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.

Topics - xeroc

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 15
Technical Support / [pyBitShares] Release 0.3.0
« on: March 04, 2019, 03:41:58 pm »
Hello everyone,

just so you guys don't miss it, python-bitshares version 0.3.0 has just been tagged.
This release took quite some efforts as it lays out the foundation to share more code with other blockchain.
Additionally, new operations (including HTLC) have been added and (shitton of) bugs found by the community
have been resolved.

At this stage, I would like to discuss with the community, how to continue with this project as I cannot promise to find
the time to work on this as actively as I would like to. Should we go for a bounty based development setup (funded by
a worker), or rather look for funding from existing projects that use pybitshares (like dexbot) and have their team
also work on pybitshares more actively?

Ultimately, I would very much love to see this grow (even more) into a community project with more contributions
being merged in. As you can see from (,
there are already some 20 contributors in the repo. Let's make this 40, please!

Dear community,

I just created a proposal for committee that expires in 2 weeks.
The proposal proposes to set the fees according to @clockworkgr results of business analysis.

The proposal has been discussed here:

The details of the fee schedule are here:

There were over 8 weeks since we first started discussions publicly here:

Details and reasoning for the proposed (USD) valued fees are here:

As USD valuem the current feed price is taken.

I expect every committee member to either approve or provide an explanation (to the community) for not approving.

Stakeholder Proposals / [Worker] Reference faucet via
« on: January 11, 2019, 02:09:22 pm »
Dear BTS voters,

as you may be aware, (BitShares Europe) provides the reference wallet for the
software as hosted on The costs so far have been covered by the infrastructure
program operated by Blockchain Projects. The faucet has been funded by the reserve pool
and rewards from the referral program are directed to the BTS reserve pool. Thus, we managed
to operated at quite some profit for the BTS holders of over 100,000 BTS.

To make value proposition clearer to the BTS voters, we decided to remove Blockchain Projects
from the equation and apply for a worker proposal directly to fund the faucet maintenance,
operations and further development.

Details can be found here:

Please consider your votes.
Constructive feedback is welcome

Ginve that there currently is refund400k (and only one refund100k) and the fact that
some community members have the desire to reduce the "inflation", I think
the entire community is best served by providing more flexibility when it comes
to voting and funding workers.

With that said, I have just today created a proposal (on-chain) for the committee to create
the following new workers:

- refund100k-1
- refund100k-2
- refund100k-3
- refund50k-1
- refund50k-2
- refund50k-3

These would be created by the committee account and refund the pay to the reserves in case they are approved.

That means, the new (finer) worker proposals serve the same purpose as refund400k but allow for more flexible decision
making for proxies and BTS voters in general.

Look forward to see discussion.

On a side node: The same proposal also creates a worker "threshold-bsip" which refunds 1 BTS per day.
The purpose is to have an independent worker proposal to consider BSIPs approved. There will be a separate
announcement to this one.

General Discussion / BitAssets statistics - a start
« on: November 08, 2018, 12:10:42 pm »
I took some of my spare time to learn vuejs and chose to build something
that the community may consider useful:

This shows "some" statistics of bitAssets including some charts.

At this point, I am looking for someone that knows Vuejs and can help me
make this page more "pretty". Anyone?

Pull Requests are welcome:

General Discussion / [eng] Marketing Efforts and Pre-Worker Discussion
« on: November 06, 2018, 02:05:00 pm »
Hey there,

I would like to gauge the community about what they believe should be part of BitShares Marketing ..

In my opinion it should consist of:
* a corporate identity/brand
* a landing page that focuses on the use and not the technology
* "public awareness" material

At @bitfest, we've had a presentation from Team Nijhuis from the Netherlands.


They have approached us to see if the community has a desire to go
forward with them for marketing. To get a better picture of what they are
trying to achieve and how they intend to do so, they prepared a pdf


Provided that I personally have only little understanding of "marketing"
and that the community appears to have a much clearer picture in their
mind, I hereby request feedback about the proposal above so we can
incorporate it BEFORE we go public with an actual worker proposal.

So if you ever wanted to express you opinion with respect to
marketing: This is your chance!

Dear BitShares community,

it is about time to clear up the uncertainty about my involvement with
the BitShares Blockchain Foundation (BBF). To many it appears as if I
spoke for the foundation. For reasons that are beyond my understanding,
people still believe that even after I told them differently.

