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 - alt

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 189
1
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Witness Proposal] blckchnd
« on: October 04, 2020, 11:11:11 am »
I agree this could be a security threat, and your advice is a possible choice, we can make a comunity consensus by voting.

Quote from: blockchained on October 04, 2020, 10:06:48 am
Quote from: alt on October 02, 2020, 01:18:13 pm
I agree all these things are ridiculous.
I think it's not a big deal to change to another official github address if we have enough vote power.

I tend to agree it is the only way to save this project is to change official github. To protect existing and future businesses from one man dictatorship that happens now.
Also, it would be good move to change "official" dns to bitshares.exchange from bitshares.org.
We have at least 2 reason to support this
1) .org dns belongs to Milos that numerous times threat our gateway, and he has plan to filter it,



also he was manager of the core that brought trojan in the 4.0 release, and he publicly supported broke of consensus



2) bitshares.exchange the dns name that was bought by the community and belong to the community, so the community already spent money to obtain it, and now the correct time to use it

2
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Witness Proposal] blckchnd
« on: October 04, 2020, 08:41:08 am »
是不是太自以为是了，怎么和你关注点不同就是选择性失明了
同一个事情，你觉得自己是BTS救星，铁腕改革，我看你是玩过家家胡闹，谁看谁都是失明的。


Quote from: abit on October 04, 2020, 07:13:51 am
Quote from: alt on October 03, 2020, 10:37:18 pm
seems it's off topic far away,
I'm not interested in those gossip.
I can see rudex's effort from the order book in the past weeks,
Wish rudex could stay with Bitshares.
It's not gossip but public info.
You're free to choose to ignore them anyway, it is called "Selective blindness" (选择性失明).
Wish you good luck.

3
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Witness Proposal] blckchnd
« on: October 03, 2020, 10:37:18 pm »
seems it's off topic far away,
I'm not interested in those gossip.
I can see rudex's effort from the order book in the past weeks,
Wish rudex could stay with Bitshares.

4
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Witness Proposal] blckchnd
« on: October 03, 2020, 02:57:23 am »
Quote from: abit on October 02, 2020, 08:56:22 pm
不知道你是真傻还是装傻，还在幻想你口中所谓的 business person 来拯救你。
CryptoBridge OpenLedger SparkDEX 给的教训还不够吗？还有 Deex 之流就不说了。

就算掰开手指数现在还在 BitShares 的公司机构，
也要先看 Move Institute ， XBTS ， ioBanker ， 甚至 BEOS 。
什么时候轮得到 RuDEX ？ RuDEX 根本都不是注册公司。

RuDEX 有关联开发团队不假。社区出钱开发的btspp手机钱包，他换个皮就是自己的了。申请一个 UI worker 拿了一百万多万没做完。后来又想申请 core worker 拿钱，我说你先提交点代码让我看看，结果没声了。回头变成我不放权？

你的聪明才智哪里去了？一个 Thule 天天在你耳边吹风，就只有他说的才是真话？
不说别的。他说锁喂价好你就支持锁喂价。 RuDEX 完全是反对锁喂价的，他有没有和你说？
他天天黑巨蟹你没听见过？还幻想巨蟹和他和RuDEX合作。
醒醒。

记得当初锁喂价是你提出的，怎么在你这变成thule了？
我代理给thule是因为社区里他思想比较开放，能听进各方的意见，也有自己的主见，即使他很多观念跟我不同我也从没威胁他迎合我。
解不解锁喂价都有道理，问题在于怎么执行。
市价跌破0.22，很多人爆仓单一直不主动调仓，在内盘规则为锁喂价的情况下，包括我在内的一些人，借出CNY，按0.22价格把爆仓单清了，你隔天马上解锁，号称要恢复锚定，反把这些仓位给爆了，这算什么事？
有人说不解锁对CNY持有人不公平。问题是CNY持有人在明知有锁喂价的情况下，在BTS市价高于0.22，有足够时间换人民币的情况下，仍然选择持有CNY，这难道不该自担风险？按规则0.22借CNY 的反而成老赖了？
解锁喂价没问题，但一定是在市价高于0.22的时候做，把影响降到最低，这点你能不清楚？

对smart coin, 很早我就说过自己的观点，不该强求锚定，重心要转为支持网关等业务，基于网关的DEX相对CEX是有足够的竞争资本的，在业务增加用户积累之后，smart coin自然会成长不断进步。
openledger 为什么离开我不清楚，社区有几个派别我也看不懂，很多时候是斗的你死我活，也不知道是为了什么，rudex一直在积极推动内盘市场，我当然支持，很多人对锁喂价有不同意见很正常，为什么不能给与理解。
巨蟹是陷到 smartcoin 精确锚定的牛角尖，可能也是因为这个和社区很多人关系紧张，回过头想想很不值得，可能是在舍本逐末。

5
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Witness Proposal] blckchnd
« on: October 02, 2020, 01:18:13 pm »
Quote from: blockchained on October 02, 2020, 11:34:33 am
We've observed and supported this project for the last four years. But the last events that happened force us to do this step.
We can't tolerate github abuse from one core dev
We can't tolerate trojan that was delivered by audit worker
We can't tolerate broke of consensus that was publicly acknowledged by core manager Milos
We can't tolerate the staking mechanism that was enforced with 0 discussions and completely changed consensus and voting behavior
The staking problem that was implemented with no discussion and I guess without any modulation is that it's not scalable and it hit hard by "voting apathy" because you have no intention in staking, you gain nothing besides the "governance drama"
The "abit precedent" vanished any trust in the current blockchain consensus & witnesses and operating on it can be just not safe.
Even if everyone starts to play with his staking rules what guarantee we have that he will not abuse github again and broke consensus again? This is a rhetorical question.

We saw attempts that was blocked, abit refused give up his position in github and after his abuse I have no reason to work with dev with such ethics, so I don't understand how you plan to put someone besides him there?

I agree all these things are ridiculous.
I think it's not a big deal to change to another official github address if we have enough vote power.
The real problem is it seems we are lack of reliable development team always, a team which truly serve the business.

I wish the business person include you and bitcrab and others can have more comunication, if you can reach a consensus, I will support with my vote.

6
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Witness Proposal] blckchnd
« on: October 02, 2020, 02:31:29 am »
It's so bad to see you decide to step away too.
I respect you and wish you have a good process.

But if it's possible, May I  ask you to stay with Bitshares for more time?
Too many big argument the community have made recent years, but they are not a big deal indeed compare today.
People come and go, Bitshares is still here, you should stay with it if you still have faith in it.

You have development team, please step in the core development work.
Your business is the exchange gateway, pay more attention to the crypto asset instead of smart coin.
we can have more opportunity if we stay together than fork alone.

I still have faith in Bitshares, wish you too.

Quote from: blockchained on September 29, 2020, 02:55:47 pm
After abit trojan took place yesterday we've stopped our witness infrastructure for bitshares.

We have a capable team of core and UI devs, so we're preparing a fork of bitshares code base, back to the consensus rules that was before the abit abuse on github.
It will be a new distribution, a new chain, and a new genesis.
 
News will come latter with announcements.

7
General Discussion / Re: Old BitCNY MSSR updated to 150%, ICR 225%
« on: October 01, 2020, 09:25:49 am »
Thanks for the PM and post.

I didn't know the rules can be manipulate like a child game.
And I can't find another reason for this change.
All the debt holders borrow CNY and spent it depend on the official rule,
and all the CNY holders buy CNY depend on it too,
All the debt holder can pay debt when price over 0.22CNY and all the CNY holder can sell CNY at 1 CNY yuan price too.
I guess the reason for this manipulate definitely not for the shorter or the CNY holder or BTS system.

And In fact I can do nothing to reduce the loss,
Whenever how many collateral I add, I can be margin call without any cent left, by change the MCR & MSSR.
so I am ready to lose all the collateral 54,545,455.00 BTS

Take care, every BTS traders.

Quote from: Thul3 on October 01, 2020, 06:37:32 am
so you kill bitcny to

Quote
改参数是在围剿猴哥吗
encircle monkey brother ?

You are killing bitcny and making many people a big loss on purpose in hope people like alt can't use much bts for stacking?

You are a criminal and nothing more


Next step forking out someones asset you don't like ?


For peoples attention


Parameters bitcny

ICR 225%
MCR Unknown
MSSR 150%


Parameters for his cny1.0

ICR 175%
MCR 175%
MSSR 110%


Now tell me based on these two parameters abit is not killing bitcny on purpose and causing knowingly many people to lose big money.

