Topic: BiblePay | 10% to Orphan-Charity | RANDOMX MINING | Sanctuaries (Masternodes) - page 319. (Read 243437 times)

Hello everyone, just a quick question.

Do I need to have the Biblepay Core wallet running all the time while PODC mining? I'm running Windows btw.

Well, as far as locking coins, we are the same as every other coin - we have a primarily cold setup.  Mintnodes only uses cold but they require the keys - so there is a level of trust similar to a centralized exchange required to use mintnodes.

I e-mailed Steve.  I offered a long detailed explanation, and I even apologized for some of the rough characters we have that he might have encountered.  I haven't heard back yet.  Hopefully he will consider reinstating BiblePay.  (Let's see if he gives us any clarification on if it's related to : mandatory, IPFS, watchman, or something character related).

I think I have some good news, Just got this email notification from GIN finally!:
"Masternode status has changed PRE_ENABLED -> ENABLED"

I think a lot of people in life are motivated by profits,
I am also motivated for political and economic reasons,
as well as for our charity and science research

We are getting into Business, Economics, and Game Theory,
What features give a cryptocurrency the best chance of future survival and adaptation?
Also the other deeper question, what is the best way to distribute a cryptocurrency?
(I liked how Ravencoin hyped for months in advance and didnt announce on Bitcointalk,
I also think Manna coin is interesting with universal basic income, verify your a unique human and get coins)
I really like with Dash Masternodes that if someone sells out, someone else can step in, its fantastic.

BiblePay has a couple devs, but only one full time developer, who is also the creator of the coin, Rob,
I believe Rob currently is the only person to hold the dev keys but I believe he will be sharing them with MIP soon

As a BiblePay miner, with the staking requirement, its harder switch to other coins because by having to buy coins you are also an investor now, I think its kind of cool but Id love to see debate on it again

Im still uncertain about Proof of Stake:
https://medium.com/@hugonguyen/proof-of-stake-the-wrong-engineering-mindset-15e641ab65a2
https://cointelegraph.com/news/the-inevitable-failure-of-proof-of-stake-blockchains-and-why-a-new-algorithm-is-needed

Our trading volume is very low, the bear market has been terrible,
theres a lot of contributing factors I could get into if your interested

That's fair and makes sense,  thanks for clarifying.

Also, btw, if you go into coin-control on QT, you can right click a masternode locked fund entry, click UNLOCK, then you can spend it.

Two miners mining on a fork isn't a "fork".  A fork is when more than 20% of our network believes that an alternate chain exists with enough work on it to cause a percentage of nodes to go off and mine on that chain.

Usually when that happens, a certain percent of our masternodes drop (they say WATCHDOG_EXPIRED) because they are on a fork.

I didn't see that happen over the last 40 days.  

So please be more cognizent of saying "we had a fork" when we did not have any trace of a fork.

A fork is bad for everyone and signifies that we have a weak network which there is no evidence of.  It makes partners want to shy away from sticking with BBP.

So we had two miners who had to reindex in reality.

There is no other crypto that uses 40,000 (as of the date we launched), that is one thing I'm responsible for checking during initial development.  Its up to the lead dev to launch a coin with a certain port.  I used 40,000 based on a few factors (I wanted non-ephemeral but above 32767), these ports are not blocked as commonly by networks since they are used for some existing services.  However I wasnt aware of safetynet.  But I don't think thats a problem for a few reasons.

First, the communication protocol handshake would just hang up on us or us on them.
Next, I have heard of instances of coins launching and stomping (or sharing) another coins ports and technically, the bitcoin protocol has the ability to overcome this (the version message will negotiate to our network only) and it will only store our peers in peers.dat (ones whose version matches).

So even if another coin launched with 40,000 we would be OK.  It would result in more inefficiency for them and hopefully cause them to switch to a free port before they get too far along in life.

Thanks for the information about PrivateSend. If it is decentralized, then it seems that person's criticism wasn't well-founded.

I realize BBP is a fork of Dash, but I guess I hold the two to different standards. Isn't Dash (and 99% of crypto) mostly just concerned with making money? BBP has the distinction of also being interested in charity work. But it would be silly of me to propose a new kind of governance.

I don't see how devs could or should prevent forks. There will always be BTC forks. That the devs aren't paid is the testament to their motivation, and I think it does well to spread the developing duties across a large number of people? How many devs does BBP have? What would be the impact if Rob wasn't in the picture? Could it survive as well as BTC has without Satoshi? I'm fine with devs being paid, BTW, just wonder how centralized BBP is, in terms of dev work. I just wonder about a potential vulnerability with that.

Honestly, I think the current governance model is fine for BBP. There are too many decision being made to not have some sort of centralized governance. This is probably silly, but I spend time try to reconcile what crypto is about in terms of spirituality since finding BBP. I've actually wondered which crypto would Jesus choose. And I keep thinking something like Dash leans too much towards oligarchy. Those with "the most skin in the game" are those already sitting on the largest pile of coins.  There needs to be enough room for new users to thrive. As a new person with few coins, I have to look at pools like bbpool @ 35% fees (?!?!) because my stake is too low. Yes, I could purchase the coins outright for however few it takes now, but I'm speaking as a miner, not an investor.

My biggest concern about BBP is the extremely low trading volume. I actually spent more money the other day than BBP traded worldwide. One person with even limited funds could pump-and-dump the living daylights out of our coin. Why do you think the volume is so low? To me, that can indicate a "closed-loop", where the emphasis is on holding and staking. Have you see what's going on with BCI? $2500 daily volume on almost $18mil market cap with 80% of the coins already in circulation? There's nothing going on but staking. Maybe staking is the next big thing, and I'm just a PoW dinosaur, and that's the best path for BBP.  This just my view as the "little guy". Thanks for your reply and thoughtful post.  

This is only documentation I have on unlocking masternode collateral:
http://wiki.biblepay.org/Create_Sanctuary_2#HOW_TO_UNLOCK_FUNDS

from mintnodes:

I've asked for more details, and/or an account we can track for this.

It may be related to how they build the nodes,  I thought masternode coins were locked from the client?

Fork was mentioned here (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.46723000) and social media multiples times...

I was going to e-mail you about the fork, but since you explicitly told me not to email you directly anymore, I didn't bother. I figured one of your team members would let you know.

I've always wondered this too. Who decides what ports to use for testnet and mainnet. It seems to be a mismash and random decision process.

Port 40000 officially belongs to SafetyNet according to IANA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_TCP_and_UDP_port_numbers

A couple of miners on discord said they were getting constant heat-mine rewards, signal that they were on a fork. They were using 1.1.5.7 but I didn't recall at that moment that the improvement didn't start working until 77000, thanks for ponting out.

One rescanned and was fine again but the other one didn't seem to provide more feedback.

Just speculation but, I'm curious if there is another coin that is bigger and requires port 40000 for masternodes,  I could see this being considered a "technical issue"

The idea of a shared MN service like this using one server for 10+ different coin masternodes is great until there is a port conflict

PrivateSend is basically a decentralized Coin Mixer
https://wiki.biblepay.org/PrivateSend

Bitcoin has coin mixers, but they are 3rd party services that you have to trust, with Dash its built in.

The only way to break PrivateSend is to gain computer access to a majority of the masternodes on the network
(Also the less rounds of mixing a user performs the easier it is to break PrivateSend for that user)

This is a chart of how many masternodes a malicious entity would need to own in order to successfuly track a privatesend
https://i.imgur.com/FfxkEBf.png


If your investing in BiblePay then your currently investing in the Dash model, we are a fork of Dash.

Bitcoin cant make decisions, there have been 16+ forks of Bitcoin, and Bitcoin Cash was a huge mess,
Dash on the other hand had a vote on the block size and all came to agreement and did not fork

Dash can pay people, how do Bitcoin devs get paid? If theyre paid by outside forces are there strings attached?
How does Bitcoin fund future development? How do they get money?

Who better to make decisions about BiblePay then the people with the most money on the line, the most skin in the game?

Please check out this wiki page:
Understanding the BiblePay Masternode Governance and Monthly Budget System
http://wiki.biblepay.org/UnderstandingGovernance

Please bring up other governance models if you think there is a better one, Im curious to learn more!

Didn't know about the fork either... And I also reached out to mintnodes. Good idea about mentioning the install-script MIP! If they reply to me I'll sure mention it.

I didn't know we had the random fork this week, I thought we have been pretty solid for 45 days or so.  But on the positive side, this is with the old codebase running (the upgraded block sync code does not start til 77000) - hopefully God willing this new start extends our current stability from 45 days to more like 365 days without forced reboots or reindexes.

Thank you for the compliments; they go a long way in the desert we are currently in .

As far as the wallet re-sending another UTXO (back to back), we actually have a line of code in the wallet designed to prevent a re-send (its basically checking to see if one was sent within the last 4 hours), however, it relies on the tx being more than 1 mature - which probably was not the case.  I'll look at this issue.

Refer them to masternode install script we prepared. It takes care of everything and avoids the legwork.
Regarding forks, I don’t know of any non-PoBH mining node (like a MN) affected.