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 - pseudoscops

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1
General Discussion / Vesting balances & whatever happend to CFSGOLD...
« on: March 18, 2017, 04:19:08 pm »
Ok, so I'm pretty sure I didn't ever claim my vesting balances for Bitshares from ages ago.

When I login to my accounts via the web interface none of them show any vesting balances as being owed and there are no transactions showing that they were claimed in the history under the "Withdraw vesting balances" filter.

What have I missed? Was there some kind of expiry date by which I had to claim them by?

Also does anyone know what happened to CFSCOIN or CFSGOLD? I have balances for both, worth together what I think is probably a few hundred dollars.

2
Technical Support / Re: Steemit or Bitshares for my VR/AR project..
« on: July 23, 2016, 07:33:59 am »
Thanks DestBest. Interested to hear that you think Steem could a better fit for my application when compared to Bitshares.

Would anyone care to comment further or provide their thoughts? Really could do with a better steer on which route to take.

Also I'm still after a Steemit invite if someone can help me out  :)

3
Technical Support / Steemit or Bitshares for my VR/AR project..
« on: July 21, 2016, 02:43:25 pm »
Mulling over the possibility of using some blockchain technology for a VR/AR project that I've been working on for about a year.

My project has some elements that make it a little like an image stock library. I read this article and it got me thinking:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/21/business/smallbusiness/a-new-wrinkle-in-the-gig-economy-workers-get-most-of-the-money.html?src=me&_r=0

In addition to using something like a UIA to provide value back to content creators like with Stocksy, I'd also like to run some sort of virtual currency scheme for end-users of the platform. How might this work? If using Bitshares then my first thoughts were UIA for shareholders and separate UIA for users that can be bought with BitUSD. It's been so long since I've looked at Bitshares I'm not even sure if what I'm suggesting is possible (i.e. buying UIA tokens/shares with BitUSD).

If I wanted to do something along these lines and partner with a number of content producers which platform, STEEM or Bitshares, would seem like the best fit to mirror what Stocksy have done? How might things change if I want to add end-users with a virtual currency to the mix.

I've barely paid attention to STEEM apart from swapping some of my BTS holdings for some STEEM. It appears to be getting a lot of traction at the moment. I read a post from Dan about it being a bit of a Trojan horse for other applications that could run on the Steem blockchain. So I'm confused as to whether I should be looking towards STEEM as a platform for my project instead of Bitshares. Certainly looks to be rocketing up at the moment.

Oh, and despite quite a long break from posting here, I was wondering, considering I'm not a complete noob,  if someone could please send me an invite to Steemit?

I've been trying to register for the last few days since I've been thinking about using it as platform to document my project rather than setting up a separate blog.

4
General Discussion / Been absent for a while. Best way to migrate from Bitshares 0.9.2 to new chain?
« on: May 22, 2016, 09:01:24 pm »
Okay, so I've got an existing backup JSON file from one of the later Bitshares2 clients on Linux, but I can't remember which > 0.8 I think. This wallet backup file was exported via the GUI. Is there a way for me to figure out which version of the GUI client I used and is this likely to be important for when I try to get back up and running and synced with the current live chain?

I do have a Linux system with the Bitshares 2 client running - it has version 0.9.2 installed. But the install is a bit screwed up and I can only login in via the terminal. Something has gone awry with XFCE4 and it's not a simple fix. I mention this in case you guys think it makes sense to re-export my wallet before trying to import my keys into the new blockchain. Given the lack of GUI I'll have to use the bitshares-cli for this and so any pointers on the sequence of commands I'll need in order to export a wallet backup from the CLI would be great (i.e. unlock wallet, export commands etc etc).

Next, what are my choices for a GUI client for the new block chain? Ideally, I'd like to keep a GUI based client on an offline ARM based machine, I have a spare Raspberry Pi 2 but could buy an Odroid C2 if more RAM is required (it has 2GB), I'd create a new account here on this machine and move most of my holdings from my old account to  this account and then unplug the machine. I'd then like to transfer some funds to a new account in a new hot wallet that will remain connected to the internet. I think I saw mention of web-based wallets and that also some form of mobile app was in the pipeline. If so what strategy would you guys recommend? I like the idea of this wallet being on my phone.

