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 - karnal

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ... 72
271
General Discussion / [STEEM] Feature request post got drowned in new stuff
« on: July 14, 2016, 04:13:11 pm »
https://steemit.com/steem/@karnal/feature-request-visually-indicate-that-re-upvoting-after-payout-is-not-possible

Seems to be harder these days for new posts from little fish to gain traction ... perhaps something to do with the change in voting rewards and the 30 minute thing?

272
Technical Support / Re: How could we capture some of steemits' userbase?
« on: July 14, 2016, 03:52:59 pm »
Quote from: mudshark79 on July 14, 2016, 11:57:41 am
New Eyeballs:

https://steemit.com/steem/@diego24/you-know-what-would-be-really-cool

I've often commented that capturing the forex + stocks market could be very, very good for Bitshares..

Have you seen the amount of fees/commissions brokers take for every order? Bitshares can do much better.

For FOREX it seems clear enough, interface a nice-looking website that looks more like a trader app than a cryptonerd wallet to the bitshares blockchain, and allow withdrawals/deposits of funds through BTC and EUR (through OpenLedger; lets ignore they do USD as well, no one from the US [in their right mind] will send dollars to Europe, it takes forever and is too expensive) ..

Individual stocks seem more like a job for companies providing UIAs.

Whole-market ETFs (SP500, NASDAQ, etc) though, I think should also be available as smartcoins ..

273
Technical Support / Re: How could we capture some of steemits' userbase?
« on: July 14, 2016, 09:20:45 am »
meh, cloudflare just ate the whole post with the stupid captchas again..

@xeroc, I understand the userbases are almost non-overlapping, but I believe there is something that we could leverage to capture (it's not either/or bitshares/steemit) a good chunk of the userbase from steemit.

And that is, personal finance.. and saving.

There is one initial big wall already on this line of thought, that being SBD paying interest, which BitUSD doesn't ..

But soon enough, with the growth that Steemit has seen, there will be users from other places with strong currencies - and if we could have bitAUD, bitNZD, bitCAD and so on waiting for them, I suspect more than a few would prefer holding their national currencies instead.

We could pen articles over time about diversifying risk and how money sitting in a bank isn't exactly risk safe, and how keeping some of your stash in SteemUSD and bitNZD may be a wise idea ..


Just seems like too good an opportunity to pass up somehow .. so many non-crypto people joining steemit, and all steemit offers is SBD (which is pretty good, mind you) .. I wonder if common, not-too-technical and not-too-financial people would be interested in diversifying into bitGold, bitSilver, bitCHF, and the others I mentioned .. we could advertise bitshares as the "swiss bank account in your pocket" that made the rounds some time ago ..

Maybe. What do you think ?

274
Technical Support / How could we capture some of steemits' userbase?
« on: July 14, 2016, 08:43:08 am »
As Steemit introduces thousands to crypto, it's been on my mind to leverage steemits' growth and somehow translate that to an increase of users for bitshares as well.

So far I'm coming up pretty blank, I mean, SBD even pay interest ..

Some less obvious things are promoting bitshares as a platform where steemit users could get price exposition to gold/silver, and to hedge in other fiats as well (I've always thought that a forex market based on smartcoins here on bitshares would be a great use case).


Help me out here. You're a crypto-clueless user, now banking some SteemUSD .. what do you need Bitshares for?

275
Technical Support / Re: Stealth Transactions - Any ETA?
« on: July 13, 2016, 04:26:23 pm »
Any updates?

276
Random Discussion / Re: Hello?
« on: July 05, 2016, 09:36:27 pm »
Sure seems quiet around here lately .. people going to steemit or interest in bitshares dying down?

277
Technical Support / Re: IPv6 support?
« on: July 05, 2016, 08:30:31 am »
IMO it's extremely important, in order to future-proof graphene, to support IPv6.

The days of IPv4 are nearly done (really, for sure, this decade. maybe.)

But seriously.

@Stan maybe you can ping BM about this?

278
Technical Support / Re: IPv6 support?
« on: July 02, 2016, 09:19:09 am »
@xeroc ? @bytemaster ?

279
General Discussion / Re: 9 reasons why Banks should use BitShares Blockchain - comments needed
« on: July 01, 2016, 11:12:41 am »
Quote from: xeroc on July 01, 2016, 10:48:56 am
Quote from: EstefanTT on July 01, 2016, 09:38:51 am
The first comment that comes in my mind is that I don't think banks will ever join BitShares or any other non private Blockchain.