Hence, I would like to clarify once and for all that

I (@xeroc) do *not* speak for the BitShares Blockchain Foundation, nor
do I speak for *any* company other than ChainSquad GmbH.

For the BBF, I serve the following functions:

* technical lead (through Blockchain Projects B.V.)
* point of contact (one out of many) to forward requests to the BBF

That said, I would also like to make clear that the @xeroc proxy account
on the BitShares Blockchain is undoubtedly independent from any
company or foundation involvement. I make this point very clear
to every party I deal with - even beyond BBF and Blockchain Projects
B.V. I intend to be as open and honest to every single community member
as possible as long as the content of this post is clearly understood.

Furthermore, as most in here know, I am also a director of the PeerPlays
Blockchain Standards Association (PBSA) which I try hard to keep
entirely separate unless BitShares is involved. In that case, my goal is
for the greater joint benefit of both Blockchains.

Additionally, through ChainSquad GmbH, I am also the owner and operator
of BitShares Europe and the services associated with it.  Certainly,
BitShares Europe's goal was (and will be) to grow the BitShares
Blockchain to its full potential. As you may know, from time to time the
@bitshareseurope account has significant voting power on the Blockchain
which is (so far) refused to use actively. Once I come up with a proper
solution for potential conflicting interests on this front, I will let
everyone know.

To those that can read between the lines, it becomes apparent that there
is huge potential for conflicts of interest. So far, all my business
partners have been informed about those potentials and would like to
know also inform the entire BitShares community about them. So far,
those potentials have not yet materialized into actual conflicts,
but they may in the future. At that point, I will stick to openness and
honesty and inform the community about them.

That said, I am looking forward to continue the work with my current
business partners including Blockchain Projects B.V. and the PBSA who
have been very understanding about this from the very beginning and
leave me the freedom it needs.

To add to the above, I fully support the BBF and the efforts they currently
undertake to establish proper legal foundation around the BitShares Blockchain
and the BTS core native token. Furthermore, I would like to clarify that despite
me not being part of the BBF legally, my input and feedback to them is highly
appreciated. To add to this, the BBF's intention is to stay as neutral as possible
which is why it is kept at a minimum size, minumum influence and does not
do partnerships or public endorse any project. We are talking about a fine line
between establishing trust and being used for the sake of good reputation (we
have all witnessed how that works)

//edit 2018-10-09
As most already know, I have resigned from the board of directors of the PBSA.
As a consequence, I am now only involved due to Blockchain Project being
contractor to the PBSA for technical consultency.

General Discussion / Attending Graphene Dev Con in Shanghai
« on: April 17, 2018, 11:23:42 am »
Dear board members,

I'd like to take the opportunity of a short coding break and let everyone know that I will be attending Graphene Dev Con in Shanghai in 3 weeks.
The roles that I will have there will be

* Developer
* Committee Member
* Proxy
* Community Member
* CTO of BlockchainProjects BV
* CEO of ChainSquad GmbH and BitShares Europe

As you may guess, this opens up plenty of conflicting interests so that I would like to emphasis that I try hard to live up to the expectations
community members have with me playing one and all of these roles - it turned much more difficult in recent months. Anyways, I would like
to also let everyone know that in conversionation with people, I will make clear with what voice I will speak and try to make conflicts of
interest clear to the dialog partner.

In Shanghai, I'll arrive on Tuesday 2nd May and will stay in the conference hotel until late Sunday.
That said, it would be my pleasure to try to arrange a meeting with anyone that would like to talk about BitShares or Graphene while I am
in Shanghai.

Looking forward to meeting you.

 -- Fabian

Stakeholder Proposals / [Worker] BitFest in Amsterdam
« on: April 03, 2018, 09:47:55 am »
Dear BTS holders, voters and proxies,

please find below a new proposal of the BBF for a conference in autumn later this year:

For your consideration:

General Discussion / Binance Dexathon - Discussion
« on: March 22, 2018, 12:33:38 pm »
Considering the recent press release of Binance:
it seems they are looking for a team to reinvent the wheel.

Assuming that the BBF applied for that hackathon, what reasons would there be for Binance to
not fork the BitShares Code and instead use the existing blockchain?

Feedback, please!

Dear community,

I'd like to update the community on a new plan that the BBF would like to pursue in the next months:

This forum thread is for public discussion.
Please don't hesitate to give feedback!

