Bitcoin Forum
January 29, 2020, 05:30:11 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 [82] 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 ... 484 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed Since 2014  (Read 1184595 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
baigreen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 100


I-CHAIN - The Revolution of Digital Advertising


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 11:35:45 AM
 #1621

good news!!!


http://www.btc38.com/altcoin/BBR/

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Amph
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1003



View Profile
June 19, 2014, 12:00:32 PM
 #1622

This is bullshit.  Hardfork this and fix this before people start abandoning this coin.  I'm ready to dump all my coins and move on and I'm not alone.  A closed source miner kept private getting a majority of all the coins.  Come on.

we're mining 5000-7000 coins a day

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=167229.msg7320842#msg7320842

I have nothing bad to say about the dev of the miner because I would probably do the same.   But I wouldn't be surprised if people called for changes either.

smug sob, dev please fork, your coin is too good to be destroyed by one greed idiot.

Hope that's not true about someone having a gpu miner and keeping it to themselves because of greed. That would defeat the ideals of decentralization in the crypto world.

funny it was the same with bitcoin, when the first gpu miner was released, the owner(ArtForz) made tons of btc and owned a large portion of the network %

decentralization is a pure utopy

a funny story https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12.msg54#msg54
Alpharisc
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 47
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 12:22:19 PM
 #1623

http://bbr.extremepool.org

Has been stuck on the same block for like 8 hours:

every share lists "height:23162"
cubydu
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2014, 12:25:35 PM
 #1624


And what does this mean?

superresistant
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 1095



View Profile
June 19, 2014, 12:56:31 PM
 #1625

funny it was the same with bitcoin, when the first gpu miner was released, the owner(ArtForz) made tons of btc and owned a large portion of the network %
decentralization is a pure utopy
a funny story https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12.msg54#msg54

Haha great.

Guys, we should keep mining Bitcoin with CPU. The same quantity is generated, no matter if we use CPU or expensive ASIC.
The problem is, everyone must do the same.
dga
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737
Merit: 511


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2014, 01:20:03 PM
 #1626

One more simpleminer upgrade for testing.  This one should improve performance by a few percent:  it reduces the time between when a worker thread finds a share and when the share gets submitted to the pool.

Feedback and any comparison benchmarking appreciated:

https://github.com/dave-andersen/boolberry

(you just need simpleminer.cpp and simpleminer.h )

one important thing to note, though, is that this should increase *share* and block rate, but it won't necessarily increase the reported hashrate output:  It reduces wasted hashing, so hr should look similar.

If all goes well, I'll submit this plus the previous small improvement to pool robustness tomorrow a.m.

  -Dave

I will start testing now.. thanks DGA


I saw a failure last night.  I don't think it's related to these new changes to the miner, but:

Code:
2014-Jun-18 22:49:36.476494 Connected bbr.extremepool.org:7777 OK
2014-Jun-18 22:49:37.349759 Getting scratchpad...
2014-Jun-18 22:49:37.468708 Scratchpad received ok, size: 0Kb, heigh=0

This caused the miner to fail in processing its scratchpad.  I'm guessing this was a pool crash and the resulting invalid data sent back to the miner caused the miner to crash.

Did others running the normal simpleminer also see this problem?

I'll get a fix to this crash bug ASAP.  In the meantime, I've submitted a pull request for efficiency improvements, because I think they're safe.

Expect an invalid scratchpad size robustness patch within two hours.

dga
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 737
Merit: 511


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2014, 01:48:16 PM
Last edit: June 19, 2014, 03:26:33 PM by dga
 #1627


I saw a failure last night.  I don't think it's related to these new changes to the miner, but:

Code:
2014-Jun-18 22:49:36.476494 Connected bbr.extremepool.org:7777 OK
2014-Jun-18 22:49:37.349759 Getting scratchpad...
2014-Jun-18 22:49:37.468708 Scratchpad received ok, size: 0Kb, heigh=0

This caused the miner to fail in processing its scratchpad.  I'm guessing this was a pool crash and the resulting invalid data sent back to the miner caused the miner to crash.

Did others running the normal simpleminer also see this problem?

