And also just to clarify, the PODC update code might have been accidentally picking some of the bankroll outputs; so let's see if this problem is resolved in the next version.
I can say for sure the next version will not spend bankroll transaction outputs for 'exec bankroll' or podcupdates (as I did some testing last night with the new version).
I believe PrivateSend also makes .001 denomination and I remember podcupdate and PrivateSend could not be used in the same wallet. If you mixed coins, your podcupdate could combined all those mixed denominations together. I suppose if your fix works as intended, the side benefit is that PrivateSend is also excluded from podcupdate? Those PS rounds are in thousands though, I think our podc update only excludes: locked, sanc locked, and pog bankroll denoms. We would have to specifically test that PS issue and probably do another patch for that case. |
|
|
|
No, what was happening, was that I had bankrolled a whole bunch of coins but left just enough for PODC. However, PODC kept saying insufficient balance. I looked at the Coin Input and saw that my bankrolled coins were nicely separated from the amount I wanted to save for PODC, so I couldn't figure out what was wrong. I ended up selecting all the coins in my NON-Tithe addresses and sending them to a single address, then I noticed that shortly after, a single automatic PODC update would go out. But after that, it would stop completely. Each day, I would have to manually consolidate all my NON-TITHE addresses into one wallet for PODC to update. Eventually, I thought there might be a problem with the bankrolled coins, so I selected those as well and consolidated everything into one single wallet address. PODC automatic updates now work fine, however, now it always takes the whole balance regardless of what I specify in UTXOOverride. POG no longer works because my entire coin age is always reset.
Perhaps why my PODC updates were failing is because somehow my wallet was not reading the utxooverride value correctly in some cases and was trying to send out a larger amount than what I had specified.
I just tried bankrolling a bunch of coins again and will see in a little while if I continue to have problems.
Sounds like the issue I posted here: https://github.com/biblepay/biblepay/issues/70I suggest you separate PoG from PoDC. The issue will resolve itself over time. There's a vote to potentially remove PoDC from BiblePay. If the proposal passes, there's no point in using dev hours to make PoDC and PoG interoperate in the same wallet. Anyway, if you want to split PoDC and PoG, you can send PoDC stake a second wallet. This worked for me in Windows 10: https://discontinuo.us/biblepay-unofficial-wiki/how-to-run-multiple-biblepay-walletsIf anything is unclear, feel free to edit the wiki. Anyone can edit it anonymous and even upload images. And also just to clarify, the PODC update code might have been accidentally picking some of the bankroll outputs; so let's see if this problem is resolved in the next version. I can say for sure the next version will not spend bankroll transaction outputs for 'exec bankroll' or podcupdates (as I did some testing last night with the new version). |
|
|
|
Been having trouble with the utxooverride command now in 1.1.8.7. Always seems to spend my full wallet balance despite what I put in. Any one else have this problem?
Is it spending your bankroll denoms? Fix is compiling right now... |
|
|
|
This is where we have to agree to disagree:
* The 40 block lookback is necessary, just as a 28 is in DGW, its an IT thing, and I weighed the efficiency vs the volatility; Youll see in prod in a couple days that vol is low with it. This decision is a good one
* There is no flaw in POG - there was only a configuration issue (all the params were wrong in the first release). This is an incorrect assessment.
* On dev time: Already wearing at least 3 hats; I don't feel this assessment deserves a proper reply - because your not fairly taking into consideration what Ive done for this coin.
* Longer lookback is not a necessary change nor an enhancement
* POG is ELI5 once the user manual for 5 year olds is created. I can say this because I know that the first gas lawnmower had more exposed controls than the 2000 version. Thats where we are. Im telling everyone that POG is going to be simpler than POW mining. Its POW with one gas pedal.
So lets be man enough to agree to disagree on these points.
For clarity, I agree a look back is necessary. Just that 40 is too small and should be increased to 205 or 410. On your Dev time, I know you spend a ton of time on the coin. I am merely saying, how you choose to spend your dev time is picking a winner in this. I'm not asking you to spend MORE time coding, merely that the reason your time is so limited for coding right now is you're spending it to improve PoG. And let's be clear, my opinion is a longer look back is necessary, and your opinion is it is not. We are both stating opinions. As you are the Dev and I'm merely a long time user, your opinion has a lot of weight. But I will say, PoG as it stands now, without further enhancements, refinements or configurations...whatever you wish to call them, will not be as readily accessible to the general public as it is now. But you are in essence, saying it's ready to go. So I get back to why not vote to eliminate PoDC sooner rather than later if that is the path you're set on BBP going on? Let's make PoG the law of the land, end the debate and let the chips fall where they may. - 40 should not be increased - it's an IT decision, and 205 or 410 would be a bad IT decision. - On the dev time, my recommendation for you is to do everything within your power to first provide 3-4 new active devs for biblepay, either by lobbying, recruiting or directly paying for them. Then you and I can sit back and prioritize their time. Til then you should be looking to me as the founder, not as the one who has to be stuck doing all the work for the coin, thats not how this works, the idea is to get the coin jumpstarted then the founders help run it. - Thanks but I still think POG is perfectly fine. We're not perfectly fine right now as a community, because we need 900 new users first, I think thats where we lack. |
|
|
|
Kudos for paying for the new user reward.
My chief concern about the 40 block look back is wild inconsistency that isn't as visible to PoBH miners as it would be in the face of PoG miners. Additionally since the rewards are not block to block, having a shorter look back for PoBH makes sense, but with the daily reward system of PoG a longer look back is a necessity to make it fair and it's payouts more consistent.
I do have concerns that you aren't willing to spend time on PoDC upfront if it's going to be retired, when that is exactly what you're doing now with PoG. By your labor, you are pushing a winner. It's your right to do so, but to use the lack of revisions to PoDC while PoG is being tweaked and refined is not a good argument against PoDC. I think you have the best intentions and your skills can get around many issues. But PoG is not ELI5 simple to understand even if it is trivial to set up.
A longer look back would mitigate one of the bigger issues with PoG. I beseech you to rethink your position there.
