The Bitshares Beet multiwallet is still under active development; a new version will be released soon which can fully interact with the new NFT issuance & viewer applications.

https://github.com/bitshares/beet
https://github.com/bitshares/beet-js

The Bitshares NFT issuance application is now available to the public.

Now available as packaged Linux (deb) and Windows (exe) applications, no coding experience required!

Check it out!
https://github.com/BTS-CM/Bitshares_NFT_Issuance_Tool/releases

To use this tool you'll need the following:
* A compiled Bitshares BEET wallet (develop branch: https://github.com/bitshares/beet/tree/develop)
* A Bitshares account with either an NFTEA NFT (https://nftea.gallery/gallery) or 100,000 BTS in its portfolio.
  * Tune into the Bitshares fractal meetings: https://gofractally.com/share/2g02Rvd0B3tOCpWi?utm_source=manual on tuesdays to potentially receive free NFTEA NFTs to use this tool.
* Enough BTS to cover create/edit asset network fees.
* Your art uploaded to an IPFS pinning service

Don't forget to check out https://nftea.gallery

---

Relevant Hive blog post: https://hive.blog/bitshares/@nftea.gallery/bitshares-nft-issuance-app-has-been-released-v1-0-0

Check out the NFTEA Gallery (https://nftea.gallery), it's a Bitshares blockchain powered NFT gallery.

The NFTs follow the Bitshares NFT spec: https://github.com/Bit20-Creative-Group/BitShares-NFT-Specification

Images are both cached and accessible from IPFS.

At the time of this post there are 34 NFTs listed on the NFTEA gallery, check them out and get collecting!

Follow the NFTEA Gallery's Twitter account for updates: https://twitter.com/NFTEA_Gallery

---

Big shout out to the other Bitshares NFT galleries:
https://artcasa.gallery/
https://alguienalli.github.io/

https://twitter.com/BittrexUS/status/1090316794299072512

Re-Listing Update: The Bitshares market is open, and trading will begin shortly on https://bittrex.com/ . For more information about BitShares (BTS) visit: https://bitshares.org/  #Bittrex $BTS

After over a year, Bittrex has re-listed Bitshares on their exchange, thanks to the Bitshares legal representative (https://www.bitshares.foundation/workers/2018-02-legal-council-bts) for working with Bittrex to resolve this situation.

Huzzah! On another note, the price on Bittrex has shot up because of the thin order book, here's hoping it spreads to the other exchanges 👌

FAO Bitshares users: Claim your WLS!

Account creations have been opened to everyone, even if you did not have a Bitshares account that qualified for the sharedrop snapshot on August 1st.

Claim deadline: 15th September 2018

If you miss the sharedrop claim deadline then you'll no longer be able to claim your stake! Make sure to claim your sharedrop before then!

If you need to claim your sharedrop:

• Make sure you have 1 WHALESHARE token in your Bitshares Account Wallet.
• Make sure you have at least 0.2 BTS in your Bitshares Account Wallet. (Fee)
• Go to https://wls.services
• Follow the instructions provided in the Official Sharedrop Announcement.

If you are not claiming and just want to create an account:

• Make sure you have 1 WHALESHARE token in your Bitshares Account Wallet.
• Make sure you have at least 0.2 BTS in your Bitshares Account Wallet. (Fee)
• Go to https://newacc.wls.services
• Follow the instructions provided in the Official Sharedrop Announcement.
• The process is the same as 'claiming with a new account'.

💡 If you don't have 1 WHALESHARE token, you can buy one on the DEX with BTS: https://wallet.bitshares.org/#/market/WHALESHARE_BTS

Related: https://whaleshares.io/whaleshares/@whaleshares/whaleshares-io-and-bitsharestalk-io-main-launch

Should we require asset owner permission to use said asset as backing collateral for an MPA?

Recently, issue #1537 in the bitshares-ui Github repo highlighted the fact that despite the UI and documentation indicating that UIA cannot be used to back an MPA on the BTS DEX, the reality actually is that UIA are an allowed backing collateral asset type in the core code.

This BSIP is not arguing for/against UIA being used as an MPA's backing collateral, because this is already enforced by core (Abit has a testnet asset configured as such).

The purpose of this BSIP discussion is to decide whether or not you should require owner permissions/approval of the asset being assigned as backing collateral for a new MPA.

---

Why I think we should require permission

• Any assets locked away as MPA backing collateral cannot be reclaimed/recalled by the UIA owner (even by force). This has the consequence of being unable to reduce the supply to 0, potentially preventing asset settings from being changed or the asset from being fully shutdown.
• By 'wrapping' an UIA in an MPA 'container' the MPA owner can effectively impose new asset settings over the existing UIA flags/permissions/settings to the potential detriment of the UIA owner.

Why perhaps we shouldn't require such permissions

• An asset owner may refuse (or be unable to) provide permission to use the asset as backing collateral, requiring an alternative asset for backing collateral.
• The committee may be overwhelmed with requests to use committee owned assets as backing collateral, though that's subjective.
• The committee would have a greater centralized control of backing collateral selection on the BTS DEX, however that could result in more private MPAs being created. The committee size could be increased too to offset risk.
• Existing MPA with non-BTS backing collateral may make implementing such a permission requirement too complex? Perhaps existing MPA could be exempt?
• What if the asset owner removed their approval at a later date? It'd have to be permanent approval unless supply was 0.
• What happens if you have owner permissions of the backing asset & MPA, then transferred the backing asset ownership to another account?
• Being able to avoid market fees and replace restrictive permission flags with an MPA is pretty cool.

Exclusions: The Bitshares core token (BTS) should be excluded, as nobody has ownership permissions over it.

Github link: https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/80

---

What are your thoughts?

Can you think of any reasons for/against requiring permission to use an asset as backing collateral for an MPA?

https://steemit.com/bitshares/@stan/bitshares-org-gets-long-awaited-face-lift

Stan/Cryptonomex apparently just transferred ownership of bitshares.org to Apasia.tech - a for-profit entity that isn't an active witness/committee member nor a part of the Bitshares foundation.

Is anyone else concerned by this? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate for the ownership transfer to have been made to the committee, witnesses or to the bitshares foundation instead of a private for-profit company?

Take precautions - I'd consider using the light wallet over the reference org wallet until we know what's going on.

Cheers