AWARD-WINNING

CASINO CRYPTO EXCLUSIVE

CLUBHOUSE 1500+

GAMES 2 MIN

CASH-OUTS 24/7

SUPPORT 100s OF

FREE SPINS PLAY NOW vertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.

slavino



Offline



Activity: 48

Merit: 1







Jr. MemberActivity: 48Merit: 1 Re: BiblePay - New Coin Launch - Official Thread February 08, 2018, 01:59:51 PM #4024 Quote from: slovakia on February 08, 2018, 01:54:24 PM Quote from: Sparks1956 on February 07, 2018, 06:52:24 PM Quote from: tmc808 on February 07, 2018, 06:26:40 PM Quote from: Sparks1956 on February 07, 2018, 06:18:43 PM Quote from: slovakia on February 06, 2018, 10:59:42 PM

by me, cancer mining looks like a fake...no tutorial,no proofs,no in road map,no answers....more ppl on dicords starts talkin about it

And your comments looks like FUD! Please do a little bit of homework first. There is a site called Google, ever heard of it? You can search and find much about the Rosetta project, e.g. recent publications in New York Times, Science, Nature.

And your comments looks like FUD! Please do a little bit of homework first. There is a site called Google, ever heard of it? You can search and find much about the Rosetta project, e.g. recent publications in New York Times, Science, Nature.

Unfortunately the Rosetta@Home project is far from perfect. While Slovak's point is poorly made, the truth is that it is also known as a massive heat-generating project. It has come under fire whether or not the benefit outweighs the risk. Again it is not proper to ask "Who has a problem with mining for cancer?" I would think no one does. However, the Rosetta@Home project can be linked to energy consequences that despite its good intention is also an environmental offender. I am not sure why BiblePay is uniting with them in an all-or-nothing fashion. Presumably it is being designed as a "shield" to the botnet mining currently underway on the BBP network.



Securing the BBP network and its integrity should be the priority, not "mining for cancer" using an environmentally dubious project like Rosetta@home



I cannot think of a University that has more anti-Christian values than the Cal Berkeley system. BiblePay and Berkeley.edu are not just antithetical but it is a questionable decision to partner with them, in light of everything else Berkeley stands for (no matter how well-intentioned cancer mining can be portrayed as)



I am at a loss here but I hope these thoughts do not get shoved under the "FUD" carpet because these are actual legitimate issues to be weighed in the discussion.



Furthermore, I have personally spent time living in Berkeley, CA so I am not speaking from anything other than first-hand experience. There are spiritual implications of donating BBP cpu cycles to the project. We don't know to what extent those cycles are being used for cancer detection & modeling, vs. how much of that research is ported to Eugenics and epigenetic research. It is a very uncomfortable partnership the more you peel back the layers.





Unfortunately the Rosetta@Home project is far from perfect. While Slovak's point is poorly made, the truth is that it is also known as a massive heat-generating project. It has come under fire whether or not the benefit outweighs the risk. Again it is not proper to ask "Who has a problem with mining for cancer?" I would think no one does. However, the Rosetta@Home project can be linked to energy consequences that despite its good intention is also an environmental offender. I am not sure why BiblePay is uniting with them in an all-or-nothing fashion. Presumably it is being designed as a "shield" to the botnet mining currently underway on the BBP network.Securing the BBP network and its integrity should be the priority, not "mining for cancer" using an environmentally dubious project like Rosetta@homeI cannot think of a University that has more anti-Christian values than the Cal Berkeley system. BiblePay and Berkeley.edu are not just antithetical but it is a questionable decision to partner with them, in light of everything else Berkeley stands for (no matter how well-intentioned cancer mining can be portrayed as)I am at a loss here but I hope these thoughts do not get shoved under the "FUD" carpet because these are actual legitimate issues to be weighed in the discussion.Furthermore, I have personally spent time living in Berkeley, CA so I am not speaking from anything other than first-hand experience. There are spiritual implications of donating BBP cpu cycles to the project. We don't know to what extent those cycles are being used for cancer detection & modeling, vs. how much of that research is ported to Eugenics and epigenetic research. It is a very uncomfortable partnership the more you peel back the layers.

