BiblePay - New Coin Launch - Official Thread

[smoosh]

Glad to see this coin is still under development

[jaapgvk]

I'm not being able to sync the wallet. There are no any block source. Is there any nodes I'm missing to add? I'm using Biblepay Core version 1.0.2.2 (64-bit) which is the latest I got from website.

Looks like the external node max connections is pegged @ 1024 (Windows limit) maybe thats why (this only affects a brand new user before they sync peers.dat).  I think I will need to set up multiple seed nodes resolved by node.biblepay.org. 

Anyway try to add:
addnode=inspect.biblepay.network

To your config file and then restart.


(The node.biblepay.org is compiled in already).

One thing I forgot to mention for new users: We have the Tools | One Click Mining config menu option in the wallet.  It automatically creates the config file and some addnodes for you.  If someone will please test it out, and see if it works properly.

The wallet fills this in for me:

Code:

addnode=biblepay.inspect.network
genproclimit=4
poolport=80
workerid=
pool=http://pool2.biblepay.org
gen=1

[616westwarmoth]

So Ive been researching the difference between X11 and F7000 and have uncovered some more info related to HPS consistency across all processors platforms and instance counts.

Some of you have really been hard on me, especially those who cant grasp the distinction between a "node level mutex" and a "processor" mutex.  You even went as far as to say the BibleHash itself is inconsistent.  One thing Ive learned over 30 years in software, is nothing about a computer or its software is inconsistent.  (Unless someone puts a rand() statement in the code).  Another words, every "hard" problem that Ive seen over the years, in the end, always has a very clear reason. 

Let me explain the difference between a node mutex and a processor mutex.  A node mutex is one where an instance of the software is forced to wait somewhere in the
 *instance* of a program for a memory space to be available.  A processor mutex is one that consumes the entire processor and it does not have to wait except for new work, and the entire server is frozen in what appears to be a locked state (btw, a crash is very different than a consumed processor).

So with BiblePay, with Pre-F7000, we had a processor mutex, in the sense that one had to buy more hash power to hash against the money supply.  With F7000, the goal was originally more of a much stronger line of defense against GPU porting, hence the reason we added the node mutex.  Ill stop here and explain.  There are two places in BibleHash that are extremely hard or impossible to run on a GPU: asking the node to go back in the chain for a block index hash, or for example a transaction hash.  Since the node level instance stops hashing while it waits for the data, the other mining threads slow down.  Otoh, if you run multiple degraded instances on one server, you have parallel stops.  However, what I dont like about that is it encourages low quality instances whereas I believe it is healther for us as a community to have higher quality instances.

So in light of this, the basic explanation is that F7000 does do its job in preventing BibleHash from running on a GPU, but it promotes the user to run as many low quality nodes as possible to squeeze as many BBP per hour from our community. 

I think the answer to this is during the Christmas update (Sanctuaries), we release F8000 with a few more enhancements to fix the problem (we can test these in testnet as soon as available).  #1:  Add a math problem to BibleHash.  This would force the processor to execute a few hundred K of instructions deterministically but unknown at the time of the hash (IE Block hash + timestamp  hashed) so no one can predetermine the problem, and this solution would be similar to executing N X11's hashes for a second or so, thereby changing the state of the nodes miner back to a processor mutex level, thereby solving the degrading network problem. 

The other thing I would like to introduce before Christmas update is making mining more of a privilege.  I was thinking, instead of asking BiblePay to pay you simply because you plug a computer in and *want* to hash, what if BiblePay wants you to contribute to the community?  I was thinking at the very least, the node will somehow need to ask the miner to Repent for sins and make a blog of progress.  Maybe we make the mining software require a Repentant sin in the block, (IE Think of the 40 mortal sins listed in Send Money (in the wallet) | check Repent | Look at the dropdown values), maybe each week, the miner must repent of a sin, and describe how they are doing in their walk of repenting for sins in the message.  If no repentance is being given, no mining is awarded.  But each week, either a new description in the walk of a sin free life must be added, or - a new sin to be worked on, this way we can hash the repentance information and ensure it is changing once every 7 days (this way, if its done once a week, its similar to keeping the Sabbath).  So our miner would help you Keep the Sabbath.  You will wonder, how will we enforce it?  I think we can have a REST URI built in, and have the sanctuaries run the RESTful web service, and ban miners who arent repenting coherently.  Their miners would be shutdown.  It could be a service we require of the sanctuaries.

I think these two features would make BiblePay consistent across all platforms, and require a level of participation to weed & feed out the wheat from the chaff in the community.

Thank you for the clear explanation of the changes.

One risk to the "repent" to mine is that you would encourage "false repentance" which in some circles is tantamount to encouraging additional sin.  You also run the risk of alienating the people who are non-religious but have a spirit to help.  If I'm an honest person but agnostic, but I enjoy the idea that a large portion of this coin benefits the less fortunate, a forced repentance puts one in a tough situation.  Do you be honest and say, "I'm agnostic and there is good and evil but no metric for sin", do you go against your moral code and lie saying "today I ate shellfish" or do you drop the coin?  Furthermore, depending on who is the arbiter of if the repentance is coherent, you risk the gatekeepers deciding what is and isn't a sin, which is a pretty complex thought seeing as how most people pretty much pick and choose what parts of the Bible are "right" (no adultery) and "outdated" (no shellfish).

In the end, I think the repentance concept is interesting but you would end up alienating a good portion of the user base or at a minimum not have the desired results.  A better option might be for there to be some task to do.  Any task is going to be "gamed" at rate that is directly proportional to the inconvenience of it and you have to consider the number of users that will be running from the command line.  Having repentance as an option in the wallet is good, much like prayer requests.  But I'm of the opinion that forcing any activity is going to be alienating and damaging to the coin.

[seeksilence]

  But I'm of the opinion that forcing any activity is going to be alienating and damaging to the coin.

Agree! The "repent" will make this coin only for religion instead of charity. The dev should use pos instead of pow since he is strong against mining.

[oliwer21]

Pay the sins for posiblility of mining... that have nothing common with chairity. Even worse it doesn't have anything common with christianity. Or wait it has, but if we will be in middleages... deus vult!

[slovakia]

only idiot thinking that all this it doesn't have anything with christian 

all we mining only for our profit .... POW POW POW =  pew pew pew

[znffal]

So Ive been researching the difference between X11 and F7000 and have uncovered some more info related to HPS consistency across all processors platforms and instance counts.

Some of you have really been hard on me, especially those who cant grasp the distinction between a "node level mutex" and a "processor" mutex.  You even went as far as to say the BibleHash itself is inconsistent.  One thing Ive learned over 30 years in software, is nothing about a computer or its software is inconsistent.  (Unless someone puts a rand() statement in the code).  Another words, every "hard" problem that Ive seen over the years, in the end, always has a very clear reason. 

Let me explain the difference between a node mutex and a processor mutex.  A node mutex is one where an instance of the software is forced to wait somewhere in the
 *instance* of a program for a memory space to be available.  A processor mutex is one that consumes the entire processor and it does not have to wait except for new work, and the entire server is frozen in what appears to be a locked state (btw, a crash is very different than a consumed processor).

So with BiblePay, with Pre-F7000, we had a processor mutex, in the sense that one had to buy more hash power to hash against the money supply.  With F7000, the goal was originally more of a much stronger line of defense against GPU porting, hence the reason we added the node mutex.  Ill stop here and explain.  There are two places in BibleHash that are extremely hard or impossible to run on a GPU: asking the node to go back in the chain for a block index hash, or for example a transaction hash.  Since the node level instance stops hashing while it waits for the data, the other mining threads slow down.  Otoh, if you run multiple degraded instances on one server, you have parallel stops.  However, what I dont like about that is it encourages low quality instances whereas I believe it is healther for us as a community to have higher quality instances.

So in light of this, the basic explanation is that F7000 does do its job in preventing BibleHash from running on a GPU, but it promotes the user to run as many low quality nodes as possible to squeeze as many BBP per hour from our community. 

I think the answer to this is during the Christmas update (Sanctuaries), we release F8000 with a few more enhancements to fix the problem (we can test these in testnet as soon as available).  #1:  Add a math problem to BibleHash.  This would force the processor to execute a few hundred K of instructions deterministically but unknown at the time of the hash (IE Block hash + timestamp  hashed) so no one can predetermine the problem, and this solution would be similar to executing N X11's hashes for a second or so, thereby changing the state of the nodes miner back to a processor mutex level, thereby solving the degrading network problem. 

The other thing I would like to introduce before Christmas update is making mining more of a privilege.  I was thinking, instead of asking BiblePay to pay you simply because you plug a computer in and *want* to hash, what if BiblePay wants you to contribute to the community?  I was thinking at the very least, the node will somehow need to ask the miner to Repent for sins and make a blog of progress.  Maybe we make the mining software require a Repentant sin in the block, (IE Think of the 40 mortal sins listed in Send Money (in the wallet) | check Repent | Look at the dropdown values), maybe each week, the miner must repent of a sin, and describe how they are doing in their walk of repenting for sins in the message.  If no repentance is being given, no mining is awarded.  But each week, either a new description in the walk of a sin free life must be added, or - a new sin to be worked on, this way we can hash the repentance information and ensure it is changing once every 7 days (this way, if its done once a week, its similar to keeping the Sabbath).  So our miner would help you Keep the Sabbath.  You will wonder, how will we enforce it?  I think we can have a REST URI built in, and have the sanctuaries run the RESTful web service, and ban miners who arent repenting coherently.  Their miners would be shutdown.  It could be a service we require of the sanctuaries.

I think these two features would make BiblePay consistent across all platforms, and require a level of participation to weed & feed out the wheat from the chaff in the community.

Thank you for the clear explanation of the changes.

One risk to the "repent" to mine is that you would encourage "false repentance" which in some circles is tantamount to encouraging additional sin.  You also run the risk of alienating the people who are non-religious but have a spirit to help.  If I'm an honest person but agnostic, but I enjoy the idea that a large portion of this coin benefits the less fortunate, a forced repentance puts one in a tough situation.  Do you be honest and say, "I'm agnostic and there is good and evil but no metric for sin", do you go against your moral code and lie saying "today I ate shellfish" or do you drop the coin?  Furthermore, depending on who is the arbiter of if the repentance is coherent, you risk the gatekeepers deciding what is and isn't a sin, which is a pretty complex thought seeing as how most people pretty much pick and choose what parts of the Bible are "right" (no adultery) and "outdated" (no shellfish).

In the end, I think the repentance concept is interesting but you would end up alienating a good portion of the user base or at a minimum not have the desired results.  A better option might be for there to be some task to do.  Any task is going to be "gamed" at rate that is directly proportional to the inconvenience of it and you have to consider the number of users that will be running from the command line.  Having repentance as an option in the wallet is good, much like prayer requests.  But I'm of the opinion that forcing any activity is going to be alienating and damaging to the coin.

I really like the idea of "making mining more of a privilege" by encouraging contribution to the community. The letter writing to the orphans is such a good idea and one thing that attracts me to BiblePay.
However, I do worry about forcing repentance to mine. I think for sure we should be encouraging people to grow in sanctification, but in my opinion, it needs to be from a place of Godly sorry (2 Corinthians 7:10), rather than motivated by self-interest (in the sense that "now I can mine because I repented").

Perhaps we could spit-ball a few other ideas to encourage community contribution and make mining more of a privilege?

