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.


Messages - VoR0220

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 20
46
Technical Support / BitUSD in graphene UI?
« on: July 22, 2015, 02:42:27 am »
I've been looking to create a new asset...so far the button is not working....is there already something set up for bitUSD or will I have to go about this manually? There is so far nothing in the cookbook regarding this to my knowledge. Any help?

47
Technical Support / Re: Trying to recreate the Graphene GUI
« on: July 22, 2015, 01:16:01 am »
yup...it appears that it is working now...kind of. I'm gonna explore.

48
Am I hallucinating? The config file seems to have changed since I last pulled from the github....

and now I can't seem to connect the witness node. There are a lot of requests being sent out to different IP addresses with the website "pool.ntp.org" being a request I am seeing.

Anybody want to enlighten me? Should I just be patient and wait? I am trying to get my node to start making blocks. Not sure what each of these new commands mean for my attempt to do that.

EDIT: let me try deleting the config file first....I should have tried that first.

EDIT2: Yup, I'm crazy...that worked.

49
Technical Support / Re: Trying to recreate the Graphene GUI
« on: July 20, 2015, 04:15:25 am »
Try this...

1. Go to explorer - account
2. Find Nathan and click
3. Click Link button on the left

I don't have any of that. I'm literally looking at a gray backdrop....

I think this error in the web dir might have something to do with it:

"ERROR in ./app/components/Transfer/Invoice.jsx
Module not found: Error: Cannot resolve module 'lzma' in /home/vor0220/graphene-ui/web/app/components/Transfer
 @ ./app/components/Transfer/Invoice.jsx 53:12-27"

50
I will join your campaign, if only to amass more of my investment.

51
Technical Support / Re: Trying to recreate the Graphene GUI
« on: July 20, 2015, 03:38:04 am »
Did you run witness node?

Yes. I got everything running....The config file looks to be set. The witness node is running. But the localhost only shows a gray screen (looks to be the background to the test shots I've been seeing but without any of the options or anything written on that background). Here's the html:

Code: [Select]
<!DOCTYPE html>
<!-- saved from url=(0022)http://localhost:8080/ -->
<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
    <meta charset="utf-8">
    <!--<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width"/>-->
    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no">
    <title>Graphene UI</title>
    <link rel="icon" type="image/x-icon" href="http://localhost:8080/favicon.ico">
    <link rel="stylesheet" href="http://localhost:8080/app.css">
</head>
<body>
<main id="content"></main>
<script src="./Graphene UI_files/app.js"></script>


</body></html>

52
Technical Support / Re: Trying to recreate the Graphene GUI
« on: July 20, 2015, 03:09:03 am »
Yes it runs locally, there are instructions in the repo. It's in a separate repo from the toolkit: graphene-ui

I tried following the instructions. Not getting me to where I want to be. Do I get the GUI from the Cli or Web directory?

The web directory.

I've updated the README, let me know if anything still needs to be clarified.

Well I think I'm on the right track now. But I'm getting a blank gray screen. Might this be from not having a user account besides Nathan created? Or should it not work anyways?

53
Technical Support / Re: Trying to recreate the Graphene GUI
« on: July 19, 2015, 01:06:06 am »
Yes it runs locally, there are instructions in the repo. It's in a separate repo from the toolkit: graphene-ui

I tried following the instructions. Not getting me to where I want to be. Do I get the GUI from the Cli or Web directory?

54
Technical Support / Trying to recreate the Graphene GUI
« on: July 18, 2015, 02:23:41 am »
Is this in the new version? I can't seem to recreate it...am I supposed to run this on a local host to see the GUI? Let me know.

55
General Discussion / Re: Status Update
« on: July 12, 2015, 02:59:47 pm »
I could ask some of the faculty at my old university if they are interested. I'm not sure that they'd bite, but I'm certain that they're interested. That and they teach almost universally low level c++, IBM assembly and mainframe. Getting them into the boost aspects might be very very good. I also just so happen to be on very good terms with the head of the department of computer science there and I think he might be looking to update the program.

56
Code: [Select]
Are you still waiting for your POW transaction to confirm,
or are you already discussing sub-10 secs block confirmation times?

Yes. We are discussing that. I'd prefer we do it securely.

57
No, I think the best case scenario will be around 3 or 4 seconds. It all depends on how quickly the database commitment process can be done. In other words, how much can it be done in parallel, and even if it is mostly serial, are modern processors fast enough to consistently generate that root hash in less than a second (meaning even for very heavy database modifications). If so, and assuming each block contains enough signatures from a (super) majority of the witnesses, either through including a signature from each witness in every block or using a threshold signature scheme to reduce block chain bloat (although when we are at the scale of 100K TPS on average, an extra 100 signatures in every block is negligible), then I think it can be brought down to 3 block intervals (i.e. 3 seconds).

well....that's a damn shame. It seems I may have obsessed over this proposal for nothing. Then again, there may be further applications for this idea...if we wanted to resurrect DNS in particular.

Quote
Also, I think there is plenty of incentive for the wallet hosts to run their full nodes (they get payment from their customers directly and/or from customer referrals). And there is of course enough incentive for the active witnesses to run full nodes since they get paid by the blockchain. But I do worry a little about all the other full nodes we would like to have participating in the network. Not the least of which are all those standby witnesses we want to make sure are ready to go at moments notice.


How are they incentivized by being paid by the blockchain? Why couldn't they just do this through a web wallet and refer people to the network? Is there some added benefit to running a full node in this scenario?

58
General Discussion / Re: Hangout Attendance (Brownie PTS)
« on: July 11, 2015, 06:24:32 pm »
vor0220 was there!!!

59
You don't think it is at all possible to bring the confirmation down to 2 seconds tops in the 2.0 setup? I agree with your analysis about the witnesses needing to be known which does create problems. I was just thinking about ways of how to alleviate that and I think your answers are excellent solutions. My concern with the web wallet approach is the single point of failure problem and the lack of incentive to run a full node. I believe there should be some kind of process involving full nodes that aren't witnesses/delegates/workers as it contributes to the security of the network. In any I do agree we need to implement the security deposit system. I've seen similar proposals to deal with the "nothing at stake" problem and I 100% agree that a deposit is a perfect way to eliminate/alleviate that problem.

60
Technical Support / Re: [VIDEO] BitShares 2.0 SmartCoin Overview
« on: July 11, 2015, 12:30:14 pm »
The coma may be confusing if non US people see the video.

The "," is for decimals in Europe.

 ??? I had no idea.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 20