Topic: BiblePay | 10% to Orphan-Charity | RANDOMX MINING | Sanctuaries (Masternodes) - page 439. (Read 243386 times)

1.1.2.6 is ready for testing in the testnet thread:

https://forum.biblepay.org/index.php?topic=190.new#new

I would be pushing to be late on the mandatory for June and wait for it - if it were not for our June 26th cascading superblock bug that gives us a black eye.

Anyway there is also the possibility that we release the token as a leisure - because exchanges don't need the token.  I'm focusing on this plan for now.  In this way we might be able to have our mandatory before the superblock bug hits, but it's already the 12th, and we need to test for a couple weeks and also give the exchanges 10 days notice to upgrade, so we might not make it anyway.  Let's see how testnet goes.

Do you think you're gonna try to wait for that to be finalised before pushing the mandatory this month? or are you gonna make the changes before that and just insert the token id via spork later?

Thanks for the post and the links.  So from what I can see, in both instances of the cheating that went on in those projects in that community, the user took advantage of an attack vector in which a vulnerability existed on the specific boinc project's server side, in the validation process, which made it possible to cheat on the actual result submission (IE it fooled the server into accepting the result of the workunit).  Another words they studied the traffic that is posted by boinc that allows the work unit to be solved and falsified it.  Note that there is no example of cheating outside of those few projects.  (Thats partially why we picked Rosetta originally, it was partially discussed in the swongle discussions when we were in testnet with cancer mining-  Part of the due diligence was to find a project that would be extremely hard if not impossible to cheat.  This is because if you look at the manual from Rosetta commons, the work you are doing is so complicated (it requires a 3mb database on the client side to refer to), with 300 scientists on the back end, I don't think its possible to falsify a low energy 'result' without doing more effort than the client does to compute the low energy result.  Also in both cases of the cheating note that the gridcoin user diluted their own project compensation - another words a report could have been written that showed a discrepency in task-turnaround/cobblestone-work, picking up the bad user.  In that case if that happened here we would have to disable the project and regroup.

As far as adding other projects, I feel we should stay focused with what we have now - these projects are related to our healing aspect (we picked Rosetta because it was based on potentially curing cancer), and WCG with their AIDS research.  Although I'm interested in using clock cycles for the benefit of humanity, I'm not interested in expanding our mining side into a volunteer computing platform, primarily because I would rather support a high quality project and maintain the healing aspect or facet of biblepay.  We have a lot of things to do on the roadmap, and one behind the scenes is investigating partners in the financial sector that also have some options for us in replacing proof of work with other cool cutting edge ideas (like analyzing financial markets etc). 

POBH(pow), when it's done I'll look into merging PODC

Nice,

Would that be for PoW or PoDC (or both)?

I've been working on one in the background as I have time, it's almost ready

Adapting MPOS,  there are a few items I'm trying to clear up before I open it for public.

What's the current thoughts on having enough pools? I know when this came up before there was a thought that most people should use the main pool because of letter writing and proposals, if nothing else - and we have purepool for the "lightweight" pool option.

But maybe it's time for another round of discussion. Should we have a third pool (I seem to remember in the history that there was a 3rd at one point), and if so, are there any features that people would particularly want?

In our case from the apple standpoint, I think we would be OK, because BOINC does the research (and that activity should be construed as research not mining) but either way, the mother process BOINC, starts the threads for the research, while MIP's mobile wallet acts as a block acceptor and wallet.

But the main show stopper with running boinc on the iphone is no project supports the proprietary apple processor so boinc only works on the mac currently.  However this scenario could come up on the samsung galaxy, and we have a couple beta testers running biblepay-android and boinc currently on that device although I realize google doesnt have the clause yet.

** WCG PODC UPDATE **
 
We are still waiting for the DPA to be re-written to be more volunteer computing specific.

Robert,

World Community Grid program manager, Juan Hindo, has posted a DPA update in the forums.  Here it is the post as well:

Hi Everyone,

Wanted to give you a quick update and a bit of background on the status of our Data Processing Agreement (DPA), which will allow people who agree to it to access World Community Grid data exports, which were previously available before GDPR came into effect.

As many of you are aware, we've been working with lawyers to come up with an agreement that will serve the wishes of volunteers who use the data exports, while ensuring that we are GDPR-compliant, as defined by IBM. We did receive the agreement drafted by lawyers specifically for World Community Grid. But since IBM is a commercial entity that focuses on selling technology solutions, we felt that the agreement drafted for World Community Grid wasn't sufficiently geared towards volunteers. The World Community Grid team feels strongly that, in the long run, it's better for us to continue to work with the legal team to push for an agreement that we believe will meet volunteers' needs as well as IBM's needs, rather than give volunteers an agreement that is more geared towards commercial engagements and is not as relevant to a philanthropic initiative.

Sincere thanks to everyone for their patience during this process. We will use this thread to provide updates.

Many thanks,
Juan

Apple is more restrictive on everything than Google historically has been.

BOINC is not available on their platform for a reason,  so I don't see this being a big deal.

edit:
Android mining is cool, but you gotta watch out for heat it will ruin the battery if you're not careful.. the default settings are way to aggressive.

Apple announced changes to its policies to disallow mining on their mobile devices inside an app.

While this is largely targeted against scammy devs that build background mining into their apps, this clause concerned me:
3.1.5 (b) (ii) Mining: Apps may not mine for cryptocurrencies unless the processing is performed off device (e.g. cloud-based mining).

Google might take a very similar stance; if this is the direction things are moving, how do we see this affecting our goal of allowing unbanked mining on phones for people in remote areas without computers? It would be a real shame to lose that feature.

Agreed,  also you have to take into account "luck" sometimes a block is easier to solve than intended.  It should not be as drastic as we were seeing but it is also a factor.

Well, I'm not sure I'd go with the word "obsession" - but let me explain why it is interesting. The sliding scale of difficulty to hit 7 minute blocks is obvious and uninteresting - however, you said it yourself, that the network hashrate changes. The comment is roughly equivalent to "wow, our network hashrate 2 hours ago must have been much much higher than now, because our difficulty is high and it has taken a long time to get a block as a result - meaning that the difficulty will again soon slide back down to adapt to the fact that our network hashrate has shrunk."

What it does it tell us some things about who is mining when. If the network hash suddenly increases such that our difficulty triples for an hour or two and then goes back down, how is that not a conversation topic? Nobody who has that much hash power is doing this adhoc, which means we have the part-time attention of some very big players. I find that a worthy note and a good discussion point. I do NOT find "DUH, 7 minute blocks!" to be an interesting point, but I guess to each their own.

Yes, I checked the Gate.io exchange that listed coin is free.
and only provide the coin information and all info.
The gate.io is big exchnage that i hope bbp will list here.

The apply listing coin link below:
https://gateio.io/listing

Rob / Dev.

Could you quire about the following exchange?
https://gate.io/

I saw it does not require a listing fee. 

It seem better than c-cex and southxchange, yobit or cryptobridge due to it within top 20 in the world rankings.

As I understand correctly it means another waiting time :-)

I cannot really tell you how to do it as I'm not that fluent in the workings of crypto when looking under the hood. However, I would strongly encourage the devs to really try to lock down ways to mitigate cheaters better than Gridcoin has done.

Collatz had to completely rebuild their site/servers/etc... because at least one Gridcoin user was cheating on a large scale  under one of their pools.
https://boinc.thesonntags.com/collatz/forum_thread.php?id=15#190
The responses from the Gridcoin team did not sit well with the community as it basically came down to telling the community to fix their projects and to not tell Gridcoin how to run theirs. Science was indeed affected and has to be re-ran. This event was the straw that broke the camels back and essentially caused Gridcoin to be banned from the Annual Pentathlon which is the largest competition in the BOINC world amongst teams.

Gridcoin users basically had coin stolen from them because of the cheater getting rewarded. I do not know if they ever resolved any of it as I don't follow their threads. Collatz lost the old forums that had a lot of the details in them.

And it appears that a possible cheater has appeared yet again at another BOINC project - http://gene.disi.unitn.it/test/forum_thread.php?id=216#1325

On a positive note, have you guys considered possibly adding GPUGrid to your list of projects? http://www.gpugrid.net/

http://www.purepool.org/main/miner/BKPfggkek4C5x7NDifRjfxTJJXLU5sZJgD/

Your URL shows up for me.

Looks good. Just wait 24 hours.

Also, I would remove utxoamount=2700 ... the wallet will stake the full amount automatically if you remove that line and restart the wallet.

Fairness and logic aside, there's something to be said for predictability making changes slowly. If you want to attract people to the pool, there needs to be some sort of incentive favoring the cruncher. I also think fee changes need to come slowly and with a lot of thought. Sure, if you want to treat the pool like a corporate business, you'd want to extract maximum profit, but I think there's a few other factors where slowly making changes will create big disruptions for the DC projects, BiblePay, nor the pool.

I think of bbppool as a form of advertising. You reduce the barrier to entry and more people will hold BBP. A big user base has more value long-term because of the network effect. Look at PayPal, eBay, Facebook, etc.  Growth became exponential as more users joined.

Like the BiblePay Faucet, might I suggest bbppool be partially subsidize up to max # of RACs. Add KYC type verification, and you can mitigate some of the botnet type issues.