[bible_pay]

I really like the idea of "making mining more of a privilege" by encouraging contribution to the community. The letter writing to the orphans is such a good idea and one thing that attracts me to BiblePay.
However, I do worry about forcing repentance to mine. I think for sure we should be encouraging people to grow in sanctification, but in my opinion, it needs to be from a place of Godly sorry (2 Corinthians 7:10), rather than motivated by self-interest (in the sense that "now I can mine because I repented").

Perhaps we could spit-ball a few other ideas to encourage community contribution and make mining more of a privilege?

Yes, I really like what you and West had to say about the risk of repentance.  On a side note though, I didnt mean to suggest that it was definitely related to Christian repentance, but yes I did mean to suggest it was Bible based repentance. 

Lets definitely entertain more ideas, and break this down into even a more basic idea.  One that has to do with the privilege to mine to begin with.

Im thinking first of all, this is technically the opposite of one click web mining.  Its more of an added step for the privilege to receive biblepay coins from mining, and something that has to be maintained on a regular basis by the miner.  Although this might be counter to the popularity argument, I actually think the benefits of this outweigh the risk. 

What ends up happening is I think the true believers in BiblePay will stay and maintain the miner, and more coins will then be available for them to mine.  These are the people most apt to invest in biblepay.  This actually increases our value (making it have intrinsic value) in contrast to bitcoins energy arb equation (when you have just miners with black boxes, the price is related to how much energy it costs to mine a block).  That to me sounds like a winning attribute to start with.

So, lets shift the idea a bit.  Maybe we let you choose to either maintain a "walk in faith" URL (from forum.biblepay.org) that genuinely explains your walk with God as a miner on your personal URL page on the forum (using minername), IE your sinner testimony +  your spiritual encounters  and how you grew closer to the Lord.  That URL would be mining argument #1 to mine biblepay.  It would be policed by BiblePay police department (sanctuaries).  For incoherent pages and bad character- who would then lose the mining key.

Alternatively Option #2 is you could prove that you wrote a letter to an orphan within 30 days.  One or the other.  All others dont successfully mine the block the miner just keeps running.

Orphan letters cannot be reused.

We could potentially change the news creator page to our new letter writer page in-wallet, hash the orphan letter, and use that txid as the input for your mined block (for 30 days).

The URL for your walk-in-Christ or walk-in-God page could be created by you on our forum, and then linked in the mining config setup.

[znffal]

I really like the idea of "making mining more of a privilege" by encouraging contribution to the community. The letter writing to the orphans is such a good idea and one thing that attracts me to BiblePay.
However, I do worry about forcing repentance to mine. I think for sure we should be encouraging people to grow in sanctification, but in my opinion, it needs to be from a place of Godly sorry (2 Corinthians 7:10), rather than motivated by self-interest (in the sense that "now I can mine because I repented").

Perhaps we could spit-ball a few other ideas to encourage community contribution and make mining more of a privilege?

Yes, I really like what you and West had to say about the risk of repentance.  On a side note though, I didnt mean to suggest that it was definitely related to Christian repentance, but yes I did mean to suggest it was Bible based repentance. 

Lets definitely entertain more ideas, and break this down into even a more basic idea.  One that has to do with the privilege to mine to begin with.

Im thinking first of all, this is technically the opposite of one click web mining.  Its more of an added step for the privilege to receive biblepay coins from mining, and something that has to be maintained on a regular basis by the miner.  Although this might be counter to the popularity argument, I actually think the benefits of this outweigh the risk. 

What ends up happening is I think the true believers in BiblePay will stay and maintain the miner, and more coins will then be available for them to mine.  These are the people most apt to invest in biblepay.  This actually increases our value (making it have intrinsic value) in contrast to bitcoins energy arb equation (when you have just miners with black boxes, the price is related to how much energy it costs to mine a block).  That to me sounds like a winning attribute to start with.

