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 - monsterer

Pages: 1 ... 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 [115] 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 ... 125
1711
I see .. it's a difficult compromise ..
but you can benefit for you campaign because you can show people CODE and not just fancy images ... I wouldn't call scam here .. but if you take a look at BTCtalk you will see plenty of them just posting fancy images and no code
IMHO it will GREATLY support your campaign if you published your code right away ..

Anyway, you have my support in any case

I understand the need for trust. Please feel free to look up my credentials via my blog (in my sig) - you should see that I'm running a real company based in the UK, so have a lot to lose by perpetrating a scam. Also you can also look up my hero member profile on bitcointalk.org https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=74298.

1712
General Discussion / Re: [DAC proposal] Decentralised Forum Software
« on: November 12, 2014, 09:37:59 am »
Any way we can move this thread into the main Discussion sub-forum? It deserves to get more eyes on, really.

1713
I am willing to Fund the total needed amount . would like to collaborate if you want . i am not a coder but i have a vision wie could maybe combine.  Lets talk via Skype or mumble . after saturday i am available

Quote
Let me now where to send some funds.

I'd like to contribute .. but under one condition: current development status is pushed to a public github (or elsewhere) repo prior to fund raising and development will be done on that public repo.

Thank you both for you kind and generous offers!

Shentist, I've love to hear your vision.

xeroc, my only concern with going open source right now is that if I don't get elected, I have potentially given away everything I've developed so far to a better funded competitor.

Cheers, Paul.

1714
I fully support this effort and encourage you to work with James as you are already familiar with his work.

I would like you to consider a slight detour in your development schedule before going fully "web based" and this is to create a version of the site that manages the funds on behalf of the users like a bank and make it open source for everyone who can get a money transmitters license.

Thanks for your endorsement :) I will consider your plan carefully; I can see why you suggested it because it would provide a quicker route to market for a web-wallet.

My only concern with this plan is that it relies on the server holding private keys which is not something I am at all keen on for security reasons. There might be a way to mitigate this risk, perhaps by generating a temporary private key from login credentials.

Quote
3) Website keeps yield earned

I would suggest that the site doesn't keep the yield (although, this probably makes it more complex), but instead derives profit through the spread on the on/off ramps into bitcoin/fiat.

Cheers, Paul.

1715
General Discussion / Re: My preferred solution for delegates
« on: November 12, 2014, 09:15:37 am »
The preferred solution in the OP faces the chicken and egg problem. If you want a delegate to just be someone who hires other devs to complete jobs, how does this delegate get elected in the first place? He would have to already have found a selection of devs *with* project plans in order to begin his election campaign.

IMO it is more natural to have the delegates be devs initially and then to transition into mini companies who hire employees to complete jobs which are voted in by the community.

That way you have a pool of wish list tasks/jobs that the community wants to see done and a bunch of mini companies who are ready to take on new work as it presents itself.

1716
Seems cool~ but I want to ask, is your exchange a centralized exchange like bter or it's the web version of BTS internal market? If it's latter, you will get my vote. +5%

It's a web portal into the BTS decentralised exchange, designed to be familiar to traders.

1717
Hi all,

MetaExchange is my work in progress exchange-like trading interface and web-wallet for Bitshares. This is currently a spare time project, but I would like to take it to the next level by creating a 100% pay-rate delegate which will allow me to work on this project for around 50% of my normal working week.




I don't have the available funds to register a 100% pay rate delegate myself, so my only option is to crowd-source the funding for the 59,881 BTS (calculation provided by Rune, 50/1010*60*60*24*14=59881) fee I need to register the delegate.

In order for this to work I'd like to ask that a trusted forum member to step in as an escrow agent to hold the funds, and to refund them if I don't manage to raise enough BTS.

What are my plans for MetaExchange?

I would like to reduce the barrier to entry to owning and trading bitshares assets and BTS to close to zero. This site is designed to appeal to traders who are familiar with bitcoin exchanges/forex and who are curious about bitshares, but don't want to download the client and wait hours for it to sync just to see what all the fuss is about.

  • Release 1 will be a simple viewer, which will allow users to browse all the markets and assets in a familiar setting to any trader who might have used a bitcoin exchange.
  • Release 2 will be a web-wallet which will allow users to deposit/withdraw and most importantly to actually trade bitshares in markets directly through the website. This will function much like one of the many bitcoin exchanges, which will be familiar to traders of crypto currencies and forex/stocks alike.
  • Release 3 will provide on-ramps to bitUSD and BTS through bitcoin.
  • Release 4 would explore adding other crypto-currencies which support trading, such as NXT

What will this project contribute to the bitshares ecosystem?

Ignoring all the accessibility advantages of a web-wallet and trading interface, this project will also contribute to the bitshares open source ecosystem with in browser transaction signing and other javascript utility functions.

