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 - fractalnode

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8
61
Technical Support / Import priv key (WIF) to new empty wallet
« on: March 07, 2017, 04:06:26 pm »
could someone please explain to me this wallet behavior
I've create new; clean user profile in Google Chrome
then I went to bitshares.org/wallet/
I did not create a new account,
Instead I went to Settings > I've created new wallet & password
There is no account at this stage.
Then I went to Import/Export columnt
And there I was trying to import priv key (WIF) from one of my existing accounts but both OWNER and ACCTIVE without success
I've only seen spinning wheel
:D WAT I do wrong?

62
General Discussion / Re: Raising the quantity of BTS witnesses & the introduction of vote degradation?
« on: March 07, 2017, 12:20:01 am »
Quote from: tbone on March 06, 2017, 10:23:18 pm
Quote from: FractalNode on March 06, 2017, 09:41:00 pm
I corrected my mistake in The third criterion:
it should be "proof of ability"

And I wouldn't group ability (price feeds) and resources (missed blocks(...), server uptime)

Around the globe we could have very different cases. IN some of them, we could have very talented and involved programmers with weak and expensive servers, and in the other hand we could have very good servers and lazy operators.

Quote
As for paying standby witnesses, I assume you mean in a scenario where they would randomly get to produce some % of the blocks.
Actually not (let it be as it is easier), They are needed to confirm blocks, not to produce it
and they are needed as a backup – this is very important!
We also create in this way a trained base of administrators and enter the competition.

maybe 21 + 79 is too much, maybe we could use 34 or 55 :
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YUeO7hJ35OJHV2DsY72-Ma_8MwVPeb56jMl-Hxf1EvY/edit?usp=sharing


I was just trying to group the metrics that pertain to how good of a job a witness is doing.  Seems logical.  But it can be grouped any way as long as each individual metric (not each group) has its own score attached. 

As for backup witnesses, I agree with the reasons to have backups (to develop pool of competent witnesses).  I also agree with incentivizing people to confirm blocks (as opposed to produce them).  Actually, if I understand correctly, this is a more important function than people realize. But how do you pay for that?  I mean, how do we even know if someone is confirming blocks?  Right now we don't.  But I've said in the past that it would be nice if the software could be modified such that the account running it could get credit for doing so.  If one could earn a return on their stake like this, many people would be willing to run a node and lock up collateral.  This could be the Bitshares version of a masternode.  The software could even be made to include the upcoming stealth "trusted setup" to enable wide participation in that process.  I think we'd get a lot of interest and could generate a lot of buzz with something like this.

summarizing:
new rating based elections for nodes
21 witness – 100% (3 BTS)
34 (or 55) backup nodes – 50% (~1,5 BTS) ---------- >>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YUeO7hJ35OJHV2DsY72-Ma_8MwVPeb56jMl-Hxf1EvY/edit?usp=sharing

Please also comment on this post – topic : New fee structure on BitShares
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,23706.msg302068.html#msg302068


And could you elaborate "trusted setup", is this has something to do with IPFS? I had to miss it.


63
General Discussion / Re: Raising the quantity of BTS witnesses & the introduction of vote degradation?
« on: March 06, 2017, 09:41:00 pm »
I corrected my mistake in The third criterion:
it should be "proof of ability"

And I wouldn't group ability (price feeds) and resources (missed blocks(...), server uptime)

Around the globe we could have very different cases. IN some of them, we could have very talented and involved programmers with weak and expensive servers, and in the other hand we could have very good servers and lazy operators.

Quote
As for paying standby witnesses, I assume you mean in a scenario where they would randomly get to produce some % of the blocks.
Actually not (let it be as it is easier), They are needed to confirm blocks, not to produce it
and they are needed as a backup – this is very important!
We also create in this way a trained base of administrators and enter the competition.

maybe 21 + 79 is too much, maybe we could use 34 or 55 :
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YUeO7hJ35OJHV2DsY72-Ma_8MwVPeb56jMl-Hxf1EvY/edit?usp=sharing

64
General Discussion / Re: Raising the quantity of BTS witnesses & the introduction of vote degradation?
« on: March 06, 2017, 07:27:40 pm »
Quote from: tbone on January 21, 2017, 02:05:40 am

Do you want to rewrite your outline with the changes?  In the meantime, I'm asking @Chris4210 if he can put this on his radar.

These are rewrited propositions:

The maximum possible total score to achieve 1000.
TOP 21 gets 3 BTS
TOP 79 gets 1,5 BTS

The first criterion: proof of geographical dispersion.
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
we want a large scatter in different countries and on different continents
maybe we could use net latency (to serwer X, Y, Z [some form of triangulation] to prevent VPN fraud) or some form of existing geolocation if we can trust it
We need a developers discussion  how to achieve this


The second criterion: proof of resources
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
Threshold of 50%, if not achieved, the candidate is eliminated completely.
missed blocks(last month, last week, last day), server uptime


The third criterion: proof of ability
The candidate must provide prices feeds for MPA
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
probably someone would have to evaluate the quality of the scripts – If the script is new and it is not widely used.

