Devcoin

[FinShaggy]

But it only takes that one guy to hurt the rest of the community for a long time to come.

I don't see how it hurts the community. He writes, which helps Devtome get traffic. And he sells his DVC for cheap, which allows you to pick up some cheap DVC.

If you look at the big picture, that guy is the only one losing anything, for brief personal gain.

[FinShaggy]

He's right though that vast spews of weird and or nonweird and or any other adjective material is just what the blogger generation seems to want. A large volume of words would be good if it were in the eyes of some readership or other worth visiting the pages to read.

-MarkM-

It's not just a "large volume of words"...
Yes, if someone comes and posts spam, it's just words.

But if they post a paper they wrote in college, they are really just helping Search Engine Optimization, as well as giving other members something to read and possibly base their next article on.

[WildElf]

Devtome writers--
I sent an email to unthinkingbit this morning explaining that yes there were some articles that were posted that we not mine and they have since been removed.  However, I stand by my original submissions namely:

DODMERB_Cloud_Computing
Identity and Access Management
Navy Cloud Computing
Zachman Framework Implementation
Software Assurance

There were written for coursework taken in a graduate program that I recently completed.  I do not condone plagarism and wish to continue contributing to Devtome should you allow me.  I do apologize that I did not safeguard my account as diligently as I should have and take full responsibility for actions taken in my absence.  I fully realize that in order to produce a quality work, there must be a quality reputation.

Please feel free to contact me directly via personal message should you have any questions.

[markm]

He's right though that vast spews of weird and or nonweird and or any other adjective material is just what the blogger generation seems to want. A large volume of words would be good if it were in the eyes of some readership or other worth visiting the pages to read.

-MarkM-

It's not just a "large volume of words"...
Yes, if someone comes and posts spam, it's just words.

But if they post a paper they wrote in college, they are really just helping Search Engine Optimization, as well as giving other members something to read and possibly base their next article on.

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

[Balthozar]

Devtome writers--
I sent an email to unthinkingbit this morning explaining that yes there were some articles that were posted that we not mine and they have since been removed.  However, I stand by my original submissions namely:

DODMERB_Cloud_Computing
Identity and Access Management
Navy Cloud Computing
Zachman Framework Implementation
Software Assurance

There were written for coursework taken in a graduate program that I recently completed.  I do not condone plagarism and wish to continue contributing to Devtome should you allow me.  I do apologize that I did not safeguard my account as diligently as I should have and take full responsibility for actions taken in my absence.  I fully realize that in order to produce a quality work, there must be a quality reputation.

Please feel free to contact me directly via personal message should you have any questions.

I had the same issue regarding a legal article I posted. I removed it, but plan on writing in my own words the laws which it described.

[markm]

Maybe what we could also consider, if there are some folk putting out huge bodies of work, could be to have a "writer's round" periodically that everyone who is not a (prolific) writer can expect in advance to get hardly any coins from because that round all the major writers get to dump huge amounts of writing on the wiki, so almost all the coins that round go to writers...

Personally I have not really tried hard yet to dig up all my old writings as my strategy was generally to make at least some effort to try to keep up with Unthinkingbit but without ending up driving him to pour out even more writing as an attempt to prevent me from dipping too deep into his accustomed stipend.

I figured if I end up driving him to ever greater volumes of output, that would just make me have to work harder to catch up, so I tried to mostly just not fall too far behind.

Also some of my stories and novels I am still not decided the best way/venue/copyright to use for them so not sure yet which I want to put into the free open source content domain.

-MarkM-

[FinShaggy]

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

I think it will be ok.
Are you saying you are worried that someone might post an article they wrote in the 90s and we'll start getting "the wrong crowd"?

[psybits]

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

I think it will be ok.
Are you saying you are worried that someone might post an article they wrote in the 90s and we'll start getting "the wrong crowd"?