I do want to become more familiar with the CLI, because I'm working on some projects where integration with Bitshares could be possible. Is there an easy way for me to use Bitshares with Python at the moment. Any wrapper libs for python being maintained?

Also, can someone point me to a summary of what is going on with Bitshares at the moment and what the state of play is? I tried to catch up the other day and it seemed like development focus in Blacksburg, in part at least, had now moved to trying to build a Reddit clone on top of the new chain? Are not the DEX and pegged currencies a primary focus anymore? Or are they considered finished now? Perhaps, someone else picked up this side of things and started to run with it? These two things were what I was hoping would turn into the Bitshares Killer App.

Sorry about all the question, it's just I've been out of the loop for a while.

Eagerly awaiting advice on all the above, but especially keen to get my account up and running on the current live blockchain.

Thanks in advance for any help !

5
General Discussion / Re: The Final Countdown!
« on: October 13, 2015, 11:44:13 pm »
Well done guys!

6
General Discussion / McKinsey warns banks face wipeout in some financial services..
« on: September 30, 2015, 11:14:41 am »
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&biw&bih&q=cache:CU-b1yHiqRcJ:http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a5cafe92-66bf-11e5-97d0-1456a776a4f5.html%2Bors+decided+to+clamp+down+on+the+disrupters+by+imposing+similar+capital+and+compliance+rules+as+th&gbv=1&&ct=clnk

 ;)

7
Nanocard / Re: Nano card advice...
« on: September 19, 2015, 12:01:30 pm »
Sounds like I can sign up now for CCDEK and will be able to activate in a week or so. When could I expect the physical card to arrive if I sign up today?

Also I realised after I posted  that Bit-X was a no go due to no integration with BitShares.

So NanoCard it is then!

8
Nanocard / Nano card advice...
« on: September 19, 2015, 11:30:20 am »
I want to start doing some of my day to day spending with a BitShares backed card. Can I get a Nano card yet or should I just go with a Bit-X card? From CCEDK Nano page:

Quote
If a customer feels he or she cannot wait, it is possible already now to pick up the similar Bitcoin Debit Card NanoCard from our partner site at Bit-x. It is available Now.

Bit-X site looks slicker and so this entices me in a little more than the CCEDK, wondering if I'll miss out on any features that Nano provides if I just go with the Bit-X card. Are the same guys behind CCEDK behind the Bit-x card? I'm in the UK - I'm assuming that either can be applied for and used in the UK. What information do I have to give in order to get one - are there any 'Know your customer' procedures in place as part of the application process for the card - I'm assuming there will be...?

Also, although I'd still like to to get a card for experimenting, I've noticed on http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/views/all/ that BitUSD is running well of the peg - as I write this coinmarket cap reports $1.21 at the moment. Is this correct? If so then this might mean that spending is not viable as the peg is so far from reality. Sorry I've been away for a while busy with other projects, but can someone point me to why this is the case when the peg used to hold very close to $1 on lower volume than we've seen over the last week.

9
Technical Support / Re: Bitshares 2.0 Wallet(s) - Spec Requiremnents
« on: September 16, 2015, 12:05:27 pm »
Any chance of it working on the original Rasberry Pi B? Or would a Pi 2 be more sensible?

10
Technical Support / Re: About BItshares 2.0 Snapshot
« on: August 22, 2015, 02:56:41 pm »
Thanks guys!

Was hoping to just withdraw all when fully vested. Anyone kept track of when that is? Seem to have 18 months in my head...?

11
Technical Support / Re: About BItshares 2.0 Snapshot
« on: August 20, 2015, 10:59:02 pm »
Does anyone know if I need to worry about my vesting shares or should I claim them before the upgrade?

