286
General Discussion / Re: Stealth token?
« on: November 03, 2017, 10:33:56 pm »
stealth is a UIA, so better ask the issuer
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.
287
General Discussion / Re: Losing Sign-Ups thanks to a sneak deal between UI Worker and Foundation
« on: November 03, 2017, 07:49:12 pm »Nice catch @fav
Is there any way to find out approximately how long this has been happening, and how many referred users were sent?
they reversed it this morning, still waiting for a public statement though.
so it was up for ~24hrs, no way to tell how many users left the sign-up. at least 2 people joined our help channel asking why they can't sign-up (via my ref link)
288
General Discussion / Re: Losing Sign-Ups thanks to a sneak deal between UI Worker and Foundation
« on: November 02, 2017, 12:50:29 pm »
additionally.
- only 40% instead of 60% for affiliates
- voter bias, setting default proxy to bisthareseurope
see: http://cryptofresh.com/u/zardo3
- only 40% instead of 60% for affiliates
- voter bias, setting default proxy to bisthareseurope
see: http://cryptofresh.com/u/zardo3
289
General Discussion / Losing Sign-Ups thanks to a sneak deal between UI Worker and Foundation
« on: November 02, 2017, 12:27:01 pm »
yup, this is absolutely inacceptable, here's the story:
by changing to wallet.bitshares.org I decided to test the referral program - did not work so I opened an issue on github.
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/677
> https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/677#issuecomment-341145204
this comment by @svk got me curious, because the default faucet used to be openledger.
so I checked bitshares.org/wallet first if ref is working (no)
I then went to check the source code, searched for bitshares.eu, and yup. they changed the default registrar to their faucet, it seems.
opened another issue:
Who decided to change the default faucet and why? https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/683
This all smells like a dirty backhand deal between Worker UI and Bitshares "Foundation".
I expect full transparency and responsibility by @wmbutler and @xeroc
by changing to wallet.bitshares.org I decided to test the referral program - did not work so I opened an issue on github.
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/677
> https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/677#issuecomment-341145204
this comment by @svk got me curious, because the default faucet used to be openledger.
so I checked bitshares.org/wallet first if ref is working (no)
Quote
btsfav commented 18 minutes ago
bitshares.org/wallet referral doesn't work either, are you guys kidding me?
@svk31 @wmbutler this is not acceptable, please test this stuff first before you change. ALL ref links are worthless now.
I then went to check the source code, searched for bitshares.eu, and yup. they changed the default registrar to their faucet, it seems.
opened another issue:
Who decided to change the default faucet and why? https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/683
Quote
btsfav commented 13 minutes ago
Who made the decision to ninja change the default registrar faucet (which is not even working) and why?
Let me remind you that openledger offers tons of access nodes, they fully deserve to be the default faucet.
also, I HOPE whoever made this decision checked with bitshares.eu that they disable the "default proxy" setting, or else you'll commit to voter bias in the reference client.
This all smells like a dirty backhand deal between Worker UI and Bitshares "Foundation".
I expect full transparency and responsibility by @wmbutler and @xeroc
290
General Discussion / Re: “Consortium blockchains” (e.g. DPoS & Tendermint) can’t Internet scale
« on: November 02, 2017, 10:19:15 am »
tl;dr
291
General Discussion / MOVED: Need Help. Smart asset. Where to get quotes?
« on: October 31, 2017, 11:11:54 am »292
General Discussion / Re: Problem withdrawing from Bter
« on: October 31, 2017, 10:45:43 am »
ask bter (horrible exchange btw)
293
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: fav - Journal
« on: October 30, 2017, 03:39:29 pm »
not voting for BitShares Greater China Rep - same reasons as for spokesperson.
lack of clear goals
lack of tracking
also started voting for refund400k in an attempt to raise the entry bar and to block unwanted workers.
lack of clear goals
lack of tracking
also started voting for refund400k in an attempt to raise the entry bar and to block unwanted workers.
294
General Discussion / Re: How "OPEN" should we be?
« on: October 28, 2017, 09:41:50 pm »you're 3 years too late for this, no need to waste time on this now
if you have money in a blockchain your history is open.
https://getmonero.org/Quote from: oxarbitragein bitshares the account history is already open to everyone that want to look. the plugin does not do anything than what it is already possible with current api calls. where is the problem with the plugin ? i still don't get it.
The account history should have never been open for everyone to see. It is something that I believe bytemaster greatly overlooked in the 2.0 design, in the rush to get the (vastly superior, except for some details, such as this one - unfortunately, a major oversight, in my opinion) graphene technology online in the form of Bitshares 2.0.
People are not that stupid, or at least I hope so - with bitcoin and other such coins (essentially 99.999% of the stuff out there) the concept of addresses makes the uninitiated believe that the thing is modestly private (turns out, that's not really true).
With an account name (good idea), however, without privacy (bad idea), people easily and viscerally realize that they are naked, and very few people would want the whole world to know everything about their financial history.
And why must it be on by default, the private transactions? Well, simple, if privacy is opt-in, the anonymity set is that much smaller, private transactions stuck out, rather than blending in.
Once again, the monero guys got it right. We would do well to learn from them.
The potential for BTS is so huge, but without privacy, it's doomed. Nobody in their right mind wants to broadcast their whole financial life to the whole internet to see.
295
General Discussion / Re: BitShares - Conflict of Interest and NDAs ( Non-Disclosure Agreements )
« on: October 27, 2017, 03:13:53 pm »QuoteI have also signed two NDAs, but I'm not going to disclose with whom or on what terms, they're called non-disclosure for a reason, you know
This is right. It is strange that some people don't get this.
If this is a problem, we could require candidates for committee/witness positions to sign an agreement not to make any NDAs in the future, however, this could create more pita than we want.
to sign a NDA to not sign NDAs? :]
297
Technical Support / Re: DID NOT GET A BACKUP FILE
« on: October 25, 2017, 12:18:30 pm »
you can change your password by using your old password to unlock your account and then change the keys.
298
General Discussion / Re: OpenLedger propose Bitshares 3.0 enhancements (NEW)
« on: October 25, 2017, 11:07:36 am »
and it's still nothing they can work on right now.
Not a fact.
Current Bitshares functionality will need to be implemented as an EOS native smart contract. This work can start now.
subject to stakeholder approval.
work can't start, there is nothing to work on.
299
General Discussion / Re: OpenLedger propose Bitshares 3.0 enhancements (NEW)
« on: October 25, 2017, 06:51:29 am »and it's still nothing they can work on right now.
300
Technical Support / Re: New to Bitshares, U Need To Have BTS In Order To Trade?
« on: October 25, 2017, 04:54:38 am »
yes.
