Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
In some cases (like mine) it got approved because there is currently no other proposal put forward by CNX.
E.g. if you turned Market Maker Incentivization into a worker proposal, I'd vote for it instead of the stealth proposal.
May I suggest you represent voting stake as "percent of active" vs "percent of shares".
Also I would be very interested in seeing a measure of total stake claimed in BTS 2... vs unclaimed stake from BTS 1 over time.
It looks like 20.3% of stake is voting and another 20 some percent is held in exchanges.
Why not use bitusd ? @onceuponatime
if you use bitUSD , our BTS system can benefit from this dealJust out of curiosity..... The 45K or 50K that onceuponatime was willing to put up .....was that in the form of Bitcoin,USD or BTS ?
Bank wire transfer of US dollars.
Just out of curiosity..... The 45K or 50K that onceuponatime was willing to put up .....was that in the form of Bitcoin,USD or BTS ?
They don't need a quantum computer to screw up bitshares. They just need to bribe the majority of witnesses. This wouldn't cost a lot.
FYI, I am currently collecting proposals and have them written down in a github repository:
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/blob/master/bsip-0008.md -- Privacy Mode
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/blob/master/bsip-0007.md -- FBA
Those are still in draft mode @onceuponatime but I would like use them to represent the idea to shareholders to have them vote on the worker, if you agree
I think that CNX would beat him to market by a long shot, and his technology, coming out later, would have to be better and/or less expensive to gain traction, right?
Is there a plan for promoting your FBA?
This thread just got real interesting; the first competitor to CNX capable of serious development.
Does this mean Anonymint & CNX are going to bid against each other for OnceUpon's $45K?
Is OnceUpon willing to consider Anonymint's bid, and is the timing an issue?
Anonymint, I hope you consider what bytemaster said about the FBA route here in the BitShares ecosystem being more lucrative than launching your own coin and all that entails.
Myinvestmentpurchase of software and its implementation would be from CNX because I have had years to evaluate the characters of the principals and trust them completely (as I have to because the technology is way over my head). If CNX wants to subcontract the work to Anonymint, or hire him, that is their business.
That makes perfect sense. So even IF anonymint were to submit a worker proposal and try to compete with CNX, you wouldn't be interested in such an arrangement. I get it, I do see the wisdom in that.
I'm not saying that is anonymint's intention, I just saw it as a possibility.
Puppies is also right, anonymint may be capable of coding such an important and complex feature, but his skills in DPoS / BitShares are more of an unknown. At this stage of BitShares (im)maturity there is added risk in getting a 3rd party involved, so a CNX code review / audit would be prudent.
was there a mumble today?
This thread just got real interesting; the first competitor to CNX capable of serious development.
Does this mean Anonymint & CNX are going to bid against each other for OnceUpon's $45K?
Is OnceUpon willing to consider Anonymint's bid, and is the timing an issue?
Anonymint, I hope you consider what bytemaster said about the FBA route here in the BitShares ecosystem being more lucrative than launching your own coin and all that entails.
6. The Initialization Package shall modify the blockchain to make the Privacy Mode feature available to users.Could you elaborate on the "Initialization Package" and the statement above?
7. The Initialization Package shall make provision for the creation of generic Fee Based Assets (FBA) and set the fee for suchQuote8. A GUI shall be provided in the OpenLedger and Light wallets to allow ordinary users to easily use the Privacy Mode features.If a GUI is to be developed for OpenLedger specifically, why wouldn't you ask
for fund from them as well? Either they take part in the funding, or you should
replace OpenLedger with "web wallet". In the end, OL is free to use the feature
implemented, but I don't see why they should be part of the contract between YOU
and CNX!
Cheers
@Stan
This wording is from Stan. Perhaps he can give an elaboration of his intention.
Which wording was mine? (I hardly ever say "cheers".)
6. The Initialization Package shall modify the blockchain to make the Privacy Mode feature available to users.Could you elaborate on the "Initialization Package" and the statement above?
7. The Initialization Package shall make provision for the creation of generic Fee Based Assets (FBA) and set the fee for suchQuote8. A GUI shall be provided in the OpenLedger and Light wallets to allow ordinary users to easily use the Privacy Mode features.If a GUI is to be developed for OpenLedger specifically, why wouldn't you ask
for fund from them as well? Either they take part in the funding, or you should
replace OpenLedger with "web wallet". In the end, OL is free to use the feature
implemented, but I don't see why they should be part of the contract between YOU
and CNX!
Cheers
