Let's assume for a second that Bitassets 3.0 are implemented.
And I'm a new user interested in using them.

Can you ELI5 bitassets in 10 sentences? (more I would probably walk away)

It's "funny" but apparently DPOS doesn't even stand for Delegated POS anymore.
Since this whole #altsareback hype it stands for Dynamic POS, used for every new shitcoin for the last couple of weeks.

Be sure to don't miss out on the next one tomorrow Viral produced by the trustworthy Adam Guerbuz.

invalid asset amount (35005) still exists

Code: [Select]

getStackTrace@app.js:35:5176
 ○ request@app.js:43:10039
 ○ market_submit_ask@app.js:44:9237
 ○ post_ask@app.js:42:51107
 ○ app.js:42:49027
 ○ confirm_order@app.js:42:49145
 ○ confirm_order@app.js:37:27453
 ○ app.js:10:7986
 ○ e@app.js:10:14415
 ○ $eval@app.js:6:83428
 ○ $apply@app.js:6:83659
 ○ app.js:10:14472
 ○ dispatch@app.js:3:14478
 ○ handle@app.js:3:11253
35005 invalid_asset_amount: invalid asset amount

    {"share_string":"86.956522","max_rhs_size":5}
    bitshares  asset_record.cpp:93 bts::blockchain::asset_record::share_string_to_satoshi

    {"share_string":"86.956522","precision":100000}
    bitshares  asset_record.cpp:109 bts::blockchain::asset_record::share_string_to_satoshi

    {"amount":"86.956522"}
    bitshares  asset_record.cpp:114 bts::blockchain::asset_record::asset_from_string

    {"amount":"86.956522","symbol":"BTS"}
    bitshares  chain_interface.cpp:241 bts::blockchain::chain_interface::to_ugly_asset

    {"from_account_name":"clayop","real_quantity":"86.956522","quantity_symbol":"BTS","quote_price":"1.15","quote_symbol":"MOONFUND","sign":true}
    bitshares  wallet.cpp:3525 bts::wallet::wallet::submit_ask

    {}
    bitshares  common_api_client.cpp:5313 bts::rpc_stubs::common_api_client::wallet_market_submit_ask

Had the same problem, strangely enough flipping the market solved the problem

Quote from: speedy on April 20, 2015, 11:28:46 am

If Toast is focusing on Music, does that also have positive benefits for BitShares as well?

I recently asked him if he works for BitSharesMUSIC or for PeerTracks, but haven't got an answer yet.
His github account went silent mid of March
https://github.com/nmushegian

From my point of view it does not (yet) look as if there are direct positive benefits for BitShares ..
I also never saw a post about what is really happening with the delegates pay, even though nikolai claims they are sent to other devs. Maybe someone can point me there.
It also become rather difficult to get any reply from Nikolai at all .. may be just me. 

Today, I removed nikolai's delegates from my slate. I'll gladly put them up again if he published a short statement because I still trust him.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,14379.msg187335.html#msg187335
This thread has it, but some posts were deleted I think

I think he made it clear he doesnt believe in same things as other core members i doubt hes working on bts.. Probably helped cause the downtrend by selling his millions of bts and every bts he earns via delegate

Haha, now pointing the finger at Toast? He made it clear he left BTS for Note. And if his delegate wasn't voted out, all pay would go to Valvaz.

Apparently the BTS holders thought this was a good idea, to keep the delegate in. Luckily Fuzzy and the awesome  gang, have decided that in times of crisis creating more 100% delegates is the solution. With the help of BM we are made to believe that the extra created BTS, doesn't have a influence on the price. This is why the price is falling, realization has set in that there will never be a fiat crisis, since QE is apparently the solution.

Quote from: Ander on March 31, 2015, 11:14:23 pm

NOTES release: yet another way for PTS bears to get some more BTS that they will be able to dump.

Also: NOTES.  Yet another thing the Bitshares community blew all their money on that wasn't Bitshares, resulting in the price of Bitshares going into a neverending bear trend.  Also see: PLAY.

lol PeerTracks has laughably more going for it than PLAY.  I'm trading NOTES because I believe it has potential to solve a lot of problems within the music industry while challenging the Spotify model IF done properly.   << So let's examine this theory briefly.  Currently Spotify has an estimated market cap of ~$4Billion.. while I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong here) NOTES have ~3.5 million based on recent trading.  That means Spotify is valued at 1,143X the value of the service NOTES and PeerTrack can offer.  My trading is calling shenanigans on that valuation.  The trade can be seen as shorting Spotify or shorting BTS but regardless there're odds I'm willing to take based purely on confidence of the Peertracks team and the underlying technology offered by BitShares,

The things we know about Peertracks:
Logo:
Slogan: Make a LIVIN’ LOVIN’ Music.
Big Launch: SXSW and Texas BTC conference, however not a single article in the media can be found.
Business strategie: secret sauce, we will reveil when we can. Sound familiar?

Same sh*t, different DAC.

I had the same problem and did the workaround.

But now it only shows UIA's, not BitAssets and BTS.

I did the wallet rescan blockchain but that didn't help, I did see all (bitasset) transactions popping up though.
My second to last transaction is now on 28 February, with a balance of roughly 5* BTS what it should be.
The last transaction shows a balance of -0.1 BTS on fen 28.

Any ideas?