Jump to content

NEWS
  • WELCOME TO CRYPTOCURRENCYTALK!
  • We've upgraded the website with a lot of new features!
  • 3 NEW THEMES! Click on the + Themes button above!
  • Notice about SOCIAL LINKS: UPDATE YOUR SOCIAL LINKS
  • New video section, add your videos: VIDEO SECTION
  • Advertising will be available shortly, hold tight.
  • If you have any issues with the new site, please submit a support ticket: SUPPORT

Should we Re-Base Gridcoin using this proposal, or should we stay with current codebase and fix it using the Roadmap 4.0 proposals?  

36 members have voted

  1. 1. Should we Re-Base Gridcoin using this proposal, or should we stay with current codebase and fix it using the Roadmap 4.0 proposals?

    • Re-Base Gridcoin using this proposal (a variation of Dash-Evolution/Bitcoin Core Nov 2017 with a Stakeminer)
      24
    • Stay with Current Code Base and fix it Piecemeal using Roadmap 4.0 Proposals
      9
    • Abstain (I do not wish to be involved)
      3


Recommended Posts

@Rob Halförd - (Gridcoin) What are you going to call your new altcoin? Since Gridcoin Research will most likely continue existing after you fork away (and we can't have two tokens both calling themselves "Gridcoin")..

 

It's disappointing to see that you've removed yourself from most of the developer channels on slack :(

 

Edit: Also, why more invalid forum polls?

Edited by C.M

^ Smash that upvote button! ;D

Follow me on:

Github   Twitter   Steemit   SoundCloud (Hangouts)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Status Update of Gridcoin III:

 

So the original tests (using my 3 month old Dash code) passed and at this point, I deleted and refreshed and started over with the Dash-Evolution November base for Gridcoin III.

 

After starting over, I wrote an export program that summarizes and consolidates all GRC balances (we have 33,500 distinct GRC balances over 1 GRC btw) into the new Genesis block. (I had to filter any balances below 1GRC to fit the balances into one block).  The block matches Prod (399MM total in the block).

 

I verified that GRC2s balance can be spent in GRC3 (by manually exporting my wallet key).  Note that although this version has all of the GRC2 balances in it, the wallet converter utility is not finished yet.

 

This version does stake and includes the PIVX stakeminer.

 

I am checking the code in so we have a current reference point as to where we are with this concept.

The github branch is here:

https://github.com/gridcoin/gridcoin

 

Note: Do not make any commits to this branch until myself and the dev team notifies that it is OK for public commits.

 

Marcos update:

Marco notified me he has a version ready of TCD to be tested.  Sorry Marco I havent been able to reply yet but Im looking forward to pulling it and testing it asap.

 

Next up on the ToDo list for me:

Im going to finish the wallet conversion rpc command in Grid2 and test it in Grid3.  (This lets you convert your existing wallet.dat to something that will work in Grid3).

Modify the block distribution characteristics to mimic the proposed (up to now) block distribution amounts and replace the current kitty.

Create a mocked up interface for the daily research budget, the induction of the budget and voting of the budget, and the emission of a fake superblock with research payments.

Integrate the fake TCD file into the fake superblock, so we can verify the superblock payment addresses and amounts.

Post the wiki article on how to create a neural network node.

Port the Gridcoin-POSE-Bulldog program into the gridcoin branch and test it.

Review Marco's TCD service and test it and begin integration.

Reach out to iFoggz to start designing the integration of the CPID associator page and the RPC reports.

Initialize the gitian builder for windows builds.

Create a web portal for weekly downloads of Grid3 so we can test as a community.

Create a windows build script and make a windows build to allow anyone here to test this branch, and update that build ~weekly, possibly ~daily.

 

Note: When we test Grid3 as a community, we *will* be able to run in Prod mode with fake GRC to ensure our balances are correct, and POW phase and POS phase, and block distribution and Research payments.

This is primarily to ensure there will be no surprises when cutting over (regarding legacy balances carrying over).

 

The POW phase in Grid3 is 200 blocks, and its using the internal CPU miner.  This is necessary to let the Genesis block (IE existing balances) mature.

At block 200 the stakeminer goes live.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, C.M said:

@Rob Halförd - (Gridcoin) What are you going to call your new altcoin? Since Gridcoin Research will most likely continue existing after you fork away (and we can't have two tokens both calling themselves "Gridcoin")..

 

It's disappointing to see that you've removed yourself from most of the developer channels on slack :(

 

Edit: Also, why more invalid forum polls?

Why would a new poll or this proposal be invalid?  If the GRC2 in-wallet poll (the one running in the wallet software) shows a high super-majority (as it is now) I feel that these three polls go hand-in-hand as these two subpolls are related to this mother project.

 

 

I said earlier, if support for this master proposal drops dangerously low, I would withdraw the proposal.  But the poll in the wallet for the master project shows strong support for this proposal (over 90%).

 

 

What do you mean altcoin?  Its either that the community likes this idea (IE over 75% like) and we go with Gridcoin 3 as a community or this is withdrawn.  Im not creating a fork of Gridcoin.

