136
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 很明显这次过年有大户利用跨行不能转账提前布局资金大量吃货PTS.
« on: February 02, 2014, 05:00:14 pm »第三方充值实际上已经开放了,很多人去买那个BTCC码,充值到BTCC,然后买成BTC转移到其他网站
央行系统1/29-2/2休息无法银行转账,而从今晚开始已经恢复运作,要转账充人民币去比如比特时代买PTS是十分方便的。资金不是问题,关键是信心。
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.
第三方充值实际上已经开放了,很多人去买那个BTCC码,充值到BTCC,然后买成BTC转移到其他网站
Today I made more progress on the block generation and validation algorithm. The wallet has successfully mined a few blocks and the difficulty goes up when there is not enough Proof of Stake.
Tomorrow I will do the following:
1) Select inputs from your wallet oldest-first so that your transactions can be validated as quickly as possible and contribute the most to securing the chain.
2) Automatically generate transactions to yourself if it will generate enough CDD to reduce the difficulty to the minimum amount.
In response to the question about eliminating mining, I have concluded that ripple-style consensus would have more downsides than straight up POS mining. Namely, even with 100 nodes people would call it centralized. I will probably work on a consensus based system in the future, but the POS mining is easier now.
Unlike NXT most of the transactions fees are paid as dividends and only a small portion paid to miners. Also unlike NXT, everyone is contributing to the security of the network when they make a transaction.
To my understanding, at least in the MVP, the Ripple style consensus and the neural network style positive feedback loop is abandoned. Am I wrong?
If it is true and you have already made the decision, I suppose a more clear and official announcement needs to be made.
正式版的价值在不同人不同时间看来虽然也是有区别的,但它的功能是明确的,有参考性。
但这个测试版的不确定性太大了,未来发展趋势几乎是随机性的,在上面交易那就是赌博。
我更可能是像你说的那样,拿1个bts出来玩玩,其它的就不动了。
ok Why not decentralize this and give a material incentive to the nodes to be nodes? Without an incentive the biggest stakeholders or those with non-material goals would run nodes. But the system itself doesn't guarantee that nodes are run.
What makes you think those with non-material goals wouldn't be making so much more? If we pay nodes to participate then everyone will want to be on the receiving side which means you need a fixed reward divided among all players.
Lets step back a second and reconsider everything... suppose you did something like this:
1) Use a mining algorithm like momentum where the difficulty is adjusted by square of the coin days destroyed by the block.
2) Pay a very small percentage of the fees to the miner.
3) If two blocks are found at once, the one with the most CDD wins.
The consequences of this approach are as follows:
1) block times return to 5 minute intervals rather than seconds...
2) if there are no transactions CDD is 0 and difficulty is infinity... therefore variation in transaction volume will have a bigger impact on the difficulty adjustment than adding or removing miners.
3) centralization one block at a time returns... but if you allow everyone's CDD to factor in then someone excluding transactions is unlikely to win. Thus the network errors on the side of including transactions rather than excluding them.
4) You end up increasing the expenses of operating the network (paying miners) and thus reducing the dividend.
I suspect that the mining reward can be as low as 1% of the transaction fees and it would be enough incentive for many people to mine in the background at some steady state. Mining will always be profitable because if it were not people would stop mining.
Overall I think I like this... though I lament the performance cost.
This introduces a perverse incentive for nodes not to forward transactions... though I suspect the damage caused by this would be small..
这周代码就能结束,看来228相当靠谱
来自我的 HUAWEI P6-T00 上的 Tapatalk
你其实避开了个很实际的问题,BTS的价值是从何而来,凭什么现在4000万美元的筹码今后能凭空涨10倍100倍甚至1000倍。溢价的部分是从何而来。目前有筹码的人80%是投资者。是不会去用Btsx 做资产交易的,今后要交易的人要花大笔资金来购买BTS,这样的经济生态环境合理吗
市场的大小不是这么算的。 假设BTS不再涨价。 就LZ说的这2000W,其实是单次交易的最大额度,但真实交易量大多是由大量的小额交易组成的。假设只有1W个玩家的话, 每个人只交易1000块,但是跟不同的人来回交易10次,这就是1个亿的生意了,假设有10W个用户,交易100次呢?
所以只要交易活跃,这个市场就会无限大。就算真的想做单次超过2000W的生意,可以分成多次,这样抵押的BTS就可以重复使用了。 而就算有人不想分多次,他必然要收购足够多的BTS,随着他的收购,BTS价格水涨船高,不需要全部收购400W,也已经足够抵押2000W了。
(帖子翻译)bytemaster宣布今天已经快完成BTS的共识机制开发看了以后觉得逻辑上很清晰。可惜不懂代码。等实测。
http://8btc.com/thread-2984-1-1.html
(出处: 巴比特论坛)
怎么又提前了不是说在2月28号才放出吗?2 月 28 号是比较完整的。二月一号这个是非常粗糙的。二月一号这个也有可能被取消,专注于二月二十八号版本。
Great!
So we will just test this feature(BTS X allocated to AGS/PTS) or also including other features of Bitshares X at Feb 28th test?
Thanks.The last BTC and PTS block on feb 28 th will be used for the snapshot of the bitshares XT blockchain. This will be the first feature complete test network.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
To my understanding, it's a feature complete version and we will test and report bugs for all the features.
Cuz, for BTS genesis block allocation only, you don't need a whole test network.
(Or, you can wait for bytemaster himself to confirm this.)
The last BTC and PTS block on feb 28 th will be used for the snapshot of the bitshares XT blockchain. This will be the first feature complete test network.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
本质在于抵押机制,市场共识由于抵押而产生,没有抵押根本不能保证市场共识。质疑BTS交易平台存在价值的最核心问题是,比特资产与实物资产价值无法锚定,使之沦为纯粹对赌工具,失去了存在价值。
思之再三,终于发现比特资产与实物资产价值锚定的本质:比特资产锚定实物资产价值的基本手段是抵押机制的实施。
举例如下:抵押2倍于当时具有1盎司黄金价格的1BTS创建1BTGOLD,那这1BTGOLD的价值就锚定了1盎司黄金的价值,这无疑会得到所有人的认可。这1BTGOLD不会沦为1BT土豆,假如1BT土豆锚定的是1㎏土豆,而创建1㎏土豆只需抵押0.01BTS。除非所有人都疯了。
此贴兼作对下文的回答-----PTS: 美丽的泡沫
http://8btc.com/thread-1419-1-1.html
抵押是实现锚定的手段,本质是整个系统可以支持参与者就某标的物的价值达成市场共识。
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk