[BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed Since 2014

[CryptoRambler]

<,1Blockologist is shady and part of the Rune (LOL Vikings LOL death metal LOL D&D LOL Druids LOL) crew>>

What crew is this? Are you saying that 1blockologist was/is involved with shady crypto pump&dumps? Proof?

[iCEBREAKER]

All that stuff about CZ coming back once he finished Louis d'or never happened.  The fact he's collecting a dev tax is terrible optics, if not ethics.  Even if he returns now, people will suspect he was intentionally running the price down to accumulate.

STOP!

You are not speaking for me! Without proof this a mobbing attack against CZ. It is ONLY YOUR opinion, as long as no other person agrees to you.

Beside this, CZ can sell his coins whenever he want, if he concludes, that the coin becomes worthless.

Louis d'or is abandoned:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=887482.140
https://github.com/cryptobender/lui

The dev tax is controversial, people cheered when 1block removed it from his fork.

I didn't say "all people, especially kneim" so you may calm your tits.

<,1Blockologist is shady and part of the Rune (LOL Vikings LOL death metal LOL D&D LOL Druids LOL) crew>>

What crew is this? Are you saying that 1blockologist was/is involved with shady crypto pump&dumps? Proof?

1block calls his fork "Rune edition."  IS THAT ENOUGH PROOF FOR YOU?

Relevant:

http://www.answers.com/Q/What_does_%27squeal_like_a_stuck_pig%27_mean

[kneim]

All that stuff about CZ coming back once he finished Louis d'or never happened.  The fact he's collecting a dev tax is terrible optics, if not ethics.  Even if he returns now, people will suspect he was intentionally running the price down to accumulate.

STOP!

You are not speaking for me! Without proof this a mobbing attack against CZ. It is ONLY YOUR opinion, as long as no other person agrees to you.

Beside this, CZ can sell his coins whenever he want, if he concludes, that the coin becomes worthless.

Louis d'or is abandoned:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=887482.140
https://github.com/cryptobender/lui

The dev tax is controversial, people cheered when 1block removed it from his fork.

I didn't say "all people, especially kneim" so you may calm your tits.

You shouldn't speak to childs this way, asshole.

Whenever you speak in the name of "people", I want to known who are them.

[iCEBREAKER]

All that stuff about CZ coming back once he finished Louis d'or never happened.  The fact he's collecting a dev tax is terrible optics, if not ethics.  Even if he returns now, people will suspect he was intentionally running the price down to accumulate.

STOP!

You are not speaking for me! Without proof this a mobbing attack against CZ. It is ONLY YOUR opinion, as long as no other person agrees to you.

Beside this, CZ can sell his coins whenever he want, if he concludes, that the coin becomes worthless.

Louis d'or is abandoned:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=887482.140
https://github.com/cryptobender/lui

The dev tax is controversial, people cheered when 1block removed it from his fork.

I didn't say "all people, especially kneim" so you may calm your tits.

You shouldn't speak to childs this way, asshole.

Whenever you speak in the name of "people", I want to known who are them.

Make up your mind.  You can't accuse me of a "mobbing attack" *AND* claim nobody agrees with me.  That not how it works.

Again, I didn't say "all people" so you may calm your tits and stop accusing me of speaking for you.

Sorry for hurting your delicate feelings with my unforgivable speculative opinion!   

How awful of me to share my thoughts when politely asked to by crypjunkie and Divorcion!   

[CryptoRambler]

<
1block calls his fork "Rune edition."  IS THAT ENOUGH PROOF FOR YOU?>

No. Actually that is not proof of anything to me, that is why I asked. Your non-specific assertions are baseless and amount to FUD from my perspective.

What do you believe 1blockologist is a part of or has done that is bad?

What is the problem with BBR emission?

[iCEBREAKER]

<
1block calls his fork "Rune edition."  IS THAT ENOUGH PROOF FOR YOU?>

No. Actually that is not proof of anything to me, that is why I asked. Your non-specific assertions are baseless and amount to FUD from my perspective.

What do you believe 1blockologist is a part of or has done that is bad?

What is the problem with BBR emission?