 

The branch name "Gridcoin" is the branch name, not the name of the wallet.  That name (of the new product for us) is TBD- if this will be Gridcoin 3, or Gridcoin-Evolution, or whatever.  The main point is when C-CEX is notified to upgrade mandatory upgrade, they are decommissioning the old GRC2 wallet and opening GRC3 for trading.

 

We have one ticker: GRC.

 

Regarding Slack, I didnt withdraw.  I just chatted with Marco a couple times over the last two days regarding TCD.  The issue is I have blown their historical buffer limit and I cant appear as a normal user unless I pay for a commercial plan.  I just sent him a message from a PC and it went through.  I can only read history on my mobile device since I have blown the buffer limit.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rob Halförd - (Gridcoin) said:

Thanks Shu,

 

Right, I see you view the continuous stake reward as "the source" for ROI for the investment component of Grid2, and the investment component of Grid3 is out of reach for an average investor.  

 

Maybe we should vote on the block breakdown also (for Grid3).  I personally dont have anything against raising the fixed stake reward component for the reasearcher and lowering the Neural Network reward component.  Even if it was 20% miner/20% NN node/60% researcher thats fine with me - for example.

 

To elaborate, if it was 20% miner, that means you would receive 20% of each block (IE 30 GRC flat) when you stake the block.  30grc would be held back for the neural network, and 90 would go to research.

 

The 30grc to the NN covers not only a network of nodes that download the boinc files, but are guaranteed to be online, had to invest their own escrow, and have static external IPs.

 

Regarding game machines on home networks, dont worry we will still have that "mix" regardless, as we have over 3000 researchers.  The normal researcher who is not investing in a Neural Node will still be there.  

 

I would like to make a distinction here.  The whole idea of proof-of-service is to require the NN node to have a static, external IP, open the firewall properly, and require servicing hundreds of INBOUND connections.

The gaming machines you refer to only make Outbound connections (generally) unless they configure the port forwarding in the firewall.  This is a huge difference, as that means Gridcoin by default has hundreds of square miles between full nodes.

When a full node opens the firewall, that node fills up with 1000 connections and keeps the entire network together by forwarding the missing blocks and tx.  It is very important.  So this is like having a city with police and fire, vs having a city with no resources around.

On vultr going down, thats really stretching it.  The NN does not have to go with vultr.  There are many cloud providers (AWS, droplets, etc), and a lot of NN owners already have a favorite cloud provider.  In addition vultr has several hosting branches, allows you to pick your closest city, and has redundancy, so when an issue occurs at one its not taking down the entire NN network.

 

I do want to say, I didnt choose Dash masternodes primarily for POSE.  I want to stress this:  I am sold on the governance model in regard to the code that exists to create a proposal, a budget, and vote the budget into a superblock.  This architecture in Grid3 is entirely focused on this part of the mechanism:

The detached NN creates a payment file (paying 50,000 GRC split among researchers) across 3000 CPIDs.  That file has to be loaded in the core as a superblock.  What this NN model does is provides the ecosystem allowing themselves to to vote in a daily budget (of 50,000 grc) for that daily file into a superblock and paying it, securely.  <- That is the primary reason for masternode technology.

 

 

 

Rob,

 

Your point is exactly right about nodes that are outbound connection only. However, there are some people (me included) that know what we are doing, set up the appropriate forwarding and configure "listen=1" in the configuration file to create a full node, and pay for high bandwidth service. I think the node should simply be required to be a full node (i.e. reachable externally - allow inboard connections), with the appropriate escrow, rather than to effectively require someone to use a hosting service. My guess is that there are a number of enthusiasts that fall into this category. You risk overcommercializing the nodes with a hard and fast fixed IP hosting service requirement.

 

By the way the average number of inboard connections is not in the hundreds, I think, unless the Dash Masternodes is a fully enmeshed network. For example, my GRC node currently has 36 connections (8 outbound and 28 inbound), while my Bitcoin Core client has 78 connections (8 outbound and 70 inbound).

 

Jim

 

Edited by jamescowens
Correct error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rob Halförd - (Gridcoin) said:

I said earlier, if support for this master proposal drops dangerously low, I would withdraw the proposal.  But the poll in the wallet for the master project shows strong support for this proposal (over 90%).

 

@Rob Halförd - (Gridcoin) The poll in the wallet is now showing almost 60% disapproval of your proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, jamescowens said:

 

Rob,

 

Your point is exactly right about nodes that are outbound connection only. However, there are some people (me included) that know what we are doing, set up the appropriate forwarding and configure "listen=1" in the configuration file to create a full node, and pay for high bandwidth service. I think the node should simply be required to be a full node (i.e. reachable externally - allow inboard connections), with the appropriate escrow, rather than to effectively require someone to use a hosting service. My guess is that there are a number of enthusiasts that fall into this category. You risk overcommercializing the nodes with a hard and fast fixed IP hosting service requirement.

 

By the way the average number of inboard connections is not in the hundreds, I think, unless the Dash Masternodes is a fully enmeshed network. For example, my GRC node currently has 36 connections (8 outbound and 28 inbound), while my Bitcoin Core client has 78 connections (8 outbound and 70 inbound).

