Topic: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed Since 2014 - page 253. (Read 1210779 times)
September 29, 2014, 09:12:14 AM
Bitcoin is down big. It's not about CN coins. People are selling alts to for BTC to sell for fiat most likely.
September 29, 2014, 09:10:28 AM
price down. bbr die? 
September 29, 2014, 03:00:48 AM
any news about superNET and BBR ?
JL777 is busy coding. The Supernet wallet is being developed so that users will have access to all the Supernet coins including BBR. James is coding Teleport which will be the link between BBR and the Supernet. So its all in development. We should be getting updates within the next couple of weeks, maybe sooner.
thank you for fast responce. If I understand right every coin in supernetwork will have access to every feature of other coins.
Yes.
thank you! strange to see all theese dumpers at that situation.
Yes. Good time to buy.
September 29, 2014, 02:57:18 AM
any news about superNET and BBR ?
JL777 is busy coding. The Supernet wallet is being developed so that users will have access to all the Supernet coins including BBR. James is coding Teleport which will be the link between BBR and the Supernet. So its all in development. We should be getting updates within the next couple of weeks, maybe sooner.
thank you for fast responce. If I understand right every coin in supernetwork will have access to every feature of other coins.
Yes.
thank you! strange to see all theese dumpers at that situation.
September 29, 2014, 02:33:54 AM
any news about superNET and BBR ?
JL777 is busy coding. The Supernet wallet is being developed so that users will have access to all the Supernet coins including BBR. James is coding Teleport which will be the link between BBR and the Supernet. So its all in development. We should be getting updates within the next couple of weeks, maybe sooner.
thank you for fast responce. If I understand right every coin in supernetwork will have access to every feature of other coins.
Yes.
September 29, 2014, 02:33:23 AM
any news about superNET and BBR ?
JL777 is busy coding. The Supernet wallet is being developed so that users will have access to all the Supernet coins including BBR. James is coding Teleport which will be the link between BBR and the Supernet. So its all in development. We should be getting updates within the next couple of weeks, maybe sooner.
thank you for fast responce. If I understand right every coin in supernetwork will have access to every feature of other coins.
September 29, 2014, 02:31:17 AM
any news about superNET and BBR ?
JL777 is busy coding. The Supernet wallet is being developed so that users will have access to all the Supernet coins including BBR. James is coding Teleport which will be the link between BBR and the Supernet. So its all in development. We should be getting updates within the next couple of weeks, maybe sooner.
September 29, 2014, 02:28:55 AM
any news about superNET and BBR ? I readed the superNET threat 3 times and really much things are not clear.
September 29, 2014, 01:14:34 AM
I was going to post this in the vote thread, but I read the OP again and I assume you want to keep that thread clear of anything but voting.
This is very shortsighted thinking. Auroracoin is a barley meaningless footnote in the history of cryptocurrencies. You're thinking about this from a very narrow angle. Even if what you say has meaning, it's only meaningful to maybe 5000/7,000,000,000 people.
What is an acceptable percentage of people that dismiss BBR because of the name? 1%? 10%? 30%? People are judgmental. That's doesn't make them right, but that's reality.
The question is, what are the goals of the project? Monero people seem to think that they have the potential to become the global provider of dark liquidity. I think it's safe to say that if that's a realistic assessment, then BBR also as the potential to fill that role. And in that context, is Boolberry going to be a name that's widely accepted?
Boolberry is a good name. But is it the right name?
aureum sounds like a portmanteau of auroracoin and etherium 
This is very shortsighted thinking. Auroracoin is a barley meaningless footnote in the history of cryptocurrencies. You're thinking about this from a very narrow angle. Even if what you say has meaning, it's only meaningful to maybe 5000/7,000,000,000 people.
What is an acceptable percentage of people that dismiss BBR because of the name? 1%? 10%? 30%? People are judgmental. That's doesn't make them right, but that's reality.
