[ANN][MOTO] Motocoin

[coinking]

let's give it up for the super active dev! This guy should be applauded, well done good sir. Now, on a side note I will have some ideas for game improvement if you'd be interested in hearing... once I actually get to play it

[1715538652]

1715538652

[1715538652]

1715538652

[1715538652]

1715538652

[1715538652]

1715538652

[1715538652]

1715538652

[HunterMinerCrafter]

let's give it up for the super active dev! This guy should be applauded, well done good sir. Now, on a side note I will have some ideas for game improvement if you'd be interested in hearing... once I actually get to play it

I'm collecting notes on ideas, so please feel encouraged to post or pm with suggestions for improvements!

[HunterMinerCrafter]

What in particular is conflicting?  I'm away from my pc for 1-2 hours or so but when I'm back I can pull from motocoin-dev/motocoin and try a merge across.

Did a very quick merge on laptop with cellphone.  Can't build/test until later, but it is pushed.

It builds and seems to test out ok.  I'll leave the new build running in testmode for a bit but I wouldn't expect any problems, resolving the conflicts was a fairly trivial process so I expect the merge to be fine.  We're past block 95k now, so I think we either need to start heading toward an official release build or make the call to push the fork out to a later block.  WilliamLie2, it is your call!

I was really hoping to hear from DeepCryptoAnalist3 on his thoughts about the fix before it came time to launch.  I sent a PM a few days ago, but have heard nothing back.

If anyone else sees anything potentially problematic with the changes, now would be the time to speak up!

[WilliamLie2]

What in particular is conflicting?  I'm away from my pc for 1-2 hours or so but when I'm back I can pull from motocoin-dev/motocoin and try a merge across.

Did a very quick merge on laptop with cellphone.  Can't build/test until later, but it is pushed.

It builds and seems to test out ok.  I'll leave the new build running in testmode for a bit but I wouldn't expect any problems, resolving the conflicts was a fairly trivial process so I expect the merge to be fine.  We're past block 95k now, so I think we either need to start heading toward an official release build or make the call to push the fork out to a later block.  WilliamLie2, it is your call!

I was really hoping to hear from DeepCryptoAnalist3 on his thoughts about the fix before it came time to launch.  I sent a PM a few days ago, but have heard nothing back.

If anyone else sees anything potentially problematic with the changes, now would be the time to speak up!

We need to give some time to other botters to update their bots, you probably already have bot for new version.

[HunterMinerCrafter]

What in particular is conflicting?  I'm away from my pc for 1-2 hours or so but when I'm back I can pull from motocoin-dev/motocoin and try a merge across.

Did a very quick merge on laptop with cellphone.  Can't build/test until later, but it is pushed.

It builds and seems to test out ok.  I'll leave the new build running in testmode for a bit but I wouldn't expect any problems, resolving the conflicts was a fairly trivial process so I expect the merge to be fine.  We're past block 95k now, so I think we either need to start heading toward an official release build or make the call to push the fork out to a later block.  WilliamLie2, it is your call!

I was really hoping to hear from DeepCryptoAnalist3 on his thoughts about the fix before it came time to launch.  I sent a PM a few days ago, but have heard nothing back.

If anyone else sees anything potentially problematic with the changes, now would be the time to speak up!

We need to give some time to other botters to update their bots, you probably already have bot for new version.

HEH, actually I've been far too busy with dayjob work and getting these patches polished to update my own bots yet..  Minim1ner's bot is trivially upgraded (I already made the necessary changes to his map filters in the reference client, they should just "drop in") and I expect it would be almost as trivial for the others to upgrade their code.  (I know one other bot miner is already upgraded.)

I think as long as we're comfortable that we'll get official builds out in time, 100k is still a reasonable block to go with.  However, like I said it is entirely your call; throw out a different number if you think more lead time is necessary!

EDIT: Also I assume that once the network has a couple of rounds behind it with the new code more bots will start to be released publicly, and the current set of bot miners will represent a smaller chunk of the hashing strength.  I'm not sure if, or how, this would play into your decision, but I figured that it should be mentioned.