 

Jim

 

 

@Rob Halförd - (Gridcoin)

I with Jim, I'm not exactly sure I understand the explicit need for a statistic IP address or dedicated server. This is a way to help avoid overtly centralized resources by still allowing the nerds to be part of the "master nodes"/NN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Rob Halförd - (Gridcoin) thanks for explaining this a bit further. I see the specific need for a more sophisticated block-structure and architecture that relies heavily on having a stable network for gridcoin available.

 

I'm still not personally a fan of the entire Masternode system, but at least in Gridcoin I can see the use of it more than in any other coin so far. Keep in mind though that 400.000GRC is a LOT of money and lowering this seems necessary to not exclude a large base of the community behind the project. 40.000GRC is still a super huge investment for many and ensures that nobody can just fire up an unreliable node that might go offline any minute, another important figure we definitely would need to vote on and come to a community agreement first before hammering down actual decisions imho...

 

Also, as it stands, the majority is against the proposal. I think we should keep in mind that we also haven't set a global percentage that needs to apply before a major code re-base can actually happen (at least none that I'm aware off). With other projects, the number is pretty high, along the lines of 70-85% of all votes of the network need to be FOR the proposal. This is definitely something we should set at one stage to make sure everyone feels treated fair in the process, no matter who "wins".

 

 

@jamescowens I wouldn't worry. From a protocol base I don't think they can just exclude any node because it switches IPs. That is correct, right? Any home-server user enthusiast should be able to continue to provide a full node service. Unless Dash has developed a restriction that I'm unaware off, I'm sure Rob could enlighten us more.

 

Wishing you all a pleasant running up to christmas,

Shu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Frank0051 said:

I do think it's a bit disingenuous for us to be praising one person with 56M in voting shares for swinging the vote when several us us have complained about the vote weighting.

 

Not to mention the vote could still be changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not over 'until the fat lady sings' ..

 

Rob, I believe you are a 'brilliant mind' and developer ..

 

Please could you try and become more a part of the community as at the moment you are sort of standing on a 'pedestal' and it does seem to me that not only are you looking down at us but we are looking up at you. I don't really know how to put this into wrds any better than that.

 

Your Gridcoin Community, it is yours as much as it is ours, has progressed a long way in the last year.

 

There is a large 'core community', of very dedicated Gridcoiners, who are trying their very best to fulfill the need to 'fire fight' problems whilst progessing this project down an equitable, secure socioeconomic eco friendly path.

 

We are aware we are far from perfect and realise that in order to achieve any of our longterm goals and ambitions for this project that we have work together utilising the synergy that a cyber community of this sort offers.

 

We have had and will continue to have disagreements. However in the long run, the majority of theses 'skirmishes' are resolved with time and in most cases the personalities involved are still talking to each other with the same commitment and dedication to shared goals.

 

I appeal to you to continue to stay active in the community and please would you consider joining one of the Gridcoin Community's bi-weekly hangouts on mumble.

 

We will 'bend over backwards' to facilitate any requirements you may have regarding times, security or any other matters that may concern you about joining the hangout.

 

The community members as a whole who would benefit from you revealing your vision of the future of the Gridcoin Project and I'm sure that there would be many questions that community members would like to ask.

 

Thanks for your work ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2017 at 1:12 PM, Mercosity said:

It's not over 'until the fat lady sings' ..

 

 

Rob:

 

As a stakeholder, I beg you to fix the wallet crashing issue.

 

Fix this and the whales will stay online and you will have your masternodes.

 

Do not discount us current stakeholders as individual forces.

 

We are willing to provide you what you need.

 

How much do we need?

 

How should we provide it?

 

Will we get the current Return on Our Investment (ROI) that we are already receiving?

 

I am assuming that this is what the current market is getting (and delivering) within their expectations?

 

I will be present if you offer a meeting. We can use our cumulative experience to bring Gridcoin to a Variable Cost Efficient. 

 

I am a cost accountant, with the necessary skills to provide assertions to investors within the "US Market".

 

Many Thanks,

 

Gridie

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gridie said:

 

Rob:

 

As a stakeholder, I beg you to fix the wallet crashing issue.

 

Fix this and the whales will stay online and you will have your masternodes.

 

Do not discount us current stakeholders as individual forces.

 

We are willing to provide you what you need.

 

How much do we need?

 

How should we provide it?

 

Will we get the current Return on Our Investment (ROI) that we are already receiving?

 

I am assuming that this is what the current market is getting (and delivering) within their expectations?

 

I will be present if you offer a meeting. We can use our cumulative experience to bring Gridcoin to a Variable Cost Efficient. 

 

I am a cost accountant, with the necessary skills to provide assertions to investors within the "US Market".

 

Many Thanks,

 

Gridie

 

 

The upcoming 3.7.0.0 release will fix at least one, possibly two, silent shutdowns which affected Windows users only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using CRYPTOCURRENCYTALK.COM, you agree to our Terms of Use.