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 - R

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 ... 69
376
General Discussion / Re: Bts is ill
« on: August 27, 2019, 08:38:52 pm »
The emission of BTS from worker proposals is not the source of price downtrend; don't spread that misinformation. Austerity is not a sustainable economic policy, it does far more harm than good. By voting for refund400k you risk loss of development capabilities, loss of marketing opportunities, you put the security of the network and client at risk by impeding development.

Don't vote for refund400k because of the low price of BTS, it's going to do more harm than good. The majority of the recently de-activated and currently active worker proposals are worth funding and are not the cause of BTS price downtrend.

377
I don't see how this worker would help the value of BTS.
Not only you see no value in this worker, but also the majority of the voters see now value in this worker proposal.

We already know:
MCR = 2.0 -> low liquidity -> unsafe
MCR = 1.01 -> unlimited liquidity -> 100% safe

Our problem is now liquidity and BTS price and not to set the parameter for MCR/MSSR!

My proposal does solve the problem by increasing the liquidity and the demand for BTS:
Margin position liquidity pool - https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/182
How would you configure the settings for algorithm based assets? Not all smartcoins are market pegged assets & the recommended settings and possibilities for algorithm based assets is lacking.

This worker proposal could provide new smartcoin setting profiles for multiple theoretical assets & that's valuable information to me and probably others.

378
General Discussion / Re: Huge spending will lead to the collapse of BTS
« on: August 27, 2019, 08:24:23 pm »
What's more, these workers are extremely corrupt, wasteful and inefficient.
This statement is outright false, cease spreading FUD. As far as I'm aware, none of the recently de-activated (nor currently active) worker proposals are corrupt nor wasteful/inefficient. Don't make accusations without evidence.

From my personal experience, I've found that the core & UI development worker proposals are excellent value for money, they have addressed multiple issues I've reported in a timely manner on github and have aided the resolution of multiple high severity security vulnerabilities reported through hackthedex in the last year.

See large quantity of releases completed thanks to worker proposals:
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/releases
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/releases

Look at the security vulnerabilities which no longer affect you thanks to worker proposals: (More to come)
https://hackthedex.io/#/reports

The cost of worker proposals is appropriate for specialist contractors working with uncertain employment conditions. If you believe you can achieve more work for less money, submit a worker proposal for such work or stop complaining.

I appeal to all of you vote on "redund400k", to reduce this huge expenditure and rescue BTS.
Worker payment is not the source of BTS price downtrend, do not spread fake information.

Rather than scuttling all ongoing worker proposals (massively disrupting BTS development & marketing), you could instead request that the committee re-balances thereferrer:network fee distribution from 80:20 so that the reserve pool funds grow.

By voting for voter400k you choose austerity rather than innovation; austerity as an economic policy fundamentally does not work. By voting for refund400k you send the wrong signal to investors. Furthermore by voting for refund400k you risk the network and your own security as severe security risks reported through the Hackthedex worker may go unresolved.

I think our differences lie mainly in our different positions.
I hold bts, so I want to raise the price, and you are workers, do not own bts, so you do not care about the price.You want to get paid by  worker.
I disagree with your positions entirely, and I've held BTS long term. Worker proposals are not the source of negative price trends, don't spread that misinformation. I've been paid by worker proposals and largely just held the bitUSD since being paid rather than dump it instantly.

379
General Discussion / Re: why not borrowing?
« on: August 25, 2019, 01:00:00 am »
Borrowing the norns recently, less risky than borrowing MPA IMO. https://norns.hertz.network

380
General Discussion / Re: Best Way To Secure BTS In 2019?
« on: August 25, 2019, 12:59:00 am »
supporting the hackthedex worker proposal 👍

381
Real solutions to our real problems:
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/pull/189#issuecomment-524290160
How does this relate to worker proposals though? Increasing the % split between referrer:network for network from 20% without changing overall fees is a fast fix for any concerns regarding worker proposal emissions.

I greatly hope that the refund400k worker proposal votes will be reversed, as multiple highly important worker proposals require funding in a timely manner. Austerity is a failed economic policy.

382
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Worker] Integration of BTS with Wirex
« on: August 25, 2019, 12:52:34 am »
This worker is good only if wirex are willing to create a "BitAssets" stablecoin alternative to how much account holder is handling at their end, this will let Wirex users to exchange between BTS and Wirex "BitAssets" stablecoin and withdraw "BitAssets" by cards at any time.