This is where we have to agree to disagree: * The 40 block lookback is necessary, just as a 28 is in DGW, its an IT thing, and I weighed the efficiency vs the volatility; Youll see in prod in a couple days that vol is low with it. This decision is a good one * There is no flaw in POG - there was only a configuration issue (all the params were wrong in the first release). This is an incorrect assessment. * On dev time: Already wearing at least 3 hats; I don't feel this assessment deserves a proper reply - because your not fairly taking into consideration what Ive done for this coin. * Longer lookback is not a necessary change nor an enhancement * POG is ELI5 once the user manual for 5 year olds is created. I can say this because I know that the first gas lawnmower had more exposed controls than the 2000 version. Thats where we are. Im telling everyone that POG is going to be simpler than POW mining. Its POW with one gas pedal. So lets be man enough to agree to disagree on these points. |
|
|
|
Where is the funding for this coming from? Right now Im paying out of my pocket for the BBP reward and the SMS service and the Google Adwords campaign. I might ask some back later but at this point I dont care. |
|
|
|
So on "I'm basically asking how can we gain more users in a system that if it were working at median difficulty would normally need more supply than exists":
We're not expecting to hit median difficulty when we are hoping to gain users; we are expecting to hit very low difficulty at first. I think we will hit difficulty around 1000 in Environment B - simply because of all the tithing capacity available. I wouldn't expect us to come anywhere close to hitting the sum of (single tithes per user) being > total money supply (until we do gain more POG users). I expect a user to tithe 20 times per day in Environment B, using all their bank notes up, with minimum coin age being almost .25 and minimum coin amount being almost 1, and re-using the same banknotes 2* per day. I could see us collecting half of the foundation tithes per day in a low difficulty environment like this, that is until new users join.
The new users are not joining because we didn't tithe our entire money supply, they are joining because POG difficulty is too low and POG profitability is too high. We would shoot from 50 POG users to 500. Why you would disagree with that is beyond me, but thats what would happen if we are paying 1 mil in rewards and only have 50 miners on POG.
On these medium diff figures, the other thing about POG that is different than the math done here above is we have 5 sets of 40 blocks per day with difficulty based on the last 40 blocks, and that will sweep in a lot of tithers who missed the boat up to 5 times per day (IE diff will be a little more volatile) giving them opportunities. What Im implying is if diff is high in the morning in environment B, we will still see it drop once those 40 blocks pass, allowing a lot of low diff users potentially in the pool (unless things are constant through the transition period).
So in summary, I expect difficulty to be as low as 1000 and everyone to tithe 24 times per day. Each time they re-use a coin, it has a minimum coin age requirement of .25 - so theoretically they could re-use the stacks of coins up to 4 times per day.
With 500 users otoh, I would expect difficulty to rise to 20,000 and then the users tithe frequency will drop to what we see now (4* per day, etc) because more coin age will be required per user to maintain the status quo. This is the kind of environment Im hoping to hit, and more than that, 20,000+ users. This algo is tuned for mass adoption.
The entire only looking back 40 blocks thing is going to introduce mass confusion for new users. If user A and B both are new users and have the default set to tithe once per day, and User A's system tries on block 40 of the string...can't because the diff has spiked to 25,000 and he's got no coin stacks older than 23 days and literally ten minutes later, his friend, User B, is able to max tithe 10 BBP from his 1 day old block of coins because he's on block 1 of a new cycle...people will believe they have done something wrong or it's just not working. Then 18 hours later, when User B gets this giant stack of rewards (probably on a 25:1 or better return) User A is really going to be mad. The next day when it happens again, User A will likely just give up and when User B finally gets to the wrong part of the 40 block cycle and suddenly cannot tithe, he'll get confused. He'll stay a few days longer than A because he thinks this coin is supposed to have these crazy rewards but for some reason he's not getting them either. He'll call User A and say "I guess you were right, this coin doesn't work right". They'll both tell non-User C, "avoid BBP, it doesn't work". The 40 block look back is a big problem in a system that strives to be fair. A look back should be 205 blocks but a look back of 410 blocks would smooth out most the bumps and give a lot more stability to the expectations of users and be much harder to game for unwarranted gains. While a crazy large ROI will draw in some users initially, at best it's only a temporary influx and quite frankly with the price where it is at and trending towards I cannot see a good retention rate. How we shoot our user base ten fold as you seem to think is feasible, is not so simple. There are MN coins out there with crazy ROI, but they're still low end coins with low user bases. We have one of the cheaper MN costs right now for established coins, but we're not seeing the volume on the markets that would imply we're getting new users from it. Getting to your point that the algo is tuned to mass use...20,000 users should be nearly impossible with the current parameters. The system (if fully implemented) at median difficulty (which I think we both agree is unlikely in the near term and I'll say is unlikely even in the long term) can only support 10,000 tithes a day. Since most power users will be tithing multiple times each day (even you expect everyone to tithe 24 times a day) this math doesn't add up. I think you misunderstand my dislike of PoG. It's not that it is inherently a bad system. And it's not that I'm a PoDC-or-die sort of user. It's merely right now we have a system (PoDC) that works for the advanced users and could be simplified for the intermediate users (in fact, it's what was democratically voted to be done a few months ago instead of PoG). I freely admit a new user will be able to put tithe=1 in their config file but that doesn't show an understanding of Pog any more than them putting gen=1 genproclimit=1 minersleep=750 in their config file means they understand PoBH. Thank you for your reply and despite my disdain for PoG, I do thank you and MiP for your hard work on the coin and the PoG system. At the end of it all, I just think we'll have to agree to disagree. Well I think you all realize by now I answer in a non biased fashion even at my own expense. This argument about the 40 block lookback creating confusion is something that is being blown way way way out of proportion. The 40 block lookback is internal and not intended to be communicated to miners - its not something that affects the everyday use in a way that should be in a training guide. Its really the same system that we have with DGW anyway. The lookback period is used by algorithms to get a barometer or a feel going as to where the trend is. Its exactly the same as our 28 block lookback that is hardcoded in to DGW. (Its used so the wallet can be efficient and not slow down). Miners dont know about it - they dont know exactly how the POW difficulty changes - they just know that when its high, its very hard to mine the current set of blocks. This is exactly the same with POG. They dont need to know how exactly the clocks internal mechanism works, but they know how to mine it because they have a steering wheel and a gas pedal. This is an unfair argument, its very clear that POG is easy to use and exposes a simple difficulty that reacts properly to the current pools tithe level. We will be able to get the exact feel for it after block 102025 and before Environment B, because the capacity will be here in just a couple more days (IE the pool capacity and behavior will be in prod at that point) so we will know very clearly how it will behave in Environment B within 7 days after that (short of the hopeful influx of users that would fill up the pool later). I know the web vote shows strong support for POG and 3 votes more for Improving PODC, however we also didnt get this far by misleading the users or not being democratic. Togo raised the potential issue that the web votes could be being swayed by illegal votes. We spoke about the untrustworthiness of the attackers that swear, that dont really care about the orphans or Jesus, that are here just because they are greedy, and I even watched, yes I WATCHED the 10 new users per minute come in when I ran the forum.biblepay site before Snat got it, and even had to shut off new user registrations to keep the polls from being corrupted. At that point I went ahead and added the official poll as a sanc poll to get support to finish writing and then to deploy POG to prod for this phase. We even commented about the untrustworthiness about web polls. As I said when the poll was on, Im not anti-PODC itself, I just have reservations about its ability to bring mass adoption. I feel the Holy Spirit wants POG over PODC because of that reason; we are supposed to be spreading the gospel otherwise God may not bless this platform. That means my job is to come up with a killer feature that exposes miners and users to the Gospel in new ways (ways that arent here yet) - for example an event list in the wallet, a spiritiual warfare campaign with compensation, we need to inundate users with gospel reminders somehow, but who are we inundating if they are all PODC miners (IE 300, with 10 computers each), why not try to inundate those horizontally, IE 3000 users where we might save one per week (IE let them reach Jesus)? Thats the kind of system God would bless. But Ill clarify, Ill get back on the PODC wagon if its voted for and Ill construct the vote in a way that makes it clear that POG would stay in environment A, and PODC would stay. However I will add a couple catches, that we enhance PODC to address the oracle concern (IE I will virtualize it) and address the concentration in another way (IE I will concentrate PODC in a way that any miner can mine it) but Im not going slate this 300 hours of work for PODC if its voted to be retired. So at this point realize I agree wholehartedly the only secure voting system that exists is our sanc voting system and the next poll should be a Sanc poll for this (around block 106000 or so). Thank you for bearing with me. |
|
|
|
hmm coin control is little bit crazy i have ~ 500k already splitted to many piles i sent another 500k, wait for 20+ confirmations and wants to split them and exec bankroll 50 10000 takes already splitted piles with coin ages ~3 days and resplitted them 500k what i sent was untouched next exec bankroll takes 500k pile finally but how can i split only coins which i want? to not risk already gained coin ages? if this will happen again with coin ages 30+ i will be very baad  (when podc will be replaced with pog and i will be moving coins) Looking at the code, 'exec bankroll' does supposedly ignore the bankroll mask denominations and it does not look to have a flaw - you are supposed to do this and it skips by already denominated coins with the .001nnnnn suffix on them. Can you please give me the txid of the flawed 'exec bankroll' transaction and let me analyze it? (One that spent a denomination coin). this one takes piles 5bab2b0f25dc2593d2d6ad89ab3312fba0f42140ba4a8d2334f0ef85487d615d here i was trying bankroll and it was marked as ''çreate denominations'' 5bc5250a15fd52b523467e120dec6989055a01a802074c2f13819735c6532a56 here was another bankroll which created piles mentioned above.. but this one was marked as ''payment to yourself'' d5378532d4b3e603cfb34b199c2a0cb61fd6c38ebec93e8060504192fe81a987 Ok, I found the bug, thanks for pointing this out. The exec bankroll function does spend existing bankrolls to make new ones and it should not do this. I will make a leisure release to fix this first thing in the morning. how it will work now? bankroll will never touched already splitted coins? (with .001 at the end?) even if i will have only 200k new coins and exec bankroll 300 1000? or in this case it will use some splitted coins? Yes, exec bankroll and podcupdate will skip by bankroll denominated coins and not spend them. (We already skip by locked and sanc locked also). |
|
|
|
hmm coin control is little bit crazy i have ~ 500k already splitted to many piles i sent another 500k, wait for 20+ confirmations and wants to split them and exec bankroll 50 10000 takes already splitted piles with coin ages ~3 days and resplitted them 500k what i sent was untouched next exec bankroll takes 500k pile finally but how can i split only coins which i want? to not risk already gained coin ages? if this will happen again with coin ages 30+ i will be very baad (when podc will be replaced with pog and i will be moving coins) Looking at the code, 'exec bankroll' does supposedly ignore the bankroll mask denominations and it does not look to have a flaw - you are supposed to do this and it skips by already denominated coins with the .001nnnnn suffix on them. Can you please give me the txid of the flawed 'exec bankroll' transaction and let me analyze it? (One that spent a denomination coin). this one takes piles 5bab2b0f25dc2593d2d6ad89ab3312fba0f42140ba4a8d2334f0ef85487d615d here i was trying bankroll and it was marked as ''çreate denominations'' 5bc5250a15fd52b523467e120dec6989055a01a802074c2f13819735c6532a56 here was another bankroll which created piles mentioned above.. but this one was marked as ''payment to yourself'' d5378532d4b3e603cfb34b199c2a0cb61fd6c38ebec93e8060504192fe81a987 Ok, I found the bug, thanks for pointing this out. The exec bankroll function does spend existing bankrolls to make new ones and it should not do this. I will make a leisure release to fix this first thing in the morning. |
|
|
|
Actually a lot of my replies fall on deaf ears. 20 pages later I never hear back. I'm not sure if you read this in one of my prior replies: Environment A: Maximum Tithes Accepted per day: 52000. Payout from Pog Pool per day: 75000. Environment B: Maximum Tithes Accepted per day: 92000. Payout from Pog Pool per day: 960,000. I don't see a problem with POG, nor a problem with the median difficulty, nor a problem with the supply. I don't understand why you are linking fresh available supply with POG difficulty in the first place and blaming the algorithm for it. I don't see any possible revisions. Stepping back and looking at the POW (POBH) diff level, I see a low diff, a 3000 or so mostly. What does that have to do with anything? Other than tell us that its not "too hard" to earn 100 bbp if I mine now. I still maintain that in Environment B, the miners will fill the void (they always do) they did from the beginning, they did after launch, they will in the future, jump from quantity 50 to at least quantity 150 and fill the void (and the 150 is if our price is low) - that is the facet you underestimate that miner count is linked to price. Nothing wrong, a good algorithm, better than our original vanilla POBH (that was subject to botnet risk) that allowed a run up in our price to 25 satoshi.  