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 ... 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 [218] 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 ... 309
3256
General Discussion / Re: Percentage based transfer fee [BSIP10] implemented
« on: January 20, 2016, 02:11:10 pm »
Quote from: jakub on January 20, 2016, 10:55:09 am
Quote from: abit on January 20, 2016, 09:17:59 am
Since BSIP#10 is currently a "draft", which means it hasn't been accepted by stake holders, I'd rather setup my worker later. @jakub would you like to setup a voting worker for BSIP#10 first, so that we can know whether the stake holders want this feature?

@abit , I'll be glad to add a voting worker for BSIP#10 - it will take 1-2 days because I need to educate myself how to create a worker proposal. It's good we have the testnet now so I'll have some space to practice.
Thanks for the help  :D

Quote
Also, those two aspects are not clear to me:

(1) Do we all agree that percentage-based fees can rely safely on CER? This is the core concept of BSIP#10 and there hasn't been much discussion about it.
The whole thing relies on the fact that issuers will not have an incentive to game the system by setting CER far below the actual market value of their assets.
Issuers can do this, and they have rights to do so. Personally I don't see anything bad from this point.

Quote
(2) You've proposed 3M BTS for the development work.
Does it include the whole thing, i.e. coding, testing , reviewing the code by CNX and UI support in the GUI?
The 3M BTS I proposed is for "my work", which includes coding of "witness_node" and "cli_wallet", as well as "my" testing in one or more private networks and/or public networks. It doesn't include (possibly needed) payment for work done by other parties. Any other parties have the rights of asking for pay for doing some additional work, including but not limited to code review,  code merge, discussion, write feature specification documents, write tutorial documents, write GUI code, setup public network, help testing, escrow and etc, which are out of my control, and currently no consensus has been reached yet. I'm definitely willing to help reach a consensus, although I'm not good at doing it.

So I'd rather like to see a poll for "features" first. After reached a consensus, we can go on and start another poll for "price" and/or "payment". Maybe I made things too complicated though.

Quote from: Bhuz on January 20, 2016, 01:21:08 pm
Can we arrive at a "final" proposal for BSIP#10 before doing any kind of worker and voting stuff?

I don't think the current settings are really the best for the network. There is too much focus on referral at the expenses of the net.
IMO the net should come first as I already stated.

Quote from: Bhuz on January 19, 2016, 09:18:18 pm
I also would prefer to see this:
"the minimum fee always goes to network, and if 20% of a fee exceeds lower limit, 20:80 scheme can be applied"

I don't see why if the 20% fee cut for the net is higher than lower_limit, the net should only take lower_limit and not his actual cut of 20%.

I also would prefer to see the network take no less than the lower_limit if his 20% cut is not enough. IMO it should *at least* take the lower_limit also at the expenses of the referrer if needed.
At the end of the day the network handle the transactions and "pay" for them, so it should be the first to get a cut...

If ppl do not like the fact that the net comes first, at least we should allow the net to get is 20% cut also when it is higher than the lower_limit.

The network won't loss any if parameters are finely tuned. Bottom line, if with flat mode network get 6BTS, with percentage mode network can also get 6BTS by setting the lower limit to 6BTS.
Sorry for discussing the features here.

3257
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 按百分比计算转账手续费功能，开发完成
« on: January 20, 2016, 09:56:47 am »
Quote from: BTSdac on January 20, 2016, 01:35:20 am
所有的费用都是按core asset ---bts 收费, 那么如果转帐是资产的时候怎么收费?
“4. 按资产的core_exchange_rate将每笔转账的价值转换为BTS，进而计算百分比、判断上下限，确定收费多少
   （相当于股市里按股票面值算过户费，而不是按股价来算。资产发行人可以根据需要调整core_exchange_rate）
”
如果资产没有设置core_exchange_rate，就按固定费率来收。

Quote from: alt on January 20, 2016, 04:14:17 am
Quote from: btswildpig on January 20, 2016, 03:41:30 am
Quote from: bitcrab on January 20, 2016, 03:18:40 am
除了申请worker还能怎样？
FBA吧
steal transfer可以用fba，我可以选择不用这个功能。transfer用fba我可以选择不用这个功能吗？
FBA可以考虑。如果选择FBA，大概会是这样：
* 设置为按比例付转账费的资产，转账时手续费分1BTS给FBA持有者；这样如果一天100笔转账，收到300万BTS要82年
* 如果资产设置为固定方式付费，那么费用按原来的分配方式，即20%网络80%推荐系统。

