HF 6
During the past few days, we have been working on deploying hardfork 6 of the Blurt blockchain.
We were mostly there, but we were having trouble building the Docker image for the Raspberry Pi version of the witness nodes.
We held off executing the fork as to not leave Raspberry Pi witnesses behind.
Tonight, we were able to fix the problem. It was down to a typo as is almost always the case when programs don't work correctly.
After the problem was fixed, we let a few witnesses with Raspberry Pis do the upgrade to be sure that it was working correctly. Then once we knew everything was in order, we proceeded with the hardfork.
This new hardfork will bring the 25/75 split for author rewards where, by default, posts will pay the author 25% liquid BLURT and 75% Blurt Power (It still might need to be configured on the front end for this to work). It will reduce the need for power downs.
The reward curve has been adjusted again. You can read about that in this post by @rycharde.
What's Next?
Now that HF 6 is out of the way, I'll continue to focus on bringing back the front ends. I first have to get the image server going, then I can bring blurt.world back online with a few fixes and enhancements.
I will be working on that in the next few days.
Well, this was just a quick update to let you know what's going on.
That's all from me for now.
Until next time, have a great one!
Vote for my witness!
I run a witness node on the Blurt blockchain and I would really appreciate your witness vote.
You can vote for my witness by going here.
Dear @rycharde,
I know that 2 or 3 days ago the bug of HF5 was fixed.
After that the pending rewards were displayed correctly.
For me for example a 100% vote with 95% vote power resulted with the error circa 2400 BLURT.
After the correction of 2 to 3 days, about 1200 BLURT were displayed.
Up to this point everything is correct.
But now that the HF6 with your changes is effective, only about 700 BLURT are displayed.
That's 500 BLURT less!
I suspect that you did not intend such an effect with the change of the reward curve.
@jacobgadikian @megadrive
I think the intended effect was to reduce the disparity between accounts with huge BP and those with very little BP, so that low BP accounts would have bigger votes and high BP accounts would have a smaller vote so to bring everyone closer to the middle. Maybe the effect was greater than anticipated, but it could also take a couple of weeks to settle and reach an equilibrium.
Thank you!
But I don't think @rycharde intended it to be so drastic.
Probably not. If it turns out to be too much, we can change it so it's halfway between what it was and what it is now whenever we do the next hardfork.
The hyperbolic nature of the reward curve means it has quite a sharp bend as it morphs from minnow to whale. The way to create a gentler curve is to rewrite the formula and turn some of the numbers into parameters - not just the content-constant.
Now that we have confidence in controlling the reward engine, this can be done in the future - NOT to enrich the whales further, as such, but to be responsive as the whole Blurt economy grows. With compounding, whales grow much faster in real BLURT terms anyway - even if absolutely linear rewards.
One thing people forget is that the rewards are calculated for the whole post - we talk about "our vote" but the curve operates on the total, hence a popular post will still get slightly more than the sun of individual votes.
That is definitely the way to go. Then we can bend the curve whichever way we want without having to write a bunch of code. I can definitely get behind that.
Thanks! Re-engineering the engine while it is running has meant doing small steps and seeing that they work. I wanted to parametrise the formulas some months ago but some were more afraid of "breaking the system". This will also be useful for the idea of a separate staking pool with two slightly different curves. This idea: https://blurtter.com/blurtopian/@rycharde/graphs-of-proposed-solutions-to-the-investor-v-blogger-dilemma
Maybe you forgot how drastic the increase was for large votes compared to low votes at HF5. We are just going back to (almost) before. There remains a small curve upwards, but small.
I hope you enjoyed the large votes for a few weeks :-)
Dear @rycharde,
I'm only replying briefly here, as I'll probably comment under your last post. Or I will post an article.
This is exactly what I have been arguing against for 3 years!
We had several times from the majority of users the following wishes.
There was also consensus on this among the founders:
No reduction of small votes
no reduction of big votes
no influence of the vote value by the time of the vote giving
no influence on the vote value by votes of other users on the same posting
no influence of the vote value by the sum of the votes on a single posting
Simply put:
I think the majority of users feel a "Proportional Curve":
most fair
most logical
easiest to understand
I will ask you in other posts what arguments there are from you against a "Proportional Curve".
@jacobgadikian @megadrive
What if I told you there's magic under the hood that I don't fully understand, and that's why we have @rycharde?
I do not think He's trying to purge the whales but I'm going to ask him.
Personally I don't call it proportional I call it linear but I get your point completely. I think that this has something to do with the reactivity that he was trying to build in.
Also I want to tell you one to one:
We are going to have a better outcome with reward math with him doing it than with me doing it.
With that said, I think we are now faced with quite a dilemma on the price side of things.
Personally I'm a vast portion of the order books.
There is no "purge".
We have merely gone back to pre-HF5, but people have short memories.
This is what "proportional" looks like. Let the reward pool react and we will be back to the economics of a couple of months ago.