So, lets shift the idea a bit.  Maybe we let you choose to either maintain a "walk in faith" URL (from forum.biblepay.org) that genuinely explains your walk with God as a miner on your personal URL page on the forum (using minername), IE your sinner testimony +  your spiritual encounters  and how you grew closer to the Lord.  That URL would be mining argument #1 to mine biblepay.  It would be policed by BiblePay police department (sanctuaries).  For incoherent pages and bad character- who would then lose the mining key.

Alternatively Option #2 is you could prove that you wrote a letter to an orphan within 30 days.  One or the other.  All others dont successfully mine the block the miner just keeps running.

Orphan letters cannot be reused.

We could potentially change the news creator page to our new letter writer page in-wallet, hash the orphan letter, and use that txid as the input for your mined block (for 30 days).

The URL for your walk-in-Christ or walk-in-God page could be created by you on our forum, and then linked in the mining config setup.

Maybe we let you choose to either maintain a "walk in faith" URL (from forum.biblepay.org) that genuinely explains your walk with God as a miner on your personal URL page on the forum (using minername), IE your sinner testimony +  your spiritual encounters  and how you grew closer to the Lord.  That URL would be mining argument #1 to mine biblepay.  It would be policed by BiblePay police department (sanctuaries).  For incoherent pages and bad character- who would then lose the mining key.

I really like this idea. I would personally do this and I would take a lot of satisfaction from sharing "my story". I think it will encourage other with our experiences.


Alternatively Option #2 is you could prove that you wrote a letter to an orphan within 30 days.  One or the other.  All others dont successfully mine the block the miner just keeps running.

The idea of having alternative contributions is a good one. Like it!

[bible_pay]

  But I'm of the opinion that forcing any activity is going to be alienating and damaging to the coin.

Agree! The "repent" will make this coin only for religion instead of charity. The dev should use pos instead of pow since he is strong against mining.

I thought about POS in the beginning, but I read so many negative comments about people getting tired of waiting for their investment to grow, and others seem to like POW due to the exciting nature of finding a block.  So I thought, you know, we can adapt POW to work with almost any complicated input.  Our sanctuaries do act as a 50% POS buffer (they are an investment).  Now we are more flexible as we have both.  

[bible_pay]

I really like the idea of "making mining more of a privilege" by encouraging contribution to the community. The letter writing to the orphans is such a good idea and one thing that attracts me to BiblePay.
However, I do worry about forcing repentance to mine. I think for sure we should be encouraging people to grow in sanctification, but in my opinion, it needs to be from a place of Godly sorry (2 Corinthians 7:10), rather than motivated by self-interest (in the sense that "now I can mine because I repented").

Perhaps we could spit-ball a few other ideas to encourage community contribution and make mining more of a privilege?

Yes, I really like what you and West had to say about the risk of repentance.  On a side note though, I didnt mean to suggest that it was definitely related to Christian repentance, but yes I did mean to suggest it was Bible based repentance. 

Lets definitely entertain more ideas, and break this down into even a more basic idea.  One that has to do with the privilege to mine to begin with.

Im thinking first of all, this is technically the opposite of one click web mining.  Its more of an added step for the privilege to receive biblepay coins from mining, and something that has to be maintained on a regular basis by the miner.  Although this might be counter to the popularity argument, I actually think the benefits of this outweigh the risk. 

What ends up happening is I think the true believers in BiblePay will stay and maintain the miner, and more coins will then be available for them to mine.  These are the people most apt to invest in biblepay.  This actually increases our value (making it have intrinsic value) in contrast to bitcoins energy arb equation (when you have just miners with black boxes, the price is related to how much energy it costs to mine a block).  That to me sounds like a winning attribute to start with.

