BitShares Forum

Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: Method-X on October 28, 2014, 10:58:48 pm

Title: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: Method-X on October 28, 2014, 10:58:48 pm
We really need a BitAsset specific mobile wallet for iOS and Android. I'd rank this as being very important.

I propose we either hire a delegate to develop a wallet or post a bounty.

Please post any open source wallet projects that can be forked and modified for BitAssets. How can we go from start to finish in as little time as possible?
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: arhag on October 28, 2014, 11:07:46 pm
Along these lines, can we get a response from bytemaster regarding the priority of the lightweight client implementation with respect to all the other tasks they have planned (update client GUI, CA vote demo, Key Graph, better cold storage, usable multsig, Turing complete scripting language, on-ramps and off-ramps, BitUSD debit cards). I am not asking for specific deadlines, but I want to understand what efforts you guys are prioritizing and to get very rough timelines of when we can expect some of these features.

I prioritize them in the following order of importance to me:
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: Pheonike on October 28, 2014, 11:21:30 pm
 +5%
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: Method-X on October 28, 2014, 11:30:31 pm
@arhag I'm curious as to why you list a mobile wallet so low on the priority list? I think it will be a key aspect of user adoption and user adoption should come before the "bonus" features.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: arhag on October 28, 2014, 11:33:49 pm
@arhag I'm curious as to why you list a mobile wallet so low on the priority list? I think it will be a key aspect of user adoption and user adoption should come before the "bonus" features.

Look at the things I have listed above it. The mobile client needs lightweight client validation technology to first be built. Part of that is sending messages to users notifying them of new incoming transactions (that requires the KeyMail infrastructure). The only other features (not including updated GUI which it seems like cass and Brian are already doing in parallel) are important security features which are especially important for mobile clients, but also very important for regular full clients as well. We need to make people feel secure that their money won't be hacked away before they are comfortable putting their savings into it. Properly done cold storage and multsig provide this security.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: Method-X on October 28, 2014, 11:36:44 pm
I think since we've now got a self funding DAC and it looks like the SEC is on a mission to fuck over every blockchain company, it might be in Invictus' best interests to quickly get burn through all AGS funds after the "marketing push". I'd say that posting a $10k bounty on an iOS/Android wallet would get the job done fast.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: Method-X on October 28, 2014, 11:41:04 pm
@arhag I'm curious as to why you list a mobile wallet so low on the priority list? I think it will be a key aspect of user adoption and user adoption should come before the "bonus" features.

Look at the things I have listed above it. The mobile client needs lightweight client validation technology to first be built. Part of that is sending messages to users notifying them of new incoming transactions (that requires the KeyMail infrastructure). The only other features (not including updated GUI which it seems like cass and Brian are already doing in parallel) are important security features which are especially important for mobile clients, but also very important for regular full clients as well. We need to make people feel secure that their money won't be hacked away before they are comfortable putting their savings into it. Properly done cold storage and multsig provide this security.

Yes I understand validation technology is necessary for a lightweight mobile client. I feel as though security can wait until adoption is higher though. I don't anticipate any major hacks until user adoption is high. Hackers only go after the big pies.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: arhag on October 28, 2014, 11:50:10 pm
I think since we've now got a self funding DAC and it looks like the SEC is on a mission to fuck over every blockchain company, it might be in Invictus' best interests to quickly get burn through all AGS funds after the "marketing push". I'd say that posting a $10k bounty on an iOS/Android wallet would get the job done fast.

I agree that Invictus should pay their employees/grants through AGS funds first before the developers start taking any pay from diluting delegates.

