BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: Shentist on May 22, 2016, 06:34:03 am
-
i would like to ask 2 questions
1. is stealth now working for "normal" people on the GUI?
2. the distribution of stealth http://cryptofresh.com/a/STEALTH seems akwared. i thought all the funds are holded from onceuponatime and not dan?
did i miss something?
-
1. No
2. Dan sent onceuponatime a refund for his money and onceuponatime sent Dan his stealth tokens back.
In other words, stealth was used as a cover to hide the development of Steem while we all thought an actual BitShares feature was being developed for months. Then the April Fools Day Steem announcement and concurrent Stealth is not going to happen announcement and it was apparent that all of us were played for fools.
-
Stealth was prioritized above steem. It delayed steem by months.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
BitShares Munich will be finishing up the Stealth project. We are launching the new Smartcoins Wallet in android-native ~June 1st and two different POS systems too around the same time. We added, and are training two IPFS people on Graphene right now as well, so all of these tools will be able to work together seamlessly. I am not going to give any dates as of yet, but rest assured guys, Stealth is high-priority. It actually needs to be finished up before we can start on any of our other personal projects that we want to do next. Stealth is next.
-
i do not understand. so when oneuponatime didn't paid for stealth who did it? dan from his own pokets?
-
i do not understand. so when oneuponatime didn't paid for stealth who did it? dan from his own pokets?
I think to compensate onceuponatime for his "loan" he was in Dan's words: "well taken care of" (read: included in the inner circle, advance notice of Steem, etc.). Seems that the devs and their inner circle spent the so-called delayed months caused by the Stealth development to heavily dump most of their remaining BTS from various large accounts.
-
i do not understand. so when oneuponatime didn't paid for stealth who did it? dan from his own pokets?
I think to compensate onceuponatime for his "loan" he was in Dan's words: "well taken care of" (read: included in the inner circle, advance notice of Steem, etc.). Seems that the devs and their inner circle spent the so-called delayed months caused by the Stealth development to heavily dump most of their remaining BTS from various large accounts.
would love to hear what "really" happened fromb @bytemaster or @onceuponatime , because i was under the impression, that he paid for the STEALTH and was not aware of the reversed FBAs to Bytemaster.
So, from the allocation right now, Bytemaster is the biggest holders of the FBA STEALTH.
-
i do not understand. so when oneuponatime didn't paid for stealth who did it? dan from his own pokets?
I think to compensate onceuponatime for his "loan" he was in Dan's words: "well taken care of" (read: included in the inner circle, advance notice of Steem, etc.). Seems that the devs and their inner circle spent the so-called delayed months caused by the Stealth development to heavily dump most of their remaining BTS from various large accounts.
would love to hear what "really" happened fromb @bytemaster or @onceuponatime , because i was under the impression, that he paid for the STEALTH and was not aware of the reversed FBAs to Bytemaster.
So, from the allocation right now, Bytemaster is the biggest holders of the FBA STEALTH.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=22138.0
-
In a nutshell:
BM's team delayed work on STEEM to build Stealth for Onceuponatime.
They completed that effort as specified.
They concluded that more work would need to be done to make it truly usable by the public (i.e. profitable).
BM refunded what Onceup paid (ate the cost of development himself) and received the useless tokens in exchange.
Onceup arranged with BitShares Munich to buy BM's tokens and finish the task with their own funds.
-
sweet, good to see stealth still getting done! thanks ken and team munich
-
Im wondering why there is not a work proposal for.stealth..... We could easyly have a budget 100000bts daily applied n splited to.xeroc, roadscape + 1 work feature n still low inflation..... When bts price apreciate we could do much more with less money......is possible implement in dex lending n margin? This would bring with liquidity a lot in fees........a system to 0 fees to market makers in dex i think is important too.
-
In a nutshell:
BM's team delayed work on STEEM to build Stealth for Onceuponatime.
They completed that effort as specified.
They concluded that more work would need to be done to make it truly usable by the public (i.e. profitable).
BM refunded what Onceup paid (ate the cost of development himself) and received the useless tokens in exchange.
Onceup arranged with BitShares Munich to buy BM's tokens and finish the task with their own funds.