The question is, what are the goals of the project? Monero people seem to think that they have the potential to become the global provider of dark liquidity. I think it's safe to say that if that's a realistic assessment, then BBR also as the potential to fill that role. And in that context, is Boolberry going to be a name that's widely accepted?
Boolberry is a good name. But is it the right name?
You can post this in the vote thread. Its a place for discussion between the two names. So its on topic.
Ok, thanks.
September 29, 2014, 12:40:25 AM
I was going to post this in the vote thread, but I read the OP again and I assume you want to keep that thread clear of anything but voting.
This is very shortsighted thinking. Auroracoin is a barley meaningless footnote in the history of cryptocurrencies. You're thinking about this from a very narrow angle. Even if what you say has meaning, it's only meaningful to maybe 5000/7,000,000,000 people.
What is an acceptable percentage of people that dismiss BBR because of the name? 1%? 10%? 30%? People are judgmental. That's doesn't make them right, but that's reality.
The question is, what are the goals of the project? Monero people seem to think that they have the potential to become the global provider of dark liquidity. I think it's safe to say that if that's a realistic assessment, then BBR also as the potential to fill that role. And in that context, is Boolberry going to be a name that's widely accepted?
Boolberry is a good name. But is it the right name?
aureum sounds like a portmanteau of auroracoin and etherium
This is very shortsighted thinking. Auroracoin is a barley meaningless footnote in the history of cryptocurrencies. You're thinking about this from a very narrow angle. Even if what you say has meaning, it's only meaningful to maybe 5000/7,000,000,000 people.
What is an acceptable percentage of people that dismiss BBR because of the name? 1%? 10%? 30%? People are judgmental. That's doesn't make them right, but that's reality.
The question is, what are the goals of the project? Monero people seem to think that they have the potential to become the global provider of dark liquidity. I think it's safe to say that if that's a realistic assessment, then BBR also as the potential to fill that role. And in that context, is Boolberry going to be a name that's widely accepted?
Boolberry is a good name. But is it the right name?
You can post this in the vote thread. Its a place for discussion between the two names. So its on topic.
September 29, 2014, 12:31:36 AM
I was going to post this in the vote thread, but I read the OP again and I assume you want to keep that thread clear of anything but voting.
This is very shortsighted thinking. Auroracoin is a barley meaningless footnote in the history of cryptocurrencies. You're thinking about this from a very narrow angle. Even if what you say has meaning, it's only meaningful to maybe 5000/7,000,000,000 people.
What is an acceptable percentage of people that dismiss BBR because of the name? 1%? 10%? 30%? People are judgmental. That's doesn't make them right, but that's reality.
The question is, what are the goals of the project? Monero people seem to think that they have the potential to become the global provider of dark liquidity. I think it's safe to say that if that's a realistic assessment, then BBR also as the potential to fill that role. And in that context, is Boolberry going to be a name that's widely accepted?
Boolberry is a good name. But is it the right name?
aureum sounds like a portmanteau of auroracoin and etherium
This is very shortsighted thinking. Auroracoin is a barley meaningless footnote in the history of cryptocurrencies. You're thinking about this from a very narrow angle. Even if what you say has meaning, it's only meaningful to maybe 5000/7,000,000,000 people.
What is an acceptable percentage of people that dismiss BBR because of the name? 1%? 10%? 30%? People are judgmental. That's doesn't make them right, but that's reality.
The question is, what are the goals of the project? Monero people seem to think that they have the potential to become the global provider of dark liquidity. I think it's safe to say that if that's a realistic assessment, then BBR also as the potential to fill that role. And in that context, is Boolberry going to be a name that's widely accepted?
Boolberry is a good name. But is it the right name?
September 28, 2014, 07:35:25 PM
ATTENTION! FINAL BOOLBERRY REBRANDING VOTE HERE: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9010361
Good luck!
Jon
Good luck!