They want solid and permanent rules, they don't want them changed after a vote from a community. When the time will come for banks to use Blockchain technology, they will probably use private Blockchain. Maybe with decentralisation but cover by their offices.

It's just my opinion but if the title of the article is not realistic (says the guy who wrote : "Why BitShares is not already worth 1 billion dollar ?" ^^) the logic will be hard to articulate.
I agree with this sentiment and have already made this very same experience. Banks certainly want to use Graphene, but probably not BitShares.
That ultimately leaves us to the conclusion that BitShares and bitAssets are meant to be used BY THE PEOPLE and not by the banks. Cheers

Agreed.

Not only are banks too much of a control freak (broadly speaking), they're also impossibly encumbered by REGULATIONS (be careful what you wish for, in the crypto space.. for it may end up where it begun), which can have them being fined millions of dollars, for something that was out of their control.

280
General Discussion / Re: [RSVP Today!] BeyondBitcoin Decentralized Conference #162 - 7/1/16
« on: June 30, 2016, 03:49:07 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on June 30, 2016, 09:46:18 am
I can't make it as I am on my graduation celebration

Congrats!

281
Technical Support / IPv6 support?
« on: June 29, 2016, 02:21:02 pm »
How's the status of IPv6 support in graphene?

Relevant and related question, will a witness_node horribly break if it cannot reach a good portion of the network (say ipv6 support is there, but only 10% other nodes run on ipv6, and this witness_node can only talk ipv6) ?

282
General Discussion / Re: How-To: Use BitShares via the Interplanetary File System (IPFS)
« on: June 29, 2016, 02:18:12 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on June 29, 2016, 02:07:54 pm
Quote from: karnal on June 29, 2016, 01:38:54 pm
What's the advantage? Or is this for geek-fun purposes :)
Easy to mirror and thus impossible to take down ..

The wallet code is easy to mirror and impossible to take down as it is already, I'd say.

What good is the wallet code if the api connection is blocked? That's fairly easy to do (if we're considering this level of threat, from that type of adversary), and fairly easy to work around as well, with the right tech skills.

Don't get me wrong, it's a cool gimmick for sure (the whole ipfs concept), but the weak spot here is the api connection, not the wallet code.

Either I grossly misunderstand ipfs, or in the end, it's your computer that's going to connect() to the api server.

Implementing proxy support on the light client (https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene-ui/issues/857) goes further to help combat censorship and improve privacy, imo; it would also allow for api endpoints to run on onionland (already possible by transparently proxying the app through tor, but out of reach for 99% of the target users, so yeah), further improving privacy as well.

Just my 2 cents.


283
General Discussion / Re: How-To: Use BitShares via the Interplanetary File System (IPFS)
« on: June 29, 2016, 01:38:54 pm »
What's the advantage? Or is this for geek-fun purposes :)

284
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« on: June 29, 2016, 10:37:50 am »
Quote from: mike623317 on June 28, 2016, 07:40:59 pm
Quote from: svk on June 27, 2016, 11:00:59 am
I appreciate the effort put into the OP, but I have to disagree with most of it. The one thing I do agree with is point 2: the liquidity proposals. I do think some kind of liqudity incentives need to be implemented, but we probably need some more discussion and some concrete proposals by developers able to implement them (@abit ?) before we decide what to do here.

Otherwise, I'm happy to finally see some stability in terms of features for Bitshares, and will not support any kind of 3.0 involving a change in the supply or IPO. We now have Ronny from Openledger stepping up to support development of the GUI, and many other projects taking advantage of the recent stability of BTS, let's not jeopardise that.

I also have no problems whatsoever with DPOS as the consensus model, it's been working very well and there's no point changing it if you ask me. While implementing a queued mining system like Steem has might be possible, I don't really think it's worth the effort. Mining will slowly disappear from crypto if you ask me so we would be adding support for a legacy, wasteful, soon-to-be obsolete system. Keep in mind I'm not saying it will disappear soon here, but over time I think it will become less and less important.

 +5% +5% Well said SVK. Good points.

+5%

285
Technical Support / Re: The case for bitGOLD and bitSILVER
« on: June 29, 2016, 10:36:29 am »
^^ Regarding the exchange integration, I'd say there's a time component to it (though it shouldn't be rushed ahead of liquidity, at the very least), as we'll likely become established as the go-to token for metals if we get listed before DGX.

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ... 72

Page created in 0.195 seconds with 23 queries.