wow that bootstrap link on page 158 of this CryptoBullion is a very slow download, is there any place else to get it?
That one is from last year. Grab the one off the OP, it is from May 1st. We will get up a June version soon.
Topic: Bullion (CBX) 'the Digital Precious Metal' | 2019 Roadmap published - page 78. (Read 359514 times)
June 13, 2017, 05:24:52 AM
That one is from last year. Grab the one off the OP, it is from May 1st. We will get up a June version soon.
June 13, 2017, 04:41:12 AM
Is speed all that essential for a store of wealth? Have you ever tried moving gold arround? It's not quick. CBX is not, and has never been setup to be a currency (there an almost infinite number of those now) - surley transaction times are not top of the list if it results in blockchain bloat... 
FR
FR
I understand you perfectly FR, my point however is that we have speed now, why abandon that if not necessary.
Blockchain bloat has a workable solution at this time and we will be improving that further with the upcoming fork. The new Vaults will have the memory usage issue solved and will incorporate the 1-click solution bootstrap installer directly into them. All a new or old non-synced user would need to do is click a button in their Vault to download the most recent updated blockchain bootstrap.
Hey elambert
Thanks for the response, fair enough - just keen to see CBX be as good as it can be
Looking forward to the update - happy to make some more splash screen art if you want 
FR
June 12, 2017, 10:06:03 PM
wow that bootstrap link on page 158 of this CryptoBullion is a very slow download, is there any place else to get it?
June 12, 2017, 01:06:25 PM
4 years is a lot of time. And still the devs are working on it means something. I will keep following this coin and try to contribute as i can.
congrtz. you must plan something special for that day.
looking forward to the roadmap
also if possible, not sure because of investment, i would run a masternode since i have a spare machine 24/7
congrtz. you must plan something special for that day.
looking forward to the roadmap
also if possible, not sure because of investment, i would run a masternode since i have a spare machine 24/7
June 12, 2017, 09:06:48 AM
Is speed all that essential for a store of wealth? Have you ever tried moving gold arround? It's not quick. CBX is not, and has never been setup to be a currency (there an almost infinite number of those now) - surley transaction times are not top of the list if it results in blockchain bloat...
FR
FR
I understand you perfectly FR, my point however is that we have speed now, why abandon that if not necessary.
Blockchain bloat has a workable solution at this time and we will be improving that further with the upcoming fork. The new Vaults will have the memory usage issue solved and will incorporate the 1-click solution bootstrap installer directly into them. All a new or old non-synced user would need to do is click a button in their Vault to download the most recent updated blockchain bootstrap.
Progress update:
Things are progressing well behind the scenes. VonSpass has created the first draft of the road map and after we finalize internal discussion and gain consensus, this will be published for the public.
It looks like option 2 is well ahead of the other options in the poll. If you have not been counted and want your vote to be tallied, please get it in soon. There will be some other opinion polls we need to put out for the community in the very near future and we can only run 1 at a time on here so this poll will have to close soon.
BTW - CBX will turn 4 years old on the 28th of this month!
June 09, 2017, 01:00:03 PM
Is speed all that essential for a store of wealth? Have you ever tried moving gold arround? It's not quick. CBX is not, and has never been setup to be a currency (there an almost infinite number of those now) - surley transaction times are not top of the list if it results in blockchain bloat...
FR
FR
June 09, 2017, 12:53:07 PM
i disagree its not lack of excitement over inflation, most of the dedicated stakers are doing so because they want to support the network not stake crazy amounts to dump every day.
Stakers are a different breed of animal when compared to miners. To stake efficiently you need to commit yourself, by buying a significant amount of CBX, and this fact alone demonstrates that a staker has at least some attachment to CBX and agrees to the CBX philosophy to some degree. I don't think that it would be typical of a staker to dump coin like miners do.
This is why I don't mind rewarding stakers a little more.
The idea of CBX as a store of value is more important then being produced generate more coins every day.
There is an economical value to the "effort" of maintaining the network i.e. staking. By today's low valuation of CBX and the low PoSP participation of CBX in general, it is clear to me that this economical value is not being met by current parameters; i.e. it's not economically interesting enough to most people. Humans are economical creatures: if a certain endeavour is not lucrative enough to them, they look elsewhere.
This is why I voted option 2 of the Poll - increase inflation very slightly to make staking and masternode creation more economically interesting while still maintaining a low inflation profile.
change the block time target so they evenly spaced out to be at least 2-3 minutes apart or even 4-6 minutes apart instead of the current
This would make CBX slower, and thus remove one of it's key advantages, so I disagree with this one.
There also the memory issue that still need to be resolved, an issue with they how the wallet is not orphaning blocks when a wallet splits off from the network,this prevents it reconnecting and adopting the longest chain that other nodes are on and leads to downtime as we have to take the wallet offline and resync from our last backup or snapshot. I've had to do this twice in the last month.
I have to agree with you on that one, the current CBX Vault is very memory hungry, and it is impossible to sync CBX without extra help which can be intimidating to non-technically inclined people.
This, to me, is unacceptable, which is why I am proposing to use brand new software and it would be nice also to reset the blockchain to current values to alleviate the slight blockchain bloating problem that CBX has.
... complete rebase to blackcoin code and then make the changes required to continue with the existing CBX blockchain and provide a more stable environment for us CBX stakers. ( I also run BLK node alongside CBX node, and it uses alot less memory and never have issues with needing to resync/getting cut off from network etc)
I am not sure BlackCoin has masternodes, from which you can't have true anonymity with BlackCoin; but I'll have a closer look.
Anonymity along with metal fungibility, ties well to the "Digital Precious Metal" idea CBX has.
June 09, 2017, 10:41:58 AM
Quote
What technique do you want to use for transaction anonymity?
Bullion Participation Nodes - essentially masternodes that pay out an annual inflation rate of the total CBX in existence among only the nodes that are participating - similar to how PoSP operates. This will allow for a far higher return for node runners as all owners will not run nodes; so those not operating a node forfeit their share of earnings to those who are operational.
Quote
I hope there will be an online wallet with an api in the next roadmap.
I think you will be pleased
June 09, 2017, 10:12:47 AM
I hope there will be an online wallet with an api in the next roadmap.
I need it for a personal project.
Eager to discover the roadmap.
I need it for a personal project.
Eager to discover the roadmap.
June 09, 2017, 10:01:35 AM
transaction anonymity,
What technique do you want to use for transaction anonymity?
June 09, 2017, 08:08:45 AM
Hey digit and FR, thanks for chiming in. However it seems like so far we are in the minority regarding interest rate voting. I really do not think the current low interest rate is an issue because in the current PoSP implementation the actual earnings one gets is close to 10% annually right now - and as we know this has not made a difference in popularity.
However if option 2 is what the community wants, at least the potential bump up to 2.75% overall inflation would still result in a very low inflation rate - so either way I do not think it will be a major deal to us CBX/CGB oldschoolers. I will support what the community wants with the vote.
As far as slowing block time, I personally do not like this idea. One of the great things about CBX is its ultra fast transaction time. One major flaw with BTC is slow transactions. It is not ideal for a usable everyday currency. CBX with its block time, inflation rate and count of coins in circulation has the perfect recipe to act not only as a store of wealth but also as an everyday currency. This should be kept imo.
Agree, and all of these items are being addressed with the upcoming hard fork which will include a new code base rectifying the memory usage problems/bugs, in-Vault trouble shooting & bootstrap loading 1-click solution (will allow all users new and old non-active users to sync quickly regardless of blockchain length), transaction anonymity, Bullion Participation Nodes (BPN) offering higher earnings to those participants locking away larger stakes in CBX, in-Vault metrics of individual user staking rates (BPN and/or non-BPN), potentially a slight change to inflation resulting in substantial staking gains for network participants through the PoSP structure (all inflation split between the active nodes only) and a to be determined via community vote method of development funding built in so that ongoing maintenance and development of CBX can continue indefinitely.
However if option 2 is what the community wants, at least the potential bump up to 2.75% overall inflation would still result in a very low inflation rate - so either way I do not think it will be a major deal to us CBX/CGB oldschoolers. I will support what the community wants with the vote.
As far as slowing block time, I personally do not like this idea. One of the great things about CBX is its ultra fast transaction time. One major flaw with BTC is slow transactions. It is not ideal for a usable everyday currency. CBX with its block time, inflation rate and count of coins in circulation has the perfect recipe to act not only as a store of wealth but also as an everyday currency. This should be kept imo.
Quote
the focus should be on long term holders and stakers and improving the wallet and network for them. (eg: optimizng the wallet, fixing bugs, updating the base code with newer btc source)
Agree, and all of these items are being addressed with the upcoming hard fork which will include a new code base rectifying the memory usage problems/bugs, in-Vault trouble shooting & bootstrap loading 1-click solution (will allow all users new and old non-active users to sync quickly regardless of blockchain length), transaction anonymity, Bullion Participation Nodes (BPN) offering higher earnings to those participants locking away larger stakes in CBX, in-Vault metrics of individual user staking rates (BPN and/or non-BPN), potentially a slight change to inflation resulting in substantial staking gains for network participants through the PoSP structure (all inflation split between the active nodes only) and a to be determined via community vote method of development funding built in so that ongoing maintenance and development of CBX can continue indefinitely.
June 09, 2017, 04:59:32 AM
Thanks VS, great stuff! I personally like option 1 (snip)
I like better option 2. 2.75% inflation is still low by today's altcoin standards, and people have to be rewarded well enough, if we want them to actually lock in some CBX to help the CBX network as masternode. Having the current low 1.5% - 2% yearly inflation has not helped CBX gain traction so far, because reward is so low.
i disagree its not lack of excitement over inflation, most of the dedicated stakers are doing so because they want to support the network not stake crazy amounts to dump every day. The idea of CBX as a store of value is more important then being produced generate more coins every day. When the value of CBX goes up so does the value of those returns on staking so it not necessary to try to compensate for it now by increasing the annual amount of coins created. Also there little value in have stakers that are only interested in a quick return, the focus should be on long term holders and stakers and improving the wallet and network for them. (eg: optimizng the wallet, fixing bugs, updating the base code with newer btc source)
and if it is just about a psychological effect then you can do this with option 1 and then change the block time target so they evenly spaced out to be at least 2-3 minutes apart or even 4-6 minutes apart instead of the current where we can have multiple blocks within the same minute with any spacing out, and then increase the block reward to stay within 2% inflation. This would kill 2 birds with one stone, a higher reward per block and the increase in blockchain bloat/size from new blocks could be reduced by at least 50% which is important to keep CBX PoSP decentralized by ensuring anyone can run a node on minimal hardware.
There also the memory issue that still need to be resolved, an issue with they how the wallet is not orphaning blocks when a wallet splits off from the network,this prevents it reconnecting and adopting the longest chain that other nodes are on and leads to downtime as we have to take the wallet offline and resync from our last backup or snapshot. I've had to do this twice in the last month.
I would also suggest looking at adoption or reworking the Blackcoin code as this is most advanced and most stable PoS coin of all imho. There is not that much difference between the effects on supply of Blackcoin PoS3.0 vs PoSP except that PoSP uses an interest rate instead of set reward.
I would suggest looking at a complete rebase to blackcoin code and then make the changes required to continue with the existing CBX blockchain and provide a more stable environment for us CBX stakers. ( I also run BLK node alongside CBX node, and it uses alot less memory and never have issues with needing to resync/getting cut off from network etc)
I voted option 1 as well.
Very much inline with my thoughts digit
FR
June 09, 2017, 01:45:57 AM
Thanks VS, great stuff! I personally like option 1 (snip)
I like better option 2. 2.75% inflation is still low by today's altcoin standards, and people have to be rewarded well enough, if we want them to actually lock in some CBX to help the CBX network as masternode. Having the current low 1.5% - 2% yearly inflation has not helped CBX gain traction so far, because reward is so low.
i disagree its not lack of excitement over inflation, most of the dedicated stakers are doing so because they want to support the network not stake crazy amounts to dump every day. The idea of CBX as a store of value is more important then being produced generate more coins every day. When the value of CBX goes up so does the value of those returns on staking so it not necessary to try to compensate for it now by increasing the annual amount of coins created. Also there little value in have stakers that are only interested in a quick return, the focus should be on long term holders and stakers and improving the wallet and network for them. (eg: optimizng the wallet, fixing bugs, updating the base code with newer btc source)
and if it is just about a psychological effect then you can do this with option 1 and then change the block time target so they evenly spaced out to be at least 2-3 minutes apart or even 4-6 minutes apart instead of the current where we can have multiple blocks within the same minute with any spacing out, and then increase the block reward to stay within 2% inflation. This would kill 2 birds with one stone, a higher reward per block and the increase in blockchain bloat/size from new blocks could be reduced by at least 50% which is important to keep CBX PoSP decentralized by ensuring anyone can run a node on minimal hardware.
There also the memory issue that still need to be resolved, an issue with they how the wallet is not orphaning blocks when a wallet splits off from the network,this prevents it reconnecting and adopting the longest chain that other nodes are on and leads to downtime as we have to take the wallet offline and resync from our last backup or snapshot. I've had to do this twice in the last month.
I would also suggest looking at adoption or reworking the Blackcoin code as this is most advanced and most stable PoS coin of all imho. There is not that much difference between the effects on supply of Blackcoin PoS3.0 vs PoSP except that PoSP uses an interest rate instead of set reward.
I would suggest looking at a complete rebase to blackcoin code and then make the changes required to continue with the existing CBX blockchain and provide a more stable environment for us CBX stakers. ( I also run BLK node alongside CBX node, and it uses alot less memory and never have issues with needing to resync/getting cut off from network etc)
I voted option 1 as well.
June 08, 2017, 03:22:18 PM
Let's talk about masternodes!
I think there is something good with masternodes, more than a fad we should blindly follow. There are many advantages to adding BPN (Bullion Participation Nodes) to CBX - an even more reliable network, adding anonymity to the network, removing many coins from trading, thus making CBX even more scarce and facilitating the creation of a reliable mobile CBX app.
I have posted a new poll, outlining how we see the possible implementations of masternodes to CBX; please select one, and perhaps voice your constructive opinion on this thread.
Essentially, CBX holders continue to gain PoSP rewards, but we open 500 000 possible CBX to masternodes, at 1000 CBX each. With option 2 as an example, we split 20 000 CBX yearly rewards between all registered BPN runners - this means that if 50 people lock in their 1000 CBX each or 50 000 CBX then the 20 000 CBX reward gets divided among those 50 - or 400 CBX each yearly for a nice 40% yield!
Large CBX holders will have the possibilitly of locking in more than one 1000 CBX sum, in 1000 CBX increments those will count as more nodes to the same owner.
All this would work in typical PoSP fashion, online BPN or non BPN get all rewards for given block, essentially adding the Participation twist to traditional masternodes.
The master nodes would be a good start for Crypto Bullion.
I already get this good news everywhere ...
June 08, 2017, 11:31:23 AM
... not interested in masternodes would be penalized from 2% to 1.5%. ...
Not penalized, check the actual current yield figures. Currently CBX has never created the stated 2% (plus interest compounding should be 2.2%) - currently CBX network pays 1.8% including interest compounding or about 1.6%.
Lack of excitement because of this too low inflation is a problem, missed opportunity.
June 08, 2017, 10:09:46 AM
Excellent feedback and discussion guys!
Putting the memory usage issue aside (this does have to be and will be addressed).
I would like to get some feedback on the blockchain bloat issue. Yes we have 4 years of transactions creating a large blockchain, however this is not uncommon and simply a result of he way blockchain tech operates. We have done some things to remedy this issue, first being the bootstrap file which users can place into their roaming folder. To take this a step further, Alex created a downloadable troubleshooting tool which will insert the newest version of the bootstrap for the user in a 1 click solution. I am not sure if people have not seen this tool (it was announced here, twitter, facebook and in the OP) or if people are having difficulty with the tool. Please advise, download link is below.
https://mega.nz/#!WBs3HZjT!mAnYaJKjsYFVhdA8-WQ_EsvyBytiPJViHp4rI65-CVo
Putting the memory usage issue aside (this does have to be and will be addressed).
I would like to get some feedback on the blockchain bloat issue. Yes we have 4 years of transactions creating a large blockchain, however this is not uncommon and simply a result of he way blockchain tech operates. We have done some things to remedy this issue, first being the bootstrap file which users can place into their roaming folder. To take this a step further, Alex created a downloadable troubleshooting tool which will insert the newest version of the bootstrap for the user in a 1 click solution. I am not sure if people have not seen this tool (it was announced here, twitter, facebook and in the OP) or if people are having difficulty with the tool. Please advise, download link is below.
https://mega.nz/#!WBs3HZjT!mAnYaJKjsYFVhdA8-WQ_EsvyBytiPJViHp4rI65-CVo
Indeed I missed the release of the CBXTool of Alex
Thanks
June 08, 2017, 09:13:16 AM
In line with what Alex said and keeping our historical record, perhaps we could simplify current workaround further by incorporating the troubleshooting tool directly into the Vault download. So when one downloads the Vault they are presented with the option of importing the existing bootstrap kept updated by CBX devs or they can sync from 0.
June 08, 2017, 09:05:02 AM
Hey all
Master nodes may work for CBX, however I would first focus on fixing the current blockchain so it downloads / synchronises in a reasonable amount of time / at all - the bootstrap file is a nice work around but it makes everything look somewhat broken / un-managed if you have to do anything but install it and leave it to sync.
Connectivity is an issue for sure; master nodes will help here but the amount of CPU churn the wallet imparts on the hosting machine is crazy high - especially as the CBX network is currently processing a tiny fraction of the total number of transactions that it may one day be processed if CBX's profile raises considerably.
I would highly recommend:
Snapshot the current chain, hard fork, re-start the block index from zero, adapt the code base of one of the other POS coins in existence that synchronise correctly end to end (headers first certainly improved the bitcoin blockchain download) and re-implement PoSV2 on top. You will consolidate the source, gain all of the various security fixes and start fresh from a known good state.