Well, i was reacting against Slovaks statement "cancer mining looks like a fake". For me that looks like FUD, i am myself participating in the World Community Grid and involved with the project "Help researchers smash childhood cancer", so i know distributed computer processing to contribute to cancer research is for real, and is already connected to some crypto's like Curecoin and Gridcoin, so it is not fake. You have arguments of a different order, for me worth to study more carefully.





SVK NOKO total useless



ROBERTOS: why we are still on 150 blocks daily?... your information is still contradictory



SPARSK1956: this rosettaproject.com? < 200 visitors per day that web is dead ofc

i like this newbie accounts ... hahaha...SVK NOKO total uselessROBERTOS: why we are still on 150 blocks daily?... your information is still contradictorySPARSK1956: this rosettaproject.com? < 200 visitors per daythat web is dead ofc

@bible_pay any information about cancer mining? in roadmap missing all infos @bible_pay any information about cancer mining? in roadmap missing all infos

SVK Noko



Offline



Activity: 300

Merit: 0







NewbieActivity: 300Merit: 0 Re: BiblePay - New Coin Launch - Official Thread February 08, 2018, 02:25:03 PM #4025 Quote from: mr.oz on February 08, 2018, 12:46:06 PM Is it really hard to join that exchanges. What are they needed to add any coin?

what about bittrex, binance or at least cyryptopiaIs it really hard to join that exchanges. What are they needed to add any coin?

Today morning binance has suspended all deposit and withdrawal operations. Now the status is: Due to an unforeseen slowdown in the speed of our data sync, we now estimate for all trading activity to resume at 2018/02/09 4AM (UTC).



Something is going wrong there :-) :-) Today morning binance has suspended all deposit and withdrawal operations. Now the status is: Due to an unforeseen slowdown in the speed of our data sync, we now estimate for all trading activity to resume at 2018/02/09 4AM (UTC).Something is going wrong there :-) :-)

MIP



Offline



Activity: 364

Merit: 0







NewbieActivity: 364Merit: 0 Re: An argument against Proof of Distributed Computing February 08, 2018, 04:11:14 PM #4029 Quote from: Swongel on February 08, 2018, 04:02:42 PM ...

I believe Proof of Distributed Computing to be harmful to the Bible Pay network, making it 10x easier to launch a 51% attack and centralising the ability to mint new Bible Pays to the BOINC network.

This is harmful because of the following reasons:



- Bible pays can be used to set up Master Nodes effectifely granting voting rights to those who are able to mint coins.

- Making BOINC a central authority for deciding who gets Bible pay subsidies making them a single point of failure and allowing for fraudulant non-verifiable transactions.

- Depending on the developer to spork whenever something goes wrong makes the sole developer a single point of failure.

- Giving the power to mint money to BOINC, an organisation which did not ask nor accepted this responsibility will automatically a target for hackers looking to earn crypto currency by hacking.

- Reducing block chain securing mining subsidies by 90% will effecitvely make the resources required to launch a 51% attack 90% less.





As far as I understood, PoDC subsidy calculation is uncoupled to transaction verification, which will continue using PoBh. I agree on the single-developer risk.



In any case, we can peek at how other PoDC projects like GridCoin have tackled these challenges. As far as I understood, PoDC subsidy calculation is uncoupled to transaction verification, which will continue using PoBh. I agree on the single-developer risk.In any case, we can peek at how other PoDC projects like GridCoin have tackled these challenges.

bible_pay



Offline



Activity: 1022

Merit: 215





Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords







Full MemberActivity: 1022Merit: 215Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords Re: An argument against Proof of Distributed Computing February 08, 2018, 04:56:46 PM #4031 Quote from: Swongel on February 08, 2018, 04:02:42 PM ...

I believe Proof of Distributed Computing to be harmful to the Bible Pay network, making it 10x easier to launch a 51% attack and centralising the ability to mint new Bible Pays to the BOINC network.

This is harmful because of the following reasons:



- Bible pays can be used to set up Master Nodes effectifely granting voting rights to those who are able to mint coins.

- Making BOINC a central authority for deciding who gets Bible pay subsidies making them a single point of failure and allowing for fraudulant non-verifiable transactions.

- Depending on the developer to spork whenever something goes wrong makes the sole developer a single point of failure.

- Giving the power to mint money to BOINC, an organisation which did not ask nor accepted this responsibility will automatically a target for hackers looking to earn crypto currency by hacking.

- Reducing block chain securing mining subsidies by 90% will effecitvely make the resources required to launch a 51% attack 90% less.







Alright, here are the FUD rules, for the FUD smell test.

I have a responsibility to give our investors the truth so they can make investing decisions on the truth.



If your post contains a biased LIE, its going to be deleted.

Here is an example of an unbiased statement:

"I believe the Biblepay Proof-of-dc implementation will centralize blockchain consensus by relying on a central authority - boinc- Rob how is that not true?"

vs.



FUD:

We are Making BOINC the central authority for deciding who gets Biblepay subsidies.





The second is a LIE because we are not.



One more requirement: Before posting about BOINC or Rosetta, please study the implementation. You cant be taken seriously if you do not understand what you are talking about.



I will respond to this FUD separately.











Alright, here are the FUD rules, for the FUD smell test.I have a responsibility to give our investors the truth so they can make investing decisions on the truth.If your post contains a biased LIE, its going to be deleted.Here is an example of an unbiased statement:"I believe the Biblepay Proof-of-dc implementation will centralize blockchain consensus by relying on a central authority - boinc- Rob how is that not true?"vs.FUD:We are Making BOINC the central authority for deciding who gets Biblepay subsidies.The second is a LIE because we are not.One more requirement: Before posting about BOINC or Rosetta, please study the implementation. You cant be taken seriously if you do not understand what you are talking about.I will respond to this FUD separately. Bible Pay 🕇

🕇 Announcement | Forum  Slack  Discord  Reddit  Twitter | SouthXChange

🕇 A Christian cryptocurrency | Supporting orphans through a decentralized autonomous charity 🕇

harrisvan87



Offline



Activity: 86

Merit: 0







NewbieActivity: 86Merit: 0 Re: BiblePay - New Coin Launch - Official Thread February 08, 2018, 05:12:46 PM

Last edit: February 08, 2018, 05:30:25 PM by harrisvan87 #4032

My wallet today can not turn on, with effort help from bbp community on discord who help me to find solution to fix but nothing work (Tks you so much Tmike)

https://imgur.com/YTeXl6k

Please help me to recover my wallet.

Seem like newbie can not post a picture.Sorry

The wallet.dat backed up Hi Rob, everyone and christant,My wallet today can not turn on, with effort help from bbp community on discord who help me to find solution to fix but nothing work (Tks you so much Tmike)Please help me to recover my wallet.Seem like newbie can not post a picture.SorryThe wallet.dat backed up

bible_pay



Offline



Activity: 1022

Merit: 215





Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords







Full MemberActivity: 1022Merit: 215Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords Re: BiblePay - New Coin Launch - Official Thread February 08, 2018, 05:19:18 PM

Last edit: February 08, 2018, 05:29:21 PM by bible_pay #4033 Please see inline:



FUD by Swongle:



- Bible pays can be used to set up Master Nodes effectifely granting voting rights to those who are able to mint coins.



-> The sanctuaries job is to vote on the authenticity of the distributed credit file(s) as a whole. Since the algorithm is ranked, no particular sanctuary could predetermine when it will be their job to perform the function. The chances as pointed out by Duffield for such attack are lower than .10%, because of the number required for a net yes. So the statement is misleading. The correct statement is "We as a network will trust 10% of the sanctuaries to verify the Distributed Computing files for authenticity". If one rogue actor fraudulently creates a file, 99% of the other sancs will vote it down. So in reality we are only going to assimilate the official file, created by the distributed boinc network. The users will be paid their fare share of cancer research based on this assimilated and voted file.





- Making BOINC a central authority for deciding who gets Bible pay subsidies making them a single point of failure and allowing for fraudulant non-verifiable transactions.



-> There will be no central point of failure in biblepay, because if the BOINC network or Rosetta goes down, Biblepay stays up while the heat-miners, the PoBH miners continue block checking. Next, there is a distributed web farm on the server side of Rosetta verifying the Cancer Solutions. (Not a single point of failure). We do not directly ask for your solution credit from those servers. Those servers have a backlog, and a proven 99.9% uptime, and simply approve work units in a queue. We actually ask the distributed network for the entire file so that those machines could be down and we could be UP on the DC side. The only way DC goes down is if 10% of our sanctuaries ALL fail to download the distributed computing credits, consecutively, once every 15 minutes for 23 hours. Then DC goes down. AND I Do Not have to send a Spork In to disable PODC. Its automatic. (More FUD).



- Depending on the developer to spork whenever something goes wrong makes the sole developer a single point of failure.



-> Actually for issues like complete network failure of Instant Send, Soft Forking, and Enabling the switch for PODC and Disabling PODC, I do have the right to Execute a SPORK, but that is because I am the sole github contributor. I started the github, and there is a certain inherent level of trust you must assume, that I will not insert a Virus into github, or do anything nefarious that will kill Biblepay. You have my word that I will never do anything to hurt biblepay, and this is an issue in all baby cryptos that have just been birthed: How many years did it take Sunny King to turn control over to "the community", or BlackCoin? A few years. I am in the process of interviewing devs right now. I promise that eventually, we will have 7 devs with spork signing rights (the good ones who know what they are doing).







- Giving the power to mint money to BOINC, an organisation which did not ask nor accepted this responsibility will automatically a target for hackers looking to earn crypto currency by hacking.



-> We will write reports in the RPC that we can export to the web to show the relationship between biblepay user, RAC, Magnitude, and ensure everything rolls up. There is a difference between blockchain coinbase minting and Distributed-Computing Rewards. The difference here is in the name of Cancer Research, I believe it is a Huge advantage for biblepay to reward DC users with blockchain rewards, in the form of our daily superblock. This question was posed as Risky and is also FUD. The answer paints a clearer picture of the intent of Biblepay.





- Reducing block chain securing mining subsidies by 90% will effecitvely make the resources required to launch a 51% attack 90% less.

-> Pure FUD. We use DGW, it was carefully designed to not include POL into the mix while reducing the reward, you cannot buy your way into a 51% attack in this scenario. You would certainly drive up the diff within 5 blocks of high hashpower, and you cannot take over biblepay with POW mining with our low nonce rule. It is a true and certain statement, that One Nefarious high hash individual who just hit us with 4 consecutive blocks, would NOT be able to solve block 5 because we only allow 200 hashes per second in the solution. Take a look at the code before making this heinously arrogant statement, and misleading everyone. The 51% attack liklihood on the POW side is more like : 80%, 33%, 11%, 1%, 0.10, .05, .001% for an individual with 75,000 PCs left dormant. Our diff would be : .50, 150, 2500, 8500, 65535, 256000, 1 million. They would not reach level 5 without failing in the attack.





Lastly I make a very important argument that Currently our Botnet has 93% of our hashpower, and they are in a stronger position of controlling our chains future now than they would be with a consensus change. The current "status quo" is what is broken - and its a carryover of the problem existing in bitcoin supermajority pools and ASICs. DC is part of the solution.









Bible Pay 🕇

🕇 Announcement | Forum  Slack  Discord  Reddit  Twitter | SouthXChange

🕇 A Christian cryptocurrency | Supporting orphans through a decentralized autonomous charity 🕇