Don't panic, eyeball-torture for testing purposes only. 

Select Your Own 'Orrible Theme 'feature' now fully working!

Use at your own risk, may induce dizziness, nausea and rage...   

Just some food for thought, here's our competition: https://bitreserve.org/en/homepage

I'm looking forward to putting our in-wallet version of this together: https://bitreserve.org/en/status  

We can beat them primarily on decentralisation and therefore security, privacy and no signup crap. Downloading the BCR wallet should be it.

Oh, and BCR reserves will belong to everyone with BCR, not just the parent company, and that's an ongoing revenue stream...  

Having a gander at the recent commits now, still mostly Klingon to me... 

No disrespect to bitcreditscc, but I think the updates will be incremental anyway, some pretty hefty changes suggested recently, they aren't all going to get released in one giant and fully functional upgrade.

Also, halfway there with the 'pick your own ugly paint job' thing:

Finding these themes will be an exercise left entirely to the user.    However, you have a choice of having the browser point at and only at a specific directory as above (eg. ~/.bitcredit/themes) or allowing the user to roam free and try to load christ knows what...

...which would mean I'd probably have to add some 'is this actually a valid css/qss file' code to prevent complications when someone tried to load an .mp3 or a .pdf or something. I would prefer the former, we could ship additional themes as they got tested for actual usability.

Any of the DASH guides will also do as a reference, but BCR doesn't have the fixed IP + port 9999 restriction. You can specify any port you want with a 'port=xxxx' line in your bitcredit.conf file(s) - you might also need to tick the 'Map port using UPnP' box under Options > Network if you're launching them from your local QT client.

BTC is going nowhere long term. PoW is a grotesquely inefficient farce, security theatre at best not actual security, it doesn't scale and it's horribly exclusionary. Any rally in BTC price will be short lived.

ETF's and other chicanery will just serve as another table at the casino for the high rollers to gamble at using the free chips their fiat central banking buddies crank out for them.

If BTC side chains manage to provide better utility than BTC, pegging them to BTC instead of letting market forces establish their price will kill them. Arbitrary value assignment leads inevitably to systemic distortion and collapse.



I think your tinfoil hat is probably working fine, but BTC will continue to sabotage itself, at least with regard to its supposed goals. I don't think any government intervention will be needed, BTC zealots are all clambering into bed with the devil as fast as they can drop their pants. 

Right now 250000 but in the near future 50000. Need more BN's as tx validation is being moved to them..

bitcredit-qt (stripped) from my latest build is 12.6MB, 7zip gets it to 3.5MB, rar 3.8MB, various tar flavours about 5MB. We can at least save on 'shipping weight' if needed.

A compressed blockchain probably wouldn't hurt either, eventually, though it's not a pressing concern.

Simple way of seeing publicly if your node is listed, but you can check that via pubkey as well as privately. Early design decision by Evan Duffield I suppose, you're right, is there any reason for the network to maintain a list of IP addresses for a specific subclass of peers when as far as I can tell those peers don't even need the information themselves? And the list isn't necessarily accurate anyway, as I mentioned a few posts up.

Up yours Mr [2001:0:9d38:6abd:2427:3bfc:58a7:e646]:8877 for forcing me to deduce that in QT-speak, "stretch," actually means, "stretch, unless it doesn't fit, in which case, shrink!"     Couldn't figure out why the scrollbar wasn't showing up as the Pubkey column kept getting truncated.



edit: I'm not sure what the point of the Active column is. If it isn't active, it's not going to be listed anyway. (I'm sure you all find this stuff absolutely fascinating!  )

You can use onion addresses now AFAIK?


I don't know enough about I2P to sensibly comment, but you only need to know the IP that a Banknode is initially launched from. This is what gets reported by the client even after your BN has switched to another IP. I've run my BN from home for weeks on a laptop that has access to and switches between 3 different ISP connections, all dynamic, with no issues.

The code doesn't use the original IP for much, DASH's fixed IP and fixed port requirements are arbitrary restrictions.

In short, I think there are plenty of other things more pressing currently. 

IPv6 funkiness?

I'm going to have to stick a horizontal scrollbar in there.

@bitcreditscc: I'm trying to get the QT wallet to build in QT Creator, but the src appears to be missing paymentrequest.pb.h?

It's an #include in paymentrequestplus.h and commenting it out gives 'payments does not have a specified type' errors.

Any advice would be appreciated, if I can get the desktop wallet building in Creator (or via qmake/make) I'm hopeful I can get it to spit out an Android .apk

Sidechains are fundamentally indistinguishable from separate currencies, although they may cohabit on shared infrastructure. I thought BTC zealots hated alts?  

Sidechains might be easier to peg in value to the motherchain, though imposing price pegs instead of letting market forces determine value has never really worked and the attempt is always systemically destructive, as a glance at the current fiat shambles will demonstrate.

Bitcoin Forum > Alternate cryptocurrencies > Marketplace (Altcoins)   -   some devs advertise there, maybe an ad of our own- - java dev wanted?

Yes, the sooner we leave toytown the better, but I really hope miners can see the benefit of spending money directly on the development of their assets instead of giving it to the power company.

And don't forget, BCR will be backed by that money.

If 'Coin' type names were still in vogue I'd suggest 'Paradime^TM', and Paradime Shift^TM' for the fiat bridge.  

edit: if we can somehow get the goldbugs and silverstackers on board too... maybe maintain some of the backing in PMs? The Chinese / Indians / Russians love their shiny...

Thankfully this is a moderated thread. We are due a deluge of trolls when word gets out about D2D and Sig/SmartPoW.

And 6-12 months tops from now, everyone will probably be doing it and competitive Proof of Wattage will be viewed as some collective mental aberration.  

If BCR can crack the fiat entry barrier then... well, I'm actually exited about this stuff again.

Maybe Direct2Developer is a bit of a misnomer? It's really Direct2Blockchain  / Direct2Community / Direct2EveryoneWithAnyBCR, because anyone holding BCR is going to be holding tokens freely interchangeable with traditional currencies, because the distributed BCR blockchain will be administering those reserves.

We're a considerable way from the need for paid-for marketing. Most of the features aren't implemented yet.

DASH has a few guys spamming twitter etc. but I'm not convinced they have achieved much. Look at BTC - 6 years old and real world use is close to zero. Identifying our target market and the decision makers in it is key, since we can't afford a full page ad in the WSJ just yet.

Jo Public simply doesn't care (yet) and current wallets are too complex for Jo and Jo's granny. The corporate sector is another story though...

I think there should be some effort by us all to get out some info about the upcoming, "BCR ditches wasteful, exclusionary and unscalable Proof of Work as a means of blockchain security and distribution in favour of more secure Overlay Network Transaction Verification, Direct2Developer Funding and  Direct2Community Inclusive Distribution..." - or something. Revised thread title anyway. Possibly need to make it a bit snappier. 

SigPoW / SmartPoW - better blockchain security with no waste
Direct2Developer Funding - not direct to power company
Inclusive Distribution - anyone can acquire newly minted coins, not just geeks with expensive hardware and cheap electricity

I was thinking purely in terms of avoiding a BN hashpower arms race, if all earn the same regardless of whichever one happens to solve the block then there's no incentive to throw pointless processor cycles at it... I'm not overly concerned about the exact amount/split. As long as BNs don't take a paycut from current levels of course. 

The limiting consecutively mined blocks approach also sounds great to limit damage in the event of BN subversion.