BiblePay | 10% to Orphan-Charity | RANDOMX MINING | Sanctuaries (Masternodes)

[slovakia]

EmoHP most ppl using VPS in DataCenters,cos of cooling ... and we using wallet from biblepay.org

[joelles]

EmoHP most ppl using VPS in DataCenters,cos of cooling ... and we using wallet from biblepay.org

Most VM then 1 machine big for automated cronjob for sync updates fast

[zthomasz]

When I open the Windows wallet and click Send >> Inputs >> (select List Mode) and select some of the Available Amounts, a little red arrow appears by one of them.





Does anyone know what the arrow indicates?

[EmoHP]

Ok, 2 replies, no answers. I need to recompile Biblepay for CPU specific optimization.

Regarding to staking I wonder what follows if exchanges don't work and last weeks the botnet was the biggest miner?

[joelles]

Ok, 2 replies, no answers. I need to recompile Biblepay for CPU specific optimization.

Regarding to staking I wonder what follows if exchanges don't work and last weeks the botnet was the biggest miner?

why recompile?

[bible_pay]

No, its not recommended because it will get you ddossed, and if you only have one IP, then your whole house/farm is ddossed.

The n+ miners who are still latched on to the stake transaction they are trying to add risk thinking that they found a block (due to the increased weight) and will attempt to broadcast it.  We dont want to hose our network up with bad practices and have everyones log showing stuff like that either.

So I guess the question is if I'm running the same wallet on multiple machines, when I send a transaction from one, it is reflected in all of them.  So why would the usage of the stake with a successful win be any different than with five machines on the same wallet or one machine on a singular wallet?

When your wallet searches for a proof-of-loyalty stake, both machines would be searching for the exact same oldest coins that meet the target of say a 10k stake.  So both machines would be placing the transaction to spend the same coins in position #1.  And here is one potential issue :  At Hour X, enough coin-age was built up to make this 10K stake 50% influental on the block, meaning not much hashing needs done to solve it.  You are running 10 machines.  Machine A hashes it first and broadcasts the solution.  Before the block is accepted as a new block on the network, machine B finds the solution at the same time, so it broadcasts the solution.  Machine B would be sending a block with the same transaction spent.  

That led me to believe B was a double spend, but thinking of that situation more, B's block would just be rejected as stale.

Sorry, I think you might be correct, this might be possible to do without a ddos.  But remember, once the coin is spent- its spent network wide.

So yes, lets have someone test that in testnet also.

[bible_pay]

How can I compile my own cpu-specific wallet? I use windows.

It's a big challenge, but we have the executable. So it should be possible somehow.

And I have to ask another question. Is linux mining faster than windows? I see more people choose linux.

Im getting about the same performance in windows on the native HPS nowadays with the latest.
I think the huge upsurge in linux is due to 1) the Sancs and expirimenting with future sancs, 2) the hobbyists renting the cloud vps like Slovakia said, and in general those with a small cloud VPS base started scaling their base in the cloud bigger and bigger over the last 45 days when our price was rising.

As far as building in windows, Im using gitian to do it:
https://github.com/biblepay/biblepay/blob/master/doc/gitian-building.md

Its tricky to set up, but easier to maintain than a native windows build environment.

[bible_pay]

When I open the Windows wallet and click Send >> Inputs >> (select List Mode) and select some of the Available Amounts, a little red arrow appears by one of them.





Does anyone know what the arrow indicates?

The red arrow is the row that is selected by the cursor, thats so you can count up and down etc.  The lock is of course a locked output like a sanctuary.

Good luck!

[bible_pay]

Ok, 2 replies, no answers. I need to recompile Biblepay for CPU specific optimization.

Regarding to staking I wonder what follows if exchanges don't work and last weeks the botnet was the biggest miner?

If we go on proof-of-loyalty and the botnet was the biggest miner, diff drops temporarily while single individual users start picking up biblepay and filling the void over a longer duration...

I dont see a security concern there at all.  We have DGW (dark gravity wave) in here.

Exchanges might be delayed but I think CCEX will come back by end of month.
If all deals fall through we can pull together as a community and raise the 2btc for coinexchange.io, I believe Luke was quoted, and definitely the decentralized one (NEXT I guess) since that is .5 btc.  I think blue might front the money for that one and enter a proposal.

[bible_pay]

Looks like we only have one tester in testnet:

http://forum.biblepay.org/index.php?topic=89.new#new

Anyone want to test on this fine Saturday?

