|
ahh of course a modification to PoS reward will be much simpler than rejigging it to allow a short Pow session.
|
|
|
|
Specifically for bumbacoin
woot these are great 
currently auctioning two of these on cryptopia market place with a reserve price of 5000 bumba.
https://www.cryptopia.co.nz/MarketPlace?categoryId=0¤cyId=211&locationId=0&sortBy=Title&searchTerm=&type=All%20Items
==== also we are still giving away bonus coins to stakers,
by sending regular transactions (randomly around every 30 minutes) with random transfer fees up to 70 bumba. if you stake bumbacoin, then you automatically get a chance to get these bonus coins
http://blockchain.bumbacoin.com/address/BEfgRsDm14ntxewGFTpM7XsN6hkrwEiXTGhave just moved 12,300 to this address so you can sort of watch them. basic process is, we send a random amount from the wallet holding this address back to this address, the change from each transaction goes to a brand new random address (but still in the same wallet) ... however it keeps getting sent back to this address so you can watch it.. how to see what fee has been sent. click on a transaction, you can see amounts on the left that were used to source the coins for the amounts on the right. there will be an obvious difference between amounts. this transaction http://blockchain.bumbacoin.com/tx/c82ec3ce73c67e35d5b37cde03b0130c6fa605933571f8bfbf28f552144ac0cashow a combined left (output) amount of 67, with a combined right (input) amount of 57. showing a fee of 10 bumba was used. clicking on the blockhash, http://blockchain.bumbacoin.com/block/5277ae7eca433546a4a1e4b628cb1d7ed91686028056800cd8da4bcb8627e8aayou can see that the middle transaction was for 12 bumba, this is the base PoS reward of 2 bumba, plus the extra fee of 10 bumba. clicking on the transaction, then click on the address takes you to http://blockchain.bumbacoin.com/address/B77SWJwPTYyb83UAYUmkjWoiTxehkWdLsLincreasing the show latest transactions to 100, then on a quick scroll down currently the explorer shows this address has gained bonus fees 9x out of those 100 (this will change over time as it stakes more blocks succesfully) |
|
|
|
Dear All,
I believe we are close to making progress with , however for me to work on the private network setup for the mining , I would need a coinage against the network weight currently at and we can only use the the balance of mined coins , which I believe is close to 1.32m which I came to know is securely and in possession of GREEDYJOHN and thus he has asked me kindly to inform the community of my request publicly on the thread before transferring it into my possession.
Warm Regards,
~SoopY~
if it's necessary i'm all for it either this process will work and droidz will live again or ... my understanding is that there needs to be a hard fork, with a very small PoW reward timeframe to mine the necessary new coins (although possibly not if those bittrex funds don't move lol), for this process to work, it needs the blockchain needs to be on a small private blockchain to ensure the rewards end up in the correct hands. and as soopy is doing the work, immediate access to the funds seems obviously preferable rather than extended access through other persons if the chain needs to be moved backwards and forwards a few times ... or seomthing else. but i assumed the previous request for PoW showed you were past the stage of needing this PoS weight (assumedly to move the chain along). |
|
|
|
there are a few ways that i can think of to help the process - create a centralised chain for the swap. this will be the official chain. must have acceptance by exchanges (eg c-cex) most PoS code has a centralised server checkpointing inbuilt, just need to build clients that accept your centralised server. i'm not sure about how you'd manage PoW though, perhaps using a centralised pool? - using btcpool. allow deposits for 1 week. close deposits for a few days/week/whatever. then auto swap process, any coins on the exchange will get swapped. this will mean any chain attack will have to unwind the few days/weeks/whatever worth of blocks. athough doesnt prevent multiple forks from happening. - take a snapshot of chain. use that with users offereing proof of ownership. more work, no actual swap or burn as you don't do anything to the swapcoin. |
|
|
|
You could possibly make arrangements with the hosting exchanges to create a central chain for the duration. Using the auto-checkpointing feature in most PoS coins. (as long as the coin is PoS) All exchanges would have to agree obviously. -- i'm all up for you continuing to burn coins  obviously there will be further challenges as it's pretty easy to attack coins with weak networks. if you can do as i suggested above, that would be beneficial for everyone as the exchanges will benefit as well if they are targeted too. |
|
|
|
i wants to see dem pictures .. |
|
|
|
2 days 21 hours left, one is bid beyond ye reserve price, one is still virginal and waiting  |
|
|
|
2 days 21 hours left, one is bid beyond ye reserve price, one is still virginal and waiting |
|
|
|
looks like we have two competing threads with the same posts.. woot
well spotted. fixed now, i hope lol thanks for that |
|
|
|
cheery fucks everywhere but on the positive side, i did receive my stake stick been sitting on it, and havent got around to posting such infos yet as i havent even gotten around to plugging it in yet. but thought i should just thank spots for it edit. i was right, posting did manage to encourage me to dig it out and plug it in. only took me far too long. it works but i don't' have any cube to test the wallet. lol .. the fork isnt happening for weeks. |
|
|
|
You could dump any amount of Bumba you wanted at any time, while our decentralized trustlessly transparent accountability deters us from doing that.