This has to be discussed with Wirex, and the integration for this from their side is not complex.

OTHERWISE IT WILL BE JUST ANOTHER LEGACY COIN FASHION LISTING AT CEX
Meanwhile major amount of BTS are dumped as bounty to get bitCNY listed on CEX? Getting BTS integrated will provide EMEA debit card access which massively simplifies using Bitshares for everyday finances IRL. What you propose is out of scope.

This has to be discussed with Wirex, and the integration for this from their side is not complex.
You may have missed that the real thing here is the legal paper work for being compliant with credit card networks!
It surely not about the technicalities of integrating bitshares.

Also, if you can convince their lawyers that bitAssets are not securities, then that can be done right afterwards.

Before trying to convince their lawyers; we have to design the bitAssets to not get classified as a security.

I suggest to have discussions about the current design and mechanism of profits of the bitAssets then to study how can bitAssets pass the howey test initially before starting promoting bitAssets in a common enterprise that facilitates cards transactions.

Why? The worker proposal states that BTS will be integrated primarily, not the bitassets - thus your concerns are out of scope.

383
General Discussion / Re: bitshares 101 - bitshares.finance
« on: August 21, 2019, 04:05:43 pm »
Is the proposal to list some of the bitshares smartcoins/bitassets on your defi website?

Which assets would be in scope?

384
On the one side 201907-uccs-research-project does create a problem, where there is actually is no problem, but doesn't solve any of our real problems.
The BitShares community is already aware MCR = 1.5 and MSSR = 1.01 is the sweet spot.

A very quick answer: how do you know there is no problem? The community chose the older chain parameters and then crypto winter caused most BitAssets to GS. Since then, you've adjusted the parameters to shift more risk onto BitAsset holders. Why would those new parameters be better?

A question back to you: How do you know that 1.5 and 1.01 are the sweet spot? Why not 1.2 and 1?
If optimal configurations are discovered or BSIPs are proposed from the research then it's totally worth the worker proposal investment. There's quite limited documentation on the effects of smartcoin settings and exotic smartcoins like algorithm based assets.

385
Looking for further price feed publishers for the norns. Perhaps a BSIP would be the best way to get witness feed attention? 😂

386
General Discussion / Re: Allow non-LTM accounts to be referrers?
« on: August 19, 2019, 06:59:26 pm »
Rather than entirely removing the LTM requirement, what about a minimum BTS balance requirement for referral mechanism access?
It still means you need to invest some money before you're possible to earn money. Small marketers won't touch it.
At least 1 BTS would mean they've at least used the platform before they're decided to promote it. Might deter bot sign ups?

387
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Worker] Integration of BTS with Wirex
« on: August 19, 2019, 06:37:01 pm »
I hope that this worker proposal will be reactivated, I've got a wirex card now and have been using it across Europe, it's very handy. 👍

388
I hope that your worker proposal can be reactivated soon, I support your research worker proposal 👍

389
Would you consider voting for a smaller refund worker proposal, rather than the refund400k?

I do not believe that austerity works, we aught to be steadily investing in most of the proposed worker proposals.

I'm hoping that we can reactivate the following worker proposals:
* Wirex - Using wirex with BTS would enable me to spend BTS like a normal bank card, it's a great ongoing development for the EMEA Bitshares ecosystem.
* Bitshares UI development - I view this worker proposal as highly productive, improving the reference UI is an excellent investment for the global Bitshares ecosystem. Without this worker proposal, there may be a lack of developers available to resolve new issues reported in the HackTheDex worker proposal.
* Bitshares code development - Very productive worker proposal, multiple releases recently and excellent new functionality being introduced to the network. It would be unfortunate to lose UI or core devs due to loss of funding, we need this development capability to further thwart any issues reported through the HackTheDex wp.
* Conferences - Bitshares is so rarely marketed, these would be an excellent opportunity to get Bitshares some good exposure (worthwhile investment).
* uccs research project - I believe this is highly valuable, it will improve Bitshares academic credibility and I'm confident that its research will lead to new novel assets and optimized bitasset settings for the Bitshares platform.

I do not believe that any of the currently active Bitshares worker proposals are the cause of the downtrend in the Bitshares prices, the worker proposal fund emissions are lower than most other cryptocurrencies.

390
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares at the cross roads
« on: August 17, 2019, 04:44:39 pm »
What's the next rainfalls on staked BTS?

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 ... 69