Topic: ◈◈Bitcredit ◈◈ Migrating to UniQredit◈◈ - page 51. (Read 284526 times)

Thanks, but it is not the missing node. I got enough other nodes connected.
It is the error that blocks the sync.
lg t.

try adding this node :-91.230.123.101

Hi together,
I tried to sync a new client, but get stuck at this point:

I tried with both last versions: 30.17.6-64bit and 30.17.8-rc2 and each with a new wallet.
Same result with both versions.

Any suggestions to resolve this?
lg t.

Might have some ideas, tomorrow I will hit you up on Skype about the ANN overhaul.

Id like to step up for the wallet one, basically ill take what i wrote up as positive/negative and rewrite it to inject the planned features/process flow for anything nonfunctional/incomplete in a formal "how to use the wallet" along with photos for a writeup. problem is im in the middle of moving so I havent had much time.

also Chain ID sounds very interesting. Im interested to hear what other banknode holders feel about the potential need to burn 50k and offer services against it. It could cause a disconnect between people who want tom mine without having to babysit the setgenerate true command, and people who want to have a banknode for payouts. Also Im assuming loans would eventually come straight form the banknode escrow? or will we be able to provide loan-able BCR as a banknode that comes off the top of it, say i have 200k BCR, 50k is in  a banknode and I would want to allow someone to loan 100k, either i need 2 banknodes? or i need 100k on top of the banknode.?

Yeah, overhaul, more like a whole new one. I made offers of huge amounts of BCr for people to take up jobs but none came forward. As for roadmap/timeframes.... i like to stay clear of those as there is no telling how long/quickly it takes for me to learn new things, i dislike having people pushing me to produce something based on "timeframe".

it is a great idea to be transparent. I think the announce needs an overhaul too, but who has time! Since there has been a hard press forward to get the wallet working with the mining rules in place and bids/payouts working right all efforts have revolved around getting that finalized, along with the lending platform into beta. it would be great to have a historical writeup of the releases/ideas in timeline form, an updated announce, and a howto for wallet/features, as well as a new roadmap with updated timeframe.

I think a 25 block limit is more reasonable @bitcreditscc... there is always the risk that too high a limit would freeze up the chain if able miners went offline... or do you have a work  around?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12611151
this answers most of your question.
The 4 mil seems to have been used as working capital over the past year.

Yeah that's old news. By requiring a minimum balance and imposing a X block limit i have discouraged pools as well as competitive mining.

Well, i'm almost ready with a !!database only rc

Some words and thoughts :- maybe the beginning of a white paper finally?  

Ask the Bitcoin devs and they'll encourage you to use an address only once...hell they'll say an address does not really exist on the chain (technically true). This is all well and good in a system designed to maintain total pseudo anonymity, use of different addresses should make it harder to tell who is who and what they are doing with their money. Many people argue about what spirit of cyptocurrency development is about....ranging from privacy , to challenging the existing banking systems/ financial systems. My thoughts on Bitcredit (not really important) are fairly straightforward , I am pushing the development of a digital foundation of a decentralized/distributed financial ecosystem that will offer not only alternatives to existing systems, but also make possible new and interesting ways to conduct online commerce.

Thus i'd like to start by arguing some points :-

Finances are what drives the world's economies, people perform tasks and receive compensation in the form of money, cash or digital. Sometimes immediately available funds may not be sufficient for intended uses, thus we approach banks and ask for loans. The bank performs highly detailed background checks, not just on financial history but personal information as well, in an effort to build a profile which results in a "score". This score determines the risk to the bank of you defaulting on a loan. If they find that you are likely to default, no money for you. This in essence is fair play, you wouldn't arbitrarily lend money to someone you don't know without a certain level of surety that they will pay you back. The blockchain is a whole different type of animal, on a typical bitcoin based blockchain users are identified by the "address" they use to send/receive payments and it can be changed instantly... resulting in no real positive identification.

I would like to expand in the opposite direction to the recommendation of the current Bitcoin dev team. Rather than encouraging disposing of "addresses", I am developing a system that rewards useage of a single "address", which for our purposes can be referred to as ChainID.

ChainID

Transactions are recorded in the blockchain, every time you use your funds/transfer them, a record is created. Essentially this means we can mine a lot of numeric data about a ChainID, from number of transactions to how much you are likely to spend in a single transaction. This , if there has been enough activity can result in a fairly detailed income/expenditure profile spanning the existence of the ChainID.

Qualitative data is almost non-existant on the blockchain, this is because typically noone uses personally identifiable data on the chain, encrypted or otherwise. I approach this problem by analysing aspects of associated ChainIDs, building a detailed profile of known associates and their trust ratings, the higher the trust/credit ratings of know associates...the higher yours will go. I also incorporate a system of voted trust, each user can "vouch" for another by endorsing them with a vote, please note a ChainID can only vouch once for another ChainID, all subsequent votes are not calculated. As with the first system, trust/credit rating of the voting ChainID will be considered, so voting with low or zero trust is pointless.

Information on a ChainID is served on demand or optionally triggered by a automatic parsing of a specially formatted message. Each service provider will have available to them a set of parameters they can set for minimum threshold ratings required to receive a service from them, so along with relevant data service provider may get a recommendation or set auto responses.

These are some of the ideas driving the development train.....feel free to discuss , nitpick.

I have to do the following:-

1) A standard wallet may only hold a single address (need to find a way to enforce this) or figure an alternative
2) BNs are no longer moveable.... you literally burn the coins to enable a BN, (or another CRYPTOGRAPHIC solution)
3) Batch processing of trust and credit tables once an hour
4) many more things big and small

Where have you seen/read that? That sure is interesting..

LOL.....dev is actually the first to verifiably solve the

1) Pool Domination
2) Hardware Arms Race

problems

New branch is pretty heavy on the I/O , i'm guessing you'll fix that soon? QT literally froze.

Not surprised , which is why i have been trying to find ways to divorce bitcoin.

I haven't looked at my boxes recently so not sure about payouts. The upcoming update should resolve the issue of miners waiting until payout blocks to mine and snipe the block.

I will setup auto invites soon. It's just something in the long line of to-dos

looks like people selling to get on the bitcoin train, meanwhile my desktop has been off (moving) how have the bid payouts been going?

I asked about slack at least 2 times, it's empty because nobody knows that it already is, so where ? Invitation only ? Kill me but there's no link to it in this topic.

After asking for something few times you just give up ...

That does sound good, but financialNode sounds better.

I think a lot of people here are unfamiliar with github aside from being able to yell "zomg its not on github scam!"
If github problem tracking is working, i know theres 3-5 devs intermittently helping bitcredits with branch changes and "pull?" requests, then no need to make a push for community to congregate elsewhere.
Worst part about bitcointalk is that once the page flips to the next 20 posts, its rare anyone will read back unless theyre quoting somehting they saw before. If we got together on another medium like irc, or turned up the intensity on the slack that could be good for when things are tuned up enough to make a community expanding / media push movement.
if slacks not completely private feel free to post an invite link here hack__

edit: I guess the push by Bitcreditscc to have someone draft up some media kit on how to run the wallet and what BCR is about would go a long way to answering the most asked questions. Shame I dont have enough time this week :/