I don't think developing a mobile client is as simple as putting up a bounty like you are claiming. The I3 dev team is the one best suited to quickly modify the BitShares toolkit and the BTS blockchain to be suitable for lightweight client validation. It is a tricky problem that I think they are best suited to solve rather than relying on some new devs that get paid by bounty. The team only needs to build a command line lightweight client that can securely send and receive funds with the minimum amount of trust (meaning economic incentives need to be aligned to reduce the risk of bad actors, IMHO this requires certain hard fork changes to the blockchain) and without needing to download and validate the entire blockchain. Once that proof-of-concept is done, then I think we could use bounties to get other devs to port over that open-source implementation to the various platforms (browser, Android, iOS) with appropriate GUIs.


Yes I understand validation technology is necessary for a lightweight mobile client. I feel as though security can wait until adoption is higher though. I don't anticipate any major hacks until user adoption is high. Hackers only go after the big pies.

I disagree that security should wait. I don't think the effort required for cold storage with offline transaction signing is very high, but it provides an immense amount of security of funds. Multisig is a little bit trickier but I still think at least building the support in the client provides far more benefit than the costs in development. I guess I would be willing to accept a swap in priorities between step 3 and step 5 if the amount of effort for implementing usable multisig is really a lot higher than I think. But I certainly think that the multisig implementation and getting companies on-board to support it can be done in parallel to the Android/iOS client development efforts, and they are both way more important than Key Graph, a full voting booth implementation, and Turing complete scripts.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: tonyk on October 28, 2014, 11:58:28 pm
I think since we've now got a self funding DAC and it looks like the SEC is on a mission to fuck over every blockchain company, it might be in Invictus' best interests to quickly get burn through all AGS funds after the "marketing push". I'd say that posting a $10k bounty on an iOS/Android wallet would get the job done fast.

I agree that Invictus should pay their employees/grants through AGS funds first before the developers start taking any pay from diluting delegates.

I don't think developing a mobile client is as simple as putting up a bounty like you are claiming. The I3 dev team is the one best suited to quickly modify the BitShares toolkit and the BTS blockchain to be suitable for lightweight client validation. It is a tricky problem that I think they are best suited to solve rather than relying on some new devs that get paid by bounty. The team only needs to build a command line lightweight client that can securely send and receive funds with the minimum amount of trust (meaning economic incentives need to be aligned to reduce the risk of bad actors, IMHO this requires certain hard fork changes to the blockchain) and without needing to download and validate the entire blockchain. Once that proof-of-concept is done, then I think we could use bounties to get other devs to port over that open-source implementation to the various platforms (browser, Android, iOS) with appropriate GUIs.


Yes I understand validation technology is necessary for a lightweight mobile client. I feel as though security can wait until adoption is higher though. I don't anticipate any major hacks until user adoption is high. Hackers only go after the big pies.

I disagree that security should wait. I don't think the effort required for cold storage with offline transaction signing is very high, but it provides an immense amount of security of funds. Multisig is a little bit trickier but I still think at least building the support in the client provides far more benefit than the costs in development. I guess I would be willing to accept a swap in priorities between step 3 and step 5 if the amount of effort for implementing usable multisig is really a lot higher than I think. But I certainly think that the multisig implementation and getting companies on-board to support it can be done in parallel to the Android/iOS client development efforts, and they are both way more important than Key Graph, a full voting booth implementation, and Turing complete scripts.

Ohhh God! of course!
I hope nobody is jumping on the Key Graph, voting booth, Turing complete scripts before we have fully functional, user useable, marketable bitUSD.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: xeroc on October 29, 2014, 08:35:20 am
I am not sure .. but I have a feeling that KeyGraphs are essential for VOTE and thus a priority due to the upcoming California event.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: cube on October 29, 2014, 11:00:55 am
I am not sure .. but I have a feeling that KeyGraphs are essential for VOTE and thus a priority due to the upcoming California event.

I agree. KeyGraphcs is important for VOTE.  And the discussion for VOTE is how we started and snowballed into the btsx+vote+dns superDac merger.

Mobile wallets would probably need to get a separate funding.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: fuzzy on October 29, 2014, 11:09:57 am
We really need a BitAsset specific mobile wallet for iOS and Android. I'd rank this as being very important.

