Pages:
Author

Topic: [ANN][MOTO] Motocoin - page 52. (Read 178256 times)

legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1001
Crypto since 2014
July 10, 2014, 05:03:43 PM
Another coin claiming "human mining" when what they really mean is just a giveaway from their (massive) premine stash...

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/anngood-part-pow-part-human-mining-part-decided-by-u-on-exchange-578963

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.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 10, 2014, 03:30:55 PM
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?

Quote
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
'
        from ./bin/gbuild:228:in `each'
        from ./bin/gbuild:228:in `block in
'
        from ./bin/gbuild:226:in `each'
        from ./bin/gbuild:226:in `
'
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.
full member
Activity: 204
Merit: 100
July 10, 2014, 01:13:18 PM
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?

Quote
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
'
        from ./bin/gbuild:228:in `each'
        from ./bin/gbuild:228:in `block in
'
        from ./bin/gbuild:226:in `each'
        from ./bin/gbuild:226:in `
'
Dunno what to do
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 10, 2014, 12:50:40 PM
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?

Quote
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 ?
full member
Activity: 204
Merit: 100
July 10, 2014, 10:09:16 AM
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 .
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 10, 2014, 07:46:11 AM
Another coin claiming "human mining" when what they really mean is just a giveaway from their (massive) premine stash...

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/anngood-part-pow-part-human-mining-part-decided-by-u-on-exchange-578963

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!
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 10, 2014, 07:44:00 AM
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.

full member
Activity: 204
Merit: 100
July 09, 2014, 06:02:29 PM
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.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 05:57:25 PM
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.
legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1001
Crypto since 2014
July 09, 2014, 05:13:26 PM
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.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 02:58:27 PM
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.


full member
Activity: 204
Merit: 100
July 09, 2014, 02:45:59 PM
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.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 02:09:17 PM
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!
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 01:59:45 PM
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 Smiley

I'm collecting notes on ideas, so please feel encouraged to post or pm with suggestions for improvements!
legendary
Activity: 927
Merit: 1000
July 09, 2014, 01:19:59 PM
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 Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 11:51:26 AM
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.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 11:31:45 AM
Why your indentation looks like garbage?

Probably because I jump between multiple editors/tools that each have their own notions of how to handle indentation.  I'll make a formatting cleanup pass later.

Quote
Also, please, resolve merging conflicts.

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.
full member
Activity: 204
Merit: 100
July 09, 2014, 11:14:02 AM
Why your indentation looks like garbage?
Also, please, resolve merging conflicts.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 10:21:12 AM
Done with map changes.  Shouldn't ever get stuck now, and should also still pick up new work as it comes in.

Also, I quickly bound the map filter options to a key so you can select between no map filtering, and the two map filters minim1ner released.

However, I just realized that the secondary work code in motogame got lost somewhere during the other patches.  I'm going to have to work that back in very quickly. Noone build against master right now! :\
What was the url to your master branch again?

https://github.com/hunterminercrafter/motocoin

I just re-merged the secondary work function, without the openssl dependency in motogame.  (Someone please sanity check my compact representation logic?!?!)

This code has been running on a testnet in testmode with a ~200% warp set on all the mining bots.  It appears to be stable, however, it also took about 20 re-targets before the secondary work function settled on a difficulty.  Since we're currently using the same 2000 block interval for the second target check, this ends up allowing for quite a bit of the work deficit created in a warp to go unpaid over time!  As such, I'm redoubling my stance that we should quickly follow this up with another change to apply the secondary target calculation at a more frequent interval.  (Hopefully *none* of this crap will ever become relevant/necessary because hopefully nobody will ever attempt any warp attacks to begin with, but "better safe than sorry" ofc!  It would certainly be preferable to constrain warp "steps" to tens of blocks instead of thousands, for hopefully self-evident reasons.)

I've also re-merged the median correction, since we are forking anyway.  This should accelerate (downward) TT adjustment by a very small amount.

Those 10k blocks are going by a bit faster than I expected... I had originally estimated them at just over 48 hours but we are already halfway there!  Should we delay the fork point more blocks?  Personally I want to see the network secured as soon as possible, so I'm all for sticking with the 100k mark.  Thoughts?

EDIT: Woops, just realized that I also let one of my private/internal patches slip through as well.  Perhaps the content of it is a bit "telling" but I'm going to just leave it and call it a feature. It will become a relevant patch for users soon enough anyway, so it wouldn't have been long before I released it.  It was just originally intended to go out along with some other "still secret" stuff.  Wink

legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1001
Crypto since 2014
July 09, 2014, 02:46:59 AM
Done with map changes.  Shouldn't ever get stuck now, and should also still pick up new work as it comes in.

Also, I quickly bound the map filter options to a key so you can select between no map filtering, and the two map filters minim1ner released.

However, I just realized that the secondary work code in motogame got lost somewhere during the other patches.  I'm going to have to work that back in very quickly. Noone build against master right now! :\
What was the url to your master branch again?
Pages:
Jump to: