passwords to maintain... 

[klondike]

And 20 CPIDS and 20 BoincStats accounts to check and 20 biblepay addresses and 20 wallets, right ?  Thats a lot of usernames and passwords to maintain...

for speculant easy

[sunk818]

The biggest impact is removing Team BiblePay requirement. This change brings in more miners, but are they going to stake or sell BBP? GridCoin miners seem the most logical to register their CPID. I feel they will sell BBP & ByteBall. BBP is a Christian crypto niche: highly targeted with a loyal demographic. Others in it for distributed computing will likely not stake BBP. So, it feels like a net loss to me. You lose advertising benefit of highly ranked team on Rosetta@Home/WCG and still have liquidation issues because GridCoin miners sell their BBP.

1MAG= 10 000 RAC=1 dedicated server= 20 new accounts= free mining w/staking

Your current magnitude will plummet due to influx of GridCoin miners. 10 000 RAC for 1 MAG could easily become 30 000 RAC for 1 MAG.

Email registration on Rosetta@Home and WCG is extremely easy.

If I don't have to stake, it'd be easy enough to create multiple instances with separate CPID on one machine:
* datadir to current directory
* biblepay.conf with unique port & rpcport

You can easily run 20 instances on a single machine.

I just created another instance of BBP on my machine just now.

And 20 CPIDS and 20 BoincStats accounts to check and 20 biblepay addresses and 20 wallets, right ?  Thats a lot of usernames and passwords to maintain... 

Why would you need to check stats? Wouldn't PoDC payment be enough (assuming you had the same hardware for each machine). Certainly, there's some upfront configuration time, but once everything is set up, there'd be very little intervention involved. I don't think there'd be that much abuse... just saying it'd be easy to do.

[klondike]

but for free staking my rac will be same and my MAG will be falling when will be exists more miners 

[Rob Andrews]

The biggest impact is removing Team BiblePay requirement. This change brings in more miners, but are they going to stake or sell BBP? GridCoin miners seem the most logical to register their CPID. I feel they will sell BBP & ByteBall. BBP is a Christian crypto niche: highly targeted with a loyal demographic. Others in it for distributed computing will likely not stake BBP. So, it feels like a net loss to me. You lose advertising benefit of highly ranked team on Rosetta@Home/WCG and still have liquidation issues because GridCoin miners sell their BBP.

Your current magnitude will plummet due to influx of GridCoin miners. 10 000 RAC for 1 MAG could easily become 30 000 RAC for 1 MAG.

Email registration on Rosetta@Home and WCG is extremely easy.

If I don't have to stake, it'd be easy enough to create multiple instances with separate CPID on one machine:
* datadir to current directory
* biblepay.conf with unique port & rpcport

You can easily run 20 instances on a single machine.

I just created another instance of BBP on my machine just now.

Why would you need to check stats? Wouldn't PoDC payment be enough (assuming you had the same hardware for each machine). Certainly, there's some upfront configuration time, but once everything is set up, there'd be very little intervention involved. I don't think there'd be that much abuse... just saying it'd be easy to do.

Im not saying thats its not possible, and Im not saying it wont be done, what Im saying is a large percentage of people who use boinc have an affinity to keep ONE CPID and like to keep their stats intact.

And time is worth money and it does cost this person time to manage multiple accounts.    Especially to manage 20 biblepay controller wallets. 

The RAC threshhold requirement for UTXO would still be better to have in to keep the boinc whales from jumping in and destroying the small miners rewards.  If a whale wants to split the cpids, so be it, but for the most part the end user would be protected moreso with the utxo requirement than without it.

[SVK Noko]

...
So if user BBP (and I'm not trying to sully this user and claim they would do this with 100% certainty) broke up their fleet of machines into 300 separate users, they then could field roughly 18 new Sanctuaries, which would be a very positive increase in ROI and certainly worth the hassle.  Or worse, suddenly have 28M BBP for sale, and destroy the current price wall.
...

Only some remark from traders point of view.
I would not be nervous from destroying the price wall. I think there are for sure traders waiting for this and it is a great opportunity for them to buy the dip and get a cheap bbp without any mining effort.

[jmmc]

I support everything that could bring new people aboard  and so I have no problem to vote for this proposal. However I have hardship how this proposal could have any significant impact. From my point of view it will have just a minor tweak, which is ok except BBP is on the brink of edge not being able to support current orphans anymore. Brief look on the order books on exchanges shows that there were less than 1BTC total on the buyers side (on all exchanges) total when I looked last time. Price around 10 sat is also not a good signal. BBP market is dry, selling 2 sanctuaries will send market below 10 sat and selling 10 sanctuaries will send market to zero.

Low demand is main problem for BBP. We need to come with something that will make BBP desirable. To answer the main question - why to hold BBP? BiblePay started when market was booming, it was relatively easy to keep the price. Now, during this bear phase, market is also flooded with new small MN projects every day (some of them are also charity focused). Maybe you say this charity is the key  feature but frankly people can support orphans effectively without BBP as well and in more sound way (in terms of taxes, etc).  I know that BiblePay is also working in this direction and that's good.

I really wish to see BiblePay supporting 1M orphans one day. But from investment and economical PoV BBP doesn't make any sense. Inflation (even though it's declining in time) is drastic and 10% sell-off of newly created BBP will always undermine the price, ie. also demand. And not the forget other expenses that are doing the same. I believe we need to start with more sound economical model here. Sound economy brings sound investors. In Bible, tithes are 10% of real profit, not value of 10% of newly created coins even during a loss period. I believe BBP should give 10% of profits to orphans - I mean real profits and at the same time to generate reserves for time of bear market (Joseph's approach). We need to calculate our BBP profits based on BBP/USD performance, not based no how much new BBP are generated.

Difficult thing is that BBP already supports 300 orphans although size and performance of the projects is way to small for this size of support. Now a miracle (strong philanthropist investor or strong crypto bull market) is needed to keep them supported.

I believe there are two ways. Either some miracle happens and I'm all for that or/and we must rethink our economy model to make it more sustainable (ie. spend newly generated BBP only when price grows enough and create reserves for worse times) and to bring some killer feature kicking up demand in general that would bring the project into TOP100 crypto projects. Although adjusting economy model is relatively easy tasks, to bring some excellent feature is not. On the other hand, sound economical model is valuable feature as well imho.

That's my two cents. I believe God is backing up this project and Lord Jesus will not let it fall but I also believe that economical side of the project needs to be properly adjusted and sound from broader perspective. And sorry I went little bit further from the main topic here.

[Rob Andrews]

"That's my two cents. I believe God is backing up this project and Lord Jesus will not let it fall but I also believe that economical side of the project needs to be properly adjusted and sound from broader perspective. And sorry I went little bit further from the main topic here."

Amen brother.