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

[hashappliance]

Copy of text from reddit post at:

https://www.reddit.com/r/boolberry/comments/98pkmg/while_boolberry_was_almost_the_monero_before/

Interesting observation, and I absolutely agree. There were a couple of important things that happened around that time in April / May of 2014. Aside from the fact that Monero was "rush launched" which gave it status as the 1st fork from BCN, it also had 1 minute block times for the first 2 years, and therefore a much faster emission curve, even though they both had the same emission factor. This faster emission curve allowed coins to be accumulated and gave people an incentive to organize and work as a team, similar to the effect that DASH's instamine had. If you look at the old OTC threads on BCT, Boolberry actually traded at a premium to Monero in May 2014 prior to listings on Polinex and Bittrex.

BBR OTC: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=616391

XMR (MRO) OTC: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=578192.0

Its important to note that the lag between the pre-ann and genesis block for Boolberry included some changes that have stood the test of time. The change in the hashing algo Wild Keccak, was never shown to have any unfair advantage like we saw with Monero. (see link)

https://da-data.blogspot.com/2014/08/minting-money-with-monero-and-cpu.html

Additionally, other features that were challenged by the Monero community, namely, Smooth, were later incorporated such as pruning of ring signatures and eventually changing the hashing algo to V7 (supposed to be ASIC resistant), which might change yet again! Monero uses a 2MB scratchpad, where Boolberry has a scratchpad that is now about 340MB and grows at about 90MB per year. Even if there were FPGAs mining BBR, the Xilinx VCU1525 only has 346MB on chip memory, so that should be passed in the next couple of weeks.

Cryptozoidberg, was churning out code in mid 2014 at a pace that was unprecedented. There was a funny post from CZ aimed at FluffyPony as they were blindly merging commits. (see link)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=577267.msg8960248#msg8960248

Also during this time there was a chess match between Monero and Boolberry. (see link)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1190988

The competition during 2014 was fierce and the fact that cryptozoidberg was 1 person trying to compete against a group of old bitcoin guys that took over Monero from thankful_for_today.

Here is the original Bitmonero thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563821

Current Monero thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0

In December 2014 Cryptozoidberg announced that he was going to be working on a new project code named Louid'or. (see link)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=887482.0

In his absence there were several attempts by unrelated parties to bring changes to Boolberry, which ultimately led to its de-listing from both Polinex in April '17 and Bittrex in August '17.

For a period of almost 3 years, CZ would periodically surface to reiterate his commitment to return. Finally earlier this year, He DID return, and has implemented a number of improvements over the past several months. Improvements include, off-line signatures (a requirement for exchanges like Binance), LMDB (which took monero a year to implement) integrated addresses, which eliminates the confusion for people sending coins to exchanges which requires a payment ID, and a long list of optimizations and bug fixes.

If you look on cryptomiso.com, and choose ranking by previous 3 months, Boolberry is listed among some large name coins, and at the moment BBR is ranked #114 vs XMR at #86.

https://www.cryptomiso.com/months_3.html

There is not much information out regarding what is planned, but on the website https://boolberry.com/ if you look at phase 3 of the road-map, it say "Big news to come in the year ahead."

Hope this helps connect some of the dots and gives a better overview of history.

Here is the link to the Boolberry Telegram Group: https://t.me/boolberry_bbr

And "the official" Twitter: https://twitter.com/BoolberryBBR

[1714059937]

1714059937

[Kurrie]

Hey. Please tell us what are the communities' ideas about including the BBR as Masternode?

[teknohog]

Hey. Please tell us what are the communities' ideas about including the BBR as Masternode?

I don't represent the BBR community, but I've been here for a while (see my profile). In my opinion, masternodes are completely against the original ideals of cryptocurrencies, as I explain in the link in my signature. (I probably have enough BBR to be in the "masternode class" of BBR users, but I don't think I should be granted any special privileges for it.)