Thats a clear criminal act.

The best part he won't announce even the new MCR but just change it when he wants to.

8
General Discussion / Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« on: September 23, 2020, 03:02:12 am »
BTW, the operation of lock BTS is a good feature,
we should give more rights to the locked shares, for example airdrop the fees income to them.
and  I encourage vote for the witness who have locked more BTS first.

Quote from: alt on September 23, 2020, 02:53:48 am
remove the voting power of liquility BTS is a big change, but it's reasonable and acceptable to me, so I will support it.
but we'd best keep enough time for the transition period to prevent abuse of voting power.

Quote from: ripplexiaoshan on September 19, 2020, 04:53:03 pm
I support this update, but we have to obey the consensus by voting, so I have created a poll(ID:289/290), please consider voting for it.

9
General Discussion / Re: BitShares 5.0 (2020-09-30)
« on: September 23, 2020, 02:53:48 am »
remove the voting power of liquility BTS is a big change, but it's reasonable and acceptable to me, so I will support it.
but we'd best keep enough time for the transition period to prevent abuse of voting power.

Quote from: ripplexiaoshan on September 19, 2020, 04:53:03 pm
I support this update, but we have to obey the consensus by voting, so I have created a poll(ID:289/290), please consider voting for it.

10
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Poll] Do you support what abit changed to voting system?
« on: August 16, 2020, 08:12:27 am »
In fact in most condition whether rule A or rule B is not a big deal to me.
What I really concern is the business based on core which make BTS more valuable like gdex\rudex\CNC\magicwallet...
I expected a stable core since years ago, but seems it's still not coming today.

What abit had done is totally not acceptable in my opinion.
But it's already happen. I can accept the changes even some details is not reasonable to me.
The important thing is how to ensure our developer don't do it again.

I don't support fork, it's a disaster to all business based on BTS, what will happen to bitCNY/GDEX.BTC/CNC.. ?
Anybody  will have faith to build business on BTS in the future?
I wish you can resolve disputes, somebody can give a concession,  price will rise, BTS can have a good future.

11
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: MXC Exchange will list BTS/抹茶交易所拟上线BTS
« on: February 11, 2020, 07:19:51 am »
But how can you prove it's famous and there are much more users?
I saw very few reply in their weibo account, seems not worth 600K BTS.
 
Quote from: binggo on February 11, 2020, 06:25:01 am
As i said this is just another form of marketing, list or not list in MXC is not important. As the famous and users of MXC is much more than BTS, we did the Market making in BTS DEX, just grow a little users.
I don't mean I need trust MXC, I never trust any CEX sure.
I just want to get more information about it's background, if it worth the payment.
A CEX with a boss of nobody and fake volume and few reply articles seems worthless to me.
Quote
This is not important thing.

Mt.Gox have the boss and the office.

QuadrigaCX have the boss and the office too.

So...

HUOBI,OKEX,Binance didn't have offce.
Gate didn't have office, even you know its boss, can you believe it?
CoinEgg didn't have the office, even didn't know who is its boss.
ZB didn't have office, 徐子敬 is one of its boss, can you believe it?
Poloniex have the office，孙宇晨 is its boss, can you believe it?
So?

12
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: MXC Exchange will list BTS/抹茶交易所拟上线BTS
« on: February 11, 2020, 04:44:47 am »
Thanks for the infomation.
I did some researches by google/weibo, seems  this exchange is very abnormal, even nobody knows who is the boss of MXC, where is the office.
I will unvote this work tomorrow if there is no more enough reason.

Quote from: litepresence on February 09, 2020, 10:30:15 pm
每次出现重大价格变动：
在实际交易中，这会导致音量峰值。

让我们来看看：

Binance音量vs MCX音量

2019年中

真实音量
Binance BTC：USDT
绿色排行榜

假货量
MCX BTC：USDT
底部图表为红色

为什么在MCX的价格变动期间没有交易量激增？

欺诈！


Each time there is a major price movement,
at a REAL exchange... this results in a volume spike.

Lets take a look at Binance Volume vs MCX volume mid 2019

REAL VOLUME
Binance BTC:USDT  top in green

FAKE VOLUME
MCX BTC:USDT bottom in red



also, note the 20 day period in the middle, with nil volume, when their fake-volume wash-trading machine was apparently malfunctioning


Quote from: abit on February 09, 2020, 08:05:27 pm
I'm not an expert though.