I'm not questioning the maximum tithes or the payout (beyond the ROI being astronomical). I'm basically asking how can we gain more users in a system that if it were working at median difficulty would normally need more supply than exists. I'm not asking if the system can support more tithes than it currently does, I understand the system under Environment B in theory could support 92,000 tithes a day but the issue is there is not supply to actually do that. So to break it down I'll hit my thoughts step by step; stop me where I'm wrong. Under Environment B Median difficulty would mean: 46,000 in tithes per day (92,000 max, median difficulty is half that)? max tithe of 5 BBP (based half the maximum tithe of 10)? If both are true, then you'd need roughly 9,200 tithes in a day (at 5 BBP) to maintain median difficulty. Those tithes would have to come from coin stacks (or whatever you wish to call them) of at least 12,500 BBP each? Those coin stacks would have to be at least 30 days old? If those are both true, then in a single day, you'd see 9,200 * 12,500 coin stacks being used that were each at least 30 days old. This is 115M BBP. To continue this system at the same median difficulty, you'd need another 115M coins that had been idle for 30 days on day 2, another on day 3, and so on. So to continue at median difficulty for a month, would require 3.45B coins sitting idly until they were used to tithe, then recycled and waiting another 30 days to tithe again. This is more than the current supply. If that is true, then to reach max difficulty, would require 92,000 tithes from 25,000 BBP stacks that were 60 days old. In one day, that would mean you'd need 2.3B coins that had been idle for 2 months tithe, again beyond the current supply. If this is incorrect (beyond the idea that some small percentage of tithes will be coming in below target difficulty and the actual numbers would be slightly smaller) please explain. So on "I'm basically asking how can we gain more users in a system that if it were working at median difficulty would normally need more supply than exists": We're not expecting to hit median difficulty when we are hoping to gain users; we are expecting to hit very low difficulty at first. I think we will hit difficulty around 1000 in Environment B - simply because of all the tithing capacity available. I wouldn't expect us to come anywhere close to hitting the sum of (single tithes per user) being > total money supply (until we do gain more POG users). I expect a user to tithe 20 times per day in Environment B, using all their bank notes up, with minimum coin age being almost .25 and minimum coin amount being almost 1, and re-using the same banknotes 2* per day. I could see us collecting half of the foundation tithes per day in a low difficulty environment like this, that is until new users join. The new users are not joining because we didn't tithe our entire money supply, they are joining because POG difficulty is too low and POG profitability is too high. We would shoot from 50 POG users to 500. Why you would disagree with that is beyond me, but thats what would happen if we are paying 1 mil in rewards and only have 50 miners on POG. On these medium diff figures, the other thing about POG that is different than the math done here above is we have 5 sets of 40 blocks per day with difficulty based on the last 40 blocks, and that will sweep in a lot of tithers who missed the boat up to 5 times per day (IE diff will be a little more volatile) giving them opportunities. What Im implying is if diff is high in the morning in environment B, we will still see it drop once those 40 blocks pass, allowing a lot of low diff users potentially in the pool (unless things are constant through the transition period). So in summary, I expect difficulty to be as low as 1000 and everyone to tithe 24 times per day. Each time they re-use a coin, it has a minimum coin age requirement of .25 - so theoretically they could re-use the stacks of coins up to 4 times per day. With 500 users otoh, I would expect difficulty to rise to 20,000 and then the users tithe frequency will drop to what we see now (4* per day, etc) because more coin age will be required per user to maintain the status quo. This is the kind of environment Im hoping to hit, and more than that, 20,000+ users. This algo is tuned for mass adoption. |
|
|
|
Under Environment B Median difficulty would mean:
46,000 in tithes per day (92,000 max, median difficulty is half that)?
max tithe of 5 BBP (based half the maximum tithe of 10)?
Is there a simulation that we could see as a Google Sheets and a chart? From using testnet, tithes and pog difficulty don't move linearly. If tithes are exhausted then min coin age and min coin value would come down until participants drive the difficulty back up. Do you consider a different set of parameters more optimal? I like linear because it is easy to explain to those curious. I'm not sure what the downside is... maybe giving too much reward w/ low buyer risk? Or difficulty that is too linear instead of logarithmic? I'm also going to reply to him after I check Capulos issue. |
|
|
|
Nothing wrong, a good algorithm, better than our original vanilla POBH (that was subject to botnet risk) that allowed a run up in our price to 25 satoshi.
Someone on Discord asked me if there is risk of botnet again? If I recall right, CPID can't mine blocks sequentially? Testnet I think it was every other, prod is it every 4th (e.g. CPID a,b,c,d,a,b,c,d)? So, if the proposal is for PoDC to go away, CPID will no longer be an external unique identifier (oracle?). So, do you have a plan for replacing CPID with something within the blockchain itself? I ask because PoG seems to only use blockchain data so the logical conclusion is that Proof of Bible Hash (modified Proof of Work) may be due for a similar enhancement? Well let me break this into two distinct problems however first. In Nov 2017 (roughly) the original botnet exploited us in a way where someone from Japan I believe installed 300 copies of biblepay in a setting where I believe it was hard for them to upgrade (maybe a plant or something). We were not prepared, so we had a problem pushing mandatory upgrades. Granted if I were to do this all over, I would have reacted by adding a non deterministic spork in our very first algorithm, but nevertheless thats water under the bridge now. So that botnet risk is solved in POG in a couple different ways: A) We are on multiple exchanges, so people have to upgrade or they cant sell, B) POG rewards the controller wallets now (not the distinct machine count). We were happy with CPIDs being one per researcher with multiple machines - that busted the botnet in a different way - by demanding a unique ID per researcher (IE they could run as many sub machines as they wanted) and we didnt care, because PODC is modular (it runs outside of biblepay). The distinct CPID rule was more related to 51% attack prevention. It required an insider to solve blocks and guaranteed the same researcher couldnt solve back to back blocks. We have a new 51% attack prevention mechanism now live in BiblePay. I can't really explain it due to security concerns, but its about 1000* better than the cpid rule. But in summary, as of this latest mandatory (we are already in pog phase 1) any heat miner can solve back to back blocks again. This does not give us botnet risk primarily because of the low reaper reward that we now have. IE botnets are formed when they are receiving the primary reward, so they go out and create as many machines as possible. Im all for many machines mining for security if our price is going up, don't get me wrong- Im not aiming for cheap security, we want as much security as possible. |
|
|
|
Oh Ok, thanks, I just like to put words in others mouths; OK, great. (Even if the words are synonomous to your spirit). Oh and I do it "again" right, even though I can't remember doing it before, unless you mean quoting you in a more succinct way. Maybe that's how we should communicate: Remove the FUD, remove the misleading nature of the post, remove anything your not sure of first, then tell me if I've referred to your spirit incorrectly.
