Quote from: robrigo on October 18, 2014, 01:44:39 pm

Quote from: JakeThePanda on October 18, 2014, 12:20:53 pm

Quote from: robrigo on October 18, 2014, 03:48:57 am

My KeyID v0.0.4 GUI client is also stuck at block 1251 on OS X 10.10.

Checking to see if the CLI syncs properly.

Update: able to sync fine on Mac using the CLI... maybe there is a problem with the latest KeyID.dmg.

What is CLI?

Command line interface. I cloned the KEY ID code from github and followed the instructions for building on OS X.

Can you give us some more details because it seems that you solved the problem
How do you clone the code and where did you find the instructions for building on OS X?
Were you able to import the pts wallet in the OS X keyid?

Thanks!

I can tell you what to do to build the client, but unless you are used to using the terminal, I would say hold off for a fix to the GUI... with that said:

1) Clone the keyid repository (https://github.com/keyid/keyid/) using git
    >git clone https://github.com/keyid/keyid.git

2) Follow these instructions, replacing references to bitshares_toolkit with keyid: https://github.com/keyid/keyid/blob/master/BUILD_OSX.md

Note: I didn't build the desktop client in this manner, but maybe if you do so it will work (the last step of the previous link explains how).

Now you can run the bitshares_client and use the API commands from the terminal... there should be a command to import the wallet and claim your stake. More information about the commands and other useful things can be read about in the technical wiki: https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/wiki

My KeyID v0.0.4 GUI client is also stuck at block 1251 on OS X 10.10.

Checking to see if the CLI syncs properly.

Update: able to sync fine on Mac using the CLI... maybe there is a problem with the latest KeyID.dmg.

A lot of the work is done in the core bitshares_toolkit repo:

https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/graphs/contributors

The bitsharesx repo you linked is a fork of the bitshares_toolkit repo.

I think your IP would be exposed to the peers you are connected to in the network, but not in a public manner on the chain. Those nodes would likely have to log the IPs connected to them in order to get that information. Even then, I don't think the peers can determine which transaction correlates to which IP. I don't see how you could link the purchase of a specific song to an IP address on chain w/o the inherent security issues but I am by no means an expert or versed in the bitshares_toolkit network code.

My question for the torrent style distribution is how could you prevent a copycat from listing music that isn't their own for stream in a decentralized manner? The artists would want to register and distribute their own artistcoin, but if Carl comes along and registers beyoncecoin and starts uploading / streaming Beyonce on the torrent network, how can we prevent that in the fully distributed system? A centralized service like PeerTracks solves this by being able to disallow fakes / copycats. Sure, someone could take the name an artist wanted to use for a coin and register it as an asset. But the actual distribution can be restricted to music of verified musicians. Maybe artistcoin names could be auctioned DNS style?

I think the user experience would be simplified a lot using the centralized service like PeerTracks that can be accessed as a web app. Then the user doesn't need to interact with the BTS Music client. It seems to me a simple web experience would drive more mainstream users to use the system then dealing with the torrent streaming stuff in a client. It may seem pretty basic for this community but there is definitely a large number of people who aren't exactly sure what torrent networks are or how to use it them. Good food for thought, though. Maybe a separate app could be built that utilizes the Music DAC and facilitates something similar to what you are describing.

The points made about buying music being a dying concept- I've wondered myself what % on average of a musician's income comes from online music sales. The price point of the current digital music distribution model is a major turn off for me- I might buy a digital album or two per year for musicians I really like, but $10-15 always seems lot a lot for digital media. If this price point came down to $5 or less on average for an album, I could see myself making more purchases. Especially if I know the artist is receiving most / all of that money. This is the possibility with PeerTracks.

I also think that musicians involved with the project would promote it directly to their fans as the best way to support their music, and I can definitely see musicians taking their own coin "to the next level" as far as incentivizing or interacting with fans. At the end of the day, BitShares Music / PeerTracks will hinge on the artists that decide to use it for distribution, and getting the point across to music fans that they can profit by finding the best talent on the DAC and holding their coins.

Another thing I've seen a lot of people bring up that you haven't addressed is the problem of people copying other people's music on the DAC and just taking it and distributing it. There's no way to get around that in the modern day and age, so why not build a protocol around the assumptions and encourage it in a way that allows artists and shareholders to profit? We could do this by creating a P2P database in the DAC protocol that would create audio fingerprints for songs uploaded and for each upload check the database to make sure it's not replicated. There are ways to do this on a decentralized, P2P basis.

From my understanding, the audio files won't be stored on chain, but rather PeerTracks will be authorizing downloads from their servers. Their app watches the blockchain for a music sale, then allows that account in PeerTracks to D/L the file. I assume that musicians that wish to use the PeerTracks service will have to do some form of verification to prove that they are the actual musician they claim to be.

Considering BTC as a "cryptocurrency" is a misnomer for the reasons stated above as well as the fact that a useful function of currency is the property of being a stable store of value- which BTC obviously lacks.

Quote from: cob on October 03, 2014, 03:20:15 am

So peertracks never handles any funds.

Cob, does that mean that Peertracks definitely wont be accepting any fiat for music purchases? I thought the plan was to accept fiat which is use to buy BitUSD for music purchases on the blockchain.

If peertracks wont take any fiat, that means the only avenue for sales is from existing Notes holders correct? If I want to promote an artist an pump his artistcoins, I need friends to put in their fiat into his songs.

Maybe a fiat on ramp that has a seamless experience could facilitate this on behalf of PeerTracks. I wonder if that is the plan for the on ramp "funnels"? Imagine a checkout plugin that would automatically, securely convert your credit / debit card into bitUSD that could be used to buy the artistcoin programmatically. To the user the transaction would be like any other online purchase, peertracks would not handle the PCI compliance, they would just be given bitUSD as per the arrangement with the on ramp to programmatically buy the artistcoin.

Can someone tell me what I need to type in the wallet to get the information I need to send DNS to it from BTER (or to receive it from a donator)?

I'm setting up a Delegate as we speak.  The account has been created, password made, but it is not yet registered..

Quote from: robrigo on October 05, 2014, 01:21:36 pm

0% pay robrigo-delegate standing by and eager to produce blocks!

@ Fuzz: I will try my best to keep this page up to date with the latest versions of each DAC client: http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/BitShares_DACs

Not the same as a stickied thread but it's something. 

Thanks man

Np! You can register your name with http://freekeyid.com/ faucet and then send DNS from BTER to your newly registered account name. I tried sending from bter to the public key of an account but it isn't supported yet (transaction gets canceled).