lol. i just noticed this. yep, i can dump all the bumba i have control over anytime i want, which goes nowhere the > 95% of the entire coin supply taht you control and can dump whenever you want a trustless system, that deters you ? trustless and deter shouldnt be together in that sentence. you know that? a trustless system would mean it was impossible for you to dump, there would be no deterrence, there would be impossibility. it's not impossible for me to dump bumba, therefore it relies on trust that i don't dump teh bumba it's not impossible for you to dump barr, therefore it relies on trust that you don't dump the barr you don't have trustless accountability. |
|
|
|
hmm, yes. but what about the bits you havent updated ? or are you going to continue to post irrelevant material ?
The fact that I've just proven you a shameless liar is the single most relevant thing in this conversation. you're the shameless liar lol not really, your being consistently wrong doesn't necessarily make you a liar. i guess i win !! happy birthday to me !! woooot i can't believe you keep harping on about some figures that you have updated, i told you they werent' relevant lol. but noooo, you'd rather focus on those and accuse me of being a liar. Burn Period #2-B, January 1 to January 30, 2016:
- - To Be Decided
—————————————————————————–
please tell me why you believe that Intrinsin did not get his swap data from the exchange,
and i will tell you why i do.BTCPoolExchange reported 324,689.
intristin reported 714,348, and then he reported 449,479, and that is still what he's reporting.
I have included multiple links, multiple times, to prove all these statements.
You have ignored the facts and you continue to talk nonsense.
...
lol around we go back in circles. first point.
intrinsin reported a figure that was reported to him by btcpool. you deny this, and say he did not get it from btcpool. please prove where he got the figure from. not one of your previous links does anything to suggest that intrinsin reported anything other than figures supplied to him by btcpool. at worst, they suggest that intrinsin has not updated the actual figures. second point,
your Ann is not uptodate, pointing which bits are now uptodate (because i pointed it out to you) is not relevant to how uptodate other sections are not. me first
1. intrinsin reported figures given to him from btcpool
No, he didn't. You keep saying that, so you must believe it. But you haven't explained why you believe that. perhaps you can explain first why you believe he didn't? please prove where these figures came from. barr_official replies
please prove where these figures came from.
From the owner of BTCPoolExchange, which I just quoted again in my last post. I won't quote him again, since you're either a troll or you can't read. |
|
|
|
here's a simple question if you hold 1million ACP, is it better for the swap ratio between BARR:ACP to be set at 60 or 600 sats? which answer will return you a higher amount of BARR? 600 sats is better as it will return you a higher amount of BARR.
ACP was trading at 60 sats,
you swapped at 600 sats,
ACP was trading at 600 sats. We swapped at 600 sats. runpaint thought he could easily clear up the matter, defend BARR and shut up the fudder, by asking you to confirm that BARR was the reason for ACP going from 60 sats to 600. |
|
|
|
looks like we have two competing threads with the same posts.. woot https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1352963.msg13833797#msg13833797here's my reply to the above from the other thread .. (the only trust issues anyone has accused me of has been those you created with no basis ) When you show up to someone's ANN and say they shouldn't be doing certain things, be ready for them to point out that you're doing the exact same things. You're the one who accused yourself. lol. great defense. he made me do it!! he was on MY thread!! i'm innocent!! Did I show up in your ANN to do that, or was it only in direct response to your posts in which you showed that you're either a troll or you can't read? and there you go again impugning again my good person. shame on you. my posts were neither troll nor showed evidence that i could not read. such a false dichotomy.
