So really you are turning yourself into a fully skilled crypto developer.
It's not my intention. I'm a cognitive psychologist by discipline and a cognitive scientist by profession, the latter mainly defined by its use of computational models as investigative tools (hence my broad but patchy knowledge of programming / software engineering --- it was acquired pragmatically and in a piecemeal fashion). Although local constraints circumscribe my involvement to that of a hobbyist, if I had a professional interest as such, it would be in what you might be forgiven for thinking is a bit far-fetched but is very real and also very pertinent to altcoin communities: aspects of Theory of Mind as they pertain to collective intelligence.
https://phys.org/news/2015-06-intelligence-online.htmlhttps://gfbertini.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/theory-of-mind-predicts-collective-intelligence-equally-well-online-and-face-to-face/For convenience:
Have you ever wondered what factors may shape the interactions we have in online chatrooms? With the advent of the Internet 20+ years ago, the ways in which we communicate have drastically changed, allowing us to easily interact nonverbally or anonymously. Whether it's in a chatroom, email thread, or an online forum, most of us have taken part in some form of group communication on the Internet. Maybe, unbeknownst to us, we became a part of the group's collective intelligence, a form of group intelligence that can surface after collaboration and competition among individuals in the group. But some scientists are wondering, how can we measure the ability of others to communicate in a group, and how can we quantify the effectiveness of a group?
Two traits that make us "distinctly human" are our abilities to empathize and to interact well in social settings with others. These traits are usually measured in face-to-face situations, and may be more difficult to measure online, away from in-person social cues.
One factor that correlates to overall collective intelligence is "Theory of Mind" (ToM), or the ability of one individual to understand the mental state of another and recognize it as distinct from their own; what some may consider "mind reading." In a recent PLOS ONE study, MIT researchers tested the hypothesis that ToM, which can be used to predict collective intelligence in collaborative face-to-face tasks, can almost equally predict collective intelligence in online collaboration. One individual's ability to "read" the behavior of another individual can help contribute to successful communication and overall group intelligence. More than that, this ToM ability may exist even where verbal communication is prohibited, and may contribute to successful communication within an online group.
I'm applying an altcoin context to the questions: “how can we measure the ability of others to communicate in a group, and how can we quantify the effectiveness of a group”.
Except that I'm changing the question away from measurement and quantification to: “how can we
best support ...”
Basically, my interest is in understanding the user task information requirements - what information is required to perform a specific task and how it should be presented to best support the process (of creating and maintaining accurate mental models of others).
Are there any specific questions ...
Unfortunately not. The Navcoin clone of Bitcoin Core 0.13 was an exercise in expediency, with parts of the code short-circuited in order to simplify the initial PoW phase - which I hadn't expected, so wasn't looking for.
It's because by the time Bitcoin Core 0.13 was released, the block generation part of the in-wallet miner had been completely obsoleted on mainnet by the shift to ASIC mining and the functionality/API had been adjusted to assume a testnet context with
setgenerate (create blocks via continuous hashing) giving way to
generate/generatetoaddress (create blocks on demand).
I tried the x11 miner without success and stopped at that point. So I'd had to use
generatetoaddress to hand-crank the blockchain. What I hadn't spotted was that the API block generation code generated candidate blocks
according to PoW diff rules, in an entirely different location in the codebase, the code had been adjusted so that (all) candidate blocks were
checked against PoS diff rules, hence the failure to match. I guess the Navcoin devs chose a different route.
I was able to route the candidate PoW blocks to the appropriate checks and get
generatetoaddress working, hand-cranking (via a scheduled task) the PoW block generation phase. I have left Navcoin's staking schedule in place (because it has a 2hr minimum staking time whereas Bee has 7
days and I'm not hanging around for a week).
Anyway, staking does seem to be working ...
(The 50 BEE amounts aren't actually stakes, they are mislabelled PoW blocks.)
Also do you mean because we are trying to conduct this upgrade in the fairest way with this kind of auto balance shift to the new chain that it is proving to be much more complex than if we just forked nav coin and did a coin swap over to the new code base like that?
No, I was merely explaining the presence of a test premine in the committed code as “Plan B”. But having already performed some limited tests of the ledger transfer mechanism, I do have some justification for expecting “Plan A” to execute flawlessly.
But you might want to try it out for yourself. ATM, a candidate pre-release version of the Bee Core 0.13 network
using a throwaway UTXO set is (thus far) happily ticking away on minkiz.co (our rented Hetzner box) and on two Linux laptops running locally (my new XPS with Mint 18.2 and my old Acer running Ubuntu 17.10).
I imagine most subscribers to this thread use Windows and am happy to report that (bar a couple of small tweaks) MXE cross-compilation of Windows binaries works out of the box (
https://minkiz.co/noodlings/bee/bee-qt.exe.zip),
although I've not had chance to check its functioning on a Windows VM as yet.
Edit: Windows users will need to set port=19999 in the config file, at least until I refresh the binary
Linux source code is available
pro tem from:
https://github.com/gjhiggins/beenIt should just sync straight up. If not,
addnode=144.76.64.49:19999You should be able to check whether your imported BEE2 privkeys show any balance at all and if they do, whether they stake (2hrs minimum wait, atm). It's an elderly UTXO, when we're ready actually do the hard fork, I'll update it to reflect the distribution at that point and re-do entire the genesis block creation / PoW mining phase.
Cheers
Graham
That's quite interesting and I do also find that the case in real life too. The more a person can chameleon himself to fit smoothly with another or for the best within a group of persons the more valuable they are. Even more so if the group is very varied in personality/ability types and they (the chameleons are like the oil that ensure least friction between the cogs. They are kind of like the interface that allows a connection between all parties. Extremely smart people often do not relate well to normal persons so their value (in a collective online effort) is not always as dominant as their iq would have you assume.
Great news on the new wallet I am going to download and test this out asap.
I have been sadly contemplating not having a lambo lately (since my crypto stash of value tumbled to more second hand older bmw levels) so not been so active on this board. But now i have spotted bee is springing to life again it will be great to help get it back on its feet.
I will ask if john can send out the mass message for beelievers to test the new bee wallet out.
thanks for your hard work graham. Although i don;t follow what exactly is happening it seems obvious it is a time consuming and quite a nasty task to get all of this stuff working correctly.
Show Posts
