Topic: [BBR] Boolberry: Privacy and Security - Guaranteed Since 2014 - page 70. (Read 1210779 times)

List of Node ? Thanks

Hi everyone,

From where can I download wallet for windows ? Thanks !

- Tomi

Ok thanks , can you send me a list to add node ?

Hardfork is not the best way. I think the best way is to make it as it was in the past - better than the competition and without relinquishing its roots.

Thanks for the openness ... sounds interesting ... if only time would not be in such short supply ...

But for what it's worth, I write down a sketch of the result of my brainstorming. (Don't trust a random poster with less than a dozen posts too much, however.)

As I wrote already, it is based on my assumption (which may be false, who knows) that the technological differences between current and future Boolberry are simply too great to introduce it in the form of a single program that is able to "smoothly sail over a hard fork block height", so to say.

For the following let's call current Boolberry Boolberry Classic. A first hard fork brings to life its successor, Boolberry Intermediate, and the second hard fork introduces the real destination, Boolberry NT (for "new technology", of course).

Boolberry Intermediate is a true hard fork: A new version for transactions forces people to decide whether they follow and install it, which is a "Yes" vote for the whole endeavor, or whether they reject it and want to stay Boolberry as it is - a "No" vote.

Boolberry Intermediate is basically the current codebase, fully compatible, but with some crucial code added to manage the switchover to the new, incompatible blockchain: It is programmed to flat-out refuse adding any more transactions at and above the height for the second hard fork, so that basically the old chain can be "stopped" in an orderly way.

Furthermore, some yet-to-design mechanism would make it highly improbable that there will any competing chains in the last few blocks before the second hard fork height, of all things. Maybe be a single, temporary and single-purpose Boolberry masternode that is the only one with the power to mine the last few blocks, to really minimize the danger that the old chain ends in disagreement?

With the old chain "stopped", Boolberry NT can pick everything up and continue.

So that's my two-hardfork idea. If the introduction of Boolberry Intermediate fails, it's clear already rather early on that the project in the planned form does not fly, which I see as positive because it allows adjustments. If it succeeds, you have installed the necessary mechanisms for the switchover.

There's no 'outsiders' here, if you're a BBR holder then you're part of the community Our development plans will be made public soon.

You're more than welcome to join the team meeting on Monday, just shoot me a PM. That invitation is also open for anyone else that wants to join our development efforts and provide technical value to the planning session. I want to include as many potential contributors from the community in this process and also after the project reveal. After all, this is a community project.

I am an outsider, and I don't know what is planned the "new" Boolberry of course, but I would also say to hard fork the blockchain as seamlessly as possible is "the way to go", and "they way it's done", and if it's done properly, people will keep faith and mostly migrate to the new chain.

I have a hunch that part of the problem might be a difficulty for the new daemon to read the serialized blockchain of the old daemon, so that you can't just switch at a given block height within a single program, but must orchestrate a "daemon switch" of sort as well. A fascinating problem, if true, that got me thinking and has my head spinning. I currently brainstorm that I would probably try to do this with two hard forks...

Yes, but if you look at the history of other cryptocoins, the likelihood of such forks living on is quite low.

A centralized coinswap is much worse in this respect, IMHO. I'd certainly be wary of sending all my coins to a "trusted" party, and I'd seriously look into maintaining a "classic" version. In contrast, it is much easier to simply update your software and accept the fact that old clients are no longer compatible.

This sentence alone contradicts with humanity. I never would enter your room, but nevertheless you can count with me.

Isn't this simply known as a hard fork in crypto currency space? Where you always have the potential problem that the old chain lives on?

If you're going to make a statement like that without even knowing the specifics of what we're working on or who is working on it, then you should justify it with some logic. No offense, but it just looks ignorant. Somehow you think its better for Zoidberg to work alone, than with a team of researchers and developers sharing a common goal? Also without real compensation? We all know where that got this project, if you want to repeat past mistakes then more power to you. It's 2017, almost 2018.. a project needs a full team to compete with top tier market caps. One person can't do it alone. The workload is too much and the competition is too stiff.

Remember, I wouldn't of had to build a team if there was already one here. I'll let Zoidberg decide for himself if he wants to contribute to new codebase after we do project reveal. Like I said, the door will always be open to him. Regardless of his decision, I've had positive interactions with him since starting this endeavor and regard him as a friend.

Better do not use this door.


I like this idea.

Let me also clarify the statements to the community here:

1. Zoidberg is correct, he hasn't made any commits to the new codebase. He's only been advising us with certain things, this is why I said he's been working with us in advisory position. We've been relying on our own scientists for algorithmic changes and peer review. That said, the team has definitely appreciated him making himself available for advice when we've needed it.

2. Zoidberg is also correct here. He showed interest in eventually joining an effort towards a renewed BBR, but he has obligations to some other project. This is fine with me, because we have a very capable team with their main obligation to this project. If he wants to contribute the door will always be open for him.

In the future, we'll be doing a full project reveal that will give everyone here clarity on what we've been working on and how we're proceeding. On Monday, we have a team meeting where we'll be finalizing the technical aspects of the transition to the new codebase. I've invited Zoidberg to the meeting, so he's more than welcome to join us.

When I originally made the update about the coinswap, we had an idea to either partner with an exchange or handle it through a team based effort. This method is centralized and would leave it open to some attack vectors, most notably exchange theft. Due to recent dealings with exchanges, most would be hard to trust with this task.

The new direction is to do a snapshot of BBR blockchain and import that into the new codebase. If this method is viable, the transition would be as simple as downloading the new client and importing wallet file. This idea is much more decentralized and removes potential attack vectors. It also has potential to save mined aliases but we will only be able to confirm this after the meeting. I know that's an issue for some here so we'll do our best to resolve that. The drawback is that the old BBR chain will continue to function, so there will be two chains. After the project reveal, we'll leave it up to community and general public on which chain they will support.

After the meeting on Monday we'll have complete clarity on this subject that we can share with the community.

I need AMS. I suggest exchanging 100 BBR per day for 5000 AMS v4 or v3  per day. Write to pm

Let me put little remark here:

1. I'm not involved in b4h4mu's project. They asked me just a few things, but I have an only misty idea about the project that they do. Hope it's gonna be something interesting.
2. I never claimed to join full time into it.

What I really promised is to get back to BBR, eventually and i still want to do that.

And i really appreciate all efforts of b4h4mu to put BBR to exchange.

Zoidberg

Just a friendly reminder that im willing to by some BBR if you got some to sell...

Waiting for you!

Nowhere. Maybe you should go and make one?

Where is the BBR exchange, please.

im glad to see people are still behind bbr,

Ive been informed the dreaded ram issue is coming in a upcoming release... so i have reopened my pool!


Join us at http://bbr.hash.group     @ 0.5% pool fee ( the lowest around )

Block explorer is coming as well, and daemon has been updated to newest source for transaction verification.

No offical exchange at this times, You can add node to wallet!
It can sync your wallet!
Thanks