12
General Discussion / Re: Announcing Brownie Points (BROWNIE.PTS)
« on: August 14, 2015, 11:03:27 am »
Quote from: DataSecurityNode on August 14, 2015, 04:30:19 am

Everyone was asked to post in a thread about what they've done and some Brownie.PTS were sent about 2 months ago or so. Are we supposed to keep posting each time we do something we think is worthy of a Brownie.PTS nod from @bytemaster or will he simply know we contributed or how do we know when to stop begging for Brownie.PTS for contributing because we didn't know we were on a shitlist?   ;D

I've been away for a while and so trying to catch up. My absence means that any contributions I've made in the past, which amount to far less than a lot here, will probably faded from memory.

But my contributions are irrelevant because I think Brownies just seem like such a daft idea and I think they are going to switch off more people than they turn on. When I hear people like Xeroc suggesting that people should consider sharedropping on Brownies vs BTS it just makes me wonder what has happened in my absence. Xeroc was so fair-minded and he seemed the other day to be advocating dropping on what must amount to a tiny fraction of people who have supported BTS in some way. Perhaps I'm missing something.

Maybe I just don't get it. All these twists and turns - well they're just confusing. I'm hoping not intentionally so. I'm still holding, but I'm losing faith a little with this Brownie stuff.

Faith will be restored if someone can build a logical argument as to why Brownies are fair and will remain so. Whilst trying to answer this please keep in mind the quote from DataSecuirty Node above. I'm pretty sure if you read what he says you'll quickly realise that Brownies are not practical and cannot ever be fairly distributed. So this means at the very least sharedrops should be refused/not encouraged by BM and Xeroc and other Brownie holders.

13
IDentabit / Re: Coming Soon
« on: August 12, 2015, 10:47:31 am »
+5000%  :o

14
General Discussion / PR opportunity on WSJ...
« on: March 02, 2015, 01:45:08 pm »
The counterargument part of the this WSJ article appears to hinge on the fact that Bitcoin is volatile and not backed by anything:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/do-cryptocurrencies-such-as-bitcoin-have-a-future-1425269375?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_tech

There are only 4 comments in the comment section at present. If someone has a WSJ account then perhaps it might be worth logging in and mentioning how BitShares solves the volatility problem. I expect this will get a lot of eyes today in light of the the imminent release of Barry Silbert's Bitcoin Investment Trust.

15
General Discussion / Re: Bytemaster and Mumble - A Proposed Solution
« on: March 02, 2015, 12:45:26 pm »
Yep that was my initial reaction to this too, someone will want to listen to it enough to automate the recording of it which could easily be published or used out of context to cause more damage. Audio drivers such as soundflower for OSX coupled with a simple scripts would probably make this possible.

I have to say I just don't get the OP logic for having the live only mumble sessions. Also this seemingly increased need for censorship that floating about everywhere at the moment. Everyone should realise, Chinese included, that parts of the mumble sessions, and other discussions, are off the cuff and brainstorm like in nature. If Dan or anyone else suggests something sub-optimal people should have the sense to realise that it does not mean that it is enshrined future policy. We usually correct course pretty quickly and open and public debate is instrumental in allowing the course-correcting to occur as swiftly as possible.

I do agree that certain things should not be discussed in public if they might be considered very controversial, especially if they are brought forward by prominent members of the team such as Dan. I'm sure that is already the case and that much more radical ideas have been discussed by various teams that only a few have been privvy too.

To combat the controversial issues perhaps there should be a second monthly mumble sessions that only the 100 elected delegates can attend that is not recorded or made public. This could operate on the Chatham House Rule, (i.e. what was discussed can be disclosed publicly, but who said it cannot).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatham_House_Rule

Someone could be responsible for summarising the this private session, fuzzy?, and perhaps it would allow BM to save anything that might be considered a little controversial for these more private sessions instead of the main Mumble sessions.

Just a thought - not sure how practical it would be give the time it might take to summarise what was discussed. Also it relies on every one of the delegates agreeing to keep true to the Chatham House Rule and not disclosing who said what or recording the session.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Page created in 0.196 seconds with 23 queries.