Quote from: agree on January 20, 2016, 07:34:28 am
支持！顺便问一个弱智的问题，我们持有OBITS，如果OPENLEDER耍赖，不给我们分红，我们怎么办？
不给分红，只能去找他算账吧？UIA是需要信任的。

Quote from: alt on January 20, 2016, 04:19:05 am
为什么比特币的旷池不改为按比例收手续费呢，那得赚多少钱啊
1.矿池现在主要不靠手续费赚钱，主要靠挖矿赚钱
2.矿池现在也可以按比例收手续费，矿池可以选择如果手续费太低，不打包交易
3.矿池收费是互相竞争的。一旦挖矿难度增加，手续费占收入比例增加之后，在交易不够多，没有达到块容量上限的情况下，收费低的矿池打包的交易多，赚的钱可能就会多。如果交易多到块容量不够用，矿池会选择打包手续费高的交易。


3258
Technical Support / Re: Does cryptofresh.com has any API?
« on: January 20, 2016, 09:34:49 am »
Quote from: madforstrength on January 20, 2016, 06:58:59 am
Hi guys,

Thanks a lot to all of you for your help.

I have created a recursive function to get the list of all assets (as mentioned by @svk )
Then I filtered the assets in to smartcoins and userIssuedAssets by checking if they contain "bitasset_data_id" and their issuer is "1.2.0" (as mentioned by @xeroc )
After that I fetched number of holders of each asset from http://cryptofresh.com/api/holders?asset=OPENMUSE (as mentioned by @roadscape )

I got around 15 smartcoins having holders>0 and 45 userIssuedAssets having holders>3. This is perfectly fine.

Now to remove settled assets from this list I am fetching objects using "bitasset_data_id" and checking if the "settlement_fund" > 0 then the asset is settled. is it ok?
You may have filtered out TCNY and TUSD, which are private smart coins.

3259
General Discussion / Re: Percentage based transfer fee [BSIP10] implemented
« on: January 20, 2016, 09:17:59 am »
Quote from: fuzzy on January 20, 2016, 06:06:29 am
nice...wouldn't a worker proposal do?  Also, would this work be to hold the funds or would it be to sell them?  Would it be possible to hold at least some of them or vest some of them?
Thanks.

Worker proposal would be an option. If funding this way, for me it's acceptable to vest ~80% of them for one year or so, personally I would like to hold. Better if the vesting fund can vote, I'm not sure. However, if need to pay others, for example pay CNX for code review and/or someone for escrow, that part may need to be vested already.

Since BSIP#10 is currently a "draft", which means it hasn't been accepted by stake holders, I'd rather setup my worker later. @jakub would you like to setup a voting worker for BSIP#10 first, so that we can know whether the stake holders want this feature?

Another funding option would be FBA or something similar. For example, with each transfer, 1 BTS of fee paid to FBA holders or so.

Thoughts?

3260
General Discussion / Re: Percentage based transfer fee [BSIP10] implemented
« on: January 20, 2016, 12:59:19 am »
Quote from: bytemaster on January 19, 2016, 08:34:51 pm
Primary rules for BitShares operations include:

1. All values relevant to the display of the transaction history should be included in the operation.  Namely, the fee must be calculated in advance and explicitly included in the transaction.
2. Existing operations should not be changed if this requires adding additional fields.
3. As long as the FEE * CORE_EXCHANGE_RATE > MIN_NETWORK_FEE_IN_BTS then things should be fine.

The MIN fee is important to prevent spamming of UIAs that have no value.
Thanks for reply. If I understood correctly, my implementation obeys the rules above. @bytemaster have you got my email? More details there.

For anyone who have questions about the feature specifications but not the implementation, please discuss on Github https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/3 or in the BSIP discussion thread https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20789.0.html

And again, great thanks for all the supports in this thread!

3261
General Discussion / Re: [Public Testnet] testnet.bitshares.eu
« on: January 20, 2016, 12:48:40 am »
Quote from: jakub on January 19, 2016, 10:50:16 pm
I have connected my CLI client to ws://testnet.bitshares.eu:11011

When I try to execute this command :
Code: [Select]
unlocked >>> import_key neura-sx 5JMVW3catu7r2pza1yhDpVmocbJckL8jUdzpsy8THSuW6sFh3XS
If this is a private key which you're using in the real network, change it now.

