BitShares Forum
Main => Technical Support => Topic started by: ncinic on August 30, 2015, 10:02:03 am
-
The BitShares creators are planning to upgrade bitshares in the near future, which means that the old system will be discontinued. Therefore, is bitshares really decentralised if someone at the top can pull the plug on it at any time?
-
The old bitshares chain can just live on if it has enough support from delegates and users! Bitshares 2.0 is just a new chain that honors the old bitshares 1.0 shareholders 1:1. Everyone is free to choose whichever chain he likes.
-
So my bitshares will also remain on the old system? Sorry I'm new to this, but that's not the impression I got.
-
So my bitshares will also remain on the old system? Sorry I'm new to this, but that's not the impression I got.
Yes but the then old (now existing) bitshares blockchain may "die" meaning that there is no one to produce new blocks. So your bitshares on that chain would be totally useless.
-
So my bitshares will also remain on the old system? Sorry I'm new to this, but that's not the impression I got.
This is a fork like any other. Every fork is a new chain. For a fork to be successful a consensus among block producers to upgrade their clients to use the new chain must be reached.
In the case of DPOS that decision is in the hands of the delegates. There are 101 delegate positions that are voted on by the share holders. For the BitShares 2.0 blockchain to become The Blockchain a majority of the delegates will need to upgrade their client software to use the new chain.
Most delegates have voiced their decision to upgrade already giving the share holders plenty of time to fire those delegates and elect new ones that will not upgrade. Since this hasn't happened the community can reasonably assume that the majority of BTS share holders support the migration to the new chain.
The old chain can live on under two conditions: 1) You keep running the 0.9.x client and 2) at least one delegate decides to continue to sign blocks on the old chain. While this is technically possible in reality the community, and the economy at large, will not recognize the old chain so the effort would be for not.
-
So my bitshares will also remain on the old system? Sorry I'm new to this, but that's not the impression I got.
This is a fork like any other. Every fork is a new chain. For a fork to be successful a consensus among block producers to upgrade their clients to use the new chain must be reached.
In the case of DPOS that decision is in the hands of the delegates. There are 101 delegate positions that are voted on by the share holders. For the BitShares 2.0 blockchain to become The Blockchain a majority of the delegates will need to upgrade their client software to use the new chain.
Most delegates have voiced their decision to upgrade already giving the share holders plenty of time to fire those delegates and elect new ones that will not upgrade. Since this hasn't happened the community can reasonably assume that the majority of BTS share holders support the migration to the new chain.
The old chain can live on under two conditions: 1) You keep running the 0.9.x client and 2) at least one delegate decides to continue to sign blocks on the old chain. While this is technically possible in reality the community, and the economy at large, will not recognize the old chain so the effort would be for not.
This was the perfectly worded comprehensive answer you were looking for :)
-
Excellent answer!
-
The BitShares creators are planning to upgrade bitshares in the near future, which means that the old system will be discontinued. Therefore, is bitshares really decentralised if someone at the top can pull the plug on it at any time?
If the community doesnt want a change to happen, they can block it from happening. Also, in the future all changes are going to be voted on.
Bitshares 2.0 upgrade however, is something the community desperately wants right now, because the current client is bad and many of us have regular problems trying to use it.
It is true that right now, in the early stages, bitshares development makes it "too centralized". This is a thing that will change and needs to change once the project gets farther along.
Pretty much as soon as 2.0 drops, I think you will see a lot of people pushing to decentralize BTS as much as possible.
Its really important to understand that the new version does NOT mean your old BTS is worthless. On the contrary, all old BTS converts to new BTS at 1:1 ratio, and will probably rise in price once the better version comes out and is more user friendly.
-
Must resist meme ... muuuuustttt .... reeeessssiiiisstttt ....... meeeeemmme.
-
Must resist meme ... muuuuustttt .... reeeessssiiiisstttt ....... meeeeemmme.
Don't fight your gift. The Internet runs on more than cats.
-
The Internet runs on more than cats.
(https://i.imgflip.com/qbzqo.jpg)
:P
-
Proogh (http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/internet-pornography-statistics.html)
-
Proogh (http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/internet-pornography-statistics.html)
(http://i.imgur.com/96sVWKo.gif)
-
For that amazing gif I am pulling out a classic (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRgNOyCnbqg).
-
The old bitshares chain can just live on if it has enough support from delegates and users! Bitshares 2.0 is just a new chain that honors the old bitshares 1.0 shareholders 1:1. Everyone is free to choose whichever chain he likes.
This isn't true (as far as I know) - the final update for 1.0 chain will include a hard fork which essentially freezes the chain completely and forever. No doubt this will be a required update for all the delegates.
-
The old bitshares chain can just live on if it has enough support from delegates and users! Bitshares 2.0 is just a new chain that honors the old bitshares 1.0 shareholders 1:1. Everyone is free to choose whichever chain he likes.
This isn't true (as far as I know) - the final update for 1.0 chain will include a hard fork which essentially freezes the chain completely and forever. No doubt this will be a required update for all the delegates.
I hope monsterer has this right otherwise people will keep BTS in external exchanges that honor the snapshot and once the snapshot is done they will dump to others who don't know what's going on..Or keep their bts in their wallet and then transfer to exchanges and dump them after the snapshot..that will not be very fair for the outsiders..
-
IMO the 2.0 sharedrop should be exactly that, a sharedrop, not a hostile takeover. Let the market decide which chain should survive.
