bible_pay (OP)
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 215
Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords
|
|
March 15, 2018, 01:32:12 PM |
|
No Block Source Available?BBP Wallet self.BiblePay Submitted 2 days ago by stevenzak Biblepay Core version 1.1.1.0 (64-bit) No Block Source Available? BBP Wallet Balance out of sync Recent Transaction out of sync Bible Pay Sanctuaries out of sync 28 Hours Behind. Any Help would be appreciated. https://www.reddit.com/r/BiblePay/comments/83rl0p/no_block_source_availablebbp_wallet/No Block Source Available switched with "Synchronizing with Network...". Nothing Yet, anyway to reset connection? Were up to 1.1.1.1 now, please upgrade, then ensure system time and time zone is correct. No addnodes required.
|
|
|
|
svirusxxx2
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 89
Merit: 7
|
|
March 15, 2018, 02:07:59 PM |
|
Ok, now I see everything is correct, I will now wait for next superblock. Thanks!
|
Biblepay masternodes status and monitoring (https://biblepay.eu/)
|
|
|
capulo
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 491
Merit: 0
|
|
March 15, 2018, 02:45:44 PM |
|
c-cex is back
You just beat me to it. I have opened a ticket on CCEX to bring us out of maintenance. Please all lets be cognizent of how much we keep on the exchange wallets. Consider transferring all excess balances to your home wallet frequently.
Always Back Up your wallet.dat file to a safe place, such as to a USB drive or burn it to a CD and keep offsite. cool, i must pray to be out of maintenance as soon as possible to withdraw coins , because exchange could go down again.. i dont want to sell all for low price and withdraw in other coin
|
|
|
|
slovakia
|
|
March 15, 2018, 03:41:20 PM |
|
this stroke will be BBP TOP TEAM on ROSETTA for few days
|
|
|
|
turbokongen
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 30
Merit: 0
|
|
March 15, 2018, 05:24:06 PM |
|
Okay, to everyone having problems with UTXO target being 50001: DO NOT USE NOTEPAD++ TO EDIT BIBLEPAY.CONF. SOME OTHER FORMATTING IS USED. I used windows notepad for editing last time and then it worked. Now to see when the pool and podc payots come in.
|
|
|
|
turbokongen
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 30
Merit: 0
|
|
March 15, 2018, 06:38:45 PM |
|
Now I got a transfer from the pool. Nice! Now to wait for the PODC.
|
|
|
|
stevenzak
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
|
March 15, 2018, 10:29:41 PM |
|
"Were up to 1.1.1.1 now, please upgrade, then ensure system time and time zone is correct. No addnodes required" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2388064.5280// Hey guys I still can not get a Synchronization. I have 2 blue bars. "Synchronizing with Network..." Balance out of sync Recent Transaction out of sync Sanctuaries out of sync 5 Days Behind Biblepay Core version 1.1.1.1 (64-bit)
|
|
|
|
znffal
|
|
March 15, 2018, 10:33:05 PM |
|
"Were up to 1.1.1.1 now, please upgrade, then ensure system time and time zone is correct. No addnodes required" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2388064.5280// Hey guys I still can not get a Synchronization. I have 2 blue bars. "Synchronizing with Network..." Balance out of sync Recent Transaction out of sync Sanctuaries out of sync 5 Days Behind Biblepay Core version 1.1.1.1 (64-bit) Try a reindex: In tools, Wallet repair, Rebuild index
|
|
|
|
stevenzak
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 0
|
|
March 15, 2018, 10:49:38 PM |
|
"Were up to 1.1.1.1 now, please upgrade, then ensure system time and time zone is correct. No addnodes required" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2388064.5280// Hey guys I still can not get a Synchronization. I have 2 blue bars. "Synchronizing with Network..." Balance out of sync Recent Transaction out of sync Sanctuaries out of sync 5 Days Behind Biblepay Core version 1.1.1.1 (64-bit) Try a reindex: In tools, Wallet repair, Rebuild index It Worked Thank You!
