Quote

9PM CDT Wednesday

Its a bit bad for me, since I am in Moscow time atm, and 9pm CDT is 4 am for me.

...

Oh drat, if it's 4 am for Moscow it will be 2 am for me. That would be a bit late for me as well.

Ha, nice to see you are still around TonyK.

I'm chiming in to show that there are some lurkers like myself that still favour bitshares.
Well I've never been much of a poster but I do still have hopes for bitshares. Also nice to see familiar usernames posting. The merger did admittedly kill off most of my enthusiasm, with the steem-launch and weird token"distribution" killing off much of the rest.

Still a lot of aspects of bitshares that used to garner a lot of abuse and derision from the bitcoin/ethereum crowd seem to be getting more mainstream. Also kencodes project does look impressive and practical.
A few more projects like that and things should start looking up a lot more. Also one potentially positive thing about steem is that it is doing a way better job of at least getting some attention on the technology and concepts behind bitshares than most of our previous pr-big-pushes in the past. Although I have to admit that steem holds no appeal for myself personally (nor any other social media platform for that matter).

Is there news about a way to make stealth easier to use for businesses (and users)?

I've been hearing rumors about Trezor supporting graphene, are they also going to support bitshares? If so that would be a very big plus. If it could be combined with a simplified interface for less computer-savy people, that would be a big step in the right direction.

I am not sure what you mean by 100 pump (in STEEM) ? 

With respect to fees.  To create a new account requires 100 STEEM to be converted to VESTS in the new account.  In effect, there is no "fee", just a requirement to fund the account with a minimum balance of VESTS.

You can think of holding VESTS as owning a percent of available bandwidth, no fees are necessary because you already own the bandwidth you are consuming.

Keep in mind that I'm only deducing based on the statements I've seen on the bitcointalk-thread. There it was stated that creating a new account for each witness/miner costs not 100 but 1 STEEM converted to VESTS. In the same thread a list is posted of current VESTS-accounts. Looking at the list starting from 1 VESTS downward you see a history of when all miners started producing that very first account. So based on that it seems that at the start it was 1 STEEM for each 1 VEST, but at the time I'm writing this it seems to be 1 STEEM for 0.036788 VESTS and dropping.

Based on the comments in the bitcointalk-thread, this kinda implies that the everyone who transferred at the 1:1 ratio at the start is going to receive 100 STEAM for every 1 of his VESTS. Provided of course that I understood the comments correctly. This deduction is not based on me understanding the code, so I might be missing a couple of important facts.

Rate limited free.

My best guess, is that you mean transfers between accounts are free up till bandwidth limitations.
So instead of transaction fees, the network pays for itself by inflation of STEEM then?

I still don't understand how the conversion from STEEM to VEST works. After ctrl+f-ing through the bitcointalk forums, I finally found a little remark that paraphrasing states, that 1 STEEM is converted to VEST first time any miner turns witness. Looking at the bottom a website with the VEST-richlist, that seems to suggest that Conversion rates are little over 4% and dropping. So I guess the conversion rate is dropping, but I can't figure out what mechanism or rule is in effect.

EDIT
Corrected a mistake, it's 4% not 40%. Decimals be damned.

First Impression: Seems they have a trollbox  .

Couldn't people just activate the bitshares-irc for that? Not like it's used all that much for anything else.

also, if you want to store your BTS in cold storage, make sure to delegate your voting power to a proxy

Would be nice if we could have a trezor-like solution for bitshares yeah, especially for people like me with memory-problems. About the cold-storage with proxy voting, how would that work? Is there a wiki-page for it?

So the reason I've helped with the mumble-server, is that I believe it fills a gap in communication in the crypto sphere and bitshares especially.

We have mumble for hangouts with virtually no restriction in number of attendees and very low bandwidth requirements for each individual. Couple of advantages it has compared to google-hangouts and youtube is that it's still accessible from China. We had high hopes that it would enable hundreds of people to hold meetups and who knows we might get there yet.

I've been looking for ways to add to the experience and one thing I feel is missing from mumble is a way to do presentations or webinars. I've looked around and I've found two possible solutions. First one a google-hangout style audio-videoconferencing server, with screen/tab sharing. Second option a BigBlueButton-server, which is tailor made for doing online classes, presentations and such.

They won't be able to replace mumble I think, because of the increased bandwidth required and far lower number of simultaneous users. Then again, a webinar probably won't work with an overly large number of participants. I personally like BigBlueButton the most, but I'd like some input from the community which they feel is more useful.

The first option is light enough on the server requirements that I might be able to add it to the current mumble-server. The BigBlueButton server has some beefy system requirements and would most likely require us to move to a different server and probably a higher monthly bill.

So my question is two fold, which option do you think is the preferable or most useful? In case enough people like the BigBlueButton-server, does anybody have a recommendation for an affordable high bandwidth server with a minimum of 4 cores, 4Gigs of ram, a lot of storage space for recordings and high enough data-limit to allow for videostreaming.