Worker proposal

Given the growth of the BitShares ecosystem, we, Blockchain Projects BV see the urgent need to revise the existing
white papers and documentation of the whole BitShares platform.

From our recent business developments, we can confirm that regulators are taking a closer look into the whole
crypto ecosystem and they are constantly confused due to unaligned use of terminology of old economy, such
as assets, shareholders, equity, dividends.

Unfortunately, our technical information is also “polluted” with analysis in non-technical areas, such as bitassets
and trading. As can be found in the second spokesperson report, this requires an major rework.

Furthermore, the existing documentation hasn’t been updated and reviewed consistently. The majority of newcomers
to the platform run into similar issues which could be resolved by improved documentation and better integration into
the whole ecosystem (e.g. the reference wallet).

To ensure a proper and accurate representation of the BitShares platform, major rework of existing material is required.
The documentation will not be reviewed by legal council as it has a purely technical aim.

Please note that this worker proposals focuses strongly on the technical aspects of BitShares. Legal aspects need to
be dealt with separately.

It is our strong believe that it is required to separated the technical documentation (such as RPC, blockchain APIs, etc.)
from the functional and legal description (such as the DEX, and bitassets). This will help to distinguish BitShares (as
a platform) from the BTS token (as a cryptocurrency) and the services (such as the exchange) offered through smart

Read more

Stakeholder Proposals / Legal Council about BTS and No-action
« on: January 30, 2018, 07:53:41 am »
New Worker Proposal

Proposer: BitShares Blockchain Foundation

With this worker, we (the bitshares blockchain foundation) would like to fund this project to seek legal clarity and presentation for BTS holders and regulators.

Throughout the last couple months, we have been repeatedly approach about core aspects of BitShares and its governance token BTS that have been presented publicly in an inaccurate and unfavorable manner. This often resulted in ambiguity and uncertainty that has held back some businesses from working with or on the BitShares Blockchain and could well have been a reason for lack of ecosystem growth throughout the last years.

Additionally to an opinion letter of a prestigious legal council, we also seek a non-action letter by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the prototype for many regulators in the world.

Read more

Stakeholder Proposals / BitShares Blockchain Foundation: **Budget workers**
« on: December 07, 2017, 07:49:05 am »
Budget workers serve as a budget that can be tapped whenever it is needed for purposes defined in the individual budget workers. This serves as working budget that is more flexible then static escrow workers in the way that it allows to pay many different people for their support out of a single purpose-specific fund. In a sense, you can see the famous BitShares-UI worker as a budget worker that is managed by @billbutler. With this worker, we've seen a flourishing development, countless improvements throughout the last couple of months and see need for further budgets.

This thread serves as a general discussion thread about the idea of budget workers and to list the budgets as they become ready for voting.

Budget Funds
Budget workers serve as workers that provide capital for specific purposes where escrow workers do not fit, such as translation work, bug fixing or bounties. The rules are as follows:

* BitShares Blockchain Foundation has an account ( that is co-owned by committee-account and escrow partners.
* The BBF will redeem these funds on a regular basis and buy up bitUSD from the market (with reasonable premiums).
* For this reason and due to volatility of BTS, the available budget in USD terms might vary over time.
* The budget is controlled by who serves as an independent entity to supervise payouts.
* The amounts available for individual budgets can be obtained through transparent account (

Beneficiaries of this models need to authenticate themselves against the BitShares Blockchain Foundation with their real-world identity.
Properly formatted invoices need to be sent that are published in the BBF's website.

Payments will be made only after receiving and approving individual invoices!

Of course, budget that is not used belongs to the BitShares DAC and will ultimately be returned to the BitShares reserves.

Translations into (Simplified) Chinese

Accounting Report:

Looking forward to the discussion.

Deploy and maintain independent BitShares infrastructure

Given the growth of the BitShares ecosystem, we, Blockchain Projects BV, feel that the network should become more redundant and reduce its reliance on business partners that are currently running nodes primarily. That said, we would like to deploy independent servers and maintain the basic needs for a healthy BitShares network, including, but not limited to, a faucet, public API nodes, and seed nodes.

Read the full details here:



Deployed endpoints
The following endpoints are now available

Loadbalancer statistics and backend availability can be found on

Pull Requests for bitshares-ui

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 15