Quote
I get this error:
Code: [Select]
10 assert_exception: Assert Exception
base58str.substr( 0, prefix_len ) == prefix:
    {"base58str":"TEST4xx4dqbdPAbjPbGi3YJbURdXGYMYxRzow3Po4ioS4qiWK4Hqbb"}
    th_a  types.cpp:57 graphene::chain::public_key_type::public_key_type
Does anybody know what reason is?
You need to modify libraries/chain/include/graphene/chain/config.hpp to set the prefix and/or other values to "TEST".
And maybe need to modify libraries/chain/protocol/types.cpp
Same for the quoted question below.
Quote from: jakub on January 19, 2016, 11:17:27 pm
@xeroc
I've gone through your docs related to testnet but I could not find any information how and at which stage you set up the TEST core currency.
I guess you've done by editing the my-genesis.json file but you gave no details how it's done.

3262
General Discussion / Re: Percentage based transfer fee [BSIP10] implemented
« on: January 19, 2016, 08:01:32 pm »
Quote from: BunkerChain Labs on January 19, 2016, 07:05:48 pm
Yeah.. this actually came out of discussions within the Committee regarding trading fees.

@abit is up for Vote to be on the Committee.

He has shown strong interest in getting things done and as many of you like, has the technical background as a developer.

If you haven't voted for him for committee please consider updating your votes.

He is also a Witness and currently holds the record for lowest missed blocks some how.
Thanks.

By the way I added feature briefs to OP.

3263
General Discussion / Re: we can issue an IOU USD reserved by future network income
« on: January 19, 2016, 05:15:55 pm »
Quote from: alt on January 19, 2016, 04:27:18 am
it's dillution but not  for bts.
If you think a develoment worth 10000usd, make sure you can earn 10000usd for network. so your IOU USD is worth 10000USD
 
If you cant earn 10000usd for network, don't ask for the 10000usd payment
Hand a same tool to different person makes different results.
Profit comes from how to use the tool, not from the tool itself. The tool has its value, the how has its value.

Anyway, FBA makes more sense for both you and me.

3264
中文 (Chinese) / 按百分比计算转账手续费功能，开发完成
« on: January 19, 2016, 04:32:00 pm »
写在前面

写这个功能是为了赚钱的，我不想白干。
如果要把这个功能集成到BTS链上，我开价300万BTS，或者1万美刀。
合理砍价可以接受。
希望得到更多筹资方面的建议，如果没有足够资金支持，申请Worker是最后的选择。

正文

按百分比算手续费的需求文档在这里: https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/3
概要：
1. 增加全局参数3个，由理事会控制
  * 百分比
  * 每次手续费上限
  * 每次手续费下限
2. 每个资产可以选择百分比收费模式或者固定值收费模式，由资产发行人控制
3. 手续费下限归系统所有，高于下限的部分归推荐人，不再按20%/80%方式分配
4. 按资产的core_exchange_rate将每笔转账的价值转换为BTS，进而计算百分比、判断上下限，确定收费多少
   （相当于股市里按股票面值算过户费，而不是按股价来算。资产发行人可以根据需要调整core_exchange_rate）

代码在这里: https://github.com/abitmore/bitshares-2/tree/test-transfer-fee
有兴趣的可以自己编译测试。


使用示例

* 设置某资产转账手续费按百分比收取的命令：
Code: [Select]
update_asset MYASSET null {"max_supply": "1000000000000000","market_fee_percent": 0,"max_market_fee": "1000000000000000","issuer_permissions": 79,"flags": 0,"core_exchange_rate": {  "base": {    "amount": 100000,    "asset_id": "1.3.0"  },  "quote": {    "amount": 10000,    "asset_id": "1.3.1"  }},"whitelist_authorities": [],"blacklist_authorities": [],"whitelist_markets": [],"blacklist_markets": [],"description": "","extensions": [[1,{"transfer_fee_mode":"asset_transfer_fee_mode_percentage_simple"}]]  } true

* 设置某资产转账手续费按固定值收取的命令：
Code: [Select]
update_asset MYASSET null {"max_supply": "1000000000000000","market_fee_percent": 0,"max_market_fee": "1000000000000000","issuer_permissions": 79,"flags": 0,"core_exchange_rate": {  "base": {    "amount": 100000,    "asset_id": "1.3.0"  },  "quote": {    "amount": 10000,    "asset_id": "1.3.1"  }},"whitelist_authorities": [],"blacklist_authorities": [],"whitelist_markets": [],"blacklist_markets": [],"description": "","extensions": [[1,{"transfer_fee_mode":"asset_transfer_fee_mode_flat"}]]  } true

* 修改相关全局参数：
Code: [Select]
...
,[
          44,{
            "fee": 2000000,
            "price_per_kbyte": 1000000,
            "min_fee": 600000,
            "max_fee": 30000000,
            "percentage": 100
          }
        ]

...
解释:
* fee: 2000000 即20BTS，如果资产选择按固定值收费，每次转账收20BTS手续费
* price_per_kbyte: 这个不解释了
* min_fee: 600000 即6BTS，如果资产选择按百分比收费，这里可以设置一个下限，每次转账手续费最低6BTS
* max_fee: 3000000 即300BTS，如果资产选择按百分比收费，这里可以设置一个上限，每次转账手续费最高300BTS
* percentage: 100 就是1%，1000就是10%，如果资产选择按百分比收费，就是按这个百分比来算

3265
General Discussion / Re: Percentage based transfer fee [BSIP10] implemented
« on: January 19, 2016, 11:37:47 am »
Updated OP to include some examples.