I had less BP pre HF5, yet voting when curating was greater then than I am experiencing now. If those with more BP are negatively affected then it sounds like Powering down may be part of the answer for us. I cannot understand why reducing voting power for those with more BP helps anyone. I do not know what the definition of a whale is here, but it sure sounds like they or any one with a sizable amount of BP are getting hit, which also hits those with smaller amount of BP when we are curating.
And now we wait for a period of time to "let the reward pool react.." sounds like it is an unknown; a gamble that it will do so.
What do you mean by "now"? You mean today after HF6 or a week ago before it?
There is no gamble, the reward pool is an algorithm. Blurt has seen this at least 4 times now, I think.
https://blurtter.com/blurt/@rycharde/blurt-hard-fork-6-revisited
To me it feels like those with higher amounts of BP are taking the hit... maybe purging is a good way to look at it. No matter, but in that decreasing of voting value my curators take a hit on their commissions, and those we try to support which includes many with minimal BP will also take a hit when we curate their posts.
My experience here on Blurt has been that those with a sizable amount of BP helped those with limited BP. It is why I decreased my holdings on the other platforms and built 5 accounts here for curating. Now I am doubting my decision because the small user will receive a smaller reward and my curators will also see a decrease in earnings. None of which are "whales".
I guess give it two weeks.
I trust @rycharde.
I may have to significantly reduce my BP in each of my curation accounts so they are not so large. That is if large amount of BP means our votes take a hit. It is a lot of BP to have minimal impact on our curating. maybe if the price of Blurt was at a dollar it would not make a big difference but it's value has not be at even 1 cent in a long time.
I trust what I see...and the impact is what I see.
that is awful, and if that is the case, ping me, call me on discord, this is exactly what I do not want.
OK to give it the two weeks?
Really tho if you're in that circumstance, that's bad and I'll work to correct it.
thanks for giving me that example.
The value of votes has decreased, even for small accounts. Even if we had the same values as before the hard fork 5 we must consider that in the last 2 months the accounts have grown in BP. We still have to update the front ends plus 2 weeks to wait for the real values to be shown.
I don't really know how the math works but at first glance it doesn't look very good.
It would also help to read and understand the weekly economic indicators I publish. You will see there that the upper yield is much larger than the lower yield - the former has now dropped.
hello sir saboin. I see great work. Hopefully blurt continues to develop well and is increasingly known to the world.
I also thank you very much for the support you have given so far. you are very generous. May God always give you health and abundant sustenance.
I refrained from using my account because of the fee but this should be a nice reason for me to start using it.
That was one of the main reasons for switching the the 25/75 split.
@saboin, many thanks for your many and great work!
Also do you know if wBlurt is coming back? I don't like centralized exchanges which need KYC and prefer DEX's like hive or ethereum but I don't want to risk downvotes on hive if I'm seen buying Blurt.
I strongly doubt that wBlurt will come back. Someone hacked it and stole all of the wBlurt there was. So I think people wouldn't trust it even if it did come back.
I don't know where this fear mongering is coming from, but it's not from me or the foundation.
The people on Hive are not going to start downvoting your posts just for simply buying BLURT. If you're seen farming or milking Hive and selling out to Blurt, they might. But as long as you're not abusing, you should be in the clear.
I hang out regularly in the Discord servers of the anti-abuse/downvoting groups and that is definitely not one of the topics of discussion.
When I used to use discord I heard that a lot. I quit it and don't know if thats said anymore. Most of it was from @offgridlife but I never saw downvotes on his Hive side, but I don't know if he had other accounts getting downvoted. Thanks for the heads up.
You can buy BLURT or any other coin of your choice without any sort of downvotes on Hive. That's both absurd and demented. If someone is actually doing that they've completely lost their mind.
Ok, you should tell @offgridlife to stop pushing that narrative on the discord then. Its one of the reasons I haven't used blurt, maybe I'll move to my real account.
Which Narrative ??? I am recommending people buy Blurt every day on Hive-Engine, Ionomy etc.... I myself buy Blurt every few minutes on Hive-Engine.com and I don’t get any downvotes for that. It’s only when I write a post promoting Blurt on Hive that I get into trouble.
Also you can promote Blurt anywhere else on the Internet without any problems. Actually I earn a ton of BitcoinCash promoting Blurt on Noise.cash... YouTube, Theta, Twitter etc etc ... I also earn hundreds of Steem, SBD, TRX promoting Blurt on Steemit.... If you are going to mention Blurt on Hive use some alt account.
That must be why. I don't really know too much except you said you got downvoted and thats why I have never interacted.
If you are on Discord you will see that I recommend buying a little Blurt on the dips .... on Hive- Engine and Ionomy. I have mentioned that whenever I have mentioned Blurt on Hive or Leo Finance I get very angry comments and downvotes. So to avoid getting g angry comments and downvotes I recommend you don’t mention Blurt on Hive or LEO... but all other places LOVE Blurt
Congratulations, your post has been curated by @dsc-r2cornell. You can use the tag #R2cornell. Also, find us on Discord
Felicitaciones, su publicación ha sido votada por @ dsc-r2cornell. Puedes usar el tag #R2cornell. También, nos puedes encontrar en Discord