I'm not an expert on coding blockchains, deciphering C++, or even properly versioning my github; there I humbly yield to individuals like yourself.   

When it comes to trading crypto on centralized exchanges however, I do consider myself very well versed... I've been here since mtgox days; I've had my money on dozens of different exchanges since then.  I've learned the hard way by personally losing 10's of thousands of dollars many times over due to various instances of exchange implosion, theft, and scam.  Before then, I had been trading for at least a decade in regulated stock and forex markets.  I also have an educational background in finance and mathematics.  I know price charts very well.

What I see in the image above, and what I hope my purple dots make clear to all others, is most certainly FRAUD.

我在上图中看到的并希望我的紫色圆点清晰可见的，无疑是欺诈。

13
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 建议将bitcny与biteur的强清补偿至少提高到 5%
« on: February 08, 2020, 09:23:41 pm »
比如收2%手续费，清算买价实际是1.02，卖价实际是1.00，那么自然会有被清算人1.01主动挂卖单还债，这个价格比清算买价1.02低，清算也就被抑制了。
清算手续费不是为了赚钱而是为了抑制清算市场，鼓励自由市场。
Quote from: abit on February 08, 2020, 02:21:36 pm
Quote from: alt on February 08, 2020, 12:36:21 pm
Quote from: alt on February 08, 2020, 12:31:17 pm
Quote from: binggo on February 08, 2020, 11:39:40 am
Quote from: 时光旅行机 on February 08, 2020, 04:28:29 am
给系统一定的手续费这个思路是对的，被系统撸走的费用，大概率争议时没那么大的，增加系统收益率应该才是我们的目标。

系统不要想着处处收钱，收强清手续费的目的是什么？！能解决什么问题？
其实可以不停强请，在成交时如果有高于清算价格的买单就吃掉赚差价。
如果没有就调低债仓清自己，零损失，手续费才可以增加操作成本，减少这种不必要的清算。
现在有人在这么玩
另外收清算手续费，且要高于挂单成交手续费，有利于把交易从清算市场引出来。
如果我被清算时有２个点清算手续费，我可能不会反手清算回来，而是选择市场挂买单。
供过于求的时候，挂单买收不到货，真想买的人还是会强清的，要么提现去外盘买，传导给承兑商发起强清，要么直接往上吃，传导给套利者去强清。

加手续费只是雁过拔毛，让系统赚点钱而以。

14
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 建议将bitcny与biteur的强清补偿至少提高到 5%
« on: February 08, 2020, 12:36:21 pm »
Quote from: alt on February 08, 2020, 12:31:17 pm
Quote from: binggo on February 08, 2020, 11:39:40 am
Quote from: 时光旅行机 on February 08, 2020, 04:28:29 am
给系统一定的手续费这个思路是对的，被系统撸走的费用，大概率争议时没那么大的，增加系统收益率应该才是我们的目标。

系统不要想着处处收钱，收强清手续费的目的是什么？！能解决什么问题？
其实可以不停强请，在成交时如果有高于清算价格的买单就吃掉赚差价。
如果没有就调低债仓清自己，零损失，手续费才可以增加操作成本，减少这种不必要的清算。
现在有人在这么玩
另外收清算手续费，且要高于挂单成交手续费，有利于把交易从清算市场引出来。
如果我被清算时有２个点清算手续费，我可能不会反手清算回来，而是选择市场挂买单。

15
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 建议将bitcny与biteur的强清补偿至少提高到 5%
« on: February 08, 2020, 12:31:17 pm »
Quote from: binggo on February 08, 2020, 11:39:40 am
Quote from: 时光旅行机 on February 08, 2020, 04:28:29 am
给系统一定的手续费这个思路是对的，被系统撸走的费用，大概率争议时没那么大的，增加系统收益率应该才是我们的目标。

系统不要想着处处收钱，收强清手续费的目的是什么？！能解决什么问题？
其实可以不停强请，在成交时如果有高于清算价格的买单就吃掉赚差价。
如果没有就调低债仓清自己，零损失，手续费才可以增加操作成本，减少这种不必要的清算。
现在有人在这么玩

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 189

Page created in 0.197 seconds with 23 queries.