Let start from the beginning...
-No one wanted stealth...everybody insisted for a more important work that needed to be done for BTS sake BEFORE stealth.
-BM said "no I will work on stealth instead" (also claimed being of great importance to the BTS future)...
-STEALT was a great lie from the very beginning...there is not much worth 45K...45K to implement already existing cli features into a GUI.
-BM was fully aware of what the final GUI STEALTH will look like (as he knew what the cli stealth was)...
-All the stealth fiasco was...was just a time for insiders (BM) to sell their stakes before leaving the ship...
PS
I do think you went to the dark side with your twists and misrepresentations of the facts Stan...and all for financial benefits???
You are getting more and more arrogant, more and more sure you are great with that kind of manipulation with each next one you do... but the rope has always been able to carry just that much weight before it breaks...just as much as at the beginning.
-
In a nutshell:
BM's team delayed work on STEEM to build Stealth for Onceuponatime.
They completed that effort as specified.
They concluded that more work would need to be done to make it truly usable by the public (i.e. profitable).
BM refunded what Onceup paid (ate the cost of development himself) and received the useless tokens in exchange.
Onceup arranged with BitShares Munich to buy BM's tokens and finish the task with their own funds.
i don't get this point. i thought bytemaster worked alone on steem?
in hinside it looks to me that way
- STEALTH is not working and will never work that way it was promised!
- i think @tonyk s points are right. It is just a false feature to get the prices longer elevated.
-
We need to look foward..
.there is 5k online users in poloniex.....without count top.exchanges.....opportunity to make a profitable dex is huuuuuuuuuuuuge.......stealth is being create by munchen....the guys are not asking for money....lets do it privacy is important too...lets put everything togheter n go foward
-
- STEALTH is not working and will never work that way it was promised!
it DOES work .. it is just not NICE and SAFE to the end user yet .. and since you could lose fund if you fuckup, BM decided to not launch it publicly ..
-
- STEALTH is not working and will never work that way it was promised!
it DOES work .. it is just not NICE and SAFE to the end user yet .. and since you could lose fund if you fuckup, BM decided to not launch it publicly ..
@xeroc if it works, where can I grab it? (gui version)
The present situation is more or less (though not really, I know) the same as accessing your bank without https .. except even more serious, as in the case of the bank "only" someone in your local network misbehaving or anyone with network access on the path to the bank server could spy on your transactions.
With Bitshares, anyone, at any time, from now to infinity, can.
@kenCode are there any etas for release of stealth? Who's working on it, actually?
Sorry if these have been answered elsewhere recently, just now catching up with all the threads. Thanks!
-
ken Code are there any etas for release of stealth? Who's working on it, actually?
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,22514.msg292803.html#msg292803
-
- STEALTH is not working and will never work that way it was promised!
it DOES work .. it is just not NICE and SAFE to the end user yet .. and since you could lose fund if you fuckup, BM decided to not launch it publicly ..
@xeroc if it works, where can I grab it? (gui version)
The present situation is more or less (though not really, I know) the same as accessing your bank without https .. except even more serious, as in the case of the bank "only" someone in your local network misbehaving or anyone with network access on the path to the bank server could spy on your transactions.
With Bitshares, anyone, at any time, from now to infinity, can.
@kenCode are there any etas for release of stealth? Who's working on it, actually?
Sorry if these have been answered elsewhere recently, just now catching up with all the threads. Thanks!
There is a tutorial in zhe docs how to use stealth with the cli-wallet .. havent looked into the exisitng web gui code for stealth .. afaik it is on a separate branch in the graphene-ui repo. However you'd need to compile the gui on your own ..
i wouldnt recommend using the web wallet just yet
-
However you'd need to compile the gui on your own ..
Wouldn't have it any other way ;)
Are there any showstopper outstanding bugs with the web wallet stealth code?
-
convenience
potential loss of funds
I highly recommend you use it in the testnet first and make sure you understand the risks!
The cli-wallet probably works best if you dont want to risk lossing funds ..
Important thing is to have a 'receipt' for all transactions .. without them .. you cant access the funds!!