|
|
|
|
aikida3k
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 180
Merit: 0
|
|
March 16, 2018, 01:53:46 AM |
|
One error in my typing / calc and I didn't want to edit it, was the 2nd example down to 20 Mag would still need 1M BBP to stake. The reason I am hesitant to say "we'll change it down the road" is why? Why not get it right or as close to right now? That's why I think RAC is a slippery slope and Mag is not. The only way to make RAC stake holding work to me is to adjust it down the line as the value of RAC drops and the hopefully the value of BBP increases. Whereas with Mag, if you do it right now it becomes self correcting. 10% is basically 10% all the live long day, so in the above example, the 200K RAC at 2M could increase their RAC to 1M at 10M and remain at 10%, have the same staking requirements and receive the same percentile reward (although a smaller reward numerically in terms of BBP). And it doesn't matter which way the price goes, 100 MAG would cost the same in raw numbers of BBP and have a generally similar return in price values (minus of course the depreciating emissions) regardless of if BBP drops back to 7/100th of a cent or jumps to 7 cents. Whereas staking by RAC only succeeds in locking up more coins (a good thing at this point in the life of the coin, less valuable as time goes on) which is already being handily performed by the Sanctuaries and will continue to do so until probably we reach (my math) 400 or so (the Dev seems to think 200 is more realistic). The boon of stake is the reduction in turnover of users. Right now, a Gridcoin user is going to RAC for BBP if it is more cost effective the Gridcoin, and then immediately revert back based solely on the market and not his or her belief in the power of BBP. Whereas adding a staking component, keeps the RAC more stable and less likely to shift, giving investors more dependable predictions in returns and likely keeping more BBP in the hands of those who believe in the coin (as I'm of the opinion a person collecting BBP because they think this is a unique coin that does good, will retain it longer than someone collecting BBP because it returns more $$ today than Gridcoin). And none of that is a knock on Gridcoin users, some of which may come to us because of the reduction in their coin's influence at Rosetta@Home and find out they appreciate our mission and become ardent supporters. Nor is it truly a knock on profit motivated miners. For now, we're starting to really make waves in the ranking of teams at R@h, we just exceeded the overall work of Team Atheist ( http://stats.free-dc.org/stats.php?page=team&proj=rah&team=2426), we're number 125 all time over all, and will likely be in the top 100 by the weekend and likely the top 50 of ALL TIME by Easter. We are at almost 6M daily credits, which over time would mean a RAC of 6M. We had the most daily credits of any team on R@H and did nearly 15% of all the work on R@H! This is an incredible marketing tool to be utilized. Whereas with Mag, if you do it right now it becomes self correcting. 10% is basically 10% all the live long day, so in the above example, the 200K RAC at 2M could increase their RAC to 1M at 10M and remain at 10%, have the same staking requirements and receive the same percentile reward (although a smaller reward numerically in terms of BBP).