POG versions: we are up to two or three versions now, right? Sure. I wonder what the difference was between them, was it a configuration parameter between 1 & 2? Yes. So is it a new version of the algorithm? But in reality we're on still on #1 and #2 is the only future version I'm referring to, the one with the configuration change in it. But thats right you were too proud to help in testnet and didnt participate, and when I laid out the rules you had nothing to say. But thats OK, we created it without flaws, as you have not found any.
My voting is not welcome because we're not democratic, Oh I see.
I maintain that we are 100% democratic and anyone who buys a 1.55 MM Sanc may vote in a poll which dictates the future of biblepay.
I don't understand the negative spirit you bring to biblepay in response to POG; I see a lot of words here with incorrect terminology and assumptions.
All the coins in the world who offer high rewards and have a low miner count end up with an equilibrium of miners:rewards. So its a fallacy for you to say that "we are hoping" that the miners fill in the void within a couple years or whatever - you are in error, and I have the historical proof available to prove that we will fill the void very quickly when PODC is retired.
I'm insulted that you want to hold a vote early, if you are concerned about being democratic then we should let everyone prepare for the vote so we have maximum vote exposure by sancs. I believe you want the vote at a time when perception of POG is low, as you realize perception will be much more positive after block 102025.
This is sort of a hyprocritical attitude. Its like saying Togo bought too much biblepay early so lets kick him out. West has too many computers on PODC so lets not be fair and balanced to evaluate POG properly.
But, the truth of the matter is POG is fairer than Bitcoin's POW - as you are not up against an ASIC pool who can afford discounted chips, instead you receive a share percentage of the pool based on how much coin age you have and partially with 20% CPU-Mined distinct full node miners.
Reaching a median network difficulty does not matter.
Thank you none the less for a reply. But you have yet to address the supply vs median difficulty issue. And that shows one area where PoG needs at a minimum more revision. I'm confused where objective discussion qualifies as FUD, yes I'm afraid this will damage BBP, yes I'm uncertain how PoG will suddenly bring in an influx of users and yes I'm in doubt it is ready to be in main net, but it is. So at least I've cleared that up. I'm not one to talk about my personal life. You are correct that I didn't participate in testnet, but in fact was barely active on any crypto things during a majority of the time due to family issues. So thank you for your compassion and just chalking it to pride (which I'd gladly rather it been than what I was going through). I support this coin, I support it so much I cannot sit by idly while I see something coming so counter productive I feel it will hurt our community, our value and our mission. As far as an early vote, my point you are missing is you under almost any reasonable circumstance you can steer the vote to success or failure. What is hurting the coin in part is the uncertainty so remove that and just impose your design and we'll live with it. You've been a prolific coder and done great things. You'll get the coin through PoG one way or another. Actually a lot of my replies fall on deaf ears. 20 pages later I never hear back. I'm not sure if you read this in one of my prior replies: Environment A: Maximum Tithes Accepted per day: 52000. Payout from Pog Pool per day: 75000. Environment B: Maximum Tithes Accepted per day: 92000. Payout from Pog Pool per day: 960,000. I don't see a problem with POG, nor a problem with the median difficulty, nor a problem with the supply. I don't understand why you are linking fresh available supply with POG difficulty in the first place and blaming the algorithm for it. I don't see any possible revisions. Stepping back and looking at the POW (POBH) diff level, I see a low diff, a 3000 or so mostly. What does that have to do with anything? Other than tell us that its not "too hard" to earn 100 bbp if I mine now. I still maintain that in Environment B, the miners will fill the void (they always do) they did from the beginning, they did after launch, they will in the future, jump from quantity 50 to at least quantity 150 and fill the void (and the 150 is if our price is low) - that is the facet you underestimate that miner count is linked to price. Nothing wrong, a good algorithm, better than our original vanilla POBH (that was subject to botnet risk) that allowed a run up in our price to 25 satoshi. |
|
|
|
hmm coin control is little bit crazy i have ~ 500k already splitted to many piles i sent another 500k, wait for 20+ confirmations and wants to split them and exec bankroll 50 10000 takes already splitted piles with coin ages ~3 days and resplitted them 500k what i sent was untouched next exec bankroll takes 500k pile finally but how can i split only coins which i want? to not risk already gained coin ages? if this will happen again with coin ages 30+ i will be very baad (when podc will be replaced with pog and i will be moving coins) You can manually select coins in coin control and send a chuck to yourself of the correct denomination. Repeat that process with the change each time until you've broken it up into the right denominations. It's a bit more work but shouldn't take more than a few minutes and you'll get what you want. one by one? ufff, insane if i imagine that i will need to create 1000+ TXs manualy No, the exec bankroll command was made for this. |
|
|
|
hmm coin control is little bit crazy i have ~ 500k already splitted to many piles i sent another 500k, wait for 20+ confirmations and wants to split them and exec bankroll 50 10000 takes already splitted piles with coin ages ~3 days and resplitted them 500k what i sent was untouched next exec bankroll takes 500k pile finally but how can i split only coins which i want? to not risk already gained coin ages? if this will happen again with coin ages 30+ i will be very baad (when podc will be replaced with pog and i will be moving coins) Looking at the code, 'exec bankroll' does supposedly ignore the bankroll mask denominations and it does not look to have a flaw - you are supposed to do this and it skips by already denominated coins with the .001nnnnn suffix on them. Can you please give me the txid of the flawed 'exec bankroll' transaction and let me analyze it? (One that spent a denomination coin). |
|
|
|
On #2 let me restate:
Right now, with the current reward structure and tithe cap, at median difficulty would pay out approx 3:1 reward:tithe. The problem is median difficulty (with the revisions to Pog limiting a single tithe to a max of 10), cannot be reached with our current supply. So the level that CAN be reached is a lower difficulty that pays a higher ratio. Since all of the current supply will not be used for PoG titheing (non-participants and those with Sanctuaries), the actual reward will be MUCH HIGHER.