[capulo]

i think POL will only make advantege to users with already rich bbp accounts. maybe it stops botnet litle bit, but it will increase distance between 'poor and rich' normal users..
i'm still thinking about how to use this if i have lots of miners (wallets), i dont want to send money to every computer, because this will be nightmare to administer soo many wallets. now i just create wallets by scripts and does not matter if i reinstall pc or what, because there are no money in wallets (when i'm using pool)
how POL will affect pool shares? stakers vs non stakers?

i think for me it will be better to have many pcs without staking and mining in pool and one (where i'm withdrawing bbp from pool) powerfull pc for solo mining with staking

[capulo]

Looks like we only have one tester in testnet:

http://forum.biblepay.org/index.php?topic=89.new#new

Anyone want to test on this fine Saturday?

i'll join during night (8hrs later from now), now i'm building sources...

[bible_pay]

i think POL will only make advantege to users with already rich bbp accounts. maybe it stops botnet litle bit, but it will increase distance between 'poor and rich' normal users..
i'm still thinking about how to use this if i have lots of miners (wallets), i dont want to send money to every computer, because this will be nightmare to administer soo many wallets. now i just create wallets by scripts and does not matter if i reinstall pc or what, because there are no money in wallets (when i'm using pool)
how POL will affect pool shares? stakers vs non stakers?

i think for me it will be better to have many pcs without staking and mining in pool and one (where i'm withdrawing bbp from pool) powerfull pc for solo mining with staking

Thats sort of what I think is better about it.  I thought about that, and as a Christian community, one that loves others, I believe POL aligns the wallet with Christians more than pure POW.  Heres one reason I think so:
The botnet formed because we basically leave a honeypot out in the yard, and tell everyone you can grab a jar of honey if you til the garden for X minutes.  As soon as 1000 neighbors start tilling, they all walk away with 1/16 ounce of honey.  I would argue that we will never see 900 of them again.  If the "organization" or "botnet" came along their entire mentality is to take as much as possible and dump it on the exchange, but never to buy BBP to tithe to compassion.

Otoh, in POL, the ones who bought BBP on the market tithed to orphans (as technically they are funding our superblocks), they receive more of a reward with the benefit of the coin-age, and the chance to solo mine a block on a PC or a phone.

As far as the pool, Im coining the phrase for a brute force miner, one in "outer darkness", thats a miner with no coins at stake. 
I recommend stake-mining against the pool.

See the 'pool effect' section here:
http://wiki.biblepay.org/Proof_Of_Loyalty

I believe that the pool will reward something like 10-20% of the block (calculations TBD) directly to one who staked a considerable amount in the pool mined block when the block is found.  This is a BONUS for bringing Stakeweight to the pool...  Read the Pool Effect section to understand why its better to squeeze out the botnet that way.  That keeps the community separated from outer darkness.

[xrltechie]

Wow, what a blood bath today:

https://coinmarketcap.com/

Ripple down 45%
Dash down 30%

The million $ masternodes down to $670,000 in one day

Looks like its the South Korea govt threatening to ban cryptos:
https://www.investopedia.com/news/bloodbath-crypto-markets-and-bitcoin-price-fears-government-crackdown/

Well, I think BBP has a rising trend, even the bitcoin breakdown, it has not broken its support yet.
I hope we will see it reaching 0.0125$ sooner or later.https://twitter.com/techcornercm/status/954735315142565888

[crypto2017guy]

Hello,
Based on the amount of BBP you guys seem to be talking about i think i will be in trouble.  I have been mining since just before christmas and have 3 machines.  So far I have earned around 4.5K BBPs.  Does that mean i will be out of luck because i don't have that many BBPs?

Is c-cex.com the only exchange where i can buy BBPs? They don't seem to be accepting new registrations right now.

[joelles]

Wow, what a blood bath today:

https://coinmarketcap.com/

Ripple down 45%
Dash down 30%

The million $ masternodes down to $670,000 in one day

Looks like its the South Korea govt threatening to ban cryptos:
https://www.investopedia.com/news/bloodbath-crypto-markets-and-bitcoin-price-fears-government-crackdown/

Well, I think BBP has a rising trend, even the bitcoin breakdown, it has not broken its support yet.
I hope we will see it reaching 0.0125$ sooner or later.https://twitter.com/techcornercm/status/954735315142565888

yes

[inblue]

Otoh, in POL, the ones who bought BBP on the market tithed to orphans (as technically they are funding our superblocks), they receive more of a reward with the benefit of the coin-age, and the chance to solo mine a block on a PC or a phone.

Please help me understand - when I read the PoL wiki, I thought coin age was the time period since coins have started to be staked or since they have been last moved? It doesn't matter when they were actually created, right?

Because if the coin age is the time period since the coins have been mined, then as you said, someone who buys coins from an exchange can get older coins, and therefore have better conditions to mine, and the botnet miners will always have the newest coins because they never buy from an exchange, they only mine and immediately sell. But then, obviously, a buyer on the exchange can also buy the new coins, and they probably even have a higher chance to buy the new coins because those miners also sell instantly or put sell orders at the top.

And if the coin age is the time period since the coins have been last moved, then I don't get the buying BBP on the exchange part, because when I withdraw the coins to my wallet, coin age will be reset to 0?

[616westwarmoth]

When your wallet searches for a proof-of-loyalty stake, both machines would be searching for the exact same oldest coins that meet the target of say a 10k stake.  So both machines would be placing the transaction to spend the same coins in position #1.  And here is one potential issue :  At Hour X, enough coin-age was built up to make this 10K stake 50% influental on the block, meaning not much hashing needs done to solve it.  You are running 10 machines.  Machine A hashes it first and broadcasts the solution.  Before the block is accepted as a new block on the network, machine B finds the solution at the same time, so it broadcasts the solution.  Machine B would be sending a block with the same transaction spent.  

That led me to believe B was a double spend, but thinking of that situation more, B's block would just be rejected as stale.

Sorry, I think you might be correct, this might be possible to do without a ddos.  But remember, once the coin is spent- its spent network wide.

So yes, lets have someone test that in testnet also.

Thanks for taking the time to explain, I was thinking at worst it would only be attempted to be double spent if more than one machine solved the same block, but am eager to learn.

Secondly, for something of this magnitude, do you think we should put a proposal up and have the Masternode Network vote on it?

Finally, I should have a box on testnet by tomorrow.  Should we be solo mining on testnet?

[616westwarmoth]

Otoh, in POL, the ones who bought BBP on the market tithed to orphans (as technically they are funding our superblocks), they receive more of a reward with the benefit of the coin-age, and the chance to solo mine a block on a PC or a phone.

Please help me understand - when I read the PoL wiki, I thought coin age was the time period since coins have started to be staked or since they have been last moved? It doesn't matter when they were actually created, right?

Because if the coin age is the time period since the coins have been mined, then as you said, someone who buys coins from an exchange can get older coins, and therefore have better conditions to mine, and the botnet miners will always have the newest coins because they never buy from an exchange, they only mine and immediately sell. But then, obviously, a buyer on the exchange can also buy the new coins, and they probably even have a higher chance to buy the new coins because those miners also sell instantly or put sell orders at the top.

And if the coin age is the time period since the coins have been last moved, then I don't get the buying BBP on the exchange part, because when I withdraw the coins to my wallet, coin age will be reset to 0?

The coin age is, if I'm reading it correctly, the age since they were last transacted.  If you have advanced coin control enabled in your wallet, if you select inputs, it will show the age of each coin in your wallet.

So buying BBP, mining BBP, sending a transaction to yourself all end up with a coin age of zero.   The source doesn't affect coin age, merely how long it has been in YOUR wallet.

[bible_pay]

When your wallet searches for a proof-of-loyalty stake, both machines would be searching for the exact same oldest coins that meet the target of say a 10k stake.  So both machines would be placing the transaction to spend the same coins in position #1.  And here is one potential issue :  At Hour X, enough coin-age was built up to make this 10K stake 50% influental on the block, meaning not much hashing needs done to solve it.  You are running 10 machines.  Machine A hashes it first and broadcasts the solution.  Before the block is accepted as a new block on the network, machine B finds the solution at the same time, so it broadcasts the solution.  Machine B would be sending a block with the same transaction spent.  

That led me to believe B was a double spend, but thinking of that situation more, B's block would just be rejected as stale.

Sorry, I think you might be correct, this might be possible to do without a ddos.  But remember, once the coin is spent- its spent network wide.

So yes, lets have someone test that in testnet also.

Thanks for taking the time to explain, I was thinking at worst it would only be attempted to be double spent if more than one machine solved the same block, but am eager to learn.

Secondly, for something of this magnitude, do you think we should put a proposal up and have the Masternode Network vote on it?

Finally, I should have a box on testnet by tomorrow.  Should we be solo mining on testnet?

Yes, I think we should have a proposal to vote on, otherwise people will blame me for making a unilateral decision.  Ill put one in before the end of the day.

We should solo mine at first in testnet and ensure the stakeage calculation works well, then later on in the process Ill fire up the testnet pool again and we can test pool mining with POL.