I see what you are saying, but my argument against this is that the miner is doing nothing to help the price of biblepay in the process. In this case, the miner increased their hardware to stay at the same MAG but has the same level of biblepay at stake. This means that maintaining the same stake level, the miner did nothing to push the price of biblepay up because even as he increased machinery to stay at the same MAG, it doesn't influence the price, ergo the race to the bottom is still in. But if the miner staked based on RAC, at first 20*200K is 4M bbp increased to 20M bbp. The idea is that the increasing stake amount directly leads to higher prices (or at least maintains prices), and ideally it leads to more profit. Look at it this way: We know from history, pre- masternodes we traded 10-20 sat. We now have 169 masternodes which locks up 261,950169 bbp. Our Total Supply today is 467,630,665. So the percent of available supply locked up is 55%. Our current lockup stats have got us trading higher at say 35 sat, consistently. I understand right now the PODC rewards are higher than they will be, but just to simplify the calculations and get to my point, lets assume daily superblock rewards of 3,000,000. So right now I have 80K RAC, I get about 100K reward, 17 servers with a team RAC of 2,400,000. So 80K RAC/2.4M TEAM RAC=33.3 MAG. 1000 Total MAG/33.3 personal MAG=30, 30*100K bbp = 3M daily superblock for simplification. I think a realistic scenario is that 1 year from now Team RAC is 24,000,000. It is an open question how quickly Team RAC will continue to grow, and how much people would put at stake. Here is what I believe is a realistic scenario: | | -------------------------------------------------------- | | | Current Statistics | | | 1 year from now | | | | | -------------------------------------------------------- | | | ---------------------- | | | 50%MN growth | | | | | Total Supply | | | 467,630,665 | | | 1,453,130,665 | | | | | Masternodes | | | 169 | | | 254 | | | | | Masternode lockup | | | 261,950,169 | | | 392,925,254 | | | | | MN lockup % Total Supply | | | 0.56 | | | 0.27 <--1 year masternode lockup % of total supply drops to 27%! | | | | | Team RAC | | | 2,400,000 | | | 24,000,000 | | | | | Personal RAC | | | 80,000 | | | 160,000 | | | | | Personal MAG | | | 33.333 | | | 6.667 | | | | | Reward | | | 100,000 | | | 16,000 | | | | | Servers | | | 17 | | | 34 | | | | | Cost to Run Servers | | | 8.16 | | | 16.32 | | | | | Breakeven $ | | | 0.00008160 | | | 0.00102000 | | | | | Amnt Stake per RAC (20) | | | 1,600,000 | | | 3,200,000 | | | | | Amnt Stake per MAG (10,000) | | | 333,333.33 | | | 66,666.67 | | | | | Team RAC Stake | | | 48,000,000 | | | 480,000,000 | | | | | Team MAG Stake | | | 10,000,000 | | | 10,000,000 | | | | | Total MAG | | | 1,000 | | | 1,000 | | | | | Annualized Reward Run Rate (Daily Rewardx365) | | | 36,500,000 | | | 5,840,000 | | | | | %Return on Stake of Annualized Run Rate (Run Rate/Stake Amnt) | | | 2281% | | | 183% | | | | | Total lockup SPR* and MN | | | 309,950,169 | | | 872,925,254 | | | | | Total Supply Free SPR and MN | | | 157,680,496 | | | 580,205,412 <-3.68 times current free supply amount. Blessed | | | | | %Lockup of Total Supply SPR and MN | | | 0.66 | | | 0.60 to maintain sat price with 20 bbp stake per RAC | | | | | | | | | | | We keep %Lockup of Total supply stable at .6 | | | | | Total lockup SPM* and MN | | | 271,950,169 | | | 402,925,254 | | | | | Total Supply Free SPM and MN | | | 195,680,496 | | | 1,050,205,412 <-5.37 times the current free supply amount. | | | | | %Lockup of Total Supply SPM and MN | | | 0.58 | | | 0.28 Maintain current sat price and avoid round trip to 10 sat? | | | | | Profit at 10 sat (BTC=10000) | | | 91.84 | | | -0.32 | | | | | Profit at 20 sat | | | 191.84 | | | 15.68 | | | | | Profit at 30 sat | | | 291.84 | | | 31.68 | | | | | Profit at 40 sat | | | 391.84 | | | 47.68 | | | | | Profit at 50 sat | | | 491.84 | | | 63.68 | | |
*SPR: Stake per RAC *SPM: Stake per MAG It really does come down to keeping the % Total Lockup stable to try to ensure price stability. Not staking per RAC may have the % Total Lockup as low as 28% in a year. Even with lower rewards a year from now, the run rate of the daily rewards is a very respectable return relative to the amount at stake. Being rewarded (16k*365)/3.2M is 183% on an annualized basis. I like the idea of being flexible and growing the aggregate stake amount. There is no guarantee that stake based on MAG will grow fast enough to increase the total amount locked up. (For MAG to grow the aggregate stake, the network has to grow in fractional MAG users that stake meaningful amounts.) I believe we need to increase lockup from ~55% to 90% or better while our effusion is still at a high rate. The biggest problem I have with stake based on MAG is that I don't like that the amount needed to stake for larger miners goes down as their MAG goes down--older, larger miners have a decrease in their stake. I could see a scenario where lager miners lose MAG over time, their stake amount decreases, but fractional MAG entrants don't stake to get UTXO 100-- they aren't profit driven like the larger miners. I like that larger miners are profit driven, and as part of that drive for profit they must hold or acquire more biblepay as they add more hardware. 616Westwarmoth, please let me know your thoughts on this.
|
|
|
|
|
cryptocadxyz
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
|
|
March 16, 2018, 06:31:35 AM |
|
Currently, what calculation are we using to determine 100% UTXO Percentage? I've read conflicting things. Is it still 50,001 BBP, or is it 500BBP/Mag?
I'm a bit confused by the different info floating around.
|
|
|
|
znffal
|
|
March 16, 2018, 06:35:08 AM |
|
Currently, what calculation are we using to determine 100% UTXO Percentage? I've read conflicting things. Is it still 50,001 BBP, or is it 500BBP/Mag?
I'm a bit confused by the different info floating around.
I think it's 500 BBP/mag WHEN the majority of masternodes update to the latest version. So I'm not sure if that has happened yet, but the update is mandatory in a couple of hundred blocks, so then it is for sure 500bbp/mag
|
|
|
|
dave_bbp
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 405
Merit: 3
|
|
March 16, 2018, 08:28:42 AM Last edit: March 16, 2018, 08:51:48 AM by dave_bbp |
|
Hey guys, I just had an idea how to potentially raise the value of BBP. Maybe it's too early or too tricky to implement right now, but here it is: Over the last couple of days our team quickly ploughed through the Rosetta teams and it won't be long until we are the number one team there. Maybe in the not so far future we will even provide the supermajority of the hash power for Rosetta@home. Researchers are used to pay quite a lot of money for computational ressources (I know that because our research group does...). I don't know how it works for the groups using the Rosetta hash power (or BOINC in general), but how about (once we have a majority) we somehow "charge" small sums for our hash power? Here's how this could work: a research team rents (maybe monthly or biannually) a certain, guaranteed amount of computational ressources from rosetta@home. It does so by buying BBP on an exchange and immediately burning those coins. This way we could 1) increase the knowledge about BBP, 2) increase the inherent value of the coin. The best "side effect" would be that every time this happens the funded children will get more (FIAT) money and it should in general be easier for Rob to obtain the dollars necessary for funding (since there will from time to time be larger sums in the bid). I'm not sure if this is even possible to get working, of course the charged sums also should'nt really be high, but this just came to my mind. What do you all think about this?
|
|
|
|
jaapgvk
|
|
March 16, 2018, 09:27:56 AM |
|
Hey guys, I just had an idea how to potentially raise the value of BBP. Maybe it's too early or too tricky to implement right now, but here it is: Over the last couple of days our team quickly ploughed through the Rosetta teams and it won't be long until we are the number one team there. Maybe in the not so far future we will even provide the supermajority of the hash power for Rosetta@home. Researchers are used to pay quite a lot of money for computational ressources (I know that because our research group does...). I don't know how it works for the groups using the Rosetta hash power (or BOINC in general), but how about (once we have a majority) we somehow "charge" small sums for our hash power? Here's how this could work: a research team rents (maybe monthly or biannually) a certain, guaranteed amount of computational ressources from rosetta@home. It does so by buying BBP on an exchange and immediately burning those coins. This way we could 1) increase the knowledge about BBP, 2) increase the inherent value of the coin. The best "side effect" would be that every time this happens the funded children will get more (FIAT) money and it should in general be easier for Rob to obtain the dollars necessary for funding (since there will from time to time be larger sums in the bid). I'm not sure if this is even possible to get working, of course the charged sums also should'nt really be high, but this just came to my mind. What do you all think about this? The first two things that came into my mind when reading this were: 1. Biblepay is a project with a religious connotation, and I don't know if research groups would want to publicly attach themselves to a project like ours by buying our coins (because I assume they want to keep things like politics and religion separate from their - public - work). 2. Isn't the computational power we give to Rosetta@home really specific, in the sense that we are using algorithms that can't be applied in general computing applications?