No he means it's a good thing I am excited to start putting sci fi up next round 

[markm]

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

I think it will be ok.
Are you saying you are worried that someone might post an article they wrote in the 90s and we'll start getting "the wrong crowd"?

No, I meant a huge volume of material, suited to so many tastes that likely some would inevitably be distasteful to someone somewhere, would likely be what the modern internet readers would like, as no matter how weird their taste in reading material we'd have plenty of it for them.

-MarkM-

P.S. To which of my articles from the 90's are you referring Sir? Hahahahah j/k

[FinShaggy]

Maybe what we could also consider, if there are some folk putting out huge bodies of work, could be to have a "writer's round" periodically that everyone who is not a (prolific) writer can expect in advance to get hardly any coins from because that round all the major writers get to dump huge amounts of writing on the wiki, so almost all the coins that round go to writers...

Personally I have not really tried hard yet to dig up all my old writings as my strategy was generally to make at least some effort to try to keep up with Unthinkingbit but without ending up driving him to pour out even more writing as an attempt to prevent me from dipping too deep into his accustomed stipend.

I figured if I end up driving him to ever greater volumes of output, that would just make me have to work harder to catch up, so I tried to mostly just not fall too far behind.

Also some of my stories and novels I am still not decided the best way/venue/copyright to use for them so not sure yet which I want to put into the free open source content domain.

-MarkM-

I like the idea of a "writers round" but I would like to see this kind of thing implemented by making sister sites...
Like, make a site JUST for writing completely original works, like books, novels poems etc.
Then have another site that pays people to post pictures
Then another that pays you per minute of video
And another that lets you sell your stuff like ebay
etc etc

[FinShaggy]

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

I think it will be ok.
Are you saying you are worried that someone might post an article they wrote in the 90s and we'll start getting "the wrong crowd"?

No he means it's a good thing I am excited to start putting sci fi up next round 

OHHHH,
Agreed. It is a good thing.

[Balthozar]

I just thought of a flaw that could be executed to get paid multiple times for the same piece of work.

I'll use some of my work as an example:

My article titled Pavlov, I lets say the script runs, pays me for it, then I change it to Pavlov, Ivan. It would recognize that as a new page the next time the script is run. Can anyone think of how to prevent this? And if it can't be prevented, then I would propose that anyone caught doing this shall be banned from devtome forever.

[FinShaggy]

Yes. I wasn't meaning necessarily disparaging adjectives. Think adjectives like hip, modern, classic, classical, intriguing, fantastical, lyrical, imaginative, and on and on and on, different ones appealing to different crowds. (Punky, gritty, visceral, explicit, stark, gothic, horrific, suspenseful... and on and on...)

-MarkM-

I think it will be ok.
Are you saying you are worried that someone might post an article they wrote in the 90s and we'll start getting "the wrong crowd"?

No, I meant a huge volume of material, suited to so many tastes that likely some would inevitably be distasteful to someone somewhere, would likely be what the modern internet readers would like, as no matter how weird their taste in reading material we'd have plenty of it for them.

-MarkM-

Agreed.

The more types of things people post, the more unique users/views will start showing up.

[markm]

I just thought of a flaw that could be executed to get paid multiple times for the same piece of work.

I'll use some of my work as an example:

My article titled Pavlov, I lets say the script runs, pays me for it, then I change it to Pavlov, Ivan. It would recognize that as a new page the next time the script is run. Can anyone think of how to prevent this? And if it can't be prevented, then I would propose that anyone caught doing this shall be banned from devtome forever.

Implementation flaw if it happens.

Consider, we maintain a total number of words so far per writer.

You move your article,

Now the old aritcle is zero words and the new one all the words from old one.

Your new total words is still the same as your old total words...

This assumes tracking how many words each author had last round, and counting up their entire ouvre each round.

In short, we don't just go counting purportedly new stuff, we add up from scratch their entire body of contributions.

