226
General Discussion / Re: What does Peter Todd mean in his tweet about P.O.W.?
« on: January 26, 2015, 11:34:41 pm »
Not worth understanding any interpretation under which that can be argued to be true
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.
227
General Discussion / Re: 100% burn+"filler" delegates and the "cutoff" delegate
« on: January 26, 2015, 11:33:58 pm »Is the plan to modify the code such that any paid delegate (>3% pay) which has less than the number of votes of this cutoff delegate will not get paid (or will be paid at a 3% rate instead?)
This would essentially allow shareholders to vote for a bar of approval wihch must be crossed in order to be a paid delegate which is higher than simply "be one of the 101 with the most votes".
I'm not sure if thats a good idea or not, but its interesting. Is that the idea behind this delegate?
This is completely informal, absolutely no breaking changes. It just lets us learn shareholder intent.
228
General Discussion / Re: 100% burn+"filler" delegates and the "cutoff" delegate
« on: January 26, 2015, 11:20:56 pm »Gonna put you on my slate when back at the computerAdded you to my slate
Won't adding this delegate to other trusted delegates' slate compromise its entire purpose?
Don't we want stakeholders to explicitly vote for this delegate if they believe its approval rating is lower than what they think the vote-of-no-confidence threshold should be and to take away some or all of their vote if they think the approval rating is higher than what they think the threshold should be? If this is added to the slate of well established delegates, then I don't think we can really infer much from the approval rating of the "paid-delegate-cutoff.misc.nikolai" delegate, which defeats its entire purpose.
That depends on what you think the role of recommendations are and how people use them. I don't think it defeats the point at all. If people know the function of this delegate then it lets us see what the intersection of stake-vote thinks, not the union. It is different when you don't have full participation
229
General Discussion / Re: BTS price falling ... I would buy more if .....
« on: January 26, 2015, 10:47:40 pm »
We can't lock real or trade BTC without a counterparty. We could offer to generate or keep track of BTC keys in parallel but that's it. Fast reliable BTC to bitBTC bridges are the best thing we have.
230
DevShares / Re: Please help test new features in DVS 0.6.0 + Surprise GUI overhaul!
« on: January 26, 2015, 09:46:02 pm »
@arhag I think you might have not copied the builder to the data directory when you did "builder_file_add_signature"? The file argument is misleading because it only writes there, but it reads from the latest.trx
I will change the builder interface to be much more clear for this
I will change the builder interface to be much more clear for this
231
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD atomic cross chain trading
« on: January 26, 2015, 09:30:32 pm »How easy would it be to implement this in BitShares? TLDR; Payments are locked for nBlocks and refunded unless a secret from receiver is revealed.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=628547.0
http://upcoder.com/11/atomic-cross-chain-exchange/
I would love to be able to trade BitUSD for Bitcoin or other alts directly and not have to deal with going though BTS everytime.
I would love to see this. Ant not even have bitBTC at all, just real BTC on the internal exchange. Wow can you imagine how useful this would be, a real decentralized exchange you can send bitcoin to directly. This would raise the value of bitshares tremendously. People would love this. I know this is possible, I hope it gets implemented.
You know it's possible? Please enlighten us..
232
General Discussion / Re: 100% burn+"filler" delegates and the "cutoff" delegate
« on: January 26, 2015, 09:29:26 pm »You can fit 111 integers
Wait does this mean you can either vote for delegates with your BTS stake or use the space for other voting stuff but not both at the same time?
You tell me
233
General Discussion / Re: 100% burn+"filler" delegates and the "cutoff" delegate
« on: January 26, 2015, 09:21:44 pm »we removed the requirement that stuff in the slate be a real delegate ID so that we can do opinion polls as part of the normal voting process without big changes. Using this for governance is something I will be working on
Interesting... Are there size limits on the bytes that can be stuffed in the "slate" other than the maximum transaction size?
You can fit 111 integers
234
General Discussion / Re: 100% burn+"filler" delegates and the "cutoff" delegate
« on: January 26, 2015, 09:16:20 pm »It is really difficult for the stakeholders to control their votes precisely to get the approval voting of the "paid-delegate-cutoff.misc.nikolai" delegate to their desired value. But I appreciate the intent despite the hacky solution.
Can we get a new UIA to automatically be allocated to a snapshot of another asset (such as BTS) by the 0.8.0 milestone along with the UIA proposal voting feature so that we can determine true BTS stakeholder consensus on any topic?
we removed the requirement that stuff in the slate be a real delegate ID so that we can do opinion polls as part of the normal voting process without big changes. Using this for governance is something I will be working on
236
General Discussion / Re: can we analysis how much true users in 32800+ id?
« on: January 26, 2015, 08:40:13 pm »
I just counted how many transactions there were with a distinct withdraw balance in all the transactions which have account operations
237
General Discussion / 100% burn+"filler" delegates and the "cutoff" delegate
« on: January 26, 2015, 08:37:42 pm »
We might be interested to see how many paid delegates are only there because shareholders cannot coordinate to elect enough low-pay delegates to force them out. Fortunately we can use delegates like proposals and measure shareholder intent.
I've made a 0% delegate:
paid-delegate-cutoff.misc.nikolai
(He's 1% right now because a wallet bug prevents me from making a transaction to make him 0% - I'll get to it)
我们或许有兴趣看到多少付费的受托人在领工资只是因为股东们没办法调集去选足够的低支付率受托人去挤走他们。幸运的是我们可以用受托人当作是提议并且去衡量股东们的想法。我已经做了一个0%受托人。
paid-delegate-cutoff.misc.nikolai
它现在是1%的支付率因为钱包当前不允许做0%的受托人，不过我会修正这个问题。
如果这个人比真正的受托人得到更多的票，就像股东们的投票在说不认可他，因为给这个受托人的投票就是给尽量多的0%受托人投票。这会让股东们在知道它们有足够的共识去改变现状的时候通过填充足够的低支付率受托人而实现改变。
I've made a 0% delegate:
paid-delegate-cutoff.misc.nikolai
(He's 1% right now because a wallet bug prevents me from making a transaction to make him 0% - I'll get to it)
我们或许有兴趣看到多少付费的受托人在领工资只是因为股东们没办法调集去选足够的低支付率受托人去挤走他们。幸运的是我们可以用受托人当作是提议并且去衡量股东们的想法。我已经做了一个0%受托人。
paid-delegate-cutoff.misc.nikolai
它现在是1%的支付率因为钱包当前不允许做0%的受托人，不过我会修正这个问题。
如果这个人比真正的受托人得到更多的票，就像股东们的投票在说不认可他，因为给这个受托人的投票就是给尽量多的0%受托人投票。这会让股东们在知道它们有足够的共识去改变现状的时候通过填充足够的低支付率受托人而实现改变。
238
General Discussion / Re: can we analysis how much true users in 32800+ id?
« on: January 26, 2015, 06:03:06 pm »
There's about 6,300 "unique account-registering balances". So this doesn't count real users from the faucet but also probably overcounts some real users whose registrations came from different balances.
It's possible it's as low as just a few thousand, 6k is not a real lower bound.
It's possible it's as low as just a few thousand, 6k is not a real lower bound.
239
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Blackwave Labs(黑潮实验室)/Excoin(是币交中心) Delegate Proposal
« on: January 26, 2015, 05:52:24 pm »
Ok great, now you all can bug them for transparency. I will too but it is all the voters' job
240
General Discussion / Re: BTS price falling ... I would buy more if .....
« on: January 26, 2015, 05:39:30 pm »
Can't you just do it piece by piece via centralized exchanges? Figure out what you are willing to risk and split your sum into that many parts.