ACP was trading at 60 sats,
you swapped at 600 sats,
ACP was trading at 600 sats. We swapped at 600 sats. there's a great quote somewhere saying how ACP was trading at 60 sats. until you pumped it. then swapped it. runpaint thought he could easily clear up the matter, defend BARR and shut up the fudder, by asking you to confirm that BARR was the reason for ACP going from 60 sats to 600. you're working with an artificially inflated system by arbitrarily injecting funds into the process. this is no different to selling things in a market place for bumba. But you are selling things in a marketplace for Bumba, so why did you bring it up since you say it's no different from what you're doing yourself? yes, i told you earlier that we were creating artificial demand by doing that. that is not the problem with what you are doing. you havent even bothered working with a truly trustable system. you could dump any amount of Barr you wanted at any time. We're using the exact same system you're using: we never claimed to have a trustless system, as you have. Our transparent accountability is trustless, because anyone can see exactly where every single BARR goes on the NXT blockchain in real-time.
yes, if you dump, people can see where the coins come from. you do not have a trustless systemmaybe you can comment on how it seems you quite obviously own at least ~61% of distributed BARR through three different accounts Kind of like how the top addresses hold 63% of Bumbacoins and you haven't said which addresses you control? top 25 addresses, vs your 3 addresses ?? i have no idea what the rest of your richlists looks like looks like i own #6 and #8 , about 13% lol bodgey maths/ 6.5% plus i have maybe 5% on exchange <--not sure about that figure. 1. which NXT accounts holding Barr/Offs do you or other team members own? Let's see how a pro answers: Most of them. What is the point of that question? Why do you have multiple premine addresses and multiple "dev fund" addresses for Bumbacoin? Why can't you have trustless transparent accountability like BARR does? you don't have trustless accountability. you have an open ledger, so does bumbacoin, we just don't have arbitrary data. we never bothered cos we lack any delusions of grandeur, although it would be nice, but can't honestly see the need. at the moment we have multiple addresses because thats' how it's happened, change addresses have been a big reason for it, the swap happened over a year ago, would be surprising if we'd never moved any coins. lets put all the coins in address A. let's send some coins for purpose X. now the remaining funds, ie the change from this transaction, has gone to address B. etc, so, let's put all the funds in addresses A B C, then we can leave most of the coins in their declared addresses when we move coins. yes we could use coin control, but i use daemons by preference which lack coin control features. yes, i could craft transactions incoroporating specified change address as origin address, but, i havent. much easier just sending them... and as you love to point out. all the tx are there on the blockchain for anyone to look at so, in conclusion, we do have the same level of trustless accountability if anyone wants to dig through the chain. lol |
|
|
|
edit. these answers are mirrored here, as the same questions appeared in two seperate threads --- (the only trust issues anyone has accused me of has been those you created with no basis ) When you show up to someone's ANN and say they shouldn't be doing certain things, be ready for them to point out that you're doing the exact same things. You're the one who accused yourself. lol. great defense. he made me do it!! he was on MY thread!! i'm innocent!! Did I show up in your ANN to do that, or was it only in direct response to your posts in which you showed that you're either a troll or you can't read? and there you go again impugning again my good person. shame on you. my posts were neither troll nor showed evidence that i could not read. such a false dichotomy.
ACP was trading at 60 sats,
you swapped at 600 sats,
ACP was trading at 600 sats. We swapped at 600 sats. there's a great quote somewhere saying how ACP was trading at 60 sats. until you pumped it. then swapped it. runpaint thought he could easily clear up the matter, defend BARR and shut up the fudder, by asking you to confirm that BARR was the reason for ACP going from 60 sats to 600. you're working with an artificially inflated system by arbitrarily injecting funds into the process. this is no different to selling things in a market place for bumba. But you are selling things in a marketplace for Bumba, so why did you bring it up since you say it's no different from what you're doing yourself? yes, i told you earlier that we were creating artificial demand by doing that. that is not the problem with what you are doing. you havent even bothered working with a truly trustable system. you could dump any amount of Barr you wanted at any time. We're using the exact same system you're using: we never claimed to have a trustless system, as you have. Our transparent accountability is trustless, because anyone can see exactly where every single BARR goes on the NXT blockchain in real-time.
yes, if you dump, people can see where the coins come from. you do not have a trustless systemmaybe you can comment on how it seems you quite obviously own at least ~61% of distributed BARR through three different accounts Kind of like how the top addresses hold 63% of Bumbacoins and you haven't said which addresses you control? top 25 addresses, vs your 3 addresses ?? i have no idea what the rest of your richlists looks like looks like i own #6 and #8 , about 13% lol bodgey maths/ 6.5% plus i have maybe 5% on exchange <--not sure about that figure. 1. which NXT accounts holding Barr/Offs do you or other team members own? Let's see how a pro answers: Most of them. What is the point of that question? Why do you have multiple premine addresses and multiple "dev fund" addresses for Bumbacoin? Why can't you have trustless transparent accountability like BARR does? you don't have trustless accountability. you have an open ledger, so does bumbacoin, we just don't have arbitrary data. we never bothered cos we lack any delusions of grandeur, although it would be nice, but can't honestly see the need. at the moment we have multiple addresses because thats' how it's happened, change addresses have been a big reason for it, the swap happened over a year ago, would be surprising if we'd never moved any coins. lets put all the coins in address A. let's send some coins for purpose X. now the remaining funds, ie the change from this transaction, has gone to address B. etc, so, let's put all the funds in addresses A B C, then we can leave most of the coins in their declared addresses when we move coins. yes we could use coin control, but i use daemons by preference which lack coin control features. yes, i could craft transactions incoroporating specified change address as origin address, but, i havent. much easier just sending them... and as you love to point out. all the tx are there on the blockchain for anyone to look at so, in conclusion, we do have the same level of trustless accountability if anyone wants to dig through the chain. lol |
|
|
|
please. i mentioned that your ann and website are not up to date some time ago.
you havent' updated them.
thank you.
you could have updated them since that post.. idk
but if you havent, please up date them.
edit. ok, you havent updated your ANN, which means you are obviously calling me a liar for something that is true? what does that make you?
then from ANN OP (which seems updated since my last perusal?)
BARR – 230,356 coins burned out of 993,343 in circulation = 23% (self-burned BARR, sent back to the burnfund)
hmm, yes. but what about the bits you havent updated ? or are you going to continue to post irrelevant material ? |
|
|
|
BTCPoolExchange reported 324,689. intristin reported 714,348, and then he reported 449,479, and that is still what he's reporting. I have included multiple links, multiple times, to prove all these statements. You have ignored the facts and you continue to talk nonsense. You posted a figure from our ANN on February 4th, and then you came here today to say it hasn't been updated. But the current figure is different from what you quoted on February 4th. That proves that it has been updated. It also proves that your statement was not only false, but easily verifiable as false to anyone who was trying to be honest. in the OP
BARR – 230,356 coins burned out of 780,856 in circulation = 29% (self-burned BARR, sent back to the burnfund)
And it was never a relevant point anyway, because the figures were always up-to-date where people could find them through links in the same ANN. It also had nothing to do with intristin's false figures that were not out-of-date, but simply fake figures that were never accurate at any time. lol around we go back in circles. first point.
intrinsin reported a figure that was reported to him by btcpool. you deny this, and say he did not get it from btcpool. please prove where he got the figure from. not one of your previous links does anything to suggest that intrinsin reported anything other than figures supplied to him by btcpool. at worst, they suggest that intrinsin has not updated the actual figures. second point,
your Ann is not uptodate, pointing which bits are now uptodate (because i pointed it out to you) is not relevant to how uptodate other sections are not. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
