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 - abit

Pages: 1 ... 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 [237] 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 ... 309
3541
General Discussion / Re: BitShares 2.0 Roadmap (for the next 4-6 months)
« on: December 31, 2015, 05:21:23 pm »
In regards to this item:
Quote
Vested cashback balance and claim option
It has been done in the latest GUI (v2.0.151223), however in that release there are issues in some edge cases which has been fixed in latest code base.
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-2/releases/tag/v2.0.151223
https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene-ui/issues/640

These items have been done:
Quote
* Refund market order creation fees (v2.0.151209)
* Fix margin call trigger (v2.0.151209)

3542
General Discussion / Re: BitShares 2.0 Roadmap (for the next 4-6 months)
« on: December 31, 2015, 05:12:20 pm »
Quote
(2) Fix & standardize the API for trading bots
Forum thread: ?
Worker Proposal: n/a
Potential overlap with other Graphene projects: N
Status: In progress
@jakub I noticed that a "cancel_order" API has been added to cli_wallet in the release v2.0.151209(https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-2/releases/tag/v2.0.151209):
Code: [Select]
graphene::chain::signed_transaction      cancel_order(graphene::db::object_id_type, bool)
And some other API's were added in the same release.
Do we still need any more API for trading bots?


3543
General Discussion / Re: Let's create a foundation for competition among BTS developers
« on: December 31, 2015, 05:00:49 pm »
I would spend more time on the code, not sure how much time I can put in though, nor any result is able to be guaranteed right now.

3544
General Discussion / Re: Committee members, please vote for proposal 1.10.45
« on: December 31, 2015, 04:50:05 pm »
Quote from: theoretical on December 31, 2015, 04:45:39 pm
Approved by init's.  FYI, we don't have to do this with the committee account, anyone can create a burn / refund worker.  The owner doesn't really matter for the burn/refund worker policies, since a worker's owner cannot change its policy (there is no worker_update_operation).
Thanks.
Review begins in 6 hours.
Current Approval Weight   18,054   48.3%   

3545
General Discussion / Re: TUSD come at the last day in 2015
« on: December 31, 2015, 03:11:35 pm »
Price feeding for TUSD from witness in.abit is activated.

//Edit:SQR set to 1001:
Code: [Select]
"maximum_short_squeeze_ratio"   : 1001

3546
General Discussion / Re: Committee members, please vote for proposal 1.10.45
« on: December 31, 2015, 12:16:28 pm »
Review begins in 10 hours.
Only one committee member voted.

3547
General Discussion / Re: Why do you still have bytemaster as proxy? Why are you still voting for STEALTH?
« on: December 31, 2015, 12:13:22 pm »
Thanks for you reply. I'll shut up. Mods please lock this thread.

3548
General Discussion / Re: Why do you still have bytemaster as proxy? Why are you still voting for STEALTH?
« on: December 31, 2015, 02:03:04 am »
Quote from: Akado on December 31, 2015, 01:57:33 am
I thought the idea of replacing the refund400k for 4x refund100k made sense to make it more flexible, that's what I read somewhere if I'm not mistaken
That is waiting for the committee to approve. Thanks to @xeroc but now only dele-puppy approved. Without BM or more committee members it's impossible to go through. http://cryptofresh.com/p/1.10.45

Anyway it's too late to wait for it. Just do with the refund400k worker now.


3549
General Discussion / Why do you still have bytemaster as proxy? Why are you still voting for STEALTH?
« on: December 31, 2015, 01:51:03 am »
Why do you still have bytemaster or angle as proxy?
Why are you still voting for STEALTH and/or voting against refund400k?
Why are you not voting?
You're helping BM with his dictatorship.

If you don't like what BM did in these days, please vote against STEALTH and vote for refund400k TODAY.

Now we only have the choice of STEALTH or NOTHING.
After STEALTH is approved, we'll have next choice of WHATEVER WE DON'T LIKE or NOTHING.

If you don't vote with your stake now, you'll have to vote with your feet some day.

@jakub BM/CNX has already showed that they wouldn't bring anything else for you to vote, why not present your opinion by voting against current choice?

@theredpill please don't only vote against STEALTH, please vote for refund400k as well.