3266
General Discussion / Re: Percentage based transfer fee [BSIP10] implemented
« on: January 19, 2016, 11:20:01 am »
Quote from: xeroc on January 19, 2016, 11:15:42 am
+5%

Since I just recently started a public Testnet, we can have it tested there if you wish ..
Thanks. But that's depends on you to whether deploy the code the test network.

Quote
//edit:
instead of replacing the transfer operation, could we have a flag in each asset that let's the issuer chose which pricing model to use?
It's included in the BSIP.

//Edit:
Due to lack of feedback from CNX, I don't know if it's the best way to implement BSIP10.

A simple modification on transfer_operation has been tried but failed, due to unable to re-index current live chain, it get blocked at a global_fee_change_operation or so. So I end up introduced a new operation transfer_v2_operation.
Maybe it's needed to modify GUI code to adapt the new operation, at least it's needed for CLI wallet (which I have done).

3267
General Discussion / Percentage based transfer fee [BSIP10] implemented
« on: January 19, 2016, 11:01:53 am »
[DECLARATION]

The work for this implementation is not free. In order to have it applied on the live BitShares network, it needs to be funded in some way. Suggestions on how to fund it are appreciated. I ask for 10K$, or 3M BTS. Fair negotiations are acceptable.


[MAIN]

Here is the BSIP document: https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/3 https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/blob/master/bsip-0010.md

Feature briefs:
1. Added 3 global parameters which can be adjusted by the committee
  * the percentage
  * a per-transfer upper limit
  * a per-transfer lower limit
2. For each asset, the issuer can choose between flat fee mode and percentage based fee mode
3. Changed fee split schema between network and referral program: if the asset is in percentage based fee mode, the network gets an amount equals to the lower limit, referral program gets the rest.
4. Fee calculation is based on "core_exchange_rate" of the asset:
    fee = min(max(amount * CER * percentage, lower_limit), upper_limit)

Here is source code: https://github.com/abitmore/bitshares-2/tree/test-transfer-fee https://github.com/abitmore/bitshares-2/tree/dev-transfer-fee

Future developments are planned. Schedule depends on funds.


[EXAMPLES]

Here listed some sample commands:

* To set an asset to charge percentage based transfer fees:
Code: [Select]
update_asset MYASSET null {"max_supply": "1000000000000000","market_fee_percent": 0,"max_market_fee": "1000000000000000","issuer_permissions": 79,"flags": 0,"core_exchange_rate": {  "base": {    "amount": 100000,    "asset_id": "1.3.0"  },  "quote": {    "amount": 10000,    "asset_id": "1.3.1"  }},"whitelist_authorities": [],"blacklist_authorities": [],"whitelist_markets": [],"blacklist_markets": [],"description": "","extensions": [[1,{"transfer_fee_mode":"asset_transfer_fee_mode_percentage_simple"}]]  } true

* To set an asset to charge flat transfer fees:
Code: [Select]
update_asset MYASSET null {"max_supply": "1000000000000000","market_fee_percent": 0,"max_market_fee": "1000000000000000","issuer_permissions": 79,"flags": 0,"core_exchange_rate": {  "base": {    "amount": 100000,    "asset_id": "1.3.0"  },  "quote": {    "amount": 10000,    "asset_id": "1.3.1"  }},"whitelist_authorities": [],"blacklist_authorities": [],"whitelist_markets": [],"blacklist_markets": [],"description": "","extensions": [[1,{"transfer_fee_mode":"asset_transfer_fee_mode_flat"}]]  } true