So, lets shift the idea a bit.  Maybe we let you choose to either maintain a "walk in faith" URL (from forum.biblepay.org) that genuinely explains your walk with God as a miner on your personal URL page on the forum (using minername), IE your sinner testimony +  your spiritual encounters  and how you grew closer to the Lord.  That URL would be mining argument #1 to mine biblepay.  It would be policed by BiblePay police department (sanctuaries).  For incoherent pages and bad character- who would then lose the mining key.

Alternatively Option #2 is you could prove that you wrote a letter to an orphan within 30 days.  One or the other.  All others dont successfully mine the block the miner just keeps running.

Orphan letters cannot be reused.

We could potentially change the news creator page to our new letter writer page in-wallet, hash the orphan letter, and use that txid as the input for your mined block (for 30 days).

The URL for your walk-in-Christ or walk-in-God page could be created by you on our forum, and then linked in the mining config setup.

Maybe we let you choose to either maintain a "walk in faith" URL (from forum.biblepay.org) that genuinely explains your walk with God as a miner on your personal URL page on the forum (using minername), IE your sinner testimony +  your spiritual encounters  and how you grew closer to the Lord.  That URL would be mining argument #1 to mine biblepay.  It would be policed by BiblePay police department (sanctuaries).  For incoherent pages and bad character- who would then lose the mining key.

I really like this idea. I would personally do this and I would take a lot of satisfaction from sharing "my story". I think it will encourage other with our experiences.


Alternatively Option #2 is you could prove that you wrote a letter to an orphan within 30 days.  One or the other.  All others dont successfully mine the block the miner just keeps running.

The idea of having alternative contributions is a good one. Like it!

I forgot to mention another potential nuance to upkeep (as its not fair to have one miner writing a letter and another creating a blog and never updating it).
If they write a letter in the chain, they get the full block reward.

If they maintain a blog, the hashed key of the URL gradually pays from 25% to 100% of the block over time, if the blog is growing.  If it becomes static, the meter starts declining again.  So the idea is they have to blog at least once a month to maintain the 100% pay level of the mining reward.  This way if someone decides to delete the key and start a new blog, they relinquish all seniority and start back at 25% again.  Maybe it takes 1 day per percent to gain seniority to 100%, and then as long as they add more to the blog, the % stays at 100%.

[bible_pay]

Also this opens up wide avenues for PR.  If the forum blogs are all biblepay it would be very easy for this to help with PR.

I believe thats what is happening with steemit- with all the paid posts, they drive their own popularity and hence total market cap.

[seasonw]

But I'm of the opinion that forcing any activity is going to be alienating and damaging to the coin.

Yes, I 100% agreed to the point.

[Gawain]

Incentivizing community participation may have the same desired effect you are looking for but I can't see any value being added to the coin with forced participation in anything or big penalties for less zealous/less active users.

Edit:By big penalties I'm thinking anything more than 5-10%, the current letter writting model is great

[seasonw]

BBP is currently at low trading volume and low price now. So, orphan foundation could not help more orphans with the BBP on hand. Therefore, it is main priority to increase value of biblepay.

Honestly I don't think forcing miner doing this and that in order to mine biblepay will add value to the coin. However, I think masternode and rBBP should help.

[Gawain]

In my opinion the idea of policing bad character among miners is also a bad idea and I think contrary to the example of Jesus. Helping more children in need is the best way we can serve god. I don't care if my fellow miners are devout, agnostic or anything, as long as the network is making a positive difference together I don't see any benefit in forcing miners to repent or show good character. Repentance is a personal choice that should be without a monetary incentive to do so, though I would not be opposed to a place for it to take place. And honestly I don't think there is enough devout Christians to support the BBP network alone, the doors must remain open

[slovakia]

So Ive been researching the difference between X11 and F7000 and have uncovered some more info related to HPS consistency across all processors platforms and instance counts.

Some of you have really been hard on me, especially those who cant grasp the distinction between a "node level mutex" and a "processor" mutex.  You even went as far as to say the BibleHash itself is inconsistent.  One thing Ive learned over 30 years in software, is nothing about a computer or its software is inconsistent.  (Unless someone puts a rand() statement in the code).  Another words, every "hard" problem that Ive seen over the years, in the end, always has a very clear reason. 