After Release 1, the entire project will be open sourced on github.

In closing, I literally can't do this project without the support of the community; I need help raising the funds for the delegate registration and most importantly, I need people to vote for the delegate to get it included in the 101 and become an active project.

Looking forward to hearing what you all think of this, since this is the first 100% pay rate delegate campaign and the first to try crowd funding the registration fee!

Cheers, Paul.

1718
General Discussion / [DAC proposal] Decentralised Forum Software
« on: November 11, 2014, 06:37:13 pm »
It seems to me the crypto world is in absolute desperate need of a decentralised forum. Every single crypto-currency is currently using centralised forum software running on centralised servers which are subject to all kinds of attacks and take downs.

It would take the form of a client software wallet, in the same vein as any other cryptocurrency, which would be open source.

A decentralised forum DAC would cover so many bases. It would require its own blockchain, of course, with its own specific set of requirements. With DPOS, you could have moderators be delegates, voted in or out by stake holders based on their performance. Posts would require a transaction fee of course, but delegates could use some proportion of collected fees to reward good content via tipping.

Has anyone considered building this?

1719
50/1010*60*60*24*14=59881

Thanks!

Is that the official, and exact number?

It's important to get this right so I don't make a mistake trying to raise the wrong amount of capital :)

1720
This is the one-time fee to register a delegate on the blockchain and has nothing to do with how much you earn as a delegate.. it depends first of all if you are voted up enough to produce blocks .. and then secondly on your payrate .. which is a parameter you have to specify when registering on the blockchain .. and can only be lowered ... not increased

I'm confused - the one time fee both has nothing to do with, and also depends on the pay rate?

1721
Quote
"max_delegate_reg_fee": "8.12366 BTS",

Is that per block? In that case, how many blocks in two weeks?

1722
General Discussion / Re: Should we kill the DACronym?
« on: November 11, 2014, 09:26:31 am »
For right or wrong, whether there is justification or not, if the SEC or other regulator did come after one or more entities associated with bitShares, what power would they have to stop it? What are their control points?

They could ask the owner of bitshares.org to shut down the site, contact the owner of the repository and ask that be shut down, chase the owner of this forum etc.

How much actual power they'd have to do these things, I've no idea, but those are the potential points of influence.

1723
The release says '2 weeks', but it would be nice to have a hard number to work with :)

1724
Instead of a human being running for "public office" the DAC itself could run for public office. It would know more about us than any human candidate ever could. It be a source of trust for us all. It would be the perfect representative for our particular community.

I think it pays to remember that algorithms are always designed by humans, have limited scope, can be subject to design flaws and implementation errors and can potentially be exploited.

Yes, they have scope to automate various mundane functions, like search and aggregation, but more complicated issues will need a lot of time to refine and protect against potential exploitation.

The design of an algorithm or set thereof to act as a delegate with no human intervention would be quite a task in itself. As a developer, I'd estimate the ballpark complexity of such an 'entity' as being roughly equal to that of the original bitsharesX DAC.

Cheers, Paul.

1725
Recognising that the DAC does need at least some human intervention, in this case to deal with IPO and asset issuance, we've now opened up the obligation to deal with that in the most secure ways possible. I've seen there has been debate recently around the i3 allocations of unspent IPO and angel funds. In a future scenario as I described ($100m capital injection), presumably this would need to be separated amongst a trusted group of delegates, and there would need to be secure ways to deal with this capital which is invisible to the DAC. It

It doesn't have to be delegates, but you need trust in some form in order to handle the distribution and allocation of the capital injection, yes.

For me, the most challenging and as yet unanswered question is how to replace IPO. Because various financial institutions around the world regard assets as 'unregistered securities', actually doing an asset IPO as we've described is likely to land the people carrying it out in trouble, depending on their physical location.

Quote
How about another scenario, where the DAC wants to take over a company to get access to its software IP. Suppose a legal company has everything we need to offer a certain feature or service, and it would be far quicker, cheaper and more effective to buy this IP than to build it ourselves. Now it may be that the owners of that company want payment in USD, not BTS. Also there would be no legal entity to which that IP could be sold. So presumably we could never do this (?). Does this limit the methods by which the DAC can expand? e.g..we seem limited to integrating developers of open-source software that have no contractual commitments.

Yes, I don't know what the answer is in this case, it does seem like a problem area for the reasons you've mentioned.

For me, actually casting your business as a DAC instead of a traditional business can carry huge advantages for the users, because it makes the service much more resilient to being taken down. But for the owners of the DAC, the structure and operation is so much more complicated than running a traditional business that doing so might be the limiting factor to adoption in the first place.

Cheers, Paul.

Pages: 1 ... 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 [115] 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 ... 125