BitShares Forum
Other => Graveyard => BitShares AGS => Topic started by: hadrian on September 30, 2014, 07:00:50 pm
-
I now consider this resolved: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9760.msg126795#msg126795 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9760.msg126795#msg126795)
Is there an official source of information on the distribution of AGS, from which to create genesis blocks?
There seems to be a discrepancy between agsexplorer and a couple of the genesis blocks for DACs. If there is an issue it should be resolved before too many DACs are released.
As an example of a discrepancy there is address 14fXr2UTa17CadcZ911N7TBFqMLpqsfNae
agsexplorer shows the supposed balance of AGS here: http://www1.agsexplorer.com/balances/14fXr2UTa17CadcZ911N7TBFqMLpqsfNae (http://www1.agsexplorer.com/balances/14fXr2UTa17CadcZ911N7TBFqMLpqsfNae)
The genesis blocks for Lotto and for DNS have a lower amount than expected from agsexplorer. See the following posts:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9380.msg122241#msg122241 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9380.msg122241#msg122241)
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4879.msg64977#msg64977 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4879.msg64977#msg64977)
N.B. the DNS figure was supposed to show "a little extra" than would be expected from an AGS balance, so the discrepancy here is actually a little larger than it seems...
The discrepancy bothers me because:- It will persist through all future DACs, unless resolved
- I don't understand it
- I haven't seen any explanation for it
Does anyone have any insight here?
Edit: I've used strike-through on a sentence which is wrong
-
Let's add theses scripts I just found ...
https://github.com/donSchoe/ags-parser
https://github.com/flux627/AngelShares.info
If someone feels up to the task, why not rewrite it to build a AGS/PTS genesis block .. If you kindly ask around, people will surely send some funds .. maybe even BM/I3 will contribute!
-
I'm in favor and would happily pay some DNS to check the allocation for subsequent DACs.
That address is the only discrepancy that has been reported, it would be nice if someone investigates.
I'm finalizing the DNS snapshot and will pay discrepancies from the keyhotee AGS which will otherwise be burned.
N.B. the DNS figure was supposed to show "a little extra" than would be expected from an AGS balance, so the discrepancy here is actually a little larger than it seems...
I actually included keyhotee AGS when I thought I didn't, so this is no longer accurate.
-
There should be a definitive way to know how many AGS are allocated to each BTC donation address. The AGS distribution is a fundamental thing which should be correct.
Since my first post on the subject on 6th June, discrepancies between agsexplorer and genesis blocks continue to occur for address 14fXr2UTa17CadcZ911N7TBFqMLpqsfNae https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4879.msg64196#msg64196 (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4879.msg64196#msg64196)
I just want to know why, but I'm not technically proficient or knowledgeable enough to solve the problem.
It's frustrating to see many DACs coming, when I'm reminded of this every time.
I'm tempted to let the subject drop, but on the other hand I'd love an explanation. Can anyone reading this suggest any ideas as to what's going on?
...
That address is the only discrepancy that has been reported, it would be nice if someone investigates.
I'm finalizing the DNS snapshot and will pay discrepancies from the keyhotee AGS which will otherwise be burned.
...
I suppose the only way to find out if there is a discrepancy is for a definitive AGS distribution to be ascertained. I've no idea which is more likely correct between agsexplorer and the genesis blocks...