[ANN][XRB]Cryptocurrency's killer app: RaiBlocks micropayments

[anders lokka]

Faucet off!
It's this coin just an experiment or something serious with a detailed roadmap and scores?
If it's not just an experiment,dev shoud guarantee a 100% full working faucet, since the entire distribution is based on faucet.

[jibble]

Radio voice*

Awww well folks looks like the faucet is currently empty and work is being done but don't worry the blockchain is still functioning , if you wish to buy or sell your "hard" earned Mrai , come down to jibble's trade shack for those looking to buy or sell Mrai or simply for the warm hugging embrace of some strange tramp , jibble's trade shack covers all your needs*


* Does not cover all your needs , just buying and selling Mrai , not even the tramp  

[hakanbalta577]

We are waiting, hope the problem can solve fastly  we need to eat mrai, it is delicious

[btcltccoins]

Today we doubled our participation rate again which is great news for popularity.

We let the faucet stay at it rate we set a few days ago even with the increased traffic so it's close to empty again and will be for a bit while we calculate rates.

I'm going to take some time this afternoon to discuss some of the technical questions and roadmap goals asked in the last few days.

Do you know Why your Faucet is having load and increased traffic for a couple of days. People are offering Captha Jobs and giving good price per captha. You can check them in the Services section.

This is not fare for some odd reason i guess.

You are requested to  make the rate high for free claim and increase the time duration.
For example, 10,000 Mrai Free every 12 Hours.


This will discourage the people  becoming / Claiming the owner of your captha company and offering jobs.

See the Services sections for this..

Act now .
Thanks

[clemahieu]

There's been some interest in where I see the long term position of RaiBlocks, does it have a business plan or a way to generate funding.  I don't view RaiBlocks as something that should have or needs a business plan; it's more of a technical specification that people can build other real revenue generating businesses on top of. 

The goal is to have minimal ongoing expenses so any cost of operation could be rolled in to a normal cost of business like bandwidth or storage investment.  Ideally I think RaiBlocks is something that deserves an IETF RFC that's maintained by by the industry but needs almost no change, maintenance, and no investment.

The last week of faucet distribution, despite being an enormous burden to core development and a distraction to issue fixing, has been a great network stress test.  All of the representative nodes run on VPS servers with 1 shared CPU core and had no problem processing the load.  The network is designed so nodes that experience load are those that are sending or receiving balances in proportion to their individual activity.

[Krista]

When the faucet will start to work?

[- SpaceMan]

When the faucet will start to work?

Good question..

[hakanbalta577]

When the faucet will start to work?

Good question..

Really good question  Are we gonna wait or sleep 

[- SpaceMan]

When the faucet will start to work?

Good question..

Really good question  Are we gonna wait or sleep 

Dev should say something.. Cause the faucet was down today already.

[Cryptorials]

There's been some interest in where I see the long term position of RaiBlocks, does it have a business plan or a way to generate funding.  I don't view RaiBlocks as something that should have or needs a business plan; it's more of a technical specification that people can build other real revenue generating businesses on top of. 

The goal is to have minimal ongoing expenses so any cost of operation could be rolled in to a normal cost of business like bandwidth or storage investment.  Ideally I think RaiBlocks is something that deserves an IETF RFC that's maintained by by the industry but needs almost no change, maintenance, and no investment.

The last week of faucet distribution, despite being an enormous burden to core development and a distraction to issue fixing, has been a great network stress test.  All of the representative nodes run on VPS servers with 1 shared CPU core and had no problem processing the load.  The network is designed so nodes that experience load are those that are sending or receiving balances in proportion to their individual activity.

An admirable approach. Glad your representative servers are holding up ok, I think you may end up taking the whole burden of this yourself for a while. Do you have any plans to do anything to encourage others to run representative nodes, or at least do their own PoW?

[clemahieu]

There's been some interest in where I see the long term position of RaiBlocks, does it have a business plan or a way to generate funding.  I don't view RaiBlocks as something that should have or needs a business plan; it's more of a technical specification that people can build other real revenue generating businesses on top of. 

The goal is to have minimal ongoing expenses so any cost of operation could be rolled in to a normal cost of business like bandwidth or storage investment.  Ideally I think RaiBlocks is something that deserves an IETF RFC that's maintained by by the industry but needs almost no change, maintenance, and no investment.

The last week of faucet distribution, despite being an enormous burden to core development and a distraction to issue fixing, has been a great network stress test.  All of the representative nodes run on VPS servers with 1 shared CPU core and had no problem processing the load.  The network is designed so nodes that experience load are those that are sending or receiving balances in proportion to their individual activity.