I propose we either hire a delegate to develop a wallet or post a bounty.

Please post any open source wallet projects that can be forked and modified for BitAssets. How can we go from start to finish in as little time as possible?

We could use Delegate tx fees to post to a bounty/"gift" account that pays for the completed version.  Let the community give input and only release it when they are satisfied with the product.  All in all, this is a solid idea.  If the Invictus team has too much on their plate, outsource it.  This, imo, would be a great use of your initial delegate funds that would be EASILY trackable by the community, and would work as a great "Marketing" opener that also enables you to have a quantifiable measurement to show the value of your delegate overall.  Thoughts?
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: xeroc on October 29, 2014, 11:45:22 am
I wouldn't refer to delegate's tx pay in future .. as (from my understanding) the tx fees will be burned completely and the delegates will be payed solely by the .... capital infusion (or what ever we call it now)
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: cube on October 29, 2014, 02:21:42 pm
I wouldn't refer to delegate's tx pay in future .. as (from my understanding) the tx fees will be burned completely and the delegates will be payed solely by the .... capital infusion (or what ever we call it now)

Does the burn-complete apply to 'salary' delegates only or all delegates?  How do the delegates get paid from the 'capital infusion'?
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: svk on October 29, 2014, 02:26:05 pm
I wouldn't refer to delegate's tx pay in future .. as (from my understanding) the tx fees will be burned completely and the delegates will be payed solely by the .... capital infusion (or what ever we call it now)

Does the burn-complete apply to 'salary' delegates only or all delegates?  How do the delegates get paid from the 'capital infusion'?

There will still be only one type of delegate, just like now. All delegate pay will come from "capital infusion", all transaction fees will be burnt.

"Salary delegate" is just a term being thrown for any delegate actively working for the blockchain. For DNS Toast asked us to provide a free (0% pay) delegate in addition to any paid delegates, to fill in the ranks I guess that might be done for BTSX as well.

Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: svk on October 29, 2014, 02:32:26 pm
I'd put a lightweight client much higher on my list of priorities, and until it's done I don't think you'll be able to make any progress on mobile clients.

I was looking at how Blockchain.info functions earlier, and it seems to me TITAN makes it impossible to implement something similar to it right now as you have no way of obtaining balances without private keys. My understanding of all this is incomplete though so I could be wrong.

Signing transactions and transmitting them using javascript like they do to a centralized server for relay should be possible though I think.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: Xeldal on October 29, 2014, 02:38:10 pm
Quote from: arhag
I agree that Invictus should pay their employees/grants through AGS funds first before the developers start taking any pay from diluting delegates.
This cannot be overstated.  Diluting delegates should only be after all other options have been exhausted.

I wouldn't refer to delegate's tx pay in future .. as (from my understanding) the tx fees will be burned completely and the delegates will be payed solely by the .... capital infusion (or what ever we call it now)

I hope this is not true.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: cube on October 29, 2014, 03:15:42 pm
I wouldn't refer to delegate's tx pay in future .. as (from my understanding) the tx fees will be burned completely and the delegates will be payed solely by the .... capital infusion (or what ever we call it now)

Does the burn-complete apply to 'salary' delegates only or all delegates?  How do the delegates get paid from the 'capital infusion'?

There will still be only one type of delegate, just like now. All delegate pay will come from "capital infusion", all transaction fees will be burnt.

"Salary delegate" is just a term being thrown for any delegate actively working for the blockchain. For DNS Toast asked us to provide a free (0% pay) delegate in addition to any paid delegates, to fill in the ranks I guess that might be done for BTSX as well.

It seems to differ from what I read here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10679.msg140514#msg140514

Would appreciate if you could explain the new delegate pay-rate mechanism and where this 'capital infusion' comes from.  It seems a delegate (and all delegates) will be getting a substantial pay in the near future.
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: ElMato on October 29, 2014, 04:19:40 pm
We really need a BitAsset specific mobile wallet for iOS and Android. I'd rank this as being very important.