|
|
|
|
dave_bbp
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 405
Merit: 3
|
|
March 16, 2018, 12:07:54 PM |
|
The first two things that came into my mind when reading this were:
1. Biblepay is a project with a religious connotation, and I don't know if research groups would want to publicly attach themselves to a project like ours by buying our coins (because I assume they want to keep things like politics and religion separate from their - public - work). 2. Isn't the computational power we give to Rosetta@home really specific, in the sense that we are using algorithms that can't be applied in general computing applications?
1. Ah yes, I know what you mean and I think you're right about that. Paying - even small amounts - of money to a somewhat religious organisation would definitely raise questions and for some might even be impossible. This could indeed be the major problem. 2. I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. I don't think that the Rosetta packages we solve differ in any aspect from any other Rosetta packages being solved. In the end maybe we wouldn't even have to limit ourselves to Rosetta if there are other good projects dedicated to healing etc.
|
|
|
|
znffal
|
|
March 16, 2018, 12:30:42 PM |
|
yeah but, everybody who was reading c-cex thred knows, that there is strong xvg holders group against c-cex. and they plan to do steps agains c-cex. so if i were aware of going maintenance early, i could withdraw everything... when we turned to maintenance mode i still had 2 options, sell all bbp for low price and withdraw something else or wait... i was waiting because i just have enough for masternode... so now i must hope that ccex will goes up just to withdraw coins or so... but as we are still in maintenance i realy dont know ... nevermind, going to mine harder than before I just read the rest of that train wreck thread on XVG- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=418700.3720Or at least pages 160-187 (where I left off last) and I must say its painful to read it. Im sorry we have BBP caught up in the middle of this. Lets pray our users can get it all out and they come back out of maintenance. I hate to say it, but Im also having thoughts that we really need to jump on a couple new high quality exchanges as we need more reliability and integrity. Hi Rob, Have we tried poloniex yet? https://poloniex.com/coinRequest
|
|
|
|
afeno
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 175
Merit: 1
|
|
March 16, 2018, 01:23:16 PM |
|
The hash rate is arround 110 Hash/s and the amount in the pool something between 0.6 and 1 BBP.
What do you mean by 0.6 to 1 BBP? What is the timeframe? do you mean 1 BBP per hour?
|
|
|
|
bible_pay (OP)
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 215
Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords
|
|
March 16, 2018, 01:45:16 PM |
|
Currently, what calculation are we using to determine 100% UTXO Percentage? I've read conflicting things. Is it still 50,001 BBP, or is it 500BBP/Mag?
I'm a bit confused by the different info floating around.
I think it's 500 BBP/mag WHEN the majority of masternodes update to the latest version. So I'm not sure if that has happened yet, but the update is mandatory in a couple of hundred blocks, so then it is for sure 500bbp/mag This is the correct info; The state of the network has a temporary network setting of "500 bbp per magnitude" and it is now propagated to the supermajority - I see 67% of the network is using it. Note that after block 35100, 100% will be forced to use it (as the cutover block enforces the variable network setting). The current network does support BBP per RAC, but we are waiting for the poll outcome before the network setting can be changed.
|
|
|
|
MIP
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 362
Merit: 0
|
|
March 16, 2018, 01:53:11 PM |
|
The current network does support BBP per RAC, but we are waiting for the poll outcome before the network setting can be changed.
Will the staking amount be weighted, this is, if someone has only 50% of the BBP (whether it is by Mag. or RAC) he will get 50% reward, or is it on an all-or-nothing basis?
|
|
|
|
|