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 - pc

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... 102
316
General Discussion / Re: Staking BTS
« on: October 11, 2017, 10:00:24 pm »
Quote from: oollff on October 11, 2017, 09:20:19 pm
Making the system give these payouts when voting would "solve" that problem. Similar to how it is now, but instead of having to pay to vote you would receive bts for voting.

That only means that people would vote for the sake of voting, not necessarily with the intent to choose the best candidates. I don't think it would improve the overall situation.

317
General Discussion / Re: Staking BTS
« on: October 11, 2017, 06:48:44 pm »
The problem with paid votes is that those witnesses should be elected that provide the best service, not those that promise the highest payouts.

318
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: BSIP-18: How to easily revive a BitAsset after Black Swan - read for comment
« on: October 11, 2017, 06:46:50 pm »
Great, thanks!

I'm not aware of anyone else still testing, nor have I received any negative reports.

I'll start preparing the mainnet release now. Preliminary hardfork date is 2017-11-27 15:00 UTC, unless anyone comes up with a convincing argument that this is a bad choice.

319
General Discussion / Re: cancel placed order
« on: October 11, 2017, 04:17:43 pm »
Quote from: gigamike on October 11, 2017, 03:37:19 pm
1. Is there an option to cancel order?

In the UI, click on "Account" (tab at the top), then on "Open orders" (navbar on the left side). This should show your open orders, with a button to cancel each one.

Quote from: gigamike on October 11, 2017, 03:37:19 pm
2. When i exchange my BTS to BTC, where will the BTC will go to, i mean what wallet do i need to download?

When you trade on the DEX, whatever you buy stays in your bitshares wallet. If you buy OPEN.BTC, you can withdraw them to a bitcoin address of your choice.

Quote from: gigamike on October 11, 2017, 03:37:19 pm
3, What's bitUSD in the exchange?

It's a SmartCoin that is loosely pegged to its fiat counterpart. There are other SmartCoins as well, for example bitBTC tracks the value of actual BTC.

Quote from: gigamike on October 11, 2017, 03:37:19 pm
4. Is there already a fee for cancelled order?

Cancelling an order costs a very small fee (sub-cent?). If you cancel an order that has not been partially filled, the fee for placing that order will be returned to you, so effectively cancelling an unfilled order will return 90% of the original fee.

320
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: BSIP-18: How to easily revive a BitAsset after Black Swan - read for comment
« on: October 11, 2017, 04:07:20 pm »
Thanks for the approvals, guys.

Quote from: Brekyrself on October 10, 2017, 07:01:43 pm
Any know if this information was sent to Bittrex?  Could be why they are going to delist BTS on the 13th?

According to @Stan bittrex has suffered from the problem. I don't know if that's the reason for the delisting though.

Exchanges will have be notified when the mainnet release is available. It might be a good idea to highlight that p2p fix in the release notes.

321
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: BSIP-18: How to easily revive a BitAsset after Black Swan - read for comment
« on: October 10, 2017, 04:44:13 pm »
A couple of days ago, @dannotestein alerted us to an issue in the P2P code that may have been causing problems to exchanges. It seems that nodes would get stuck for hours, conveying the impression that the blockchain was dead.
@xeroc backported a fix from STEEM into our codebase. The fix is currently being tested in testnet and will become part of the next master release.

The following witnesses (and others) have contributed to testing so far:

Code review (Github)
* @abit
* Alfredo aka @oxarbitrage
* @xeroc
* Several others (@wackou, @Thom, @Taconator, …)

Approvals so far
* @xeroc
* @Fox
* iPerky aka @iHashFury
* @Bhuz
* @sahkan
* @roelandp
* @abit
* @wackou
* @Thom aka verbaltech2
* @ElMato

I'm still hoping for an ACK from @Thom , then I'll prepare the mainnet hardfork.

I'd suggest a hardfork date around end of November, that'd give everyone about 6 weeks to upgrade, which is plenty IMO.

Edit: added approvals from roelandp, abit, wackou, thom and elmato

322
General Discussion / Re: What happens when BTS value drops below smart asset value?
« on: October 09, 2017, 08:31:29 pm »
That situation is referred to as a "Black Swan" here in the forum.

The market-peg of bitasset relies on the fact that you can always have your bitCNY exchanged for 99% of its value in BTS. If the value of the collateral drops too low, this guarantee can no longer be upheld. At that point, the exchange rate for settlements of that bitasset type becomes fixed. This has already happened to some assets, the most prominent probably being bitGOLD.

We're currently working on a process that will allow to "revive" bitassets after such a "Black Swan".

323
General Discussion / Re: Proposal Idea for Bitshares - Use SmartCoins instead of User Assets for Altcoins
« on: October 08, 2017, 03:43:56 pm »
Quote from: yvv on October 08, 2017, 01:33:08 pm
Quote from: pc on October 08, 2017, 07:55:12 am
Quote from: renkcub on October 08, 2017, 06:51:36 am
even with actual bitcoins (you would simply need to exchange those bitcoins for BitBTC first on the Dex, then trade for BitUSD. Or,  even better, trade for BitUSD directly, although this doesn't seem to currently be offered anywhere).

I think you are contradicting yourself here. HOW would you exchange BTC for bitBTC or trade BTC for bitUSD without a centralized gateway? I thought that's exactly what you're proposing to get rid of.



Such a gateway would centralized, but trustless.

Care to explain? I cannot imagine how that would work.

Quote from: yvv on October 08, 2017, 01:33:08 pm
And surely, if OL offered deposits/withdrawals in bitBTC instead of OPEN.BTC, bitBTC volume would be as high as OPEN.BTC volume now.

But that's a completely different business model, with a whole bunch of additional risks (on the side of the gateway owner). I perfectly understand that they do not offer such a service.

Again, BTS provides only infrastructure. Anyone can use it. You are free to provide such a gateway if you think it's worth it.

324
General Discussion / Re: Proposal Idea for Bitshares - Use SmartCoins instead of User Assets for Altcoins
« on: October 08, 2017, 07:55:12 am »
Quote from: renkcub on October 08, 2017, 06:51:36 am
Quote from: pc on October 07, 2017, 09:51:03 am
A SmartCoin is not the same as its underlying counterpart. If you have actual bitcoins in your BTC wallet and want to exchange them for USD, the bitBTC/bitUSD market is useless to you.

SmartCoins are useful for traders (because they're derivatives), and they could be useful to merchants/users for transferring value (at least in the case of FIAT derivatives). The latter is unlikely to happen for altcoins.

First of all, I disagree, and believe the BitBTC / BitUSD has no downsides currently (besides liquidity) for anyone looking to speculate between the value of BTC and USD,

That's what I said - they are interesting for traders.

Quote from: renkcub on October 08, 2017, 06:51:36 am
even with actual bitcoins (you would simply need to exchange those bitcoins for BitBTC first on the Dex, then trade for BitUSD. Or,  even better, trade for BitUSD directly, although this doesn't seem to currently be offered anywhere).

I think you are contradicting yourself here. HOW would you exchange BTC for bitBTC or trade BTC for bitUSD without a centralized gateway? I thought that's exactly what you're proposing to get rid of.

Quote from: renkcub on October 08, 2017, 06:51:36 am
Also, you didn't give any reasons why SmartCoins are not effective for Altcoins.

Oh, they would be as effective as they are for BTC/USD/CNY. I just don't see a use for altcoins at all.
Providing feeds for additional coin means additional work for the witnesses, so we should only add SmartCoins if there's a benefit to be expected. I don't expect significant volume from altcoins, and therefore no benefit either.

Not sure if you're aware of it, but *anyone* can create SmartCoins. No need to lobby for this - if you want them, just go ahead and create them.

325
General Discussion / Re: Proposal Idea for Bitshares - Use SmartCoins instead of User Assets for Altcoins
« on: October 07, 2017, 09:51:03 am »
A SmartCoin is not the same as its underlying counterpart. If you have actual bitcoins in your BTC wallet and want to exchange them for USD, the bitBTC/bitUSD market is useless to you.

SmartCoins are useful for traders (because they're derivatives), and they could be useful to merchants/users for transferring value (at least in the case of FIAT derivatives). The latter is unlikely to happen for altcoins.

326
General Discussion / Re: [ANN] NEW MONEY: The iTunes of Blockchain (powered by Bitshares) + SOLCERT ICO
« on: October 04, 2017, 06:59:12 pm »
Thanks Solomon. Looking forward to hear the news.

327
General Discussion / Re: [ANN] NEW MONEY: The iTunes of Blockchain (powered by Bitshares) + SOLCERT ICO
« on: October 04, 2017, 04:29:34 pm »
Update? Can I write off my investment or is this still alive?

328
General Discussion / Re: The biggest problem with Bitshares is not the delisting it from the Bittrex
« on: October 04, 2017, 04:07:23 pm »
Quote from: mytniy on October 04, 2017, 11:08:53 am
Honestly, adding a new coin should be as easy as creating new wallet, or, at least, it should be accessible to anyone, thus eliminating centralized nature of someone in dev team deciding what will be trading and what not. This way the BTS will rock! Otherwise - I am not sure what devs are trying to accomplish.

The dev team does not decide what will be traded and what not.

You need to understand the difference between gateway providers (like OpenLedger) and BitShares (the blockchain). OpenLedger is a privately owned company who naturally decides for themselves which coins they support as OPEN.x assets.

BitShares only provides the infrastructure, but that infrastructure can be used by anyone - for example the Monero devs (or an independent Monero enthusiast) could build their own gateway for moving Monero to/from the BitShares DEX.

329
General Discussion / Re: Margin call algorithm is too dangerous for shorters
« on: October 03, 2017, 03:44:23 pm »
Quote from: paliboy on October 03, 2017, 12:23:27 pm
Would such a change require a BSIP and/or a hard fork?

Yes, as per policy.

We have several issues pending concerning market rules. IMO we should collect them into one BSIP and solve them all in one go.

https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/132
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/184
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/338
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/342
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/343

Quote from: oldman on October 03, 2017, 01:25:10 pm
I would suggest contacting Bill Butler or opening an issue on github https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/releases/tag/2.0.171001

This is definitely not a UI issue.

330
General Discussion / Re: Margin call algorithm is too dangerous for shorters
« on: October 03, 2017, 12:09:28 pm »
Makes sense.

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... 102

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 20 queries.