[Sun Sky]

Hey. Please tell us what are the communities' ideas about including the BBR as Masternode?

I don't represent the BBR community, but I've been here for a while (see my profile). In my opinion, masternodes are completely against the original ideals of cryptocurrencies, as I explain in the link in my signature. (I probably have enough BBR to be in the "masternode class" of BBR users, but I don't think I should be granted any special privileges for it.)

That is a good question. The cryptospace has changed and the market can totally accept masternodes. Boolberry coin have good potential.

[teknohog]

The cryptospace has changed and the market can totally accept masternodes. Boolberry coin have good potential.

There's one thing I absolutely accept about masternodes. We should totally reward those who maintain stable nodes with good uptime and connectivity. But all the masternode schemes I've seen include a large deposit of money. That's the bit that goes completely against all logic and ideals I've known so far.

In general, I pay people for useful services. I don't pay people just because they already have money. In the real world, rich people don't get richer simply by having all that money, but because they use their money sensibly -- for example, on servers and Internet infrastructure.

Moreover, I don't want a world where you need a hefty deposit in order to be a service provider. I'll rather trust a distributed P2P network than an oligarchy of a few rich players. Isn't that why we have cryptocurrencies in the first place? If you want old-time big-money capitalism, you can already do that outside the crypto world.

[gigabyted]

The cryptospace has changed and the market can totally accept masternodes. Boolberry coin have good potential.

There's one thing I absolutely accept about masternodes. We should totally reward those who maintain stable nodes with good uptime and connectivity. But all the masternode schemes I've seen include a large deposit of money. That's the bit that goes completely against all logic and ideals I've known so far.

In general, I pay people for useful services. I don't pay people just because they already have money. In the real world, rich people don't get richer simply by having all that money, but because they use their money sensibly -- for example, on servers and Internet infrastructure.

Moreover, I don't want a world where you need a hefty deposit in order to be a service provider. I'll rather trust a distributed P2P network than an oligarchy of a few rich players. Isn't that why we have cryptocurrencies in the first place? If you want old-time big-money capitalism, you can already do that outside the crypto world.

I mostly agree with what you said, but masternode by themself have nothing wrong, its more about how you become one that is an issue (High collateral in most cases).  I also believe that like DPoS a masternode should be only be reward if it provide a stable and outstanding services...

[Entusiasta]

Hey. Please tell us what are the communities' ideas about including the BBR as Masternode?

If you want BBR coins do your work, and give us the Proof of your Work.
The only solution for Byzantine Generals' Problem is the PoW, so PoS(hit) and masternodes are insecure.

[mrp1994]

Clint the LMDB version seems to take more time to synchronize with the old version. My took about two days and got stuck in the middle.

[teknohog]

If you want BBR coins do your work, and give us the Proof of your Work.
The only solution for Byzantine Generals' Problem is the PoW, so PoS(hit) and masternodes are insecure.

Good point. Those who want masternodes should first explain

• what is the problem that masternodes are trying to solve, and
• how would masternodes actually solve the problem

instead of running around like Steve Ballmer shouting "masternodes" in place of "developers".

[cryptfrog]

I know there was a lot of talk about Kucoin a while back...anyone know if there are plans to get on an exchange or two that have higher traffic before the next bull run really gets going?  Don't want to miss out on the overall rising tide effect - the price will go up even without development or "good news" just because people will start putting money into all kinds of coins.   Not sure how development is currently funded but if its from boolberry one would suppose riding a bull wave up would help that.   

[sowle]

Clint the LMDB version seems to take more time to synchronize with the old version. My took about two days and got stuck in the middle.

What version of Boolberry are you running?
Did you try using --db-sync-mode command-line option to speed-up synchronization as I suggested above?

[gigabyted]

Clint the LMDB version seems to take more time to synchronize with the old version. My took about two days and got stuck in the middle.

What version of Boolberry are you running?
Did you try using --db-sync-mode command-line option to speed-up synchronization as I suggested above?