After all that we will have a fast, efficient syncing coin - supported by master nodes that anyone can download and synchronise without additional support
FR
Memory issue is still a big problem that I am working on.Master nodes may work for CBX, however I would first focus on fixing the current blockchain so it downloads / synchronises in a reasonable amount of time / at all - the bootstrap file is a nice work around but it makes everything look somewhat broken / un-managed if you have to do anything but install it and leave it to sync.
Connectivity is an issue for sure; master nodes will help here but the amount of CPU churn the wallet imparts on the hosting machine is crazy high - especially as the CBX network is currently processing a tiny fraction of the total number of transactions that it may one day be processed if CBX's profile raises considerably.
I would highly recommend:
Snapshot the current chain, hard fork, re-start the block index from zero, adapt the code base of one of the other POS coins in existence that synchronise correctly end to end (headers first certainly improved the bitcoin blockchain download) and re-implement PoSV2 on top. You will consolidate the source, gain all of the various security fixes and start fresh from a known good state.
After all that we will have a fast, efficient syncing coin - supported by master nodes that anyone can download and synchronise without additional support
FR
During these last few months I have been a bit unavailable and I am sorry about that.
Anyway, CBX development will start back soon.
Of course CBX use some CPU and RAM and it gonna be fix with updates of masternode because I plan to change the whole code base of CBX and keep it compatible with old blockchain.
I am personnaly against a re-start to the block zero, that's against the blockchain philosophy
June 08, 2017, 08:15:06 AM
Excellent feedback and discussion guys!
Putting the memory usage issue aside (this does have to be and will be addressed).
I would like to get some feedback on the blockchain bloat issue. Yes we have 4 years of transactions creating a large blockchain, however this is not uncommon and simply a result of he way blockchain tech operates. We have done some things to remedy this issue, first being the bootstrap file which users can place into their roaming folder. To take this a step further, Alex created a downloadable troubleshooting tool which will insert the newest version of the bootstrap for the user in a 1 click solution. I am not sure if people have not seen this tool (it was announced here, twitter, facebook and in the OP) or if people are having difficulty with the tool. Please advise, download link is below.
https://mega.nz/#!WBs3HZjT!mAnYaJKjsYFVhdA8-WQ_EsvyBytiPJViHp4rI65-CVo
Putting the memory usage issue aside (this does have to be and will be addressed).
I would like to get some feedback on the blockchain bloat issue. Yes we have 4 years of transactions creating a large blockchain, however this is not uncommon and simply a result of he way blockchain tech operates. We have done some things to remedy this issue, first being the bootstrap file which users can place into their roaming folder. To take this a step further, Alex created a downloadable troubleshooting tool which will insert the newest version of the bootstrap for the user in a 1 click solution. I am not sure if people have not seen this tool (it was announced here, twitter, facebook and in the OP) or if people are having difficulty with the tool. Please advise, download link is below.
https://mega.nz/#!WBs3HZjT!mAnYaJKjsYFVhdA8-WQ_EsvyBytiPJViHp4rI65-CVo
June 08, 2017, 07:05:00 AM
Good news
I voted 2,
The reward of 4% is reasonable, the cryptos are in Boiling.
On the other hand I do not see why users who are not interested in masternodes would be penalized from 2% to 1.5%.
I will leave 4% masternodes 2% non masternode.
How it happens to host a masternode?
-Personal server
-Server rental (what price)
The team could win a% of the masternodes, for the futures developments. If everything is transparent this should not be a problem.
I agree with FiniteRed. The update of the wallet is a obstacle course (problem that's not specific to CBX but to the vast majority of cryptos).
If the team could find a way to make the instalation and update as simple as an android wallet.
We would have a length ahead.
May be in the upcoming roadmap
Impatient of good things to come.
I voted 2,
The reward of 4% is reasonable, the cryptos are in Boiling.
On the other hand I do not see why users who are not interested in masternodes would be penalized from 2% to 1.5%.
I will leave 4% masternodes 2% non masternode.
How it happens to host a masternode?
-Personal server
-Server rental (what price)
The team could win a% of the masternodes, for the futures developments. If everything is transparent this should not be a problem.
I agree with FiniteRed. The update of the wallet is a obstacle course (problem that's not specific to CBX but to the vast majority of cryptos).
If the team could find a way to make the instalation and update as simple as an android wallet.
We would have a length ahead.
May be in the upcoming roadmap
Impatient of good things to come.
Jump to: