[Passed] Proposal to fund development of NuBox (Peerbox port)

the motion isn’t all that long, it’s just the bottom of the OP.

When peerbox was launched I was very excited but 2~3 years later, I am not sure of the benefits.

  • marketing wise
  • security wise
  • utility wise
  • business wise
    for the peercoin network

You mean the Nu network?

I meant first peerbox for the PPC network, before considering nubox.


for me the main benefit is to be able to mint on a dedicated low power system, securely imo.

Let me also remind everyone that Jordan previously said that he does not support cold minting at least in its current form and that he would support something like Peerbox being made to protect NuShares while minting. Here is the quote…

1 Like

How does it compare to my win7 under Tor?
I am interested also in the current distribution of Peercoin minting machines – How does Peerbox fare?

1 Like

Keep in mind that Peerbox hasn’t really been easy for people to install until now, so that most likely contributed to limited adoption under Peercoin.

win7 isnt supported by microsoft anymore iirc.
peerbox is installed on raspberry pi, there is also x86 available, you can install on debian/ubuntu.
also has tor option
recently with the new version of peerbox the peercoin PoS difficulty went from about 10 to 15 in about a week. (maybe should have explained, since the fork last year it wasn’t possible to mint with peerbox until this new version)

ps. 5 watt powerconsumption vs. how much your system consumes


A bit on the fence with this one. I think it is important to increase the number of minters and nodes on the network.
I understand that this proposal would contribute to that in three ways:

  • Decrease the cost of running a node / minting
  • Simplifying setting up such a node.
  • Improving the security of the minting node

Justifying the 4000 NBT would imo require an increase of at least 100 nodes. The alternative would be to give $40 away for 100 users and have them find their way to set up a node. No guarantees they would do so and it would be a one-off.

I’m wrestling with the value of the security part. How much is peace of mind worth over existing solutions (Windows or Linux desktops)?

To make this work and have decent adoption rates very clear step-by-step fool-proof instructions needs to be published. What I have seen from Peerbox was that it is not that straightforward and involves command-line literacy. @peerchemist Is there room for improvement?


Do we have users in this thread that state that they will actually use this nubox thing?
As software becomes more complex and needs frequent interaction, a single powerful rig
is the most appropriate solution. Personally i am running more than 5 wallet in my main rig 24/7,
i would never use 5 Rpis for them, and vps is out of the question due to security reasons.

The port of Peerbox function would support that, just concerned about the ease of use of this.

It is also a single point of failure

I would consider using this when I can easily access and view via Windows/xwindows a window to see my RPI health/activity on my main rig and the ability to enter Peerbox functions in the same window.

You must have seen wrong :smiley: instructions are clear as a day and far, far simpler than this: https://docs.nubits.com/nu-raspberry-minting/ .
Calling it command line literacy is stretching it, it is basic copy/paste.

On what kind of improvement are you referring to? As motion suggests NuShareholders are able to provide input on development with ideas and suggestions if they are retained in reasonable limits.
Long-term there is absolutely room for all kinds of improvement and I do have all kinds of ideas, however 4k is not going to cover it. We can discuss porting back all future changes from Peerbox to NuBox sometime in the future.

I have proposed this motion as an intro for our future collaboration, as @Sentinelrv has already understood in the comments above.

Don’t know what to expect honestly.[quote=“peerchemist, post:75, topic:3753”]
it is basic copy/paste.

Here is one idea:

Another one would be the ability to just start one interactive bash/command line script to make it as simple and foll proof as possible. More advanced is a nice GUI, but I can imagine that such a thing is at another level requiring more work.

Is this such interactive fool proof command line utility:

pchem@debian8:~$ peerbox -h
usage: peerbox [-h] [-version] [-info] [-balance] [-public] [-stdout]
[-health] [-rates] [-start] [-stop] [-autostart [AUTOSTART]]
[-tor] [-restart] [-mint] [-addr] [-send [SEND [SEND …]]]

Show information on Peerbox.

optional arguments:
-h, --help show this help message and exit
-version print Peerbox version.
-info equal to “ppcoind getinfo” with some extras
-balance print balance
-public show info with omitted private data
-stdout dump data to stdout, use to pipe to some other program
-health compare local blockchain data with ppc.blockr.io as
-rates current average PPC exchange rates in USD and BTC
-start start Peerbox
-stop stop Peerbox
-autostart [AUTOSTART]
make Peerbox autostart at boot time
-tor start Peerbox with Tor
-restart restart Peerbox
-mint unlock Peercoin wallet for minting.
-addr shows all associated addresses.
-send [SEND [SEND …]]
send Peercoins; -send ADDRESS AMMOUNT


So you are basically proposing using peerbox utility trough ssh, which is in the window of your main rig.

That would be a very basic version, I was actually referring to a GUI. I know using SSH or any connection compromises security, but with the requirement to vote I think it is important for NuShareholders to have a simple interface.

1 Like

My reasoning that with this scheme voting is quite simple.
I agree with you that mass adoption will require a gui, maybe something like this but implemented properly and with security in mind. However you must agree that this grant will not cover development of something like that specifically for Nu. It will have to be implemented for Peerbox first and than back-ported to Nu sometime in the future.

Such a Peerbox dashboard is indeed what I was looking for.

What would that add in terms of cost? Could you provide an estimate. I’m prepared to invest in Peerbox for Nu, but like to have an understanding where we end up in the imo ideal target state (with GUI).

I am not sure at this point. I can not promise anything and can not even propose some number which would cover development costs.
All I can say is that I will keep working on this as much as my other errands allow.

I’m prepared to invest in Peerbox for Nu, but like to have an understanding where we end up in the imo ideal target state (with GUI).

I will get there, easy. No need for direct investment.
However expanding Peerbox into Nu territory would help with user base and funding for continual development.

Peerbox was easier to install and get started (and much better security) than compiling yourself. I have tried both. The old peerbox was not so good if you want to tinker with things because of the controls of ppcoind were in many places and the OS was not mainstream. But the new peerbox is supposed to have better arranged controls and use raspbian. So I think nubox has its value and if peerchemist can offer a period of accepting limited feature-improvement request and it can be maintained it’s worth teh 4000 nbt cost.