Are you saying it's just a random coincidence that a group of people were pushing for a rebrand to Rune that failed, and then another group begins a Rune edition after CZ abandons the project?

I specifically said I don't know anything about 1block, other than he's obviously associated with the previous failed push for a Rune (LOL skinheads LOL Aryans LOL white power LOL trenchcoats LOL basement dwellers LOL neckbeards LOL ELFQUEST LOL) rebrand.

[CryptoRambler]

<
1block calls his fork "Rune edition."  IS THAT ENOUGH PROOF FOR YOU?>

No. Actually that is not proof of anything to me, that is why I asked. Your non-specific assertions are baseless and amount to FUD from my perspective.

What do you believe 1blockologist is a part of or has done that is bad?

What is the problem with BBR emission?

Are you saying it's just a random coincidence that a group of people were pushing for a rebrand to Rune that failed, and then another group begins a Rune edition after CZ abandons the project?

I specifically said I don't know anything about 1block, other than he's obviously associated with the previous failed push for a Rune (LOL skinheads LOL Aryans LOL white power LOL trenchcoats LOL basement dwellers LOL neckbeards LOL ELFQUEST LOL) rebrand.

Ok So what if 1blockologist is part of that rebrand group?

Why should anyone really care? It looks like the price is the same as when 1block "took over", and people are talking about BBR at least.

What we need is solid codebase work, but no one seems competent enough to make substantial changes.

The team that was working with CZ in the past on BBR seems uncommitted at this point, so who accumulates coins and such seems irrelevant.

[iCEBREAKER]

<
1block calls his fork "Rune edition."  IS THAT ENOUGH PROOF FOR YOU?>

No. Actually that is not proof of anything to me, that is why I asked. Your non-specific assertions are baseless and amount to FUD from my perspective.

What do you believe 1blockologist is a part of or has done that is bad?

What is the problem with BBR emission?

Are you saying it's just a random coincidence that a group of people were pushing for a rebrand to Rune that failed, and then another group begins a Rune edition after CZ abandons the project?

I specifically said I don't know anything about 1block, other than he's obviously associated with the previous failed push for a Rune (LOL skinheads LOL Aryans LOL white power LOL trenchcoats LOL basement dwellers LOL neckbeards LOL ELFQUEST LOL) rebrand.

Ok So what if 1blockologist is part of that rebrand group?

Why should anyone really care? It looks like the price is the same as when 1block "took over", and people are talking about BBR at least.

What we need is solid codebase work, but no one seems competent enough to make substantial changes.

The team that was working with CZ in the past on BBR seems uncommitted at this point, so who accumulates coins and such seems irrelevant.

I was going to say the problem with Rune Edition is that it's a horrible name, as we discussed ad nauseam and decided as a community over a year ago.

But I was wrong about that.  Rune, with it's dorky/icky/ridiculous connotations, is the PERFECT name for internet nerd money.   

[crypjunkie]

iCEBREAKER, WINDJC, papa_lazzarou, thanks for taking the time out to reply.

Some interesting thoughts and opinions from yourselves and a few others since i posted my question, 1Block has also made a statement regarding some of the recent posts on the BTC via the slack channel:

The speculation on the bitcointalk thread is inaccurate
The wild keccak algorithm doesn't make boolberry development harder
It's been pretty easy to do the updates that have been made already, most of which is copied from monero. The testing and troubleshooting has taken longer
There's research and fact finding necessary, and unforeseen issues like the seed nodes going down
I'll set up seed node redundancies in a few weeks
In the same manner that monero does
If other developers are interested in the effort, please have them contact me as I know where they would be best used
Most of it is around Web services and parallel infrastructure, not boolberry core.

Me personally i would like either you guys all to come and join the slack channel that was started by mbe24 and get these type of discussions brought up or else 1Block to come on here and respond to all that has been said.

Don't know if it is all the talk here or what but have you seen the spike on polo in the past hr r so?

Again thanks for response

[kneim]

I need to make it clear what valuation the Blockchain Development Company sees in Boolberry: a $50,000,000 market cap.

This would mean today that the price of BBR would have to go to around 0.0065.

Believe it or not, this was the best case scenario I gave (medium term) for BBR to my subscribers some minutes before I read this!!