I'll get a fix to this crash bug ASAP.  In the meantime, I've submitted a pull request for efficiency improvements, because I think they're safe.

Expect an invalid scratchpad size robustness patch within two hours.

I've put in a quick fix to avoid this specific problem and included it in the pull request for efficiency.

update:  This is now merged.  Update your tree to get the now more-robust simpleminer code.

In the meantime:

(a)  I still recommend that everyone run their miner in a shell script that auto-restarts.  For example, on linux, the following will work nicely:

Code:
#!/bin/sh
ADDRESS=YOURADDR
POOL=YOURPOOL
THREADS=NUMTHREADS

while true
do
  ./build/release/src/simpleminer --pool-addr $POOL --login $ADDRESS --pass x --mining-threads $THREADS
done

(b)  I'm going to do a bit of refactoring of simpleminer focusing on overall robustness. This shouldn't be too bad, but it's not 5 minutes of hacking and deserves to be done with a little care, so I'll hop on it tonight/tomorrow.

ryen123
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 284
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2014, 02:14:55 PM
 #1628

http://bbr.extremepool.org

Has been stuck on the same block for like 8 hours:

every share lists "height:23162"

Is there any faster simpleminer windows build out there? Can't get any block solo or on extremepool.

btc-mike
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 19, 2014, 03:18:37 PM
 #1629


More exposure in China. Chinese speakers make up a large market share, along with Russian speakers.
Keyboard-Mash
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 06:30:48 PM
 #1630

dev please fork, your coin is too good to be destroyed by one greed idiot.

I agree. Has anyone considered if they would be willing to accept a closed-source fork? I think dev has the capability to provide the software necessary to continue.

When people have the technical capabilities to hold the coin hostage, or at least scare people into thinking they do .. simply changing the PoW might not be enough. Keeping it closed-source for a period of time would. But that would hinge on everyone using this now to accept that. Let's say that the PoW is changed .. what are the chances that christian would just do this all over again .. and again there's no way to convince him to distribute software or open source it?

What do people think?
cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 502


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 06:59:39 PM
Last edit: June 19, 2014, 07:13:05 PM by cbuchner1
 #1631

dev please fork, your coin is too good to be destroyed by one greed idiot.

I agree. Has anyone considered if they would be willing to accept a closed-source fork? I think dev has the capability to provide the software necessary to continue.

What do people think?

From a legal standpoint, the MIT license under which ByteCoin was originally published is pretty permissive.

I would not recommend it. No one would trust a closed source cryptocurrency.

I offered to publish an (open source) nVidia GPU miner provided some stratum support is available. What else do you want?
btc-mike
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 19, 2014, 07:12:36 PM
 #1632

dev please fork, your coin is too good to be destroyed by one greed idiot.

I agree. Has anyone considered if they would be willing to accept a closed-source fork? I think dev has the capability to provide the software necessary to continue.

What do people think?

From a legal standpoint, the MIT license under which ByteCoin was originally published is pretty permissive.

I would not recommend it. No one would trust a closed source cryptocurrency.

I offered to publish an (open source) nVidia GPU miner provided some stratum support is available. What else do you want?


Closed source is not an option. It would kill the coin.

Any fork would only delay Christian. He would adjust his miner and be mining again quickly. What then? Another fork?

Christian has already offered the solution. Develop a stratum pool and cpu miner. He will then rebuild his GPU miner to work on the stratum pool and make it open source.

We have bounty setup to put towards the stratum pool and cpu miner development. When we receive enough donations, we will attract some talented pool developers (zone117x, LucasJones, etc).
AizenSou
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 1000


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 07:20:41 PM
 #1633

dev please fork, your coin is too good to be destroyed by one greed idiot.

I agree. Has anyone considered if they would be willing to accept a closed-source fork? I think dev has the capability to provide the software necessary to continue.

What do people think?

From a legal standpoint, the MIT license under which ByteCoin was originally published is pretty permissive.

I would not recommend it. No one would trust a closed source cryptocurrency.

I offered to publish an (open source) nVidia GPU miner provided some stratum support is available. What else do you want?


They still even have a proper binary for Mac and Linux after 1 month launch, Christian. Why do you bother?
It seems like Prof. Andersen having much interests in this coin too, but he's too busy for other things. Sorry but I just see a lot of flaws in this coin. Amazing that it got pump so hard.
btc-mike
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 19, 2014, 07:45:02 PM
 #1634

dev please fork, your coin is too good to be destroyed by one greed idiot.

I agree. Has anyone considered if they would be willing to accept a closed-source fork? I think dev has the capability to provide the software necessary to continue.

What do people think?

From a legal standpoint, the MIT license under which ByteCoin was originally published is pretty permissive.

I would not recommend it. No one would trust a closed source cryptocurrency.

I offered to publish an (open source) nVidia GPU miner provided some stratum support is available. What else do you want?


They still even have a proper binary for Mac and Linux after 1 month launch, Christian. Why do you bother?
It seems like Prof. Andersen having much interests in this coin too, but he's too busy for other things. Sorry but I just see a lot of flaws in this coin. Amazing that it got pump so hard.

Linux compiles normally.

Boolberry was the first CryptoNote coin to even support Mac.

The only person asking for compiling help recently was using Ubuntu 12.04. I provided him with instructions.

Do you need help?
Keyboard-Mash
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 07:46:02 PM
 #1635

dev please fork, your coin is too good to be destroyed by one greed idiot.

I agree. Has anyone considered if they would be willing to accept a closed-source fork? I think dev has the capability to provide the software necessary to continue.

What do people think?

From a legal standpoint, the MIT license under which ByteCoin was originally published is pretty permissive.

I would not recommend it. No one would trust a closed source cryptocurrency.

I offered to publish an (open source) nVidia GPU miner provided some stratum support is available. What else do you want?


I'm not saying that what you've offered is not enough. I'm saying that you are making a very bold, and powerful statement that will come to define this scene, even if you don't realize it right now. Yours isn't the first, but it is the first that threatens the continued peaceful existence of cryptocurrencies. Open source coins are now at the mercy of private, closed software. It's not your fault, you just happened to be the guy that made the statement that's been long in coming.

The only way to keep this movement going is to evolve. The closed-sourcing of third party software that these 'alt' currencies must absolutely survive on in this year and the coming years must be met with an equally bold and powerful statement. You're not wrong to be doing what you're doing. If, the tendency to donate to and recognize powerful developers were still a naturally occurring thing then this very well may have turned out different. That is not the case, and nobody's to blame -- it's a natural evolution. No amount of open-source coding will ensure that developers get paid, save for a premine. Sadly, this does not cover payment to third party developers such as yourself .. who should be paid and recognized for their work, but not at the cost of the continued existence of the currency.

What I'm saying is that by taking this route, there will come a day where people will have no option but to trust a closed source cryptocurrency .. because the tools of infinite money are no longer available to them.
cbuchner1
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 502


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 07:47:58 PM
 #1636

Open source coins are now at the mercy of private, closed software. It's not your fault, you just happened to be the guy that made the statement that's been long in coming.

"now"? It has always been that way. See links posted to earlier stories about ArtForz and Coblee...

Also note how 51% of hashing power on Bitcoin (!!!) was in the hands of one pool recently. ASICs have terribly centralized mining. Ouch.

Wanna know how to solve it? Quality cryptocurrencies should come with wallets for Linux, Mac, Windows and with optimized miners for AMD, nVidia, CPU (SSE2, AVX2). Period. It won't help against ASICs in the long term but at least it creates a level playing (mining) field right from the start.

Christian
AizenSou
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 1000


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 07:50:38 PM
 #1637

dev please fork, your coin is too good to be destroyed by one greed idiot.

I agree. Has anyone considered if they would be willing to accept a closed-source fork? I think dev has the capability to provide the software necessary to continue.

What do people think?

From a legal standpoint, the MIT license under which ByteCoin was originally published is pretty permissive.

I would not recommend it. No one would trust a closed source cryptocurrency.

I offered to publish an (open source) nVidia GPU miner provided some stratum support is available. What else do you want?


They still even have a proper binary for Mac and Linux after 1 month launch, Christian. Why do you bother?
It seems like Prof. Andersen having much interests in this coin too, but he's too busy for other things. Sorry but I just see a lot of flaws in this coin. Amazing that it got pump so hard.

Linux compiles normally.

Boolberry was the first CryptoNote coin to even support Mac.

The only person asking for compiling help recently was using Ubuntu 12.04. I provided him with instructions.

Do you need help?

No thanks. I appreciate that but I can compile myself. But for some users could be a problem then if you don't provide a linux binary for them. And then why no new binary version for Mac? Should I compile one and send you dga's version ?
Btw I don't know which one has it first but QCN has even a simple GUI wallet for Mac.
Keyboard-Mash
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 08:06:35 PM
 #1638

Open source coins are now at the mercy of private, closed software. It's not your fault, you just happened to be the guy that made the statement that's been long in coming.

"now"? It has always been that way. See links posted to earlier stories about ArtForz and Coblee...

Also note how 51% of hashing power on Bitcoin (!!!) was in the hands of one pool recently. ASICs have terribly centralized mining. Ouch.

Wanna know how to solve it? Quality cryptocurrencies should come with wallets for Linux, Mac, Windows and with optimized miners for AMD, nVidia, CPU (SSE2, AVX2). Period. It won't help against ASICs in the long term but at least it creates a level playing (mining) field right from the start.

Christian


You detract from the argument. The statement was "now at the mercy of private, closed software". This is not about hardware, or centralized mining. This is about the existence of nothing but centralized mining, because exactly zero people here can do what you do. Should you profit from that? Yes. Should people just start launching coins for you and only you to profit off of? No. This one seems to be launched for you, and many more will be launched for you until people learn that either they should start paying their developers from day one, or thrive on closed source software. There's no other options.

Toward the rest, I agree .. quality currencies should come with every single bell and whistle that can possibly be conceived. But you're not gonna tell me that if all of that existed in the first place, you wouldn't have tried to find a way to do what you do best and outplay everyone involved.
dav1199
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 207
Merit: 100


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 08:16:17 PM
 #1639

Open source coins are now at the mercy of private, closed software. It's not your fault, you just happened to be the guy that made the statement that's been long in coming.

"now"? It has always been that way. See links posted to earlier stories about ArtForz and Coblee...

Also note how 51% of hashing power on Bitcoin (!!!) was in the hands of one pool recently. ASICs have terribly centralized mining. Ouch.

Wanna know how to solve it? Quality cryptocurrencies should come with wallets for Linux, Mac, Windows and with optimized miners for AMD, nVidia, CPU (SSE2, AVX2). Period. It won't help against ASICs in the long term but at least it creates a level playing (mining) field right from the start.

Christian


You detract from the argument. The statement was "now at the mercy of private, closed software". This is not about hardware, or centralized mining. This is about the existence of nothing but centralized mining, because exactly zero people here can do what you do. Should you profit from that? Yes. Should people just start launching coins for you and only you to profit off of? No. This one seems to be launched for you, and many more will be launched for you until people learn that either they should start paying their developers from day one, or thrive on closed source software. There's no other options.

Toward the rest, I agree .. quality currencies should come with every single bell and whistle that can possibly be conceived. But you're not gonna tell me that if all of that existed in the first place, you wouldn't have tried to find a way to do what you do best and outplay everyone involved.

That is the nature of the game tho , he built his own tools , you can't blame him for it. It would be the same as blaming the asic builders using their hardware before sending them out when it is not as profitable no more. Being the first onto something isn't outplaying others , it is using your skills to profit from them and it is how it should be.
Keyboard-Mash
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 08:18:14 PM
 #1640


That is the nature of the game tho , he built his own tools , you can't blame him for it. It would be the same as blaming the asic builders using their hardware before sending them out when it is not as profitable no more. Being the first onto something isn't outplaying others , it is using your skills to profit from them and it is how it should be.

If you read anything I've written, you would see that I'm not blaming him. I'm blaming idiot adopters like myself who come here and think this is a good idea to expect software and not donate, even though i do. He has every right to profit - it's his property and intellect that gives him the edge.
Pages: « 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 [82] 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 ... 484 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!