Let me explain the difference between a node mutex and a processor mutex.  A node mutex is one where an instance of the software is forced to wait somewhere in the
 *instance* of a program for a memory space to be available.  A processor mutex is one that consumes the entire processor and it does not have to wait except for new work, and the entire server is frozen in what appears to be a locked state (btw, a crash is very different than a consumed processor).

So with BiblePay, with Pre-F7000, we had a processor mutex, in the sense that one had to buy more hash power to hash against the money supply.  With F7000, the goal was originally more of a much stronger line of defense against GPU porting, hence the reason we added the node mutex.  Ill stop here and explain.  There are two places in BibleHash that are extremely hard or impossible to run on a GPU: asking the node to go back in the chain for a block index hash, or for example a transaction hash.  Since the node level instance stops hashing while it waits for the data, the other mining threads slow down.  Otoh, if you run multiple degraded instances on one server, you have parallel stops.  However, what I dont like about that is it encourages low quality instances whereas I believe it is healther for us as a community to have higher quality instances.

So in light of this, the basic explanation is that F7000 does do its job in preventing BibleHash from running on a GPU, but it promotes the user to run as many low quality nodes as possible to squeeze as many BBP per hour from our community. 

I think the answer to this is during the Christmas update (Sanctuaries), we release F8000 with a few more enhancements to fix the problem (we can test these in testnet as soon as available).  #1:  Add a math problem to BibleHash.  This would force the processor to execute a few hundred K of instructions deterministically but unknown at the time of the hash (IE Block hash + timestamp  hashed) so no one can predetermine the problem, and this solution would be similar to executing N X11's hashes for a second or so, thereby changing the state of the nodes miner back to a processor mutex level, thereby solving the degrading network problem. 

The other thing I would like to introduce before Christmas update is making mining more of a privilege.  I was thinking, instead of asking BiblePay to pay you simply because you plug a computer in and *want* to hash, what if BiblePay wants you to contribute to the community?  I was thinking at the very least, the node will somehow need to ask the miner to Repent for sins and make a blog of progress.  Maybe we make the mining software require a Repentant sin in the block, (IE Think of the 40 mortal sins listed in Send Money (in the wallet) | check Repent | Look at the dropdown values), maybe each week, the miner must repent of a sin, and describe how they are doing in their walk of repenting for sins in the message.  If no repentance is being given, no mining is awarded.  But each week, either a new description in the walk of a sin free life must be added, or - a new sin to be worked on, this way we can hash the repentance information and ensure it is changing once every 7 days (this way, if its done once a week, its similar to keeping the Sabbath).  So our miner would help you Keep the Sabbath.  You will wonder, how will we enforce it?  I think we can have a REST URI built in, and have the sanctuaries run the RESTful web service, and ban miners who arent repenting coherently.  Their miners would be shutdown.  It could be a service we require of the sanctuaries.

I think these two features would make BiblePay consistent across all platforms, and require a level of participation to weed & feed out the wheat from the chaff in the community.

finally explain  ... thanks

[bible_pay]

On a side note all, West started testing the news feature in testnet and then made the good point about the DAO being open to a copyright lawsuit if someone copies a news article fro mainstream news, so we sort of stopped testing the feature until we find out if there is a way to maybe have the user click a box that says I relinquish all legal ramifications held against BiblePay.   I was wondering if a few testnet users could please test this anyway with a harmless article in testnet now that testnet has 8 participants?  The reason why is we might use this for orphan letters or compiled in help guides:

http://forum.biblepay.org/index.php?topic=14.0

(On a side note the lull in sanctuary testnet is because I am adding a feature to the pool and working on the retirement accounts at night.  I would think 1-2 more days max and I will be back with the next thing to test in the sanctuary thread).