The fourth criterion: proof of reputation
The maximum possible score to achieve 100
Points as a result of vote

The first (eg.) 21 candidates will be witnesses, and receives 100% salary.
The next (eg.) Of 79 candidates will not be witnesses and they will receives some less pay (maybe 50% ) for it that they are ready to become a node in case of failure of other nodes
If 1 of 10 witness is down, next 10 takes his place and recive 100% salary.

if such a change would be accepted, I will definitely run one or more the backup nodes in Poland on variety of service providers


Proof of commitment, that is another topic, I see it in this this way:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,23706.msg302068.html#msg302068

65
General Discussion / Re: Raising the quantity of BTS witnesses & the introduction of vote degradation?
« on: March 06, 2017, 07:15:56 pm »
Quote from: tbone on January 21, 2017, 02:05:40 am

Do you want to rewrite your outline with the changes?  In the meantime, I'm asking @Chris4210 if he can put this on his radar.

These are rewrited propositions:

The maximum possible total score to achieve 1000.
TOP 21 gets 3 BTS
TOP 34 (55 or 89) gets 1,5 BTS

The first criterion: proof of geographical dispersion.
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
we want a large scatter in different countries and on different continents
maybe we could use net latency (to serwer X, Y, Z [some form of triangulation] to prevent VPN fraud) or some form of existing geolocation if we can trust it
We need a developers discussion  how to achieve this


The second criterion: proof of ability
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
Threshold of 50%, if not achieved, the candidate is eliminated completely.
missed blocks(last month, last week, last day), server uptime


The third criterion: proof of commitment
The candidate must provide prices feeds for MPA
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
probably someone would have to evaluate the quality of the scripts – If the script is new and it is not widely used.

The fourth criterion: proof of reputation
The maximum possible score to achieve 100
Points as a result of vote

The first (eg.) 21 candidates will be witnesses, and receives 100% salary.
The next (eg.) Of 34 (55 or 89) candidates will not be witnesses and they will receives some less pay (maybe 50% ) for it that they are ready to become a node in case of failure of other nodes
If 1 of 10 witness is down, next 10 takes his place and recive 100% salary.


Proof of commitment, that is another topic, I see it in this this way:
Proof of commitment = sum of ( locking funds in orders + collateral)

66
Technical Support / Re: !!! Stupid Questions Thread !!!
« on: February 21, 2017, 09:09:05 pm »
Could some one tell me why I was partially margin called

This is my collateral before settle :



the price of this transaction (248.xxxx) is much lower than "my Call Price"


67
General Discussion / Re: Raising the quantity of BTS witnesses & the introduction of vote degradation?
« on: January 20, 2017, 03:08:01 pm »
Quote from: tbone on January 20, 2017, 11:26:27 am
Quote from: FractalNode on January 18, 2017, 02:51:32 pm
Quote from: crypto123 on September 16, 2016, 06:11:04 pm
(....)
We should be brainstorming new ideas regarding how we can drive up voter participation in the future, such as holding informal fun polls (favourite colour, community mvp polls, etc).

The Gridcoin network is also experiencing a lack of voting participation - only 1/7th of total vote weight votes which brings the validity of poll results mandate into question.

Why not give up the idea of ​​voting.
Maybe we should make the algorithm to vote.

Eg.
A candidate for the witness would have to meet certain requirements.
This is my suggestion:

The maximum possible total score to achieve 1000

The first criterion: proof of geographical dispersion.
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
we want a large scatter in different countries and on different continents
(We need a developers discussion  how to achieve it.)


The second criterion: proof of resources (computing power) and net speed
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
Threshold of 50%, if not achieved, the candidate is eliminated completely.


The third criterion: proof of commitment
The candidate must provide prices feeds for MPA
The maximum possible score to achieve 300


The fourth criterion: proof of reputation
The maximum possible score to achieve 100
Points as a result of vote

The first (eg.) 50 candidates will be witnesses, and receives a salary.
The next (eg.) Of 150 candidates will not be witnesses and receives some less pay for it that they are ready to become a node in case of failure of other nodes


This is really along the lines of a conversation that took place in Telegram yesterday (today for some people).  It makes a lot of sense.  I think the main thing missing is a bond i.e. locking away a certain amount of BTS in order to qualify as a witness.  Some people said it should be minimum of 1M BTS.  I'm personally not sure it should be mandatory.  But I do think it should at least be part of a scoring system such as the one you laid out.  Actually, come to think of it, there should probably be mandatory minimums for all criteria, and anything over the minimum raises the score.  Anyway, I made a couple of comments next to some of your criteria (see comments in red below).

By the way, i also like your idea of having some small pay for backup witnesses.  I was talking about that in Telegram a week or so ago.  Anyway, since you suggest they should get some pay, I assume they would be producing some blocks.  If so, what percentage, maybe 5-10%?  This would be a good opportunity for back up witnesses (or "witness candidates") to earn some reputation and perhaps prove he can reach some initial scoring thresholds. 


Quote
The first criterion: proof of geographical dispersion.
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
we want a large scatter in different countries and on different continents
(We need a developers discussion  how to achieve it.)

This seems tricky, could leave it out at least initially.

The second criterion: proof of resources (computing power) and net speed
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
Threshold of 50%, if not achieved, the candidate is eliminated completely.

Does this include latency?  And what about taking server uptime into account?  How feasible is it to measure these metrics?  Well, latency seems straightforward.  But what about the others?
Latency - Yes!
Server uptime - Yes!
How feasible is it to measure these metrics?  Well, latency seems straightforward.  But what about the others?
Maybe network could send some random( task ) to calculate, once peer random(X days, XX days ). The task should bey predictable within 1s - 10s max seconds (maybe something like pice of "Multicore Super Pi Benchmark" but CPU + RAM )
It could also be that some post-witness-installation, or trustless self test



The third criterion: proof of commitment
The candidate must provide prices feeds for MPA
The maximum possible score to achieve 300

Maybe this should include missed blocks?  And perhaps call this proof of ability or proof of work.  Proof of commitment should perhaps be locking funds, no?
agree

The fourth criterion: proof of reputation
The maximum possible score to achieve 100
Points as a result of vote

The first (eg.) 50 candidates will be witnesses, and receives a salary.
The next (eg.) Of 150 candidates will not be witnesses and receives some less pay for it that they are ready to become a node in case of failure of other nodes


it's just outline

68
General Discussion / Re: New Bitshares Dividend Idea
« on: January 20, 2017, 10:47:00 am »
Quote from: Chris4210 on January 13, 2017, 03:18:24 pm
New fee structure on BitShares:
70% for referral program
10% for dividends
20% for BitShares reserve pool


The idea is to collect 10% of the fees, pool them, and pay them out to all Lifetime members (LTM) that hold Bitshares. The dividends would be paid out according to the stake, and incentive users to buy Lifetime memberships.


Additional idea:
  • Pay the Dividends in BitAssets, like BitUSD
  • Big exchanges like Poloniex are excluded from the dividends
  • LTM Accounts that hold BTS and short BitAssets get dividend
  • Dividend fee is a variable fee, controlled by BitShares Committee

I like this idea, but I would add one more condition
70% for referral program
10% dividends for LTM in proportional to his sum of (COLLATERAL + Open orders)
20% for BitShares reserve pool (pays witnesses and workers)

and maybe LTM should be able to choose (only from) bitAsset and selected bitAsset should be automatically purchased on the DEX at market price for BTS and transferred to LTM as a dividend.


69
General Discussion / Re: Raising the quantity of BTS witnesses & the introduction of vote degradation?
« on: January 18, 2017, 02:51:32 pm »
Quote from: crypto123 on September 16, 2016, 06:11:04 pm
(....)
We should be brainstorming new ideas regarding how we can drive up voter participation in the future, such as holding informal fun polls (favourite colour, community mvp polls, etc).

The Gridcoin network is also experiencing a lack of voting participation - only 1/7th of total vote weight votes which brings the validity of poll results mandate into question.

Why not give up the idea of ​​voting.
Maybe we should make the algorithm to vote.

Eg.
A candidate for the witness would have to meet certain requirements.
This is my suggestion:

The maximum possible total score to achieve 1000

The first criterion: proof of geographical dispersion.
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
we want a large scatter in different countries and on different continents
(We need a developers discussion  how to achieve it.)

The second criterion: proof of resources (computing power) and net speed
The maximum possible score to achieve 300
Threshold of 50%, if not achieved, the candidate is eliminated completely.

The third criterion: proof of commitment
The candidate must provide prices feeds for MPA
The maximum possible score to achieve 300

The fourth criterion: proof of reputation
The maximum possible score to achieve 100
Points as a result of vote

The first (eg.) 50 candidates will be witnesses, and receives a salary.
The next (eg.) Of 150 candidates will not be witnesses and receives some less pay for it that they are ready to become a node in case of failure of other nodes

70
General Discussion / Re: [hangout feedback] BitShares fees / Referral program
« on: January 11, 2017, 12:00:38 am »
Quote from: kani on January 10, 2017, 10:54:52 pm
A tricky proposition indeed.

I like the idea for no fees on very small transactions.  But a percentage-based fee on higher value transactions will simply drive users to other blockchains where it is cheaper to conduct business.  I oppose this idea.

Bitshares is special