I propose we either hire a delegate to develop a wallet or post a bounty.

Please post any open source wallet projects that can be forked and modified for BitAssets. How can we go from start to finish in as little time as possible?


MethodX,

Based on the information available this is what i think are the options for the mobile wallet.

1) Wait for the mail subsystem to be ready.
    Wait for bitshapire mobile wallet.
    --------------------
    I don't know what is the real status of both.
    Mail subsystem seems to be implemented in some way but i don't know if its usable.


2) Go the bitcoin way.

    Lets forget for a while about TITAN and its benefits (that i like so much) and go the bitcoin way. (No accouns, ugly addresses, etc).
   
    For this to work we need:
   
    a) Backend infrastructure to know the balance of any address.
    b) Backend infrastructure to create and publish transactions. (just "asset transfer" type of transactions, no bid, no ask, etc)
    c) UI design inspired in Circle wallet.
    d) Build the wallet. (just Js+html5)

    a) and b) can be integrated in bitsharesblocks.com

    http://api.blockcypher.com/v1/btc/main/addrs/1DEP8i3QJCsomS4BSMY2RpU1upv62aGvhD/balance
    http://dev.blockcypher.com/reference.html#creating_transactions
 
     d) We should use something like http://ionicframework.com/ to go for Android/iPhone with the same codebase.
   
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: svk on October 29, 2014, 05:44:21 pm
I wouldn't refer to delegate's tx pay in future .. as (from my understanding) the tx fees will be burned completely and the delegates will be payed solely by the .... capital infusion (or what ever we call it now)

Does the burn-complete apply to 'salary' delegates only or all delegates?  How do the delegates get paid from the 'capital infusion'?

There will still be only one type of delegate, just like now. All delegate pay will come from "capital infusion", all transaction fees will be burnt.

"Salary delegate" is just a term being thrown for any delegate actively working for the blockchain. For DNS Toast asked us to provide a free (0% pay) delegate in addition to any paid delegates, to fill in the ranks I guess that might be done for BTSX as well.

It seems to differ from what I read here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10679.msg140514#msg140514

Would appreciate if you could explain the new delegate pay-rate mechanism and where this 'capital infusion' comes from.  It seems a delegate (and all delegates) will be getting a substantial pay in the near future.

BM's just saying how much a delegate with 100% payrate will make at current cap there, nothing about mechanics. But I assume it will work the way it did in DNS, which is the way I explained above. In DNS we all had 1% payrates, so pay won't necessarily  be much higher than today on average. You'll need to be more attentive to the payrate a delegate is proposing however before voting.

This also means transaction fees will counteract the inflation caused by delegate payments, to what degree we'll have to wait and see. I'll start tracking total supply on my site so we can follow it.

Edit: confirming my assumptions: existing delegates will most likely have their payrates set to 1% with the BTS hardfork.

https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/issues/879
Title: Re: Let's post a bounty for a BitAsset mobile wallet?
Post by: Empirical1.1 on October 29, 2014, 06:38:12 pm
I am not sure .. but I have a feeling that KeyGraphs are essential for VOTE and thus a priority due to the upcoming California event.

I agree. KeyGraphcs is important for VOTE.  And the discussion for VOTE is how we started and snowballed into the btsx+vote+dns superDac merger.

Mobile wallets would probably need to get a separate funding.

I think for BTSX, the biggest CAP & the one that will drive funding via dilution, the merger was more about losing key developer focus and the threat of a competing BitAsset. I don't think the CAP of BTSX reflects much value/interest in VOTE at this stage, neither did the snapshot.

If BM thinks focusing on that is an opportunity to make BTS more valuable than the market realises, then I support it, though I imagine the CAP of BTSX soon to be BTS will respond more favourably to new BitAsset developments than Vote/DNS/other add-ons/announcements in the short term.