Btw guys, I've been testing out GIN and they seem to be solid (been up for a few weeks now and they maintained the nodes).

I wanted to mention, GIN has a $4.50 per month service called "cloud".  It's really the same quality as the $15 plan from what I can tell - my BiblePay sancs are doing fine on the $4.50 per month plan.

Maybe some will decide to use GIN with these lower rates.

Note to investors waiting to spin up a sanctuary:  Now you can do it with GIN's turnkey service without knowing anything technical.

BBP Pool:

https://www.bbppool.com/


I believe this is our method for brand new users who have no UTXO stake.

I think we are OK in linux and mac, but windows is showing a quick window flash.  I can take care of the windows problem.

Will someone enter a github?

As long as we can establish that there is no cheating in prod, then you can leave this message posted otherwise I vote to delete it since it is spreading FUD.

Oh OK, you were referring to the old POBH system last year- thanks.

So yes, I would not want to switch over to something that has any defects.

Trying to recall all the things we've been through: From July to September we were happy at first, and then when the diff skyrocketed, we tried to ensure PC's were mining by adding in some rules into the POBH that slowly increased the nonce over time (etc) - and then we were (slightly) exploited by the multi-wallet installs, and then finally the botnet (we think the Japan botnet), and then the upgrade problem (where the botnet refused to upgrade so we had to kick them off finally when the exchanges upgraded).

The BB2 address was and is still the orphan foundation wallet.  I don't remember any problems there; those coins were always liquidated every month for compassion.

But I agree, we definitely do not want to re-do any problems of the past.  The POG algorithm would have rewarded the givers by share weight, so I don't see the "same" problems being repeated again; however I am very cautious to jump and be a POG cheerleader unless it can be proven that it:  allows a 6 mil tithe cap fairly, and somehow slows down the ability for scripts to auto-tithe in an unfair way (IE take a higher proportion of tithes from the average person).

In the mean time, I'll go back to thinking about PODC early adoption also. 

Interesting - I am not aware of heinous bugs.

Let me do some testing.

First of all, the pool idea was quite capable of paying exactly the owed and accrued amount - on time - and in a scalable way.  The only reason I added the uncertainty principle is to prevent gaming the system on a particular exact day when the pool is empty - say for instance no one tithed, to allow one small group to tithe for a sure profit (as the predictable payment system would have resulted in a certain profit).  So, we introduced a 1/410 chance of a single tithe being included in a payment block.

However, since we have 205 blocks per day, that does not mean the system is not predictable over a one week or one month span.  In contrast to solo mining, where you do not know that you will solve a block in one month.

So even though you make these pointed questions as a trap, the answer is that if investor A tithed 100 bbp once, they would only have a 50% (205/410) chance of being paid THAT DAY for the tithe.  However, if Investor B tithed 10 times over 10 days, they would have had 4100 chances of being paid and therefore would be paid approx 3 times (yes, this is not guaranteed in such a short example, but statistically after a month of 12,000 blocks, we are reaching a 99% certainty that one persistent tither would be paid).  Meaning that Investor B would receive 3 payments (on average) in only 10 days - each of a higher value (depending on which of the 10 tithes were chosen).  This effect means that the pool system does pay regularly over longer periods.

If a malicious actor floods the pool with smaller tithes, they get more frequent payments, but each tithe has only a 1/410 chance of being included, and as the wiki shows, smaller total payments pay less % than one large payment (since they lose out on the exponential weight).  Its not gaming because the primary question at the beginning of the day is : Will tithing be profitable or not?  The question is answered depending on how many tithes are in the pool.  

So yes, if you want to participate for 30 days, you would know with relative certainty if its worth tithing each time you tithe and over the long run your results would bear that out.  Its the same as our difficulty level.  If the Dash difficulty drops below a certain threshhold, x11 miners jump in to try to solve a block, and pools jump in, but there is no guarantee the block will be solved - but the profitability level was enough to prompt the pool to jump in.  

The only thing I agree with in your summary is the "amount" of coins that would be liquidated monthly.  I am concerned that the number of coins tithed to the orphan foundation for mining should not exceed a certain threshhold.  For example, maybe if we could cap that at 6 mil tithes per month, then this system wouldn't affect our mission (or stray from the fundamental percentages).  I don't like the idea of liquidating more than the allocated charity budget per month in coins that were originally designated for mining.  

Specifically covering this question, about in-wallet features:  We are an open source project and you and other programmers are welcome to make the commitment (in wallet letter writing).  I agree it would be a good feature, but understand, that if I am writing POG its not stopping you - or others - from committing those nice feature(s) you mention.

I will PM you the info regarding BLOOM.

Well on the UI improvements, we want to make those anwyay, regardless of the algorithm for heat mining.  Some of that part of the decision has to do with where IPFS fits in.  So discussing a better letter writing interface should not drive the decision to use POG or PODC.  (However if we were voting on POOM, it would be relevant right now, because then we would have home sponsorships).

The POG advantage comes from eliminating PODC (not eliminating heat mining).  POG is bolted on to POBH.  But yes, as one improvement to POBH, we would gain the advantage of an internal pool.

I think you either misunderstood my reason to say "unpredictable" and its now being misconstrued as if I meant this POG algorithm is going to have an unpredictable payment effect or that POG is unpredictable.  That was completely technical, and referring to the individual block solving event, that it cant be predicted *technologically* by a person exploiting it to try to game rewards at the expense of others.  Let me rephrase :  POG would be very predictable, easy to use, and scalable, and impo would have the traits that allow easy adoption.  The summary of the end-user experience is that they tithe daily (when the UI or RPC report says its profitable to tithe) and then payments come back to the user once every 3 days (approximately) - which is much more predictable than solo mining.  If consistently mined, one user would have 10 payments in a given month (with the full average remuneration) smoothing out any ripples or droughts.

(So therefore there is no need to be scared, as a miner, since you are receiving regular payments, no matter how big the miner base is - they are 10 times per month, on average).

On the extra coins for the foundation, its not better for me, its better for the orphans, and that is actually our #1 mission here - to sponsor orphans.  So if we ended up with an algorithm that helped them more at the expense of our price (until our price improved, through easy adoption), wouldn't that be accomplishing our primary goal?   But just to be fair, lets discuss where those coins came from (since we have the same money supply - they arent coming from thin air).  The difference in one month of POG activity vs PODC activity is in POG, the coins were tithed from a miner to the foundation and they received less net rewards in a given month, and then the foundation sold them for orphanage payments.  In PODC, the coins were given to PODC miners who either saved them or liquidated them to pay their electric bill.  Both of these scenarios are the same - except you say that "the ones who saved them didnt crash the price".  Yes but they will when they have to pay their electric bills.  So, lets go 10,000 feet higher than this:  In reality in a year, the real question will be :  Do we have more PODC miners net or more POG miners?  If the analysis is that we will have 351 PODC, or 2351 POG, (which is quite possible at the low PODC growth rate, and quite possible for an algo to be 'copied' by simply downloading and booting a POG algo), what has a longer term positive effect on the price?  More investors.  This is simply an exercise in discovering what algorithm will multiply with word of mouth.

Electric is gone once its spent, but the orphan benefits are lasting.

This argument against is POG is almost as like you are saying I created it in a delirious state and have no idea what I'm proposing. 

POG is 90% simpler than PODC - let's at least not spread FUD to the masses to make a point.  It only has one variable : tithe_weight for a person to know about (thats how much in total you gave in relation to others over a 24 hour period).  Anyone can grasp that concept. 

In contrast PODC has a dictionary of acronyms - I think we went through this exercise last month with MinersOfMen, he was asking about CPID, Magnitude, Task Weight, UTXO, RAC, supporter sites, sancs, contracts, staking or mining, superblocks, and even after that I don't think (a new user) will actually understand all of it unless they really want to stay with it.

As far as receiving more coins in the foundation that is a good problem to have.   

TheSnat pointed out that GRCpool joined and affected everyone by 10%.

It means your CPID is in the chain, but if you are sure you want to reassociate it, do the command again with "true" appended to the end (that means force=true).
We warn so people dont kill the cpid so easily.

Crypto, I'm really sorry, I should not have reacted so quickly and I apologize.  You are a valued investor and I do value your opinion.

On a side note I tend to react negatively when something else happens in my family - or in my life that seems to add on to the situation, and I know it should have been more insulated, and for that I apologize.

We rolled out 'cancer mining' for BiblePay using Rosetta, not WCG for BiblePay.  The only reason we added WCG was because we ran out of RAH work units.  It was considered a backup project.   (Didn't we just add a lot of PODC improvements this last mandatory, which is only a couple months old, and some for MAC a week ago?  Oh right, you'll never be happy though. )

Anyway, being an open source project you are welcome to contribute in more ways than simply complaining.

Well to be fair, we were discussing one one of about 50 problems related to one-click Rosetta mining (the installation).  Yes, MIP and I did a lot of internal research to crack "installing" Rosetta and we even have a way to silently install boinc and start it - but that type of thing doesn't solve one-click PODC mining. 

You make good points, and actually what you say is sort of pro POG.

I was thinking with POG, we would be cutting the fat off.  We would be disabling PODC, disabling UTXO requirements, not staking, not talking about RAC, disabling the heat mining pool, disabling the supporter pools interfaces for CPID support, and with POG - we would be allowing "heat miners" to mine without expensive equipment (by tithing).  We could have an iPhone type interface with one page that would handle the simplicity of giving (frequency, amount, limits etc), and make it plug n play.  Its not a gimmick btw - an integrated pool is actually something that I havent seen in the cryptoworld.

Yes - starting last month everything is kept in separate dedicated accounts and Im no longer borrowing early to help smooth out the price (in attempt to be above reproach).

I just got back from a family visit near the East Coast, and combined some of the feedback I received.  Honestly I didn't expect non-computer literate people to use BiblePay at first, because I always considered the adoption problem a cryptocurrency barrier of entry, but after this trip I changed my opinion on that.  Because a few of my coworkers from my very early career have decided to download wallets.  Here is the feedback I received:  We are too complicated for my parents to understand, my coworkers, my prior coworkers-truck-drivers, and for my home family (they won't talk about RAC or BOINC here either).  

So I'm looking at this saying:  I believe the problem is that we are completely new-user unfriendly and anti-mass adoption.  If we want to appeal to the masses, we need a platform people can install, use and then talk about the actual wallet features for Gospel.  

I also like how POG aligns with Christianity.  You have to consider giving in order to receive.

https://forum.biblepay.org/index.php?topic=299.0


The Team blacklist has been removed.

Although effective immediately, it takes anywhere from 1-24 hours for the sancs to fully work the old contracts out of the pipeline.