BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: fluxer555 on September 28, 2014, 06:40:41 pm
-
Shareholders vote for delegates, then delegates vote for feed scripts.
The feed scripts would be a lot like the automated scripts that are being passed around right now, except they would be stored on the blockchain, and executed by all delegates.
There could be an intermediary 'testing ground' for scripts, to be reviewed, and then confirmed legit. They could be cryptographically signed by trusted developers.
I think this intelligently offloads some responsibility from the delegates, which seem to be piling up unnecessarily.
If this proves to be an effective method, then all sorts of new code / new features could be introduced to BTSX in this way.
-
You can't do it with an on-chain script, and people are already doing it with off-chain scripts. So your suggestion is just to have delegates more formally commit to the the exact script of their price feeds.
If you want to make delegates do this you already have the tools: tell them to put a hash of the script in the public data, then run the script in parallel and compare results. Make noise when a delegate's script isn't working as intended.
-
the goal is to NOT have ONE source .. but several DIFFERENT sources for the feeds ... also the feeds are something the delegate can market for more votes ..
-
You can't do it with an on-chain script, and people are already doing it with off-chain scripts. So your suggestion is just to have delegates more formally commit to the the exact script of their price feeds.
If you want to make delegates do this you already have the tools: tell them to put a hash of the script in the public data, then run the script in parallel and compare results. Make noise when a delegate's script isn't working as intended.
ahh .. I see .. that sounds quit nice ...
delegates can also submit a url to their (github) hosted feeds script
-
This is actually to combat a 'best script' from dominating all the delegates feeds. Consider this:
1. Feed sources (e.g. exchanges, which are limited in number, less than 101) are made readily available for delegates through individual scripts. These scripts' sole purpose is to query whatever server the source comes from, and return a number (or set of numbers: price, bid, ask, order book, volume, etc.). Each currency pair at each feed source would have a script. The hash of each script is stored on the blockchain. These can be updated. (By delegate votes? delegate-voted developers?)
2. a 'feed maintenance' script which periodically tests all the scripts and through logic, and determines if any of the exchanges are being manipulated and/or giving false results. The hash of this script is stored on the blockchain, can be updated etc.
3. a 'feed distribution' script which through logic and quality checks (possibly using more than just the price, e.g. volume, spread) determines the best way to weigh the feeds. The hash of this script is stored on the blockchain, can be updated etc.
4. The delegate can choose a percentage of how much to trust this script, against his own manual feeds or private custom script, 0% - 100%. This number is public Using the 'feed maintenance' script, 'feed distribution' script, and optionally his own feeds, the delegate now is serving all the feeds required.
The current system promotes laziness in the delegates, as all they have to do is download the latest and greatest feed script and fire away. And I don't blame them, that's probably the best way to do things right now. It just makes for weak feed security, due to lack of diversity.
Besides of easy maintenance for delegates, the purpose of this is maintainable transparency, where shareholders can see everything that is happening and can feel more secure in the system.
-
Or, the delegates could bypass the 'feed distribution' script, and implement their own distribution.
If they have a different price source than is available in the feed sources on the blockchain, then they can help everyone by submitting it.
-
Having the equivalent of USD-IOUs trading on BTSX from a trusted source like Bitstamp would allow price discover on chain.
-
the equivalent of USD-IOUs trading on BTSX from a trusted source like Bitstamp.
What do you mean by this? Care to elaborate?
-
If there were USD IOUs on the chain from Bitstamp and they traded against BTSX then we would have a very solid price feed from the internal market that is reliable so long as Bitstamp doesn't go under.
-
If there were USD IOUs on the chain from Bitstamp and they traded against BTSX then we would have a very solid price feed from the internal market that is reliable so long as Bitstamp doesn't go under.
Is something like that in the works/talks with any exchange?
-
Tradeable IOU's against USD, BTC, etc. deposits already possible with user-issued assets. The main barrier is making exchanges aware that the functionality is available, and convincing them to pay the ~$6000 asset registration fee. Perhaps if an established major exchange expresses serious interest but doesn't want to pay the fee, the developers could offer a hardfork that reduces or waives the fee for the exchange's specific TITAN account?
We should have someone contact Bitstamp and ask if they'd be interested. They're already doing something similar with Ripple.
-
Tradeable IOU's against USD, BTC, etc. deposits already possible with user-issued assets. The main barrier is making exchanges aware that the functionality is available, and convincing them to pay the ~$6000 asset registration fee. Perhaps if an established major exchange expresses serious interest but doesn't want to pay the fee, the developers could offer a hardfork that reduces or waives the fee for the exchange's specific TITAN account?
hardforks suck .. as does adding arbitrary numbers/addresses to the source ...
but seriously, is $6k so much for a business like this? If so they can start a funding campaign!?
-
Tradeable IOU's against USD, BTC, etc. deposits already possible with user-issued assets. The main barrier is making exchanges aware that the functionality is available, and convincing them to pay the ~$6000 asset registration fee. Perhaps if an established major exchange expresses serious interest but doesn't want to pay the fee, the developers could offer a hardfork that reduces or waives the fee for the exchange's specific TITAN account?
hardforks suck .. as does adding arbitrary numbers/addresses to the source ...
but seriously, is $6k so much for a business like this? If so they can start a funding campaign!?
We would pay the fee for a serious business.
-
We would pay the fee for a serious business.
thought so .. didn't dare to ask