* To change global percentage fee parameters:
Code: [Select]
...
       ,[
          45,{
            "flat_fee": 2000000,
            "price_per_kbyte": 1000000,
            "percentage_min_fee": 600000,
            "percentage_max_fee": 30000000,
            "percentage": 100,
            "extensions": []
          }
        ]
...
Explanation of above parameters:
* 45 is for a new operation "transfer_v2_operation". The original "transfer_operation" is incompatible
* flat_fee: 2000000 means 20 BTS of transfer fee for assets which selected flat transfer fee mode
* price_per_kbyte: no explanation
* percentage_min_fee: 600000 means 6 BTS of minimum transfer fee for assets which selected percentage fee mode
* percentage_max_fee: 3000000 means 300 BTS
* percentage: 100 means 1%
* extensions: a field for future extensions, leave it empty right now


[API CHANGES]

* added a new database API: get_operation_fee, which will simply return minimum required fee for a given operation, and won't recursively calculate if the operation is a proposal (not like get_required_fees API)

* fee_schedule::set_fee() function is no longer compatible with transfer_operation, a new function set_fee_extended() is introduced. However, the new function is not designed to be used in client applications, it's recommended to use the new get_operation_fee API to get required fee, then set the fee to the operation.


[IMPACTS TO THIRD-PARTY APPLICATIONS]

If a 3rd-party application (for example apps of exchanges, bridges and etc) is monitoring activities of an account, when a transaction which contains transfer_v2_operation(id=45) arrives, it should be treated as same as transfer_operation(id=0).

(3rd-party applications should detect/handle "transfer_v2_operation" too if they detect/handle "transfer_operation".)


[KNOWN ISSUES/LIMITATIONS]
* Unable to apply percentage base fee mode to BTS


[MISC]
Due to lack of feedback from CNX, I don't know if it's the best way to implement BSIP10.
//Update:
2016-01-21 Got in touch with CNX. No much feedback so far.
2016-01-25 Add extensions to fee parameter
2016-01-26 Made some changes on asset_update_operation: new_options can now have no CER or have an empty CER, in this case CER of asset_to_update won't change. Examples:
Code: [Select]
update_asset MYASSET null {"max_supply": "1000000000000000","market_fee_percent": 0,"max_market_fee": "1000000000000000","issuer_permissions": 79,"flags": 0,"whitelist_authorities": [],"blacklist_authorities": [],"whitelist_markets": [],"blacklist_markets": [],"description": "","extensions": [[1,{"transfer_fee_mode":"asset_transfer_fee_mode_percentage_simple"}]]  } true
or
update_asset MYASSET null {"max_supply": "1000000000000000","market_fee_percent": 0,"max_market_fee": "1000000000000000","issuer_permissions": 79,"flags": 0,"core_exchange_rate":{},"whitelist_authorities": [],"blacklist_authorities": [],"whitelist_markets": [],"blacklist_markets": [],"description": "","extensions": [[1,{"transfer_fee_mode":"asset_transfer_fee_mode_percentage_simple"}]]  } true

2016-02-12 Implemented a new operation, so the committee can change some options of the core asset (BTS), including:
  * percentage market fee / market fee cap
  * transfer fee mode
Example:
Code: [Select]
add_operation_to_builder_transaction 0 [46,{"fee":{"amount":50000000,"asset_id":"1.3.0"},"new_options":{"max_supply":"100000","market_fee_percent":10,"max_market_fee":"1000000000000000","issuer_permissions":0,"flags":0,"core_exchange_rate":{},"extensions":[[1,{"transfer_fee_mode":"asset_transfer_fee_mode_percentage_simple"}]]}}]

2016-03-01
* Code is re-branched to be based on develop branch, operation_ids changed.
* Code is deeply refactored, parameter names of fee schedule changed.
* Links in this post updated.
* Added "API changes" section in this post
* Added "impacts to 3rd-party applicaitons" section in this post

3268
General Discussion / Re: Cryptofresh Block Explorer + MUSE now available
« on: January 19, 2016, 12:11:00 am »
asset_claim_fees_operation shows raw json. https://cryptofresh.com/u/committee-account

3269
General Discussion / Re: [POLL] Possible committee actions to help with liquidity
« on: January 18, 2016, 02:59:28 pm »
Quote from: Akado on January 18, 2016, 02:50:22 pm
So where does this stand now? Any agreement reached?
Some fund will be get out from the accumulated fee pool and deposit to committee-account, after  8 hours. The amout is around 7000$.

No other agreement reached.

3270
General Discussion / Re: Fees are a real problem for the DEX
« on: January 18, 2016, 03:58:32 am »
Quote from: clayop on January 18, 2016, 02:30:08 am
I think users must pay small amount of order creation fee (hopefully 0.5~1 BTS worth). If not, metaexchange will get exploited easily.
Why the centralized exchanges haven't got exploited?

Pages: 1 ... 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 [218] 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 ... 309

Page created in 0.03 seconds with 23 queries.