Get the following building from source on both machines:

Code: [Select]


CMake Error at libraries/chain/CMakeLists.txt:30 (add_library):
  Cannot find source file:


    include/graphene/chain/hardfork.hpp


  Tried extensions .c .C .c++ .cc .cpp .cxx .m .M .mm .h .hh .h++ .hm .hpp
  .hxx .in .txx




-- Generating done



See my post below

Quote from: Shentist on January 18, 2016, 08:53:01 pm

is it even possible to pay for it? if i place an order with my account how would you pay with your account?

Fee pool.

So you are going to set CER very high that asset owners don't pay fees, correct?

Quote from: BunkerChain Labs on January 18, 2016, 02:48:10 pm

@monsterer I haven't seen you respond to the prospect of 1bts or 0.5bts fee. Can you explain why this would be unworkable?

It's not unworkable, no - it would just mean we'd need to move the cost into the order fill percentage, maintain our fee pools for our assets and swallow the cost of the cancels.

I assume that you are going to pay order creation fees for your customers, correct? And then fee refund is yours too, so cancellation fee does not matter IMO.
Will 0.5 BTS per filled order makes big difference in your trading fee level?

Fascinating!

this is def something MUSE can handle.

Although PeerTracks at first will be focusing more on the non-financial aspect of getting the concept out.

The tokens would simply be a membership into the artist's fan club (sort of!) where you get attention, perks, privileges, advertiser give-aways, etc.

But I see no reason why the next step wouldn't be to partner with a licensed firm of financial wizards, and make it so that all funds go into a "royalty bond" Token and are distributed to the holders of those new tokens.
Bowie did it ^^
MUSE would just make the process way more streamlined!

Kick ass find Clayop!

You got another marketing point

We soon have OPEN.EUR with 0% deposit fee via SEPA, which is very nice bank transfer system for Euro people.
I'm thinking that we can have BTC-EUR market on DEX using OPEN.EUR and OPENBTC.

Here's some marketing point.

1. It has an honest orderbook
2. The blockchain-based market system cannot be hacked
3. Users can control all of their fund (IOU)
4. With relatively secure system than centralized exchanges, it can have more secure wallet servers


I little researched Kraken, where $2 mil (BTCEUR) traded in last 24 hours, and found couple of points we have to consider to adjust.

1. Withdraw fee (deposit fees are both 0%)
- Kraken: 0.09 Euro
- OPEN.EUR: 3.0%

2. Trading fee
- Kraken: maker 0%~0.16% / taker 0.10~0.26% (Most of cases it maybe around 0.15% / 0.25%)
- OPEN.EUR: 0.3% / OPENBTC: 0.2%

3. Liquidity: we need a market making bot that copies orders from Kraken to DEX (with some aggregation and buffer) @dannotestein

If we can make it, we may get some traction from the world. Any suggestions and comments are more than welcome.

Quote from: clayop on January 18, 2016, 01:53:32 am

Quote from: emailtooaj on January 18, 2016, 01:50:44 am

Quote from: clayop on January 18, 2016, 01:39:35 am

Many good suggestions  But I want to remind that the devs now has very limited resources so we'd better to utilize existing functions.
@monsterer is it impossible to charge 0.5~1 BTS for users per filled order?

@clayop afik it's not the the fee being charged on filled orders.  It's the fee to place the initial order is what's the issue,  hence severely limiting the functions that Monsterer (or any potential integrating exchange) is up against.  @monsterer feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

The "order creation fee" (currently 10 BTS) will be refunded when it's cancelled without any partial fill.

True, but that's a big "buffer/cushion" of BTS required for the exchange to hold and account/anticipate for.  I'm "pretty sure" I know what Monsterer may be up to from him alluding to this "small" problem,  but it's a big problem if your an exchange operator willing to mount on top of BTS and expecting (potentially) thousands of Tx's within a short time frame.  I don't know what the "cancel" before filled frequency is of an exchange, but out of my ass I would think it's around 20-30% with active daily traders. 
Plus you must keep in mind... this isn't just BTS:whatever market. We're talking about any/every market that that exchange decides to open up to their clients. 
That Tx volume scales up very quickly when you're talking about hosting multiple markets to your clients.

This is a road we must go down IMHO and try to find alternate routes/ways to satisfy the fee:spam issues Monsterer is bringing up.
Otherwise, we won't get any serious outside exchanges to integrate BTS with this "global" fee in place.
 

I think users must pay small amount of order creation fee (hopefully 0.5~1 BTS worth). If not, metaexchange will get exploited easily.

Many good suggestions  But I want to remind that the devs now has very limited resources so we'd better to utilize existing functions.
@monsterer is it impossible to charge 0.5~1 BTS for users per filled order?

Isn't there a way to pass those fees onto users instead of metaexchange? Why dont you just charge the fee on top of whatever amount they transfer

This is my thought