@bitcrab @Harvey @ebit where are you?

@clayop I know you're busy these days, but please take a look here.

3550
General Discussion / Re: METAFEES BUYBACK showcase on Monday Jan. 1 2016 8pm-9pm CET
« on: December 30, 2015, 02:39:56 pm »
Quote from: luckybit on December 30, 2015, 12:09:45 pm
Quote from: Shentist on December 29, 2015, 05:25:12 pm
we will do the next buyback on monday Janary 4th between 8pm - 9pm CET on this market again https://bitshares.openledger.info/#/market/METAFEES_METAEX.BTC

Now everyone knows to buy just before the time you gave. The buyback in the future might work best if the time and date of it is kept random.
Why don't let everyone know? Imo it's better be public like this.

3551
General Discussion / Committee members, please vote for proposal 1.10.45
« on: December 30, 2015, 02:36:29 pm »
http://cryptofresh.com/p/1.10.45
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20793.0.html
Quote
This proposal (if it is approved) will create 8 workers:

- 4x 100k BTS refund
- 4x 100k BTS burn

3552
General Discussion / Re: OPENPOS :: Smartcoins Point Of Sale (POS) & BitShares Wallet for Android/iPhone
« on: December 30, 2015, 12:47:21 pm »
Quote from: Akado on December 27, 2015, 02:34:14 pm
Quote from: abit on December 27, 2015, 11:36:17 am
Imo the Market fee of OPENPOS is a bit too high.
Quote
Market fee   2%

Isn't the fee for payment terminals or whatever their called, like 3%? I understand you have a business but the difference might not be worth it for merchants.
I mean the market fee for OPENPOS token in the DEX.
Now the market fee is set to 2%, which means if you buy 100 OPENPOS from the market, 2 OPENPOS will go to CCEDK.

3553
General Discussion / Re: 2016 Vision Blog Post
« on: December 29, 2015, 04:15:49 pm »
Quote from: jakub on December 29, 2015, 10:38:37 am
Even the migration process seems to be still unfinished.
I think the migration process is now finished after @jcalfee1 integrated a bloom filter into GUI, which has been released in November.
Is there more issues reported?

3554
General Discussion / Re: A simple fiat bridge into smartcoins
« on: December 29, 2015, 03:54:42 pm »
Quote from: Xypher on December 29, 2015, 03:44:02 pm
Electrons.io is a user intuitive exchange system designed to empower retail and enterprise consumers to have quick and easy exchanges while enabling exchanges to tackle their liquidity issue. In the current iteration of the product, an individual basically sends the amount of Bitshares he needs exchanged to a bitshares wallet (electron-io) with his bitcoin wallet id in the memo of the transaction and receives his bitcoin in a matter of ten minutes (or less). This is the quickest form of exchanging an alt currency can currently have and requires absolutely no sign ups from the users side. The user further benefits by the fact that he receives the best prices at the lowest amount of time during each and every exchange. This is revolutionary in the sense that it is is no longer traders with arbitrage bots set up across exchanges that have the ability to get the best prices but the average retail consumer too. The exchanges, the system is currently plugged into further benefits by a higher level of liquidity on the platform and thereby benefits by a constant inflow of orders.


Its currently up and ready, just never launched because we're busy with other projects.
Offered it to CCEDK and a few other exchanges though.

Regards


Quote
http://electron.io/
-------------------------------
This webpage is not available

ERR_NAME_NOT_RESOLVED


Quote
http://electrons.io/
---------------------
Not Found

HTTP Error 404. The requested resource is not found.

Oh, you said it's never launched.

It looks just another MetaExchange or ShapeShift for me.

Op is discussing about FIAT bridge. Is it what electron-io can do?

3555
General Discussion / Re: A simple fiat bridge into smartcoins
« on: December 29, 2015, 03:31:49 pm »
Quote from: Xypher on December 29, 2015, 03:21:39 pm
Why dont you work with electron.io and us for this ?
We are not launching the project in personal capacity, have the code base ready and are always open to synergy.
Ping me in telegram some time and we can take this forward.

Regards
Sorry, but what's this electron.io?

Pages: 1 ... 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 [237] 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 ... 309

Page created in 0.213 seconds with 24 queries.