You guys should download the bootstrap and you would only have a few blocks to sync, its available on the boolberry github.  Thats what ive did and it took my minutes to sync...

[crypto_zoidberg]

    

Code:

    *      
    *  
    *
   ***
    *

[crypto_zoidberg]

Hi Folk!

We now started to test a bunch of optimization on synchronization speed (especially for owners of relatively old HDD, spinning ones). It led to massive protocol code changes, so we now testing everything on testnet.
If some of you got bored you can join us with this, by compiling your daemon from git hub branch "sync_optimization" and h  in the testnet-mode:

Code:

git checkout sync_optimization
cmake -D TESTNET=TRUE ..
make -j daemon
src/boolbd 

Then run it and see if it finally got synchronized.
You can remove data files (from data dir  which is by default in "C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming\boolb" on  windows machine or in /Users/roky/Library/Application Support/Boolb on mac machine on Macos) and try to resync it many times, interrupting it, power off the computer or doing something else stressful.
If you see red lines in output which started from word "Error" let me know please!

Thanks for helping us to be better! We appreciate it!

Zoidberg

[crypjunkie]

Lot's of talk of Masternodes, not sure i'm getting this correct here but what is it we would use the master node service for on  BBR? Anyone? Pretty sure we have no need for it.

[tybiboune]

Hi everybody!
I'm so sorry, but I don't have the energy to read through 400+ pages of contributions...
I'm trying to install the wallet and miners on my fresh new Ubuntu 18 install, but I'm facing some issues...

make command gives me a "Cmake error at FindBoost.cmake:1947 : Unable to find de requested Boost libraries."

I installed the boost libraries actually, so I guess I missed something...

Would anyone help, please?
Thanks in advance!

EDIT : to be precise, the missing libs are the following:
boost_filesystem
boost_thread
boost_date_time
boost_chrono
boost_regex
boost_serialization
boost_atomic
boost_program_options

[tybiboune]

okay I narrowed down to one error.... "could not find boost_atomic"

...using boost 1.54, as recommended

[sowle]

okay I narrowed down to one error.... "could not find boost_atomic"
...using boost 1.54, as recommended

Hi, tybiboune! I'm using Boost 1.66 now on Ubuntu 17.10 with gcc 7.2.0 and Boolberry builds quite well with it. If you didn't solve the issue, I suggest you building Boost 1.66 from sources.
Here's how it can be done:

Code:

wget https://dl.bintray.com/boostorg/release/1.66.0/source/boost_1_66_0.tar.gz 
tar -xvf boost_1_66_0.tar.gz
cd ~/boost_1_66_0
./bootstrap.sh --with-libraries=system,filesystem,thread,date_time,chrono,regex,serialization,atomic,program_options,locale
./b2

If everything is okay then “The Boost C++ Libraries were successfully built!” message will appear.
Then you need to set BOOST_ROOT environment variable to reflect correct Boost path. For example, you may put this line to your ~/.bashrc file:

Code:

export BOOST_ROOT=/home/user/boost_1_66_0

Make sure it was actually set:

Code:

user@ubuntu:~/boost_1_66_0$ env | grep boost
BOOST_ROOT=/home/user/boost_1_66_0

After that, cmake hopefully will run with no issues.

[hashappliance]

Here is the link to the August Dev update on medium:

https://medium.com/@BoolberryBBR/boolberry-bbr-monthly-progress-report-august-391d00e2616a

We are working with a couple of new exchanges, and waiting to get responses.  We will keep you apprised as these discussions progress.  Also, we also have quite a bit of exciting news to announce in the next several weeks, we have code named the next generation of improvements "Project Z."

We will announce on twitter when phase III of the roadmap on boolberry.com is updated, so that everyone is made aware at the same time.

Make sure you follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/BoolberryBBR

Cheeers!


JohnnyT

[igotek]

investing Boolbery... I hope it will double and i get $$$$$$$$