Author Topic: OpenLedger propose Bitshares 3.0 enhancements  (Read 8113 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ivandev

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Dear community. Due to my mistake, I’ve done poll, without possibility to change vote, while announced possibility to add new options for voting during discussion. Sincerely apologize for inconvenience, but seems the only way to get fair final decision is creating new poll with revoting (option with trustless gateway is included). Voting in current thread will be frozen and discussion is closed.
We invite you all to a new thread - follow next link:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,25187.0.html

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1917
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
I feel what we are talking about are:

1. to which direction should Bitshares evolve while the other blockchains evolve rapidly?

2. how to implement the new change and fund the development?

after go through this thread and some relevant posts, I tend to agree the ideas come from https://steemit.com/bitshares/@slavix/beos-bitshares-on-eos-alternative-proposal-for-bitshares-3-0 :  make an EOS clone with BTS as a base token.

maybe smart contracts and VM are the most important factors for the next step evolution of Bitshares, however, EVM is designed specially on Ethereum blockchain, I don't think it can be smoothly integrated into Bitshares blockchain, the obvious difference between the 2 blockchains base will make this process tough, so why not adopt EOS VM, which is also built on Graphene base, instead in this scenario?

thinking continully, if we need to adopt most of the good features introduced by EOS, why not just clone EOS and make BTS the base token? and realize the current Bitshares features as native smart contracts on BEOS (Bitshares on EOS)

to avoid the potential risks and fit the possibility that there is no consensus from community, one selection is to hard fork BTS to 2 parts, one classical BTS and one BEOS, like BTC and BCC, then each one can still prefer what he likes most and the better one will emerge with time elapse.

A worker proposal can be created to fund the development and implementation of this, after a skilled team is organized.



 
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline karnal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1068
    • View Profile
... confidential transactions? On by default with opt-out?

Offline fractalnode

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
    • View Profile

3) Creation of Fee Backed Asset.
The idea of creating the FBA was proposed back in 2015, but was never implemented.

AFAIK FBA's have been implemented. The only current use-case is STEALTH, i. e. part of the fees for stealth transfers are used to buy back the STEALTH asset.

If you mean something else, please expand.

I think it's about creating the ability to create new FBA tokens. On the other hand, I think there was a reason why this possibility was blocked or abandoned. Surely someone remembers

Offline wdfh

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
I'd like to see the option to trade all alt coins on Bitshares, then we would become the go to DEX for any trade.

Is this possible?

Offline bitcoinerS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • View Profile
I proposed Bitshares adopt EOS blockchain tech in this post
https://steemit.com/bitshares/@slavix/should-bitshares-adopt-eos-blockchain
It is relevant to this discussion. Please comment with your ideas.

I think Bitshares should migrate to EOS blockchain tech by cloning it and making BTS base token.
This can be done in steps. Both Bitshares 2.0 and Bitshares 3.0 (on EOS) can run in parallel during transition phase.
BTS tokens on both blockchains would be interchangeable 1 to 1.

BEOS - Alternative proposal for Bitshares 3.0
https://steemit.com/bitshares/@slavix/beos-bitshares-on-eos-alternative-proposal-for-bitshares-3-0
« Last Edit: October 24, 2017, 05:19:21 am by bitcoinerS »
>>> approve bitcoiners

Offline pc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1530
    • View Profile
    • Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko?
  • BitShares: cyrano
Thank you very much, great initiative IMO!

1) Implementing a virtual machine (like Ethereum’s’ Virtual Machine) into Graphene.

I'm very sceptic about porting a VM to BTS. I believe that in the end it means that we have to sacrifice our speed, because the problem here is that VMs simply don't scale. We're still one of the fastest blockchains out there - sacrificing that for something that in the end would be no better than ETH would be a very bad move IMO.

2) Implementation of the Atomic Swap mechanism.

Not sure if I understand what you mean - are we talking about Atomic Cross--Chain Trading (ACCT)?

In that case I think that this would be a great feature to have. It could provide an actual trustless gateway (as opposed to a delegate-controlled sidechain/gateway) between BTC and bitBTC, and most altcoins out there. The speed of such trades is mostly determined by the speed of the other chain (read: slow), which is why I think that people wouldn't use it for everyday trading but more to move funds into and out of our chain. For everyday trading they would use out built-in high-speed DEX.

It could also be implemented with relatively little effort (read: low cost) I think.


3) Creation of Fee Backed Asset.
The idea of creating the FBA was proposed back in 2015, but was never implemented.

AFAIK FBA's have been implemented. The only current use-case is STEALTH, i. e. part of the fees for stealth transfers are used to buy back the STEALTH asset.

If you mean something else, please expand.
Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko? ISBN 978-3-8442-6568-2 http://bitcoin.quisquis.de

Offline severo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
When will any official proposal appear on bsips?

Offline ivandev

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
After reading abit's post I realize that I misread the proposal. I was indeed thinking of sidechains for a trustless gateway and not atomic swaps. :-[
So, simply change your vote)

Offline Frodo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: frodo
After reading abit's post I realize that I misread the proposal. I was indeed thinking of sidechains for a trustless gateway and not atomic swaps. :-[

Offline ivandev

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Dear Abit and Johnny, thanks for detailed and reasonable feedback. We considered proposal to make decentralized gateway, but didn't include in last update. For now, I see real demand. Moreover,  I guess, working conception will be useful on EOS also. Thanks for links with BM conception, usefull. I'm adding this poll option and anybody (including already voted) can vote for this one.

And I want to emphasize, that we do not split goals and interests on "our" and "not our" (initiate wasn't born because of particular business reasons). The main idea is working together with community, but not against. So, we will rely on peoples' opinion in the end.

yvv, we're updating gateway services (wallets) one by one, so, very soon,  you will see extremely stable BTC, ETH and its SContracts and some BTC based currencies.

Offline yvv

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
Quote
The strategic goal of OpenLedger is to create such a platform which will outpace the competition and allow for the creation of a truly decentralized and trusted digital economy.

Greate! Than why don't you start with improving your gateway, because there are quite a lot of complains in this forum. If you could provide a gateway between bitAssets and their underlying assets, that would be great too.

Offline severo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile

The idea is to take ETH virtual machine (simply because it's working and well-tested), adjust and integrate exactly inside of BitShares. It will not support ETH, but will work only with BitShares ecosystem currencies and assets.


Aha! Great! we are going to phagocyte the ETH functionalities. I like it.

Offline severo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
If you want to swap BTC with OPEN.BTC, why not do it via OpenLedger's gateway? It needs trust from the first place. If you want to swap BTC with BitBTC, there will be a fee involved, and may have liquidity issue. If you want to swap BTC with BTS or other token, it will be a mess. BitShares has on-chain order books, which IMHO should not be weaken by any means. That said, we are an exchange, OTC markets are our competitor.
We have really understood it well. There is no need to use a trusted third party, if the blockchain can do that job. That is part of the concept of Bitshares and, in fact, of all the cryptocurrencies. The gateways have not solved the liquidity problem of the Smartcoins, but a direct exchange in the DEX (BTC by BitBTC and ETH by BitETH) could do much to solve the problem. There is no danger that operations will exit the DEX. Once you have BitBTC, BitETH, etc. trading will be faster and cheaper than in exchanges that only operate with Atomic Swaps.

« Last Edit: October 23, 2017, 12:29:22 pm by erizo »

Offline JonnyB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 636
    • View Profile
    • twitter.com/jonnybitcoin
1.) Trustless BTC gateway, (AKA Sidechains) would do more good for bitshares than anything imo.

- Every trade that happens on the Bitshares DEX is an atomic swap. This is different than the cross chain atomic swap you are suggesting.
- Cross chain atomic swaps aren't really compatible with BitShares as Abit points out.
- Stealth is a Fee backed asset I believe.
- Implementing the dividend feature that peerplays have already developed would make sense.
- EOS is going to be the VM graphene chain. If it works well we can cherry pick the code when its built and tested.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2017, 12:21:52 pm by JonnyBitcoin »
I run the @bitshares twitter handle
twitter.com/bitshares