Real numbers:
The median difficulty would require coins that are 30 days old, would require the "coin amount" to be 12,500 and the maximum tithe to be 5. Since the current maximum cumulative daily tithes is basically 50,000 (50,694 is the real number), it would take 50,000/2 or 25,000 in daily tithes to reach median difficulty. This means there would be 25,000/5 or 5000 individual tithes. Each of these tithes would be supported from a coin stack that was at least 30 days old and at least 12,500 BBP in size. At median difficulty, each of the tithe's would receive an equal share of the approximately 82,000 in rewards so 82,000/5000 or 16.4 BBP per tithe (just north of 3:1 ratio). But to reach median, you in effect need 30 days * 5000 tithes * 12,500 BBP to be "locked up". That is 1.875B BBP, our current supply is only 1.3B, so we cannot reach median. Since it's likely that a large number of MN will not disband and free up their stake for PoG nor the marketplaces participate, nor even 100% of the users participate, the realistic maximum stake that can be "locked" is far less than the supply. So the actual ratio will be MUCH HIGHER than 3:1 because median difficulty is impossible over the long run with the current supply and current parameters.
It gets worse if PoDC is disbanded and PoG gets the whole PoDC reward. Then the maximum tithe would by the current design go to "half the monthly charity budget", which right now would be 3.3M coins/ month or 110,000 per day (roughly double the current cap), but the reward would go from 82,000/day to over 1M/day (a twelve fold increase). With a higher cap, median difficulty could not be achieved for years or possibly decades (it would start at requiring nearly 4B coins to be "locked" into PoG). And for the near term, PoG would pay out approximately 17:1 at median difficulty (which isn't going to be possible). Realistically, achieving even difficulty at 20,000 would be a stretch, but at that level would require 18 day age, 7600 size and 7 maximum tithe amount and lock up 650M coins (half our current supply) and pay 198 BBP/7 tithe or a 28:1 ratio.
So yes, I've thought this out a lot more than you give me credit for.
On the voting point, I'll just say you have every right to vote all your MN, I don't feel you've cheated the system to get the (unknown) number you have. But you do know that of the Sanctuaries that normally vote, you hold the super-majority. You also know or should know that 100% participation is unheard of, even DASH only gets about 25% participation and we're more or less in line with that. So in reality, you control the direction of the coin with both your labor and can with your voting strength. So if you're dead set on PoG, just do it and reduce the uncertainty that is affecting the community.
On #2, I don't understand the spirit of your point. A page ago I thought your point was when a tither who can tithe 300 bbp moves to tithing only 10 bbp (and average diff drops), their reward will be MUCH HIGHER. And I said No, it will be the same (which is true). Now it appears you are comparing POG to losing PODC, somehow, stating that a POG miner will receive MUCH HIGHER (compared to what?) of a reward, well yes, if they drop 10 computers electric bills, and receive rewards for tithing, and our pool recipient count stays static (which it wont!) then yes they receive a higher reward. Let me clarify the numbers first then maybe you can re-phrase your point. I don't even understand why you are talking about locked up coins. If coins are free they will either be sold or invested in sanctuaries (I estimate 80% will be locked up in a sanc rather than just sit around in someones account for no reason). My point is if we dispand PODC, 30% of the coins might get sold cheap on SX, out of the remaining 70%, 75% of those will create new sancs, we dont know the exact figure, but yes, of course we will have a different animal after unlocking 50 MM coins that are currently locked. POG doesnt lock any coins - lets agree with that. Here are the key figures - lets talk about only two scenarios - after block 102025, we have Environment A (POG + PODC), and hypothetically after block 108,000 we have environment B (POG only). Environment A: Maximum Tithes Accepted per day: 52000. Payout from Pog Pool per day: 75000. Environment B: Maximum Tithes Accepted per day: 92000. Payout from Pog Pool per day: 960,000. Imo, it does not matter if the POG diff algorithm hovers at a median. Since this is a free market and the mining activity is governed by profitability, more miners will most !certainly! enter the pog pool as soon as PODC is disabled. Its a true fallacy to think that if we have 50 miners in the pog pool in Environment A, that we will have 50 in environment B. It is utterly and most certainly false. We would certainly have 500 miners in Environment B (minimum) since the pool pays out 960,000 in rewards per day. In light of this let me stop here. Ill say more thing, this is most certainly happening also: After block 102025, after everyone tithes and exhausts their coin age, the entire network will start re-tithing in the same day, because diff will drop significantly. This means that it is *entirely* possible that the 27K~ per day in donations does start to reach 52K even in environment A. In environment B, I would wager a 100% liklihood that we reach the exact 92K per day tithe cap from donations. This is because everyone will be trying to get those high rewards. What all this means to the average user is, let us assume that we have 50 people in Pog Pool today. This means an average user would receive about 4,000 in reward in BBP. In Environment B if nothing changes (which it will) they would immediately jump to 40,000 per day in rewards. But quickly as word gets out that the pool is bigger, the pool recipient count will grow to 500 (within a couple weeks) and the 40,000 reward will drop back down to 4,000 per tithe recipient. So none of this nefarious or bad for biblepay like you are saying. This is just a free economic pool. So first, I'm not saying it's nefarious...that is you again putting words in other's mouths. I'm saying this is a bad system for BBP as it is laid out (version two or three or whatever we're on that caps the max individual tithe at 10 BBP). I'm not insulting you personally, I'm not calling you names. I am saying I believe you're too close to the system to see it's faults and that is why I don't feel you voting with your massive voting block is good, even though I readily accept you have every right to do so. But you can't call that vote democratic, it is at best a plutocracy. But again, it is your right to vote if you see fit. On PoG not locking coins: I agree in legal terms, the coins are not locked. To be clear, I'm not claiming that tithing funds are locked like in Masternodes or even Proof of Stake, that's why I've used "locked" in quotes. Because even though it's not legally locked, it is in practice. In a single day, to reach median difficulty, you need half the tithe cap. Those tithes are supported by coins "stacks" of at least the minimum value of at least the minimum age. So (under current standards) to reach median difficulty, 5000 tithes of 5 BBP, each of those tithes would be supported by a separate stack of coins of at least 12,500. 5000x12,5000 is 62.5M. So every day, you need 62M coins that have done nothing for 30 days...which means in a 30 day period you're going to need 30 * 62M or 1.8B coins. So I will say if you think we'll reach the daily cap under the current standards or especially the proposed standards then you've not run the numbers, as it is impossible until the daily emission deflates considerably. That is not to say it could not happen once or twice in a blue moon, but there literally won't be enough supply to tithe the max over the long run. With the new standard, over time, the tithing would equalize, and over time would statistically see even tithing each day. With a tithing cap of 92,000 (although it really would be 110,000 by the current emissions), to reach median difficulty you need 92,000/2 = 46,000 coins at median/5 = 9,200 tithes at 5 BBP that are from stacks of at least 12,500 coins and at least 30 days old. That means every day, you need 115M coins that have done nothing for 30 days. Over 30 days, means you need 3.45B coins to achieve an equalized system. With the new standard, regardless of the return (which is a separate issue), to hit the max daily tithe, you would need 92,000/1 or 92,000 tithes at 1 BBP each from stacks of at least 25,000 aged at least 60 days, or 2.3B coins in one day. Granted, there would be some larger tithes that sneak in at the difficulty breaks but there still won't be enough coins in the market to achieve this in a single day let alone do this more than once in a great while. So, yes, some tithes would come in at lower difficulty, but the majority would come in closer to the target standards, which again, means there is not enough supply under this revision of PoG to achieve what you are saying. And that brings the issue that hasn't been discussed, fairness of tithing. There would be breaks where the difficulty drops and the max individual tithe spikes supported by fewer coins of younger age, but once these gaps are filled, those after them, in the same rewards blocks, would have in essence had a higher standard held against them...that is smaller max, larger stack of older age. Over time this coudl Oh Ok, thanks, I just like to put words in others mouths; OK, great. (Even if the words are synonomous to your spirit). Oh and I do it "again" right, even though I can't remember doing it before, unless you mean quoting you in a more succinct way. Maybe that's how we should communicate: Remove the FUD, remove the misleading nature of the post, remove anything your not sure of first, then tell me if I've referred to your spirit incorrectly. POG versions: we are up to two or three versions now, right? Sure. I wonder what the difference was between them, was it a configuration parameter between 1 & 2? Yes. So is it a new version of the algorithm? But in reality we're on still on #1 and #2 is the only future version I'm referring to, the one with the configuration change in it. But thats right you were too proud to help in testnet and didnt participate, and when I laid out the rules you had nothing to say. But thats OK, we created it without flaws, as you have not found any. My voting is not welcome because we're not democratic, Oh I see. I maintain that we are 100% democratic and anyone who buys a 1.55 MM Sanc may vote in a poll which dictates the future of biblepay. I don't understand the negative spirit you bring to biblepay in response to POG; I see a lot of words here with incorrect terminology and assumptions. All the coins in the world who offer high rewards and have a low miner count end up with an equilibrium of miners:rewards. So its a fallacy for you to say that "we are hoping" that the miners fill in the void within a couple years or whatever - you are in error, and I have the historical proof available to prove that we will fill the void very quickly when PODC is retired. I'm insulted that you want to hold a vote early, if you are concerned about being democratic then we should let everyone prepare for the vote so we have maximum vote exposure by sancs. I believe you want the vote at a time when perception of POG is low, as you realize perception will be much more positive after block 102025. This is sort of a hyprocritical attitude. Its like saying Togo bought too much biblepay early so lets kick him out. West has too many computers on PODC so lets not be fair and balanced to evaluate POG properly. But, the truth of the matter is POG is fairer than Bitcoin's POW - as you are not up against an ASIC pool who can afford discounted chips, instead you receive a share percentage of the pool based on how much coin age you have and partially with 20% CPU-Mined distinct full node miners. Reaching a median network difficulty does not matter. |
|
|
|
The bbp price shows how changes are received.
This is the effect of lack of patience in business. In these hard times for crypto, no one likes changes. At this price this coin has already landed in the crypto trash. Now, unfortunately, next superblock will be at 1sato.
I think the BBP price change has to do with those who unlocked the 20bbp-per-rac and feel like front-running the others who didnt. Period. I think you we should be more patient before we judge - this analysis is naive and jumping the gun. |
|
|
|
Well, thanks for your responses.
On point 2) the point I was making is at median difficulty the reward was about 3:1, but currently the supply of coins won't allow for even median difficulty with the change to Pog so the reward realistically will be 5:1 or there abouts. If PoDC was eliminated...the reward shifted to PoG and the max tithe increased by a similar percentage, then we wouldn't be able to hit any where close to median difficulty and the 3:1 reward would be much much higher.
If you're unwilling to mitigate your strength in voting then let's just vote tomorrow since you hold the majority of traditionally voting nodes and at least remove the uncertainty of what will happen. You've done a lot of work and deserve a large say in how things go, but with your position of strength in voting, if you plan on voting the nodes you control then there is really no point in any debate. Just tell us the direction you're taking the coin and do it...saving us the heart ache of actually thinking we may have a real voice in this coin.
On #2, I don't think you realize we have a tithe cap or a reward cap per day in POG. In Phase 1 we only pay out 90K per day. Therefore this thing about rewards being "much higher" would not be true. They are the same in phase 1 and phase 2 (they never breach the covenant of our emission schedule). On voting: For one I have the vote scheduled in 20 days or so because POG has not really been rolled out yet. It needs to enter phase2 for people to see its value first then have something to compare PODC to. Then we will vote on schedule as block 106000 or so is when people expect the vote to be. What I am confused about is why you are trying to infer that I hold the key to the vote. Why do you think I have more than 20% of the sancs? We have approx 496 nodes right now. You should be lobbying the other approx 75% sancs that are owned by people other than me. Slovakia claimed something like I received special treatment to earn free sancs.. What did I get in payroll, 30 million bbp or so in total? Maybe that helped me buy 20 of my sancs, but I just as easily could have crashed the price, isnt it more noble to run those sancs than crash the price? All the other sancs I bought on the free market. So no, there was no special treatment. On #2 let me restate: Right now, with the current reward structure and tithe cap, at median difficulty would pay out approx 3:1 reward:tithe. The problem is median difficulty (with the revisions to Pog limiting a single tithe to a max of 10), cannot be reached with our current supply. So the level that CAN be reached is a lower difficulty that pays a higher ratio. Since all of the current supply will not be used for PoG titheing (non-participants and those with Sanctuaries), the actual reward will be MUCH HIGHER. Real numbers: The median difficulty would require coins that are 30 days old, would require the "coin amount" to be 12,500 and the maximum tithe to be 5. Since the current maximum cumulative daily tithes is basically 50,000 (50,694 is the real number), it would take 50,000/2 or 25,000 in daily tithes to reach median difficulty. This means there would be 25,000/5 or 5000 individual tithes. Each of these tithes would be supported from a coin stack that was at least 30 days old and at least 12,500 BBP in size. At median difficulty, each of the tithe's would receive an equal share of the approximately 82,000 in rewards so 82,000/5000 or 16.4 BBP per tithe (just north of 3:1 ratio). But to reach median, you in effect need 30 days * 5000 tithes * 12,500 BBP to be "locked up". That is 1.875B BBP, our current supply is only 1.3B, so we cannot reach median. Since it's likely that a large number of MN will not disband and free up their stake for PoG nor the marketplaces participate, nor even 100% of the users participate, the realistic maximum stake that can be "locked" is far less than the supply. So the actual ratio will be MUCH HIGHER than 3:1 because median difficulty is impossible over the long run with the current supply and current parameters. It gets worse if PoDC is disbanded and PoG gets the whole PoDC reward. Then the maximum tithe would by the current design go to "half the monthly charity budget", which right now would be 3.3M coins/ month or 110,000 per day (roughly double the current cap), but the reward would go from 82,000/day to over 1M/day (a twelve fold increase). With a higher cap, median difficulty could not be achieved for years or possibly decades (it would start at requiring nearly 4B coins to be "locked" into PoG). And for the near term, PoG would pay out approximately 17:1 at median difficulty (which isn't going to be possible). Realistically, achieving even difficulty at 20,000 would be a stretch, but at that level would require 18 day age, 7600 size and 7 maximum tithe amount and lock up 650M coins (half our current supply) and pay 198 BBP/7 tithe or a 28:1 ratio. So yes, I've thought this out a lot more than you give me credit for. On the voting point, I'll just say you have every right to vote all your MN, I don't feel you've cheated the system to get the (unknown) number you have. But you do know that of the Sanctuaries that normally vote, you hold the super-majority. You also know or should know that 100% participation is unheard of, even DASH only gets about 25% participation and we're more or less in line with that. So in reality, you control the direction of the coin with both your labor and can with your voting strength. So if you're dead set on PoG, just do it and reduce the uncertainty that is affecting the community. On #2, I don't understand the spirit of your point. A page ago I thought your point was when a tither who can tithe 300 bbp moves to tithing only 10 bbp (and average diff drops), their reward will be MUCH HIGHER. And I said No, it will be the same (which is true). Now it appears you are comparing POG to losing PODC, somehow, stating that a POG miner will receive MUCH HIGHER (compared to what?) of a reward, well yes, if they drop 10 computers electric bills, and receive rewards for tithing, and our pool recipient count stays static (which it wont!) then yes they receive a higher reward. Let me clarify the numbers first then maybe you can re-phrase your point. I don't even understand why you are talking about locked up coins. If coins are free they will either be sold or invested in sanctuaries (I estimate 80% will be locked up in a sanc rather than just sit around in someones account for no reason). My point is if we dispand PODC, 30% of the coins might get sold cheap on SX, out of the remaining 70%, 75% of those will create new sancs, we dont know the exact figure, but yes, of course we will have a different animal after unlocking 50 MM coins that are currently locked. POG doesnt lock any coins - lets agree with that. Here are the key figures - lets talk about only two scenarios - after block 102025, we have Environment A (POG + PODC), and hypothetically after block 108,000 we have environment B (POG only). Environment A: Maximum Tithes Accepted per day: 52000. Payout from Pog Pool per day: 75000. Environment B: Maximum Tithes Accepted per day: 92000. Payout from Pog Pool per day: 960,000. Imo, it does not matter if the POG diff algorithm hovers at a median. Since this is a free market and the mining activity is governed by profitability, more miners will most !certainly! enter the pog pool as soon as PODC is disabled. Its a true fallacy to think that if we have 50 miners in the pog pool in Environment A, that we will have 50 in environment B. It is utterly and most certainly false. We would certainly have 500 miners in Environment B (minimum) since the pool pays out 960,000 in rewards per day. In light of this let me stop here. Ill say more thing, this is most certainly happening also: After block 102025, after everyone tithes and exhausts their coin age, the entire network will start re-tithing in the same day, because diff will drop significantly. This means that it is *entirely* possible that the 27K~ per day in donations does start to reach 52K even in environment A. In environment B, I would wager a 100% liklihood that we reach the exact 92K per day tithe cap from donations. This is because everyone will be trying to get those high rewards. What all this means to the average user is, let us assume that we have 50 people in Pog Pool today. This means an average user would receive about 4,000 in reward in BBP. In Environment B if nothing changes (which it will) they would immediately jump to 40,000 per day in rewards. But quickly as word gets out that the pool is bigger, the pool recipient count will grow to 500 (within a couple weeks) and the 40,000 reward will drop back down to 4,000 per tithe recipient. So none of this nefarious or bad for biblepay like you are saying. This is just a free economic pool. |
|
|
|
How long I will get these losses?
Tithes -1 655.10053560 Biblepay
Reward +1 614.55979473 Biblepay
Why this wallet got less rewards than it gave?
Other wallet I control made gains during same timeframe
Tithes -497.70015320 Biblepay
Reward +850.93978577 Biblepay
this should not be possible, as i know rewards are linear, so everybody should gets same % hmm or i missed something  One of his tithes was illegal (exec istithelegal txid), which should not be possible after block 102025. So another words he tithed it and the pool didnt accept it, but it also was not rejected by the network. Once the supermajority is on the new version, it should be impossible for someone to mine an illegal tithe. (It was illegal because it was mined in a block where his tithe didnt meet the diff level for the block). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
