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 - gn1

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9
46
Technical Support / Brainkey verification is not working
« on: March 12, 2016, 08:57:32 am »
One person reported a problem to me saying that "verification of brainkey" is not working. Basically, he is trying to copy and paste the brainkey into the textbox, but gets the error message, "Brainkey does not match, keep going…"

I was able to replicate it on my account as well. I'm not sure which version of Openledger introduced this problem, but can you guys take a look at this, please?

47
General Discussion / Re: Cannot create account on Openledger
« on: March 07, 2016, 04:54:59 pm »
It worked. Can this problem be fixed permanently?

48
General Discussion / Re: Cannot create account on Openledger
« on: March 05, 2016, 02:24:26 pm »
Anybody else experiencing this issue?

49
General Discussion / Re: Cannot create account on Openledger
« on: March 04, 2016, 12:09:55 pm »
I tried just now, but I get the unknown error.

Something's definitely wrong.

50
General Discussion / Cannot create account on Openledger
« on: March 04, 2016, 04:11:04 am »
Two people are reporting the same problem where they get the error message, "Failed to create account: - unknown error" when trying to create an account on Openledger. Can you advise if something is going on?

51
Two questions.

1. How does the collab of Openledger and MUSE work? I thought Openledger and Muse are two separate blockchains.

2. What if songs are already registered on performance rights organizations? Are you able to add the songs on Peertracks?

52
Technical Support / Vesting Period question
« on: January 19, 2016, 03:43:26 am »
Somebody has just upgraded to lifetime member through me. That was good, but I have realized that the "Days left of vesting period" jumped back up to 82 days. Why is this the case?

Why would my other vesting fees get affected just because new money came into "Vesting balance amount"?

53
Technical Support / Re: About reducing supply of UIAs
« on: January 07, 2016, 09:13:40 am »
Question.
I found the link below, but is this the way to install the CLI wallet on a Mac?

https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/wiki/Building-on-OS-X

54
Technical Support / Re: Paying network fee via UIA or BTS
« on: January 04, 2016, 02:58:59 am »
The features is there already .. but only available to the blockchain level. It's not yet exposed to the end-user in the GUI

Devs are working on it:
https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene-ui/issues/356

This is in regards to issue #356.
I see that this function is now implemented on GUI level, but only for fee transfers.
Is there a plan to allow user to select the method of payment for network fees for trading (placing limit orders)?

There have been discussions about how to best do it. We don't want to make trading too difficult for people .. hence this will probably be an "advanced" setting ..
But its on the list of things to do!

Thanks for letting me know that BROWNIE.PTS was created during BitShares 1. No wonder I cannot configure it the same way on BitShares 2.

Okay, so since core exchange rate cannot be set to zero for assets created in BitShares 2.0, I guess I have to wait for this "advanced" setting to be implemented in the future. Hopefully.
FYI it's already possible to set fees in BTS or UIA while transferring / trading with the latest GUI.
//Edit: by now it will pay fee in BTS while trading if fee pool is insufficient. See https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene-ui/issues/628

Thanks for letting me now that system will try to pay fee in BTS while trading if fee pool is empty. Since I don't know how long I must wait for this "advanced" setting to get launched, so emptying out the fee pool sounds like a good workaround.

55
Technical Support / Re: Paying network fee via UIA or BTS
« on: December 22, 2015, 03:24:41 pm »
The features is there already .. but only available to the blockchain level. It's not yet exposed to the end-user in the GUI

Devs are working on it:
https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene-ui/issues/356

This is in regards to issue #356.
I see that this function is now implemented on GUI level, but only for fee transfers.
Is there a plan to allow user to select the method of payment for network fees for trading (placing limit orders)?

There have been discussions about how to best do it. We don't want to make trading too difficult for people .. hence this will probably be an "advanced" setting ..
But its on the list of things to do!

Thanks for letting me know that BROWNIE.PTS was created during BitShares 1. No wonder I cannot configure it the same way on BitShares 2.

Okay, so since core exchange rate cannot be set to zero for assets created in BitShares 2.0, I guess I have to wait for this "advanced" setting to be implemented in the future. Hopefully.

56
Technical Support / Re: Paying network fee via UIA or BTS
« on: December 21, 2015, 05:23:05 pm »
all assets that have been migrated from BitShares 1, start with a CER of 0

Hold on. Are you saying that BROWNIES.PTS was issued during BItShares 1?

57
Technical Support / Re: Paying network fee via UIA or BTS
« on: December 18, 2015, 08:10:48 pm »
The blockchain allows for a core exchange rate of zero (obviously) hence it is a bug in the GUI

https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene-ui/issues/543

Thank you for the reply. I now understand it's a GUI bug. I will keep following this issue on Github.

I realized that this was closed by svk31 with the message, "Seems xeroc was mistaken and it's not actually possible to set a zero or null cer. I've added the ability to set the CER on creation however, and also hid the asset selection in asset update for assets that have a valid (CORE + the asset to update) combination of CER assets."

In that case, how was BROWNIE.PTS configured as zero core exchange rate by bytemaster?

58
Bump.

bytemaster is mentioning about this thread on this week's beyond Bitcoin hangout, between 24:14 - 26:50. You should definitely listen to it, if audio helps you understand it better than text.

https://soundcloud.com/beyond-bitcoin-hangouts/beyond-bitcoin-hangout-12-11-2015-s3

I am hoping that the BitShares community starts seeing the importance of changing the market fee structure of BTS, when considering the risks that UIA issuers are taking.

59
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: MUSE 1.0.151101 released
« on: December 09, 2015, 03:45:51 pm »
I'm trying to look into the possibility of MUSE.

Does MUSE have an online wallet host, equivalent to OpenLedger? If so, please provide me the link.

60
Quote
I really like crediting the fee pool of the issuer with the BTS market fees.  That is like giving "store credit", they can only cash it out by spending it with the blockchain. 

I also like the idea of allowing BTS to yield to UIA fee settings.

Great! I knew you will like the idea. I think this will encourage the UIA issuer to put in more effort and capital in their UIA to try to jumpstart their own asset.

Quote
The primary issue I have is that putting in "special cases" for BTS asset that don't apply to all assets makes the code more error prone and the system more complex to explain in general.  Currently most of the code is written in a manner that it doesn't care what the asset types involved are, they are treated equally.

I understand coding to some extent, but my brain operates more like a businessman/trader than a coder, so I don't see the magnitude of the change you need to make in the BitShares code to put in special cases for BTS asset.

Does this sound like a big-sized project?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9