Jon
September 28, 2014, 03:58:23 PM
Good point. I might have missed the explanation behind keeping it 64 bit. Maybe mbk can assist.
reciprocal_value64 needs __int128 support from compiler.
Sure miner could be made to work without __int128 on 32bit targets, by using 64bit modulus operation, but who uses 32bit systems nowadays?
I have had 64bit since 2006..There are quite of those machines in the developing world i suppose
Doesn't matter in practice - for mining, no older 32 bit machine will be energy profitable, even at developing world energy costs.
It's more important for the wallet, but even that's probably stretching it a little.
I just happen to be using one of the premade mining distros (PiMP in this case), and apparently they chose to build it from 32 bit debian. The processor is a quad-core AMD. I haven't had any problems building bfgminer 4.7, several sph-sgminer varieties, or lucasjones cpuminer-multi (which can mine with all four cores of course). It's not a big deal, I was just trying to figure out what the problem was.
For the CPU, one of the core optimizations requires a 64 bit operation (actually, two) in every step of the inner loop. You could remove this optimization, but it would further place you at a disadvantage.
XMR has a similar optimization in it that also makes 32 bit ugly.
(Both use 64 bit multiply-high operations. BBR also uses a standard 64x64->64 multiply.)
In some ways, this is actually more about the design of the PoW for each of these: They were specifically designed to use 64 bit operations on modern CPUs to reduce the advantage of GPUs and ASICs.
September 28, 2014, 03:46:05 PM
September 28, 2014, 02:39:47 PM
expectations of this coin? thanks 
September 28, 2014, 01:42:57 PM
Good point. I might have missed the explanation behind keeping it 64 bit. Maybe mbk can assist.
reciprocal_value64 needs __int128 support from compiler.
Sure miner could be made to work without __int128 on 32bit targets, by using 64bit modulus operation, but who uses 32bit systems nowadays?
I have had 64bit since 2006..There are quite of those machines in the developing world i suppose
Doesn't matter in practice - for mining, no older 32 bit machine will be energy profitable, even at developing world energy costs.
It's more important for the wallet, but even that's probably stretching it a little.
A lot more machines could run daemon and wallet e.g. from bootable USB with hardened OS and maybe VPN supplement, such as Tails. Wouldn't be good to exclude anyone, and it will make a difference on the network value if developing world is waited for 1-3 years while they renew machines. Now the daemon could be run and they will renew eventually, quicker if they find a need
September 28, 2014, 12:42:02 PM
Good point. I might have missed the explanation behind keeping it 64 bit. Maybe mbk can assist.
reciprocal_value64 needs __int128 support from compiler.
Sure miner could be made to work without __int128 on 32bit targets, by using 64bit modulus operation, but who uses 32bit systems nowadays?
I have had 64bit since 2006..There are quite of those machines in the developing world i suppose
Doesn't matter in practice - for mining, no older 32 bit machine will be energy profitable, even at developing world energy costs.
It's more important for the wallet, but even that's probably stretching it a little.
I just happen to be using one of the premade mining distros (PiMP in this case), and apparently they chose to build it from 32 bit debian. The processor is a quad-core AMD. I haven't had any problems building bfgminer 4.7, several sph-sgminer varieties, or lucasjones cpuminer-multi (which can mine with all four cores of course). It's not a big deal, I was just trying to figure out what the problem was.
September 28, 2014, 12:36:15 PM
Good point. I might have missed the explanation behind keeping it 64 bit. Maybe mbk can assist.
reciprocal_value64 needs __int128 support from compiler.
Sure miner could be made to work without __int128 on 32bit targets, by using 64bit modulus operation, but who uses 32bit systems nowadays?
I have had 64bit since 2006..There are quite of those machines in the developing world i suppose
Doesn't matter in practice - for mining, no older 32 bit machine will be energy profitable, even at developing world energy costs.
It's more important for the wallet, but even that's probably stretching it a little.
September 28, 2014, 11:05:51 AM
no, really
September 28, 2014, 10:29:20 AM
Jump to: