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

[dav1199]

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. He has every right to profit - it's his property and intellect that gives him the edge.

Sure but that isn't his fault .. its a non argument , there is always a bigger player. Don't mean you can't profit from the coin , just not as much as he does.

[1713572457]

1713572457

[1713572457]

1713572457

[1713572457]

1713572457

[1713572457]

1713572457

[sorryforthat]

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.

Investors reading thinks like this will not help him profit, it will drive price down considerably

[Keyboard-Mash]

ure but that isn't his fault .. its a non argument , there is always a bigger player. Don't mean you can't profit from the coin , just not as much as he does.

I'm not saying he shouldn't profit. I'm saying if the field is going to be changing for one side, then it must change for both. If the tools of adoption are now closed source, then the thing to be adopted will naturally evolve to be closed source. Telling me that 'this is the way things are and always have been' isn't going to cut it. Because two months ago, things were open source. Now they're not, that door has closed and that's okay; but, I won't be adopting it (one last edit here: unless both sides are open source or both sides are closed source). Simple as that. I will, and already have, taken my money elsewhere .. to something that I've already accepted. That is why I proposed a closed source hard fork as the only one option.

edit: you also seem to not understand where I'm coming from. I'm not a miner. I'm an investor. I make my money on the market.

[dav1199]

There is a difference between closed source and not released to public .. If he hadn't said anything about it noone would care or talk about this.
That you are an investor or miner doesn't matter , if you find it is not fair go trade something else .. there are enough coins to go around.
I just don't get the argument here , it is not a shift in a direction or another. Its a private miner he keep for himself because he did it himself .. Well big deal.
It would be something else if it went public, closed source and like taking a huge % of the stuff mined sent to him.
It is exactly the same as someone with a huge farm atm. Just a software one.

[Keyboard-Mash]

There is a difference between closed source and not released to public .. If he hadn't said anything about it noone would care or talk about this.
That you are an investor or miner doesn't matter , if you find it is not fair go trade something else .. there are enough coins to go around.
I just don't get the argument here , it is not a shift in a direction or another. Its a private miner he keep for himself because he did it himself .. Well big deal.
It would be something else if it went public, closed source and like taking a huge % of the stuff mined sent to him.
It is exactly the same as someone with a huge farm atm. Just a software one.

You know you're wrong. So am I. Dreams dead, goin2mars.

[cbuchner1]

There is a difference between closed source and not released to public .. If he hadn't said anything about it noone would care or talk about this.

We have been talking about the GPU miner from the start. Concerns were voiced that a malicious coder would create a private GPU miner without releasing it.

It does seem that in order to aid fairness, we should actually be focusing on producing a GPU miner now and as soon as possible. This would prevent a malicious coder creating one in secret and obtaining an unfair advantage.

We need a hardfork. (ASAP)

What a gem of a quote in your quote.

I've never regarded mining as a malicious activity. It's a service to the network, it generates coins that will then be available on the open market. Mining is also a competitive activity, and of course I am trying to be more efficient than others. I think you're having a problem with unequal distribution of mining profits, a feeling known as envy.

A hardfork is dangerous, kind of like switching drivers while on a curvy coastal highway. Mountcoin fell off a cliff trying to come up with a V2.0 wallet version that also attempted to change some coin parameters (I think they intended to lower orphan rates by reducing the average block time), but did so without the required technical expertise.

[dav1199]

There is a difference between closed source and not released to public .. If he hadn't said anything about it noone would care or talk about this.

We have been talking about the GPU miner from the start. Concerns were voiced that a malicious coder would create a private GPU miner without releasing it.

hey Crypto_Zoidberg I'm a fan of your project.
I think the cryptonote system addresses some of the major concerns of bitcoin and its derivatives. I also appreciate the changes to the cryptonote system found in your system. I've been wanting to mine since launch but the windows disadvantage has put me off permanently 

I do see the efficacy of the scratchpad based hashing in the future if it grows 90MB a year. For now this doesn't even really begin to tax GPU's with 6GB of ram. Basically with 6GB ram a GPU and a 90mb blockchain, you could perform 66 hashing functions concurrently yes? With a 180mb blockchain 33, with a 270mb blockchain 22, etc etc.

I also see how producing an ASIC with ever-increasing CPUs would be wasteful, as the amount of them that can actually work is wholly dependent on the RAM, the amount of these CPUs available to hash would be reduced by a large step each year. Basically, whats the point in having a ASIC that can perform 2000 hashing functions concurrently when you only have enough ram to do 20 or 30. However I don't believe that was indicated and explained in a clear and precise manner.

It does seem that in order to aid fairness, we should actually be focusing on producing a GPU miner now and as soon as possible. This would prevent a malicious coder creating one in secret and obtaining an unfair advantage.
Once we take that step to GPU mining, the playing field will be even and we know that ASICs will never be developed (as they are pointless in this scenario by design). Once that GPU miner is created the road will be paved and we can all be sure that no one has an unfair advantage.

As it stands, GPU mining will be more efficient than CPU mining for... 8.333 years.
This is a lot of time in the cryptocurrency world.

Until a GPU miner is created, we will always be wondering if someone else has one, and for good reason (66x efficiency? yes please!)

I don't know why it's acceptable to everyone that someone is mining half the coins because they have an unfair advantage. Even if it's ethical, it is not in anyone's best interest except the GPU miner.

We need a hardfork. (ASAP)

I just don't get it .. how is it ''unfair'' ? ''HE'' built a miner and it work well , it just sound like ppl are butthurt because he keep it for himself. Well nothing to be done about it.
Would ''you'' stop your money printing machine and share it with everyone ? .. Doubt it.
It is in his best interest over everyone else .. Well yeah , just like anyone with a massive mining farm... That is just how it works.

[I_M]

Not that he can't fight his own battles, but you guys are trying to vilify one of the better known software miner developers for cryptocoins.    Nothing is stopping anyone from creating their own miner.  If you think that a programmer who spent their own hard earned time learning how to code, and create a miner OWES you the software they've made --- try to think of it differently.  Let's say I own an ice cream shop that makes ice cream cones the fastest and the best.  Do you expect me to give you your own ice cream shop?  If you do, that's called entitlement.  Christian just happened make a miner before anyone else, for himself.  Interestingly enough it seems to me he's here to reassure you that he's not going to use his miner to tank your coins value.  I almost guarantee anyone else who has made a miner, wouldn't even register with the forums to discuss it.  They'd just power-mine and dump.  He also has a long track record of transparency, and has put countless hours of work into other open source projects that I am certain some of you have taken advantage of.

The nature of cryptocurrency is transparency and competition.  So before you get all crazy butthurt and demand forks and stupid ideas like a closed source block chain because one person made significant developments, take a moment to think about what you say before you say it.

[ol92]

Private optimized miners (gpu or cpu ) are more frequent than most of us believe. The point here is that the developpers of ccminer openly admitted the existence of their private miner and the others miners are angry from this potentially unfair advantage.
If there is an hardfork, there will be some private miners again for sure (cpu only if the algo is more gpu resistant)... but secretive this time : not sure it will be better since ccminer dev have good intention toward bbr.

[dav1199]

I just don't get it .. how is it ''unfair'' ? ''HE'' built a miner and it work well , it just sound like ppl are butthurt because he keep it for himself. Well nothing to be done about it.
Would ''you'' stop your money printing machine and share it with everyone ? .. Doubt it.
It is in his best interest over everyone else .. Well yeah , just like anyone with a massive mining farm... That is just how it works.

He has said himself the changes to adapt the Keccak GPU miner to Wild Keccak are simple. He does not "deserve" the ridiculous advantage.

Lol .. this argument is ridiculous , he deserve it because he freaking did it , it start and stop there. And if it is this easy , then he probably isn't the only one that have done it. And they probably just don't say it while mining for themselves.
He deserve it more than you or me, period.

[sorryforthat]

Let's say I own an ice cream shop that makes ice cream cones the fastest and the best.  Do you expect me to give you your own ice cream shop?  If you do, that's called entitlement.  

If the society of which you are a part of has a structure built on community outreach, support and the spread of open source(free ice cream) software, then yes, I would not entirely consider this "entitlement". It is breaking the underlined meaning of cryptocoins and if that is what you rally for over all, then I suppose you are a detriment to the community.

He also has a long track record of transparency, and has put countless hours of work into other open source projects that I am certain some of you have taken advantage of.

This does not outweigh the harm this is causing and furthermore he is taking something that was built for the open source community and putting shackles on its growth, deterring miners and bringing a bad name to a coin and everything the devs here have put into it. Its caustic to his name and in my mind will be the one who chose profit over community; a true socialist.

With all that said, I have nothing invested in this coin, but have a lot vested in the community. I have a whopping 10 sent to me from a logo competition and am set to lose nothing. I say all of this not as an investor or miner, but as someone who sees support being brought to this by others. I understand your reason of why he "should" be in the right in doing this, but this does not really transcend into this medium.

[cbuchner1]

The lengths people will go to to justify their greed..

The lengths people will go to to secure their income..

Fixed that for you.

[sorryforthat]

The lengths people will go to to justify their greed..

The lengths people will go to to secure their income..

Fixed that for you.

Oops, I thought Jackpotcoin was profitable enough..

I respect what you do surfer, but this is not a good look.

[I_M]

blah blah blah

You live on a different planet.
Just because someone makes something, doesn't mean they're obligated to share it with everyone else.  And if you really believe that, I'm coming to your place for dinner every night.

[dav1199]

Lol .. this argument is ridiculous , he deserve it because he freaking did it , it start and stop there.

Still not seeing why he deserves the huge advantage. We don't have to allow it to continue. Or is he entitled to the opportunity to have an advantage? 

He have every right to use his own tools and not share it .. Again , there is nothing more to add to this. Yes he deserve the tool he have built.. lol .. This is retarded even debating this.

[onemorebtc]

blah blah blah

You live on a different planet.
Just because someone makes something, doesn't mean they're obligated to share it with everyone else.  And if you really believe that, I'm coming to your place for dinner every night.

but isnt it the responsibility of everything else to fix the situation and make it fair again?

[I_M]

blah blah blah

You live on a different planet.
Just because someone makes something, doesn't mean they're obligated to share it with everyone else.  And if you really believe that, I'm coming to your place for dinner every night.

but isnt it the responsibility of everything else to fix the situation and make it fair again?

If you REALLY want to fix it and make it fair, create your own miner and open source it.

[btc-mike]

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.

Thanks for your input. No one has asked for it, but I will make sure we get some Linux binaries up there.

Crypto_Zoidberg was having problems with his Mac. I will check with him on the Mac binaries.

[ripplebtc]

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.

Made a RPC-based GUI is easy. BBR devs want to integrate GI with C-level CryptoNote coin API, which is much harder.

[501026666]

BBR is go down..what's going on