You MFers......

 

There are about 8 million BBR in circulation. Which means a $50 million cap is around .01 not .0065.

Although this may seem like an improbable outcome from a technical analysis perspective

We are using forms of fundamental and quantitative analysis to make our assessments. By addressing both the utility, and the scarcity, we can estimate the market cap improvements based on the known supply and future demand.

Disproportionally deep resistance walls on the order books will come from people not sharing our analysis, which I will post details about soon, what we can do in the near term is organize OTC trading facilities and encourage proper storage of boolberry off of the exchanges.

Is this information current yet? I'm buying like hell.

(for the more naive ones: no, it's ironic. And yes, I'm collecting them on falling market price)

[crypjunkie]

I need to make it clear what valuation the Blockchain Development Company sees in Boolberry: a $50,000,000 market cap.

This would mean today that the price of BBR would have to go to around 0.0065.

Believe it or not, this was the best case scenario I gave (medium term) for BBR to my subscribers some minutes before I read this!!


You MFers......

 

There are about 8 million BBR in circulation. Which means a $50 million cap is around .01 not .0065.

Although this may seem like an improbable outcome from a technical analysis perspective

We are using forms of fundamental and quantitative analysis to make our assessments. By addressing both the utility, and the scarcity, we can estimate the market cap improvements based on the known supply and future demand.

Disproportionally deep resistance walls on the order books will come from people not sharing our analysis, which I will post details about soon, what we can do in the near term is organize OTC trading facilities and encourage proper storage of boolberry off of the exchanges.

Is this information current yet? I'm buying like hell.

(for the more naive ones: no, it's ironic. And yes, I'm collecting them on falling market price)

I'm still buying, all about lowering my avg buy price now

[CryptoRambler]

>> I'm still buying, all about lowering my avg buy price now>>

Thanks for the update crypjunkie! It does appear to be a terrific time to buy BBR right now

It seems reasonable that BBR could trade $.30-50 in the short term and $1 a year from now with steady progress. Cheers!

[Coinopoly]

Greetings fellow traders,

We're working on an in-depth interview with crypto_zoidberg that we'll be publishing on coinopoly.xyz in the near future. The goal of the interview is to help bring clarity to the speculation surrounding the future of Boolberry.

[crypjunkie]

Greetings fellow traders,

We're working on an in-depth interview with crypto_zoidberg that we'll be publishing on coinopoly.xyz in the near future. The goal of the interview is to help bring clarity to the speculation surrounding the future of Boolberry.

..

That should be interesting...

[1blockologist]

<
1block calls his fork "Rune edition."  IS THAT ENOUGH PROOF FOR YOU?>

No. Actually that is not proof of anything to me, that is why I asked. Your non-specific assertions are baseless and amount to FUD from my perspective.

What do you believe 1blockologist is a part of or has done that is bad?

What is the problem with BBR emission?

Are you saying it's just a random coincidence that a group of people were pushing for a rebrand to Rune that failed, and then another group begins a Rune edition after CZ abandons the project

Hi.
Thats exactly what happened though

I read alot of your posts and there are several assumptions that lead to conclusions hard to give rebuttals to, so I'll try to address the assumptions.

First and foremost it seems you are conflating software fork with blockchain fork. Software forks are part of open source development and is the only way you, I or anyone can make modifications to open source projects like Boolberry. None of the modifications that have been done cause forks in thr blockchain. Development is ongoing, you can follow on github, or the bi weekly updates, or slack, and we havent released any binaries because it isnt ready yet. You can compile from source and run the "rune" edition if you want right now, like others do. There is also a java boolberry client in development too that you can build from source. It would be misinformed to say it failed when nothing was released, it is an open source project.

These seem to be things shaking your confidence in boolberry for reasons that are irrelevant. The updated client allows for other services (web wallets, block explorers, bitsquare, etc). This isnt bitcoin unlimited, there is no blockchain fork. The c++ client that CZ, clintar2 , and more originally worked on is being updated so that I and others can build more infrastructure on top of it, whether other people use it or not. It doesnt effect how transactions are relayed across the network, so it is not a blockchain fork. Im not really sure how many ways to spell this out, but it seems misunderstanding of how blockchains work is shaking confidence in people looking for a leader.

