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 - abit

Pages: 1 ... 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 [215] 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 ... 309
3211
I don't foresee this needing a lot of GUI work, a day at most (a day being 8 hours). As long as there's a flag on the asset that says what type of fee to use, and only transfers are affected, it should be trivial to add a switch to whichever transfer operation type that asset uses.

Fees need a little bit of work but not a whole lot, assuming the percent fee structure is easily available either in the asset object or in global parameters. We estimate fees using the global parameters and the operation type, so that would need to be extended to handle percent fees but that's not hard. And final operation fees are fetched from the witness node so that should not require any work on the GUI.
@svk Imo here is a list of work to be done in GUI:
* add an selection box on the "create asset" page and "update asset" page, so the issuer can set fee mode easily
* show transfer fee mode on asset details page, and maybe somewhere related
* use new operation to do all transfers (although the original operation can still be used on assets with flat mode)
* extend fee estimation to handle percent fees.
* the fee schedule page

Did I miss something?

I think Jakub will provide a document about data structure changes and API changes. Or you can dig into my code (after CNX reviewed)

Thanks for support!

OK.

How is the fee mode switched? Does it use the existing flags and permissions structure?
A new field in "extensions". Please check the examples in OP for reference (haven't been reviewed so far, so don't rely on it right now).
No permission involved so far.
Please let me know if I missed something. Thanks.

3212
Technical Support / Re: is the witness thing running under win?
« on: January 25, 2016, 10:27:02 am »

A few things to check:

1) You are running the latest witness_node (what is the version release?)
2) Your firewall is not blocking witness_node (disable firewall temporary to check)
3) You are connected to at least one seed node and not blocked  (show result of command 'netstat -a' here).
I'm sure @tonyk is running with an old version. The newest version contains a hard fork logic at block #2821745 on Jan. 3.

3213
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Please vote for xn-delegate
« on: January 25, 2016, 10:19:29 am »
you can use it for free and play with it as much as you want ..
hard forks need to be coordinated with me, but since witnesses are centralized, it shouldn't be much of an issuer
I think he wants to be a witness, is it possible in your testnet? Or we need another testnet for people who are willing to become witnesses (I think I've asked this question earlier)?

3214
To @xeroc, @cube and others who are testing or going to test my code:

I'm about to add an extension to the fee structure for easier future extension. After this change, something in the test chain will become incompatible. If replay doesn't work, need to reset the chain to a state before the first propose_fee_change after applied my previous change.

I will post here when the work is done.

I won't add hard fork logic for this change since it's too much work and not very useful imo.

Sorry for the inconvenience, and thanks for support!

3215
CCDK和Openleger交易平台发行了自己的代币。他虽然应用BTS的源代码,但完全抛开了BTS体系,当初按照BM的设想,凡是第三方DAC都要给BTS持有者分发股份。这个事情,坛子里的大侠们给解释一下好吗?俺不太懂!
Openleger是BTS的一个在线钱包。他们发行的代币都是在BTS系统里面运作的,不是所谓”抛开“,也不算是第三方DAC。每笔代币交易都会给BTS系统贡献手续费。

3216
I believe when we dilution 1 USD value BTS, the share holders will lose more than 10 USD.
How so?

Do you think the committee would use their accumulated fee income to pay for workers instead?
I welcome your approach and am willing to be payed by other means as long as can fill my fridge
Although the accumulated fees of bitUSD and etc seem to be a bit high right now, they can only be spent one time.

In the long run, accumulated fee of an asset is not income, it's a swap position between BTS and that asset.

When the fee pool is running out, either sell the accumulated fee into market for BTS to charge fee pool, or request  more BTS via workers. I prefer the former.

3217
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 对当前BTS系统的一些分析
« on: January 25, 2016, 09:25:48 am »
目前的reserve pool里的BTS,按每天消耗50W的话,应该还够烧5-6年(如果我没记错的话),此种情况下,根本不用过多考虑是否有收入,应该全力提升平台的使用价值。
看起来 Alt 的观点是不应该烧,应该先创造利润。
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,21156.0.html

3218
General Discussion / Re: poll for the percent based transfer fee
« on: January 25, 2016, 09:04:04 am »
I don't foresee this needing a lot of GUI work, a day at most (a day being 8 hours). As long as there's a flag on the asset that says what type of fee to use, and only transfers are affected, it should be trivial to add a switch to whichever transfer operation type that asset uses.

Fees need a little bit of work but not a whole lot, assuming the percent fee structure is easily available either in the asset object or in global parameters. We estimate fees using the global parameters and the operation type, so that would need to be extended to handle percent fees but that's not hard. And final operation fees are fetched from the witness node so that should not require any work on the GUI.
Since it's a little off topic here, I posted a reply in my thread.

3219
I don't foresee this needing a lot of GUI work, a day at most (a day being 8 hours). As long as there's a flag on the asset that says what type of fee to use, and only transfers are affected, it should be trivial to add a switch to whichever transfer operation type that asset uses.

Fees need a little bit of work but not a whole lot, assuming the percent fee structure is easily available either in the asset object or in global parameters. We estimate fees using the global parameters and the operation type, so that would need to be extended to handle percent fees but that's not hard. And final operation fees are fetched from the witness node so that should not require any work on the GUI.
@svk Imo here is a list of work to be done in GUI:
* add an selection box on the "create asset" page and "update asset" page, so the issuer can set fee mode easily
* show transfer fee mode on asset details page, and maybe somewhere related
* use new operation to do all transfers (although the original operation can still be used on assets with flat mode)
* extend fee estimation to handle percent fees.
* the fee schedule page

Did I miss something?

I think Jakub will provide a document about data structure changes and API changes. Or you can dig into my code (after CNX reviewed)

Thanks for support!

3220
Technical Support / Re: Discussion of a CFD market on Bitshares
« on: January 24, 2016, 10:58:15 pm »
1.So you have never heard of contracts that can be 'settled' before expiration? Or do you believe no trades in them exist, as it is? I will not go that far and ask about knowledge of mathematically correct ways to determine if and when to do such settlements?

Sorry but Hivemind and Augur's Prediction Markets will make use of CDF's go obsolete...  for the reasons I stated before... holding up collateral is risky and just another needless cost for a trader. 

2. While I have my thoughts on if this is gonna actually work (or work better), I want to ask a simple question first.
Why do you believe it cannot be done in bitshares? What is wrong with the feed price being your reference price and forcing trades within 0.5% of that price during your 'freeze window'/ locking period?

No it can't be done in Bitshares because Bitshares does not use LMSR.  Bitshare needs another party to have collateral, which ensures liquidity problems and thus the bulk of Bitshares problems.  LMSR does not have liquidity issues.
Can this LMSR thing be implemented as a 3rd party market maker bot which runs in BitShares markets, if have some fund? Thanks.

3221
General Discussion / Re: poll for the percent based transfer fee
« on: January 24, 2016, 09:42:36 pm »
These are the next steps:
(1) Create a worker proposal for BSIP#10 - I'll do that this coming week (something like Monday or Tuesday).
And after it is accepted:
(2) Complete the coding and perform initial testing - this area belongs to abit.
(3) Review the code - this will be done by CNX.
(4) Test the implementation on the testnet.
(5) Write the documentation - I'll try to do it with abit's help.
(6) Deploy the implementation with a planned hard-fork (unless hard-fork is not necessary, I'm not sure).

And when the above is complete, we will need to:
(a) pass a committee proposal to establish the min, max & percentage values.
(b) pass another committee proposal which will switch committee-owned smart-coins to percentage-based fee scheme.

So it's quite a long way.
Sounds like a very reasonable approach ..
One advice regarding implementation though: could it be built such that people can
a) easily choose/change the fee model for their asset
GUI development is not included in the steps above. Maybe svk would help? @svk do we need to add budget for GUI development into the worker proposal? If yes, how much?

Quote
b) have an easy way of adding other fee modells as well from which issuers can choose?
I assume that you mean GUI as well? More modes would need more development work at least on the witness_node level. If GUI calculates fees independently (but not by querying witness_node), we may need more development work on GUI side.

The feature "easy to extend in the future" hasn't been added into current implementation yet, I'll add it.

Quote
c) please send a pull request to the bsip repo so that we can have it listed outside of 'issues'
d) drop me a line if you want the testnet upgraded i am looking forward zo figuring out how hard fork are actually done on a running network

3223
How about the fund raising?

3224
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 比特帝国幸运彩票--第001期
« on: January 24, 2016, 04:07:32 pm »
没看懂。。
没玩过彩票,乐透是怎么玩的,怎么和这个对应?

3225
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 对当前BTS系统的一些分析
« on: January 24, 2016, 03:46:37 pm »
主贴已更新。原来关于refund400k的worker理解有误,已修正。感谢 @BTSdac

Pages: 1 ... 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 [215] 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 ... 309