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.
I'd love to see the lead developers of Bitshares, Ethereum, NXT, eMunie, .. have a public discussion in a dedicated forum thread.
We will be participating in a live panel on Friday (BitShares/Ethereum/Mastercoin) to debate the issues and it should be available for download somewhere.
Yep! This will be on Let's Talk Bitcoin! in early February.
Ok, I have identified the problem that was hanging the blockchain market... more rounding issues. The problem arises when I have to revalidate price calculations using rounded or truncated data. There is no way around the fact that information has been lost and thus the validation step has to be 'fuzzy'.
My 'quick fix' was to increase the epsilon I use for comparing claim_by_cover outputs as the rounding error was 870 satoshi in this instance. This means I have to choose between lower meaningful divisibility or switching over to 128 bit numbers for all balances. I can then ignore the lower 64 bits for comparison purposes but still use them for price multiplication purposes. This would add an average of 16 bytes per bid/ask and keep all of the rounding errors so small as to be inconsequential. Perhaps 1000 satoshi is inconsequential for all practical purposes.
The changes required to fix this problem will require all testers to recompile and break the blockchain.
If you want to process the current blockchain you will have to update and recompile your client otherwise your client will fail to validate the hacked solution. After Miami I will probably convert all amounts over to 128 bit numbers and just eat the bandwidth and storage costs to provide reliable and meaningful calculations.
Not sure about being able to delegate voting power, makes it easier to pay for votes and rig an election.
Yes - that's a hazard - we'd need to think about that carefully.What i would like to see is somewhere where all the candidates are given a couple of pages for their plans which could be listed.
I think this is up to candidates - If voters prefer candidates to do this, candidates who do this will get elected, and then more candidates will do it.2. Introduce a secondary system of voting so you can vote on which parts of my manifesto you want to be prioritised and which are just a nice to have.
Yes, we've got the voting machinery there and should see this soon - people will be able to hold polls about whatever they like.The idea of a coin that has paid employees is what sets memory coin apart. If we want to see it raise in value and taken seriously we need to demonstrate that having elected paid employees leads to quicker more focused development and a community which is engaged in the coins direction.
I think we're doing that by doing quicker, more focused development - there's a lot being produced very quickly right now.
How exactly to handle the firehose of cash that is going to be fired at officers if the price starts to ramp up is something that we're going to have to learn.
Thanks for your suggestions for improvements.
I'm thinking maybe proxy voting would help to improve the situation - that would allow users to delegate their voting power to someone they trust. Not implemented yet, but might be something for the future.
Not sure about being able to delegate voting power, makes it easier to pay for votes and rig an election.
What i would like to see is somewhere where all the candidates are given a couple of pages for their plans which could be listed.
For example, vote for me and i will
1. implement a tally chart continually updating the number of votes going to each candidate.
2. Introduce a secondary system of voting so you can vote on which parts of my manifesto you want to be prioritised and which are just a nice to have.
3. ........ ect ect
The idea of a coin that has paid employees is what sets memory coin apart. If we want to see it raise in value and taken seriously we need to demonstrate that having elected paid employees leads to quicker more focused development and a community which is engaged in the coins direction. Which in turn will make the elected moor accountable for their promises.
I believe if its done correctly you can create auto focusing development in all aspects of the coin. Then even the development becomes decentralised because it ends up being a consensus of the will of all holders.
Im surprised to see no opinions on the above, surly this is the most important discussion for memory coin. How to make the best of what sets it apart. or am i taking about something already covered somewhere else? If i am please reply with the link.
Thanks for your suggestions for improvements.
I'm thinking maybe proxy voting would help to improve the situation - that would allow users to delegate their voting power to someone they trust. Not implemented yet, but might be something for the future.
Not sure about being able to delegate voting power, makes it easier to pay for votes and rig an election.
What i would like to see is somewhere where all the candidates are given a couple of pages for their plans which could be listed.
For example, vote for me and i will
1. implement a tally chart continually updating the number of votes going to each candidate.
2. Introduce a secondary system of voting so you can vote on which parts of my manifesto you want to be prioritised and which are just a nice to have.
3. ........ ect ect
The idea of a coin that has paid employees is what sets memory coin apart. If we want to see it raise in value and taken seriously we need to demonstrate that having elected paid employees leads to quicker more focused development and a community which is engaged in the coins direction. Which in turn will make the elected moor accountable for their promises.
I believe if its done correctly you can create auto focusing development in all aspects of the coin. Then even the development becomes decentralised because it ends up being a consensus of the will of all holders.
Thanks for your suggestions for improvements.
I'm thinking maybe proxy voting would help to improve the situation - that would allow users to delegate their voting power to someone they trust. Not implemented yet, but might be something for the future.
1: http://mmcvotes.com/ - not in a convenient table, but no special tech skills needed to read the logs either
2: http://www.memorycoin.org/candidates - the best overview you can get at the moment
I got a test message from Public Key 8f7Wepj8NEejZ9AkEDCaZZwkxxLPhDwhtdBSrv1vw4uvThvfi1 and It is Signed Sy so that must be you. But no name is displayed.
Yep that's me and since you can't register without being a founder afaik all your messages should be from one. My guess is that the adresses aren't in the genesis block yet (that's why we all are doing this) so the names just aren't there to begin with.
Yeah that's what I think to. But do you see my name? Bitcoin3D. I am a Founder.
I seem to remember it was 20 million? Is that still the case
10% PTS 2 mil
10% Angel shares 2 mil
Is that correct? I have tried to look around but cant find anything recent.
And how will the extra 16 million shares be allocated if you don't plan on having mining?
Im trying to decide whether to buy some angel shares with BTC and would like this clear in my mind.
4 M total BitShares in the first chain, 50% PTS holders, 50% AGS holders.
Thanks for the quick reply,
and the first chain will include 16-32 bit assets? including bitusd ect?
First chain will be 16 assets: there is another thread discussing those assets. Top currencies, gold, silver, oil, BTC
I seem to remember it was 20 million? Is that still the case
10% PTS 2 mil
10% Angel shares 2 mil
Is that correct? I have tried to look around but cant find anything recent.
And how will the extra 16 million shares be allocated if you don't plan on having mining?
Im trying to decide whether to buy some angel shares with BTC and would like this clear in my mind.
4 M total BitShares in the first chain, 50% PTS holders, 50% AGS holders.