-
Dumping your bts v1 to others as fast as one can is not fair for others that may not follow these forums everyday and may have open orders at ridiculous low prices. People who don't have problems with their clients will transfer their bts1 in the exchanges after the snapshot and dump to people who don't know what is happening, while others will struggle making their client to work in order to do the same..
On the other side I do agree that maybe both versions can survive so having bts1 could not be entirely worthless after bts2 but judging at today's market cap i don't think this will be the case..
Having said all that I think we need a clarification regarding how this is going to take place so we have all the same opportunities and choices..In order to avoid complications and people moaning around later on I am personally in favor of bts1 to freeze forever once bts2 is share dropped so not anyone can dump shares to others.
-
Dumping your bts v1 to others as fast as one can is not fair for others that may not follow these forums everyday and may have open orders at ridiculous low prices. People who don't have problems with their clients will transfer their bts1 in the exchanges after the snapshot and dump to people who don't know what is happening, while others will struggle making their client to work in order to do the same..
On the other side I do agree that maybe both versions can survive so having bts1 could not be entirely worthless after bts2 but judging at today's market cap i don't think this will be the case..
Having said all that I think we need a clarification regarding how this is going to take place so we have all the same opportunities and choices..In order to avoid complications and people moaning around later on I am personally in favor of bts1 to freeze forever once bts2 is share dropped so not anyone can dump shares to others.
It's more than a few weeks that the news about bitshares 2.0 is out and it will be alot more time than 1 month until bitshares 2.0 is ready, plenty of time for everyone to act accordingly, everyone that places orders in external exchanges and forgets about them deserves all the pain he can get.
-
Dumping your bts v1 to others as fast as one can is not fair for others that may not follow these forums everyday and may have open orders at ridiculous low prices. People who don't have problems with their clients will transfer their bts1 in the exchanges after the snapshot and dump to people who don't know what is happening, while others will struggle making their client to work in order to do the same..
On the other side I do agree that maybe both versions can survive so having bts1 could not be entirely worthless after bts2 but judging at today's market cap i don't think this will be the case..
Having said all that I think we need a clarification regarding how this is going to take place so we have all the same opportunities and choices..In order to avoid complications and people moaning around later on I am personally in favor of bts1 to freeze forever once bts2 is share dropped so not anyone can dump shares to others.
That's something that has always happened during the other snapshots. But if people want to avoid that this time, why not simply import your wallet in the new client? Just like a client upgrade or something. No need for snapshots. You import it and you have the same balance as you had previously, but in the new client. Why do we need a snapshot?
-
The way I understand it is that there will be a snapshot and at that time all open orders and margin orders and anything open on the DEX will be cancelled. Can someone please confirm this?
Then once the snapshot happens one can transfer his BTS on external exchanges and dump if he wish so. Then I can upload my wallet on the new DEX and I will see the new BTS and bitassets even if by that time i have sold all the BTS in external exchanges and is at that time empty (since it won't be empty at the time of the snapshot). Can someone please confirm that this is correct?
Don't you think that this will hurt BTS marketing wise and many people will start complaining that they bought uselless BTS from the exchanges? I remember when the whole DNS thing happened that suddenly everyone dumped their DNS and by the time I could dump my DNS on the exchanges they were worthless.That wasn't a very nice experience since I was planning to hold my DNS and this decision came into public the last minute...
-
That's something that has always happened during the other snapshots. But if people want to avoid that this time, why not simply import your wallet in the new client? Just like a client upgrade or something. No need for snapshots. You import it and you have the same balance as you had previously, but in the new client. Why do we need a snapshot?
Because 2.0 is a totally different blockchain, basically its a different altcoin than the current bitshares.
-
Dumping your bts v1 to others as fast as one can is not fair for others that may not follow these forums everyday and may have open orders at ridiculous low prices. People who don't have problems with their clients will transfer their bts1 in the exchanges after the snapshot and dump to people who don't know what is happening, while others will struggle making their client to work in order to do the same..
On the other side I do agree that maybe both versions can survive so having bts1 could not be entirely worthless after bts2 but judging at today's market cap i don't think this will be the case..
Having said all that I think we need a clarification regarding how this is going to take place so we have all the same opportunities and choices..In order to avoid complications and people moaning around later on I am personally in favor of bts1 to freeze forever once bts2 is share dropped so not anyone can dump shares to others.
Exchanges need to upgrade, and use only the new BTS 2.0, and not use the old version anymore. That is the point of the 30 day announcement to get exchanges to upgrade.
It would be seriously damaging to the future of BTS if there were two different versions running around, and the community was split. (Just like if Bitcoin XT came out and was only accepted by some of the people and exchanges, and both it and original Bitcoin were both still around).
When you fork, the whole community needs to get behind one fork.
-
in some coments i think bytemaster said that with the last upgrade for BTS 1.0 a freeze of the blockchane will be done and you can not transfer the coins anymore.
question is if the exchanges are aware of it and will freeze the trading, because they do it on their internal system.
-
in some coments i think bytemaster said that with the last upgrade for BTS 1.0 a freeze of the blockchane will be done and you can not transfer the coins anymore.
question is if the exchanges are aware of it and will freeze the trading, because they do it on their internal system.
No one is holding them back .. they just have to move over deposits and withdrawals to the BTS2 chain .. BitShares 2.0 will NOT be a separated market .. it's an upgrade of the existing technology