An admirable approach. Glad your representative servers are holding up ok, I think you may end up taking the whole burden of this yourself for a while. Do you have any plans to do anything to encourage others to run representative nodes, or at least do their own PoW?

For the PoW, 1 proof is generated on the send and 1 proof is generated on the receive, this is why people will see CPU activity when receiving from the faucet, the faucet itself also generating its own work.  Other than that there is no PoW in the network, only when transactions are being added and the work is only applied to those doing the transactions.

Taking the example of RFCs and how they're maintained, how do you see their incentive structure being similar or different than something like this?  From my perspective, groups maintain the TCP standard without TCP giving direct in-protocol incentives for its use, people build on top of it which is where their incentives lie.

[- SpaceMan]

There's been some interest in where I see the long term position of RaiBlocks, does it have a business plan or a way to generate funding.  I don't view RaiBlocks as something that should have or needs a business plan; it's more of a technical specification that people can build other real revenue generating businesses on top of. 

The goal is to have minimal ongoing expenses so any cost of operation could be rolled in to a normal cost of business like bandwidth or storage investment.  Ideally I think RaiBlocks is something that deserves an IETF RFC that's maintained by by the industry but needs almost no change, maintenance, and no investment.

The last week of faucet distribution, despite being an enormous burden to core development and a distraction to issue fixing, has been a great network stress test.  All of the representative nodes run on VPS servers with 1 shared CPU core and had no problem processing the load.  The network is designed so nodes that experience load are those that are sending or receiving balances in proportion to their individual activity.

An admirable approach. Glad your representative servers are holding up ok, I think you may end up taking the whole burden of this yourself for a while. Do you have any plans to do anything to encourage others to run representative nodes, or at least do their own PoW?

For the PoW, 1 proof is generated on the send and 1 proof is generated on the receive, this is why people will see CPU activity when receiving from the faucet, the faucet itself also generating its own work.  Other than that there is no PoW in the network, only when transactions are being added and the work is only applied to those doing the transactions.

Taking the example of RFCs and how they're maintained, how do you see their incentive structure being similar or different than something like this?  From my perspective, groups maintain the TCP standard without TCP giving direct in-protocol incentives for its use, people build on top of it which is where their incentives lie.

Dude why the faucet is off man?

It was already off today.

[clemahieu]

There's been some interest in where I see the long term position of RaiBlocks, does it have a business plan or a way to generate funding.  I don't view RaiBlocks as something that should have or needs a business plan; it's more of a technical specification that people can build other real revenue generating businesses on top of. 

The goal is to have minimal ongoing expenses so any cost of operation could be rolled in to a normal cost of business like bandwidth or storage investment.  Ideally I think RaiBlocks is something that deserves an IETF RFC that's maintained by by the industry but needs almost no change, maintenance, and no investment.

The last week of faucet distribution, despite being an enormous burden to core development and a distraction to issue fixing, has been a great network stress test.  All of the representative nodes run on VPS servers with 1 shared CPU core and had no problem processing the load.  The network is designed so nodes that experience load are those that are sending or receiving balances in proportion to their individual activity.

An admirable approach. Glad your representative servers are holding up ok, I think you may end up taking the whole burden of this yourself for a while. Do you have any plans to do anything to encourage others to run representative nodes, or at least do their own PoW?

For the PoW, 1 proof is generated on the send and 1 proof is generated on the receive, this is why people will see CPU activity when receiving from the faucet, the faucet itself also generating its own work.  Other than that there is no PoW in the network, only when transactions are being added and the work is only applied to those doing the transactions.

Taking the example of RFCs and how they're maintained, how do you see their incentive structure being similar or different than something like this?  From my perspective, groups maintain the TCP standard without TCP giving direct in-protocol incentives for its use, people build on top of it which is where their incentives lie.

Dude why the faucet is off man?

It was already off today.

It's off because we've been over target the last couple days and we're focusing on making sure it works going forward.

Everyone concerned with the long term health of the project is primarily concerned with the health of the network itself, first and foremost.

[- SpaceMan]

There's been some interest in where I see the long term position of RaiBlocks, does it have a business plan or a way to generate funding.  I don't view RaiBlocks as something that should have or needs a business plan; it's more of a technical specification that people can build other real revenue generating businesses on top of. 

The goal is to have minimal ongoing expenses so any cost of operation could be rolled in to a normal cost of business like bandwidth or storage investment.  Ideally I think RaiBlocks is something that deserves an IETF RFC that's maintained by by the industry but needs almost no change, maintenance, and no investment.