[e1ghtSpace]

Damn, my graphics card stopped working and now the framereate is crap for motocoin. I hope chainging igpu to have 1gb of memory helps.
I hope I can still play properly when this patch arrives.

Will the time be reset back to 60 or will it continue going down from whatever we are at right now?
Thanks guys.

[HunterMinerCrafter]

Damn, my graphics card stopped working and now the framereate is crap for motocoin. I hope chainging igpu to have 1gb of memory helps.
I hope I can still play properly when this patch arrives.

Will the time be reset back to 60 or will it continue going down from whatever we are at right now?
Thanks guys.

The TT will not be reset by my patch.

[WilliamLie2]

I think as long as we're comfortable that we'll get official builds out in time, 100k is still a reasonable block to go with.  However, like I said it is entirely your call; throw out a different number if you think more lead time is necessary!

EDIT: Also I assume that once the network has a couple of rounds behind it with the new code more bots will start to be released publicly, and the current set of bot miners will represent a smaller chunk of the hashing strength.  I'm not sure if, or how, this would play into your decision, but I figured that it should be mentioned.

I'm going to sleep now. If until tomorrow no one will have any objections against these patches I will make a build tomorrow.

Damn, my graphics card stopped working and now the framereate is crap for motocoin. I hope chainging igpu to have 1gb of memory helps.
I hope I can still play properly when this patch arrives.

Will the time be reset back to 60 or will it continue going down from whatever we are at right now?
Thanks guys.

This patch just fixes one potential theoretical vulnerability, it will not make Motocoin human mineable again.

[HunterMinerCrafter]

I'm going to sleep now. If until tomorrow no one will have any objections against these patches I will make a build tomorrow.

Over 3/4 of the way through those 10k blocks.  All of my testing so far has turned up positive, although I am seeing a slightly increased stale rate from bots on testnet.  I'm not sure why this is just yet, but from what I can tell it shouldn't be anything that impacts users.  The little bit of feedback I've gotten has been positive, but still not a word from DeepCryptoAnalist3 who originally devised the attack.  DeepCrypto if you're out there somewhere, speak up!

Damn, my graphics card stopped working and now the framereate is crap for motocoin. I hope chainging igpu to have 1gb of memory helps.
I hope I can still play properly when this patch arrives.

Will the time be reset back to 60 or will it continue going down from whatever we are at right now?
Thanks guys.

This patch just fixes one potential theoretical vulnerability, it will not make Motocoin human mineable again.

Yes, it only increases human mining margin by a very small (practically unnoticeable) amount.  In theory, if the anti-warp ever does kick on it would add more human margin since humans will generally do far less map iterations.

Once everything is sorted out with the difficulty warp, we can move straight onto implementing something like the "N heads" concept, or similar, which will do quite a bit more for the humans.

Another notion that I've been mulling over is the idea of allowing participants to "purchase extra lives" for use in their mining.  Basically, a user could burn some number of coins in a special transaction and receive an allocation of extra lives.  Then in proof checking, if the bike rider hits his head but a coinbase address for the block has some extra life the rider will not be put into a dead state, but the allocated lives will be decremented instead and the head would just "bounce" off of the ground.  I'm not sure if this would be utilized by people, considering that on the one hand rewind more or less accomplishes the same thing and only costs time, but on the other hand wall clock time for solution finding is in very short supply.  On the gripping hand, this approach might also just give even more advantage to bot operators, who could likely afford to buy a lot of extra lives and would probably do just about anything they can to increase solution space relative to search space!

It will probably take some combination of changes to make human mining feasible again, but we will accomplish it one way or another.  The only reason we haven't really been working toward this so far is the existence of the warp attack - priorities.

There are also some things that can be done "off chain" to help out the humans.  For example, I've been increasingly interested in exploring the idea of "cyborg mining" where a human and a bot work together to find solutions.  Bots easily get stuck wasting time in particular map layout scenarios where a human can trivially overcome the obstacles tripping the bot up.  Right now I handle this with an option to enable visualization on my bots, and can manually trigger a particular bot search thread to ditch the map it is currently "stuck" on when I see that it is stuck in one of these scenarios.  (This is the "metagame in the meantime" that I referred to previously.  Maybe I'll make a video of this in action to better illustrate what I'm talking about.)  When actively nudging my bots around like this I can increase their productivity by almost double when I'm intently focused.  I imagine that a more complete cyborg mining setup could detect when the bot was stuck, and present the game state to the operator to manually traverse the obstacle, who could then hit some key to pass the game state back to the bot to complete the rest of the proof.  Such a setup would likely blow both bots and humans out of the water, at least for awhile... probably until the third wave of bots start to come into the picture.

[HunterMinerCrafter]

Another coin claiming "human mining" when what they really mean is just a giveaway from their (massive) premine stash...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=578963.0

The fact that human mining has become enough of a buzzword that scam-coins (and even some confused nonscam coins?) are latching onto it left and right is a very positive sign for the human mining concept!

[WilliamLie2]

Once everything is sorted out with the difficulty warp, we can move straight onto implementing something like the "N heads" concept, or similar, which will do quite a bit more for the humans.

Even if it will work (I'm very dubious about it) it won't help humans much.

Code:

extern enum _g_Filter
{
  FILTER_NONE,
  FILTER_BASIC,
  FILTER_DOUBLE,
  
  FILTER_COUNT
} g_Filter;

Why didn't you put this definition into header if it is used in multiple files? Why enum name is different in different files and how gcc was even able to compile it? I fixed it .

[HunterMinerCrafter]

Once everything is sorted out with the difficulty warp, we can move straight onto implementing something like the "N heads" concept, or similar, which will do quite a bit more for the humans.

Even if it will work (I'm very dubious about it) it won't help humans much.

Why do you say that?  With sufficiently large value of N it becomes trivial to collect coins.  I think even giving humans just four times as much time would make a drastic difference. 

Also, what do you think would not work about it?

Code:

extern enum _g_Filter
{
  FILTER_NONE,
  FILTER_BASIC,
  FILTER_DOUBLE,
  
  FILTER_COUNT
} g_Filter;

Why didn't you put this definition into header if it is used in multiple files? Why enum name is different in different files and how gcc was even able to compile it? I fixed it .

There's no reason gcc wouldn't have compiled that, is there?  The duplication was not intentional, it just kind of worked out that way while I was testing something and I forgot to revert it.

otherwise are we good to go ?

[WilliamLie2]

Once everything is sorted out with the difficulty warp, we can move straight onto implementing something like the "N heads" concept, or similar, which will do quite a bit more for the humans.

Even if it will work (I'm very dubious about it) it won't help humans much.

Why do you say that?  With sufficiently large value of N it becomes trivial to collect coins.  I think even giving humans just four times as much time would make a drastic difference.  

Also, what do you think would not work about it?

I think we discussed N-heads quite a lot but no one have convinced the other.
Can you manually complete a map in 9.35 seconds in 4 minutes?

otherwise are we good to go ?

I changed hardfork to block 104000. I'm compiling it right now, thanks to your updates from ltc I will need to rebuild dependencies, this will take some time.

EDIT: gitian gives me some strange error

Code:

./bin/gbuild:21:in `system!': failed to run copy-to-target  inputs/motocoin build/ (RuntimeError)
        from ./bin/gbuild:108:in `block (2 levels) in build_one_configuration'
        from ./bin/gbuild:106:in `each'
        from ./bin/gbuild:106:in `block in build_one_configuration'
        from ./bin/gbuild:94:in `open'
        from ./bin/gbuild:94:in `build_one_configuration'
        from ./bin/gbuild:233:in `block (2 levels) in <main>'
        from ./bin/gbuild:228:in `each'
        from ./bin/gbuild:228:in `block in <main>'
        from ./bin/gbuild:226:in `each'
        from ./bin/gbuild:226:in `<main>'

Dunno what to do

[HunterMinerCrafter]

Once everything is sorted out with the difficulty warp, we can move straight onto implementing something like the "N heads" concept, or similar, which will do quite a bit more for the humans.