I'd be surprised is that is not basically how Unthinkingbit did it. Read the python scripts to check his work but he never struck me as the kind of scripter who'd make such a big loophole when there is such a simple, obvious, albeit brute force, way to do it.

(He might even have found a more elegant way aleviating the use of brute force, now I am curious exactly how he did do it, I never actually went and looked at the scripts to check.)

-MarkM-

[Balthozar]

I just thought of a flaw that could be executed to get paid multiple times for the same piece of work.

I'll use some of my work as an example:

My article titled Pavlov, I lets say the script runs, pays me for it, then I change it to Pavlov, Ivan. It would recognize that as a new page the next time the script is run. Can anyone think of how to prevent this? And if it can't be prevented, then I would propose that anyone caught doing this shall be banned from devtome forever.

Implementation flaw if it happens.

Consider, we maintain a total number of words so far per writer.

You move your article,

Now the old aritcle is zero words and the new one all the words from old one.

Your new total words is still the same as your old total words...

This assumes tracking how many words each author had last around, and counting up their entire ouvre each time around.

In short, we don't just go counting purportedly new stuff, we add up from scratch their entire body of contributions.

-MarkM-

Okay, this is true, because as I recall, you get paid for words you add to articles after rounds' end. Just kind of popped in to my head, I didn't really consider these facts before posting my worries.

[markm]

Still its possible he uses the wiki's "changes" info to figure it, that counts how many words people add to and subtract from articles. So its not impossible you were on to something. It just seems quite likely Unthinkingbit also thought of it, thus that he'd have looked for a way to prevent it, which would if no other way is possible at least lead to sheer brute force.

(He backs up the whole wiki by scraping the pages with curl, so he is known to use brute force already, for that.)

-MarkM-

[FinShaggy]

I like the idea of a "writers round" but I would like to see this kind of thing implemented by making sister sites...
Like, make a site JUST for writing completely original works, like books, novels poems etc.
Then have another site that pays people to post pictures
Then another that pays you per minute of video
And another that lets you sell your stuff like ebay
etc etc

BTW.

I'm making a website where people will get paid in Devcoin. I get paid in June, so that's when the site will be coming up. Unless I can get some DVC supporters to sponsor.

[markm]

The scripts should be checked to make sure they elegantly handle people's pages being removed, I guess.

That would require not only recording their previous number of words but their previous "high-water mark" number of words.

That way, a bunch of someone's pages could be deleted or grow smaller and it would simply dock their pay, as it were, up to the point where they are back up into an new total number of words beyond those they have already been paid for last time around before the deletions or summaries or whatever caused their total word count to shrink instead of growing in some particular round.

Actually maybe only high water mark is needed, in which case this already likely works, it just needs to not change their "previous total words" (which actually really would be their high-water-rmark number of words) downwards, only change it if it grows.

Hmm quite likely already done I guess; Unthinkingbit does seem pretty handy at writing scripts.

(His nickname is maybe misleading, he's not actually all that "unthinking" at all haha.)

-MarkM-

[WildElf]

Per unthinkingbit's request, please see two emails that I sent this morning in the attempt to clear up some of my postings:

Re: Did you write "Identity and Access Management"?
« Sent to: Unthinkingbit on: Today at 01:46:59 PM »
Yes, that paper is definitely mine as are the one's that are currently posted under my profile.

I was concerned about the other submissions that I saw there and realized after some investigation what occurred.

I had allowed my daughter to access my devtome account after I told her what it was that I was doing and she wanted to assist me as we are trying to get extra money to make ends meet.  What she did was post my "Identity and Access Management" paper to BigNerds and then took four to five other papers to post on the Devtome site in the effort to increase the word/share count.  You will see that this since been corrected and the articles removed.

Whatever action you wish to take at this point is completely up to you.  I have made the corrections on my end and can assure you that all further postings will be by me and will be genuine works.

This is what I meant in one of my forum posts about safeguarding my account.

Furthermore:

Re: Did you write "Identity and Access Management"?
« Sent to: Unthinkingbit on: Today at 05:48:37 PM »
Quote  Reply  Delete 
The writings that I posted were written anywhere between 2009 (when I started my grad program) - 2012 (when I graduated).  When I came across the Devtome site a few weeks ago, that is when I dug them out again, reformatted them for the wiki and posted them.

Again, I believe in this project and want it to be successful.  I hope that you can pardon this aberration.

[markm]

Yep, these go in pnSeeds...  

unsigned int pnSeed[] =
{
  0xb73c9ac6,

is what I have for the first node you posted the other day.

I used http://www.webdnstools.com/dnstools/ipcalc to convert that integer to an IP address...

...It came out as "The IP Number 0xb73c9ac6 converts to the IP Address 183.60.154.198"

So, backward, it seems, assuming said site is doing it correctly.

Unfortunately it does not use hax itself when turning an IP into an integer:

" The IP Address 198.154.60.183 converts to the IP Number 3331996855."

But presumably that is merely cosmetic, the array of IPs-as-integer should work with decimal integers too assuming that is actually what they are showing there.

So, using their page on our four stable node IPs, I have arrived at

Code:

unsigned int pnSeed[] =   
{
        3331996855, 3331996733, 1815951733, 84535656,
};

But... was your version backward deliberately?

Does pnSeed actually need a bytewise-reversed version (different-endian, or something) ?

I think maybe it does want it byte-reversed, as I asked that site to convert the first of the ancient commented out ones from way back when we swiped bitcoin code to make devcoin, and is said it was 29.219.16.50, but watch:

Code:

nslookup 29.219.16.50
Server:         192.168.2.1
Address:        192.168.2.1#53

** server can't find 50.16.219.29.in-addr.arpa.: NXDOMAIN

[bitcoin@megabox bitcoin]$ nslookup 50.16.219.29
Server:         192.168.2.1
Address:        192.168.2.1#53

Non-authoritative answer:
29.219.16.50.in-addr.arpa       name = ec2-50-16-219-29.compute-1.amazonaws.com.

Authoritative answers can be found from:
219.16.50.in-addr.arpa  nameserver = pdns6.ultradns.co.uk.
219.16.50.in-addr.arpa  nameserver = pdns2.ultradns.net.
219.16.50.in-addr.arpa  nameserver = pdns5.ultradns.info.
219.16.50.in-addr.arpa  nameserver = pdns1.ultradns.net.
219.16.50.in-addr.arpa  nameserver = pdns4.ultradns.org.
219.16.50.in-addr.arpa  nameserver = pdns3.ultradns.org.
pdns1.ultradns.net      internet address = 204.74.108.1
pdns1.ultradns.net      has AAAA address 2001:502:f3ff::1
pdns2.ultradns.net      internet address = 204.74.109.1
pdns2.ultradns.net      has AAAA address 2610:a1:1014::1
pdns3.ultradns.org      internet address = 199.7.68.1
pdns3.ultradns.org      has AAAA address 2610:a1:1015::1
pdns4.ultradns.org      internet address = 199.7.69.1
pdns4.ultradns.org      has AAAA address 2001:502:4612::1
pdns5.ultradns.info     internet address = 204.74.114.1
pdns5.ultradns.info     has AAAA address 2610:a1:1016::1
pdns6.ultradns.co.uk    internet address = 204.74.115.1

So it looks like maybe that spew of addresses is probably a list of bitcoin nodes, and the array does need byte-reversed addresses.

Luckily it is easy to manually reverse the bytes of a ##.##.##.## format Ip address before typing it into that conversion website, so...

Code:

unsigned int pnSeed[] =   
{
//      3331996855, 3331996733, 1815951733, 84535656,
        3074202310, 1027381958, 1966685547, 1760102661,
};

(I left the non-reversed integers in there but commented out. Just in case.)

-MarkM-