Nothing that I or CZ have ever done or will do will cause a fork in the boolberry blockchain. There is already an open request to merge the code changes in my fork with his open source repository. There is also a work in progress java client being written from scratch in javajared's github repo, because he wants to. This is just extra information to help you amd others form objective opinions before some of the farfetched conclusions Ive been reading. A lot of what Ive been reading just dont matter, but if it is really creating the semblance of a cloud over the viability of this project then Im trying to address them.

CZ's code is really good, having dug through it over the last few months, and I and others continue to develop on top of it mostly pulling code from Monero. There are not "1000 developer hours" necessary to bring this network up to speed.

It would be great to work more closely with CZ, but it is still surprising to me that you and others are looking for an endorsement despite all the transparency into what is going on and the decentralized nature of blockchains. I wouldnt count on that at this point, also doesnt matter. If CZ actually did push updates to the open source code (this hasnt happened since september 2015), I will merge those changes in to the copy I work on. It would push the project ahead, he suggested he has done the database work that I want to do. The copy I have has RPC server updates. It is only a net positive, I haven't felt the need to explain this but now I see other peoples line of thinking, so I hope that helps.

Second, regarding RUNE and a previous dwarven name change. Myself and other analysts skimmed threads about boolberry and saw that thread. For distinctive purposes the name is just homage to that point in time. The official stance is that my company experiences nothing but apathy to drama related to it in this community. Ive been consistent about the utility and scarcity improvements that I see here and will continue improving the client towards. We can talk about branding when applicable, it is primarily to let others know the project isnt dead.

Come to the slack channel on occassion. It will be easier to chat there about your remaining concerns. Feel free to post our conversations here for transparency.

[iCEBREAKER]

<
1block calls his fork "Rune edition."  IS THAT ENOUGH PROOF FOR YOU?>

No. Actually that is not proof of anything to me, that is why I asked. Your non-specific assertions are baseless and amount to FUD from my perspective.

What do you believe 1blockologist is a part of or has done that is bad?

What is the problem with BBR emission?

Are you saying it's just a random coincidence that a group of people were pushing for a rebrand to Rune that failed, and then another group begins a Rune edition after CZ abandons the project

[unverifiable claims that previous and current Rune groups are unrelated]

Bruh, I've been here since 2011.  I solved 50 BTC blocks with cgminer before there was stratum, much less ASICs.  No need to ELI5 the difference between a software fork and blockchain fork.

Not even sure where you get the idea I'm confusing the two, as I never mentioned blockchain forks, intentional or otherwise.  Seems like a handwavy distraction and/or attempt to impugn my credibility/expertise.

BBR's and XMR's codebases have drifted apart from their common Bytecoin origin, so you can't simply "pull" things like LMDB, RingCT, etc into BBR.  Of course you can reuse a lot of the work done for Monero, but it's still going to take 100s of hours to adapt the code for BBR, test it, and keep doing that as Monero moves forward.

That's why I suggested it would be easier to fork XMR's code, modifying it with Wild Keccak replacing CryptoNight, than to go the other way.

Since there's no way to verify you are not related to the original Rune pushing group, the only thing I learned from your post is that you are almost certainly not CZ.  And that's not because you claimed it, but because you do not write like he does (native English speaker vs Slavglish).

[1blockologist]

<
1block calls his fork "Rune edition."  IS THAT ENOUGH PROOF FOR YOU?>

No. Actually that is not proof of anything to me, that is why I asked. Your non-specific assertions are baseless and amount to FUD from my perspective.

What do you believe 1blockologist is a part of or has done that is bad?

What is the problem with BBR emission?

Are you saying it's just a random coincidence that a group of people were pushing for a rebrand to Rune that failed, and then another group begins a Rune edition after CZ abandons the project

[unverifiable claims that previous and current Rune groups are unrelated]

Bruh, I've been here since 2011.  I solved 50 BTC blocks with cgminer before there was stratum, much less ASICs.  No need to ELI5 the difference between a software fork and blockchain fork.

