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 - bobmaloney

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 24
76
General Discussion / Re: 350M votes for marketing delegates WTF
« on: August 20, 2015, 12:51:51 am »
Only referring to the delegate voting system in general:

Have we ever considered the pros and cons of vote expiration dates, say 365 days or so? Or maybe losing a percentage of that person's vote over time unless continuously reaffirmed?

77
General Discussion / Re: 2FA through clef
« on: August 17, 2015, 09:39:52 pm »
Quote from: Pheonike on August 17, 2015, 09:24:05 pm

It a polished for profit version of SQRL.

http://bravenewcoin.com/news/sqrl-revolutionizing-web-site-login-and-authentication/

I sure hope we do everything possible to integrate SQRL.

Clef seems like something that would be well-aimed at enterprise/employee use of a BTS DPOS chain, but SQRL seems like the obvious open-source built-in, p2p option.

Business, yes:
https://getclef.com/pricing/ 

Individual, yes:
https://www.grc.com/sqrl/sqrl.htm

I was a bit worried when bytemaster claimed a few weeks ago on a mumble that it was QR-based.

AFAIU, SQRL has not been QR-based since the first few weeks of inception - I'm fairly certain that Steve Gibson went out of his way only a few weeks into the project to rename it "Secured, Quick, Reliable Login" so as not to give the impression that QR codes are required.

The possible benefits of incorporating this into BTS, IDentabit, etc. seem priceless to me - if there were any community we would want to draw the attention of (especially near the release date) - it would be the security community surrounding Steve Gibson and TWiT.
I wouldn't doubt that we would get some notice from Steve and Leo if we were one of the first large projects to successfully implement it - and with it, probably some very good security stress tests as well.


78
General Discussion / Re: Let's rebrand the name to Graphene
« on: August 16, 2015, 11:57:48 pm »
Quote from: d3adh3ad on August 16, 2015, 10:49:29 pm
Quote from: DataSecurityNode on August 16, 2015, 10:44:12 pm
Quote from: d3adh3ad on August 16, 2015, 08:50:03 pm
Hey Cryptonomex, you are already giving us a new toolkit and convincing a bunch of new chains to share drop on us. Can we have the name Graphene too? What about your cars? Can we have those too?

Wait what?! I thought we already go their cars as part of the social consensus!!?!

What kind of scam is this?!

<s/c> [emoji14]

I heard several of the devs have cars with doors that open upward. Not outword.... Upward... Like this..  \=/   ;)
... And capable of 88mph. ;)

79
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Delegate Proposal] payroll.delegate.xeroc
« on: August 15, 2015, 01:22:38 pm »
+5 to xeROCK of bitsharestalk.

Terrific news!

80
General Discussion / Re: How to best perform an after-the-fact, unknown time sharedrop.
« on: August 15, 2015, 12:06:20 pm »


Quote from: betax on August 15, 2015, 05:19:29 am
Great idea!

You can use as one of the inputs https://www.random.org/ random number generator. 

Doesn't PLAY offer this exact feature?

Seems like this might be a perfect opportunity to demonstrate a touch of their capabilities?

81
General Discussion / Re: Let's Try This Again
« on: August 14, 2015, 11:02:55 pm »
Hello Charles, welcome back.

82
IDentabit / Re: Important Criticism
« on: August 14, 2015, 08:40:04 pm »
There are a lot of organizations using "idex", but iDEX does sound and look impressive.

83
General Discussion / Re: Updated Voting Screen in Graphene
« on: August 14, 2015, 08:37:35 pm »
 +5%

*bytemaster2

I always knew there were more than 1 of you.

84
Beyond Bitcoin [closed] / Re: *RAW* Beyond Bitcoin BitShares Dev Hangout with bytemaster 8-14-15
« on: August 14, 2015, 05:21:32 pm »
 +5%

But Dude...

PLEASE...

Simplify your donation address.

Is it:

tipmeh?
buckfankers?
tuckfheman?
tuckfheman-com?




85
Beyond Bitcoin [closed] / Re: Hangout Questions for Bytemaster (Due Friday @ 10:00am EST)
« on: August 14, 2015, 04:54:57 pm »
Quote from: Stan on August 14, 2015, 04:27:20 pm
Question mentioned on Mumble that didn't get answered:

Paraphrasing..."Don't chains that sharedrop 20% and then dilute violate the Social Consensus?"

Answer:  No violation.  After you get your full 20% then you have to decide whether to cash it out or let it ride.

...

You start out sharing 20% and have plenty of time to decide your own fate (and opt out if you want) before any change in the supply ever happens.

This is a good point and I agree.

However, I would think and recommend it in the best interest of many potential sharedrop projects to require vesting, especially those projects that will require substantial maturation.
In order for the above to hold true to the Social Consensus, any inflation/dilution should not occur until vesting is complete unless those particular sharedropped accounts include vesting equal to any inflation/dilution.


86
General Discussion / Re: Maker sharedrop on the BitShares community
« on: August 14, 2015, 04:23:06 pm »


Quote from: xeroc on August 14, 2015, 03:48:24 pm
Plus .. there is not a single AGS *investor* .. not a single one!!

One of the many reasons AGS will always be a valuable sharedrop target.

87
General Discussion / Re: ANNOUNCEMENT 8 - IDentabit Will Sharedrop on BitShares Community
« on: August 14, 2015, 03:35:13 pm »


Quote from: Thom on August 13, 2015, 04:23:22 pm
This was an  A B S O L U T E L Y  awesome OP, bravo Stan!!!

Talk about a great experiment! My ultimate hope is that the need for AML / KYC compliance "features" will ultimately be removed from BitShares b/c everyone that wants to use them would rather go where the action is (Identibit).

+5

88
IDentabit / Re: [ANN] IDentabit Announcement
« on: August 12, 2015, 09:13:58 pm »
 +5%

89
General Discussion / Re: ANNOUNCEMENT 8 - IDentabit Will Sharedrop on BitShares Community
« on: August 12, 2015, 07:04:41 pm »
 +5%

ANNOUNCEMENT 8 - TL;DR:

Quote from: Stan on August 12, 2015, 06:30:02 pm
That’s a tall order and may be the crypto equivalent of Icarus flying too close to the sun.

However, there are already several groups positioning themselves to be an IDentabit competitor, so I would much rather gamble on the winner of this game include the bitshares community and our ideologues vs. their "pragmatists".

This also makes it so much important for something like bitshares (with fully functional privacy and somewhat attainable anonymity) to succeed parallel to allow for and function as a lifeboat when the worst does eventually happen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QR3fD5YyN3g

 :o


90
General Discussion / Re: Maker sharedrop on the BitShares community
« on: August 12, 2015, 06:17:46 pm »
Quote from: mf-tzo on August 12, 2015, 06:07:55 pm
I am obviously fine with whatever you  decide but I would think that the best sharedrop would obviously be mostly to BTS, then Brownie.PTS  but also AGS and old PTS. This way you attract everyone. Core Devs, active members, users, donators and people with vision. 

AGS / old PTS also may not even claim their shares since they won't risk to expose their private keys right?

Agreed:

Quote from: bobmaloney on August 11, 2015, 05:19:37 pm
I'm going to go ahead and throw out the following suggestion from the standpoint that it:

1. Casts the widest net

2. Offers the possibility of bringing back the attention of some early supporters that recognized the need and importance of something like bitUSD (but have drifted away due to numerous reasons) to Bitshares, while introducing them to Maker.

5% - PTS
5% - AGS
5% - BTS
5% - Brownie.PTS

The demographics of each group listed above offers a unique set of potential benefits/qualities and that it would be wise to consider what may be gained from including all of them.

Obviously, the recommendations from those CURRENTLY in the forum for this single snapshot of time will side heavily on BTS/Brownie.PTS (and which I would personally gain most from) - but this community has seen plenty of interest and early support from individuals who could probably be found more heavily in PTS/AGS as well.

My .02 BTS


*The only keys I would recommend excluding from this are Cryptsy's PTS keys (if they are known).

I was fortunate enough to not have any PTS on Cryptsy during any snapshots, but I still don't see how there wasn't more uproar about such outright and blatant theft.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 24

Page created in 0.187 seconds with 22 queries.