Anyway, first I do disagree that "any change we make" will be disruptive and hurt the coin.  Not true.  Ive been around the block 8* (actually Im still going around the block every day actively - right now - in the day time).  The more innovation in this coin, the better.  And, we are in our infancy, and starting from the bottom of the barrel right now.

However I agree that if we make it a nuisance, or too hard to mine BiblePay, we risk curbing the user base and I really dont want to do that. 
And I do agree that it might be too strong to try to police miners, and levy and major fee (like you all said over 15% or so).

I really like the idea of having forum URLs to mine however, I think its one thing that would set us apart as the light from the dark, in that we could promote high quality character to our community and the ones that see it as too big of a nuisance will just not take the effort to do it, leaving more coins for the true biblepayers.  We could Recommend a walk-in-Faith page, but in reality, accept any forum URL content that is "edifying" to the community.  The only content that would be "policed" per se would be something like this: Anonymous miner sets up a forum URL, and writes one unrecongnizable sentence in the blog, and its obviously not "edifying" to us.  So maybe we make the acid test Edifying/Not Edifying.  If a blog URL is "not edifying" the sanctuaries hold a vote to mark the URL as neutered.  At that point the mining activity on it is rejected.

So let me propose a new idea- one that would work by default:
- Mining URL would be Required for all, otherwise no blocks would be mined (something like URL=http://  in config file)
- If one sets up a blog that is Not edifying and links to it, and is not caught, the mining works but blocks pay at 75% level
- If one runs a non-edifying blog and Is caught by a sanctuary, and vote is entered to ban that URL, blocks start paying at 0% level after the vote
- If one runs an edifying URL, payment starts increasing from 75-100% over 60 days, until full seniority is reached.  One must just continue to add something edifying one a month to the blog to maintain 100%.

So blocks would always pay 75-100% with a valid URL, depending on seniority level, and 0% with a Banned URL or a missing URL.

The sanctuaries would have a command to 'vote against URL' and if supermajority pushes the command, the URL is then banned.

What Im thinking is this would end up giving us a Huge, positive web presence, and a closer loving community.

[nsummy]

I would caution to not make mining this coin anymore confusing than it is.  Since this coin is new, I think we have all got caught up wasting time arguing over fair mining.  Lets not forget that mining the coin is not what brings it value.  The average consumer buying bitcoin has no idea how mining works or really cares.  Miners provide the important task of securing and maintaining the blockchain.  The coin itself should derive its value from an economy.  I.E.  If I bought $1000 worth of biblepay today, how can I use it?  I can't really, just hold and hope it goes up in value.  I've been too busy to fully keep up on the last few pages of posts on here but from skimming it I see some good ideas.  I don't think these ideas should be tied to mining though.   If we want to implement testimonies and blog posts, maybe that could be a way to earn biblepay credits without mining.  Furthermore punishing/rewarding for posting about spiritual walks with the Lord runs counter intuitive to Jesus' teachings.  Instead of showing we are Christians by helping those in need, we will become a group of modern day pharisees voting on whose story is deemed worthy.  And lets not forget the ability for this process to be hijacked.  What if a group of trolls/satanists/etc start a bunch of Sanctuaries and take over the voting?  The coin is called Biblepay, but I don't know that we should necessarily reward those who have accepted Christ over those who haven't.

Sorry my post is a little long winded and all over the place   TL;DR  Instead of focusing on adding a bunch of new requirements for mining, we should focus on what sort of cool features we can add to the coin that does not require mining!

[gigabyted]

Im a bit confused by the network hashrate in the wallet:

"networkhashps": 355952751341.9575,

this stated that the hash rate is about 355ghs!  i guess theres a decimal misplacement here. and it must be something like 35mhs or something.

Can anyone confirm this, because my PC is doing about 20khps so either my PC isn't high enough or theres millions of computers on this network!

Thanks