Not even sure where you get the idea I'm confusing the two, as I never mentioned blockchain forks, intentional or otherwise.  Seems like a handwavy distraction and/or attempt to impugn my credibility/expertise.

BBR's and XMR's codebases have drifted apart from their common Bytecoin origin, so you can't simply "pull" things like LMDB, RingCT, etc into BBR.  Of course you can reuse a lot of the work done for Monero, but it's still going to take 100s of hours to adapt the code for BBR, test it, and keep doing that as Monero moves forward.

That's why I suggested it would be easier to fork XMR's code, modifying it with Wild Keccak replacing CryptoNight, than to go the other way.

Since there's no way to verify you are not related to the original Rune pushing group, the only thing I learned from your post is that you are almost certainly not CZ.  And that's not because you claimed it, but because you do not write like he does (native English speaker vs Slavglish).

eh most of the post wasnt about you specifically, it was about your influence on less tech savvy lurkers. My post should serve to clarify the difference between fork normenclature as there are other people who have expressed concern about blockchain divergence if two clients emerged

It isnt pulling, but there is a lot of copy and pasting involved

Your suggestion of forking monero and making transactions compatible with existing boolberry clients is interesting, the code for the wild keccak algorithm and transaction formation is largely compartmentalized, ill look into it before dismissing it and see what is involved

What would happen if you just assumed I wasnt part of the original rune group, rainbows and butterflies and an awesome bbr daemon?

[iCEBREAKER]

Your suggestion of forking monero and making transactions compatible with existing boolberry clients is interesting, the code for the wild keccak algorithm and transaction formation is largely compartmentalized, ill look into it before dismissing it and see what is involved

What would happen if you just assumed I wasnt part of the original rune group, rainbows and butterflies and an awesome bbr daemon?

Until I know who the original Rune group was and you are (thus being able to ascertain with certainty overlap or lack thereof), I'll use Occam's Razor and avoid multiplying entities needlessly.

Regardless...

Since Monero has waaay more post-Bytecoin work done on it, and the PoW is designed to be modular, it seems easier to (re)start from there and swap out CryptoNote for Wild Keccak than to keep the rest of CZ's legacy code and doom yourself to an eternity of shoehorning into it the latest XMR pulls.

It would be a clean break, although you'd lose the bit of pruning CZ added.

You could also modify Wild Keccak to use be as ASIC friendly as possible (IE reduce the memory req and stop its growth), to prevent or at least forestall monopolization by well funded entities.  You may call it Feral Keccak.  

To me the beauty of WK is that it forces miners to maintain or at least be close to full nodes (Satoshi's original design), not the pointless/counterproductive ASIC arms race acceleration.

[CryptoRambler]

Your suggestion of forking monero and making transactions compatible with existing boolberry clients is interesting, the code for the wild keccak algorithm and transaction formation is largely compartmentalized, ill look into it before dismissing it and see what is involved

What would happen if you just assumed I wasnt part of the original rune group, rainbows and butterflies and an awesome bbr daemon?

Until I know who the original Rune group was and you are (thus being able to ascertain with certainty overlap or lack thereof), I'll use Occam's Razor and avoid multiplying entities needlessly.

Regardless...

Since Monero has waaay more post-Bytecoin work done on it, and the PoW is designed to be modular, it seems easier to (re)start from there and swap out CryptoNote for Wild Keccak than to keep the rest of CZ's legacy code and doom yourself to an eternity of shoehorning into it the latest XMR pulls.

It would be a clean break, although you'd lose the bit of pruning CZ added.

You could also modify Wild Keccak to use be as ASIC friendly as possible (IE reduce the memory req and stop its growth), to prevent or at least forestall monopolization by well funded entities.  You may call it Feral Keccak.  

To me the beauty of WK is that it forces miners to maintain or at least be close to full nodes (Satoshi's original design), not the pointless/counterproductive ASIC arms race acceleration.

That's a pretty sweet idea, i.e. BBR is still a BCN fork with WK, just a lot further upstream to where we want to be.

Icebreaker, shouldn't there be a good mix of light and full nodes in the network, to compensate for the loss of pruning in your scenario?

[CryptoRambler]

Also, I like your idea of Feral Keccak - great name!