The last week of faucet distribution, despite being an enormous burden to core development and a distraction to issue fixing, has been a great network stress test.  All of the representative nodes run on VPS servers with 1 shared CPU core and had no problem processing the load.  The network is designed so nodes that experience load are those that are sending or receiving balances in proportion to their individual activity.

An admirable approach. Glad your representative servers are holding up ok, I think you may end up taking the whole burden of this yourself for a while. Do you have any plans to do anything to encourage others to run representative nodes, or at least do their own PoW?

For the PoW, 1 proof is generated on the send and 1 proof is generated on the receive, this is why people will see CPU activity when receiving from the faucet, the faucet itself also generating its own work.  Other than that there is no PoW in the network, only when transactions are being added and the work is only applied to those doing the transactions.

Taking the example of RFCs and how they're maintained, how do you see their incentive structure being similar or different than something like this?  From my perspective, groups maintain the TCP standard without TCP giving direct in-protocol incentives for its use, people build on top of it which is where their incentives lie.

Dude why the faucet is off man?

It was already off today.

It's off because we've been over target the last couple days and we're focusing on making sure it works going forward.

Everyone concerned with the long term health of the project is primarily concerned with the health of the network itself, first and foremost.

So when it will be up again? Today? Or..?

[jibble]

For the PoW, 1 proof is generated on the send and 1 proof is generated on the receive, this is why people will see CPU activity when receiving from the faucet, the faucet itself also generating its own work.  Other than that there is no PoW in the network, only when transactions are being added and the work is only applied to those doing the transactions.

Taking the example of RFCs and how they're maintained, how do you see their incentive structure being similar or different than something like this?  From my perspective, groups maintain the TCP standard without TCP giving direct in-protocol incentives for its use, people build on top of it which is where their incentives lie.

Thanks for the information , it is a cool unique way of looking at transactions on a blockchain , instead of paying a fee for the sending of a transaction you are using a small amount of CPU usage for what amounts to less than a few seconds.

Since this method having each transaction confirm itself by sender and receiver and their resources being used , does this mean scale-ability is greater than that of other conventional cryto currencies or has not enough testing been done yet?

Also i do understand that while my trade thread has given an incentive for people to pay people smaller amounts of bitcoin to pay others to complete the captchas for them thus increasing their ability to claim more coins than others, is there anything you have in mind that might be able to curb this behavior and make the distribution less incentivized for these people . I know the trade thread may be partly to blame for this occurrence but any adding to an exchange would of had an equal and perhaps larger effect taking place . and i think the benefits of introducing new users to the project has been beneficial and awareness of the currency  

[Cryptorials]

For the PoW, 1 proof is generated on the send and 1 proof is generated on the receive, this is why people will see CPU activity when receiving from the faucet, the faucet itself also generating its own work.  Other than that there is no PoW in the network, only when transactions are being added and the work is only applied to those doing the transactions.

Taking the example of RFCs and how they're maintained, how do you see their incentive structure being similar or different than something like this?  From my perspective, groups maintain the TCP standard without TCP giving direct in-protocol incentives for its use, people build on top of it which is where their incentives lie.

I thought 'representative nodes' were ones that were doing this send and receive PoW for other users? Your comment made me think that this was already happening.

I understand that you don't want financial rewards within the protocol for running nodes and I'm not trying to get you to go against that. I was thinking of encouraging people through facilitating it or through promoting the idea of it rather than actual bribery.  I'm not sure I would want to set one up right  now, but I would be curious what's involved in having a representative node rather than regular wallet (unless I've miss-remembered what they actually are) and perhaps at some point before too long there may be other people curious enough to want to give it a try.

[clemahieu]

For the PoW, 1 proof is generated on the send and 1 proof is generated on the receive, this is why people will see CPU activity when receiving from the faucet, the faucet itself also generating its own work.  Other than that there is no PoW in the network, only when transactions are being added and the work is only applied to those doing the transactions.

Taking the example of RFCs and how they're maintained, how do you see their incentive structure being similar or different than something like this?  From my perspective, groups maintain the TCP standard without TCP giving direct in-protocol incentives for its use, people build on top of it which is where their incentives lie.

Thanks for the information , it is a cool unique way of looking at transactions on a blockchain , instead of paying a fee for the sending of a transaction you are using a small amount of CPU usage for what amounts to less than a few seconds.

Since this method having each transaction confirm itself by sender and receiver and their resources being used , does this mean scale-ability is greater than that of other conventional cryto currencies or has not enough testing been done yet?