Even if it will work (I'm very dubious about it) it won't help humans much.

Why do you say that?  With sufficiently large value of N it becomes trivial to collect coins.  I think even giving humans just four times as much time would make a drastic difference.  

Also, what do you think would not work about it?

I think we discussed N-heads quite a lot but no one have convinced the other.
Can you manually complete a map in 9.35 seconds in 4 minutes?

otherwise are we good to go ?

I changed hardfork to block 104000. I'm compiling it right now, thanks to your updates from ltc I will need to rebuild dependencies, this will take some time.

EDIT: gitian gives me some strange error

Code:

./bin/gbuild:21:in `system!': failed to run copy-to-target  inputs/motocoin build/ (RuntimeError)
        from ./bin/gbuild:108:in `block (2 levels) in build_one_configuration'
        from ./bin/gbuild:106:in `each'
        from ./bin/gbuild:106:in `block in build_one_configuration'
        from ./bin/gbuild:94:in `open'
        from ./bin/gbuild:94:in `build_one_configuration'
        from ./bin/gbuild:233:in `block (2 levels) in <main>'
        from ./bin/gbuild:228:in `each'
        from ./bin/gbuild:228:in `block in <main>'
        from ./bin/gbuild:226:in `each'
        from ./bin/gbuild:226:in `<main>'

Dunno what to do

Does the rest build if you revert the updates patch?  

Edit: you will need to either upgrade your gitian to match the new version in the files, revert the gitian version change in the patch and just do the newer openssl, or revert the ltc merge commit entirely, I suspect.

[e1ghtSpace]

Another coin claiming "human mining" when what they really mean is just a giveaway from their (massive) premine stash...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=578963.0

The fact that human mining has become enough of a buzzword that scam-coins (and even some confused nonscam coins?) are latching onto it left and right is a very positive sign for the human mining concept!

True. I have been involved with this coin a little bit, I have ~3000.
Do you guys think they'll listen to me if I tell them to take that out of the ANN?

They say "part POW part human mining" but it really is just full POW with half of the coins given away slowly.

[HunterMinerCrafter]

I think we discussed N-heads quite a lot but no one have convinced the other.
Can you manually complete a map in 9.35 seconds in 4 minutes?

No, but I am not a very good exemplar.  It takes me something like 20-30 minutes to complete a map in forfun mode at all, and a lot of that time is often spent repeatedly running out of time even at 60 seconds!  I don't think I've ever human mined a motocoin at all.  I've always been bad at bmx/moto games for some reason.

[WilliamLie2]

I think we discussed N-heads quite a lot but no one have convinced the other.
Can you manually complete a map in 9.35 seconds in 4 minutes?

No, but I am not a very good exemplar.  It takes me something like 20-30 minutes to complete a map in forfun mode at all, and a lot of that time is often spent repeatedly running out of time even at 60 seconds!  I don't think I've ever human mined a motocoin at all.  I've always been bad at bmx/moto games for some reason.

I think that no human will be able to find and solve map in 9.35 or even faster.

[HunterMinerCrafter]

I think we discussed N-heads quite a lot but no one have convinced the other.
Can you manually complete a map in 9.35 seconds in 4 minutes?

No, but I am not a very good exemplar.  It takes me something like 20-30 minutes to complete a map in forfun mode at all, and a lot of that time is often spent repeatedly running out of time even at 60 seconds!  I don't think I've ever human mined a motocoin at all.  I've always been bad at bmx/moto games for some reason.

I think that no human will be able to find and solve map in 9.35 or even faster.

Apparently I've gotten a little better.  I timed a few runs in forfun and my best time was down to about 5 minutes on 60 second TT!  (not counting ~20 seconds of map filter run to make a particularly easy map.)

How long do you think it would take for a skilled player to finish a 9.35 TT run?  We can arbitrarily make N as large as we like, as long as miners agree to adopt the change.

[e1ghtSpace]

Remember when this was called "Proof of Thought"?
Fun times.

[HunterMinerCrafter]

Remember when this was called "Proof of Thought"?
Fun times.

I dunno it has had me thinking pretty hard lately