Also i do understand that while my trade thread has given an incentive for people to pay people smaller amounts of bitcoin to pay others to complete the captchas for them thus increasing their ability to claim more coins than others, is there anything you have in mind that might be able to curb this behavior and make the distribution less incentivized for these people . I know the trade thread may be partly to blame for this occurrence but any adding to an exchange would of had an equal and perhaps larger effect taking place . and i think the benefits of introducing new users to the project has been beneficial and awareness of the currency  

I think this method is an incredible benefit to scalability and that's one of the things I'm most excited about and hope people share in that.  Proof of work verification is several million times easier than generation, despite the fact that I had a 24core system being saturated running the faucet because the faucet was creating transactions, the VPS 1 core servers that are the representative nodes were sitting at less than 1% CPU utilization.

I really liked your trade thread, thanks for doing that I think a lot of people wanted it!

The trade thread had a side effect of creating that secondary faucet mining market but that's to be expected, my only miscalculation was in how many people were willing to sit clicking captchas for hours for essentially no money.  So I created an artificial scarcity that's being satisfied by people willing to spend time for xrb which they in turn sell for BTC to people who don't want to spend time clicking the captcha.

The initial distribution is my absolute least favorite part of this whole thing because no matter what happens, someone sees it as unfair.  I would much rather be spending my time on the technical aspects and helping people setting up systems that make use of rai nodes.  There are some doing setting them up and unfortunately my time has been saturated by a mountain of faucet requests, which I don't see as providing long term value.

[cryptoboy.architect]

I sort of started that secondary market and was overwhlemed with people willing to solve captchas. In fact they said this was 10x the going rate. I just wanted to acquire a more decent position in Mrai, but there were no decent offers.

That said - I like what one of the captcha solvers said - for this to be fair, and to eliminate the second market. Why not make it give some large amount, say 10,000 Mrai every 12 hours. or 1,000 every hour, or something along those lines. (You could even dynamically adjust the number based on when the target will be reached).

This achieves 3 things:

* Discourages second markets for captcha solvers (one I am guilty of creating, but not against eliminating the need for it)
* Puts less load on the faucet server, as it spreads transactions out more
* Puts less load on the blockchain, as it will have less total blocks per account

Most of us who want to acquire some in the long run, generally click in our free time, once or twice a day.

Just my 2 rai.

[clemahieu]

For the PoW, 1 proof is generated on the send and 1 proof is generated on the receive, this is why people will see CPU activity when receiving from the faucet, the faucet itself also generating its own work.  Other than that there is no PoW in the network, only when transactions are being added and the work is only applied to those doing the transactions.

Taking the example of RFCs and how they're maintained, how do you see their incentive structure being similar or different than something like this?  From my perspective, groups maintain the TCP standard without TCP giving direct in-protocol incentives for its use, people build on top of it which is where their incentives lie.

I thought 'representative nodes' were ones that were doing this send and receive PoW for other users? Your comment made me think that this was already happening.

I understand that you don't want financial rewards within the protocol for running nodes and I'm not trying to get you to go against that. I was thinking of encouraging people through facilitating it or through promoting the idea of it rather than actual bribery.  I'm not sure I would want to set one up right  now, but I would be curious what's involved in having a representative node rather than regular wallet (unless I've miss-remembered what they actually are) and perhaps at some point before too long there may be other people curious enough to want to give it a try.

Ahh I see, the representatives do very little different than a plain wallet, since they're supposed to be long term things it's probably best to run a command line version on a server rather than a GUI on your desktop but I run them on cheap 3$/mo VPSs with no issue.

Setting one up involves running a node that just has a modest amount of disk space and network bandwidth, CPU usage is almost non existent.  You can then pick an account and tell people, "this is my representative account, set me as your representative" and they can do that under Settings -> Change representative.  When they do that it'll take the representation away from their old rep and give it to you and your vote strength would increase by the amount of their balance.

What your node will be doing is watching the network for transactions and signing them.  This lets the nodes in the network know quorum to make sure they haven't been disconnected.  The representative also watches the network for forks and if it sees them, it participates in the vote to pick which block survives.  Forks are also an almost non existent thing since they're only created by people who changed the code to create them.

[Cryptorials]

helping people setting up systems that make use of rai nodes

Well if you do find any time at some point feel free to send me any information about using the ad-removal script. I have a website with ~2500 page views per day which has adverts on it and gets crypto-friendly readers. If you are willing to help set it up and it isn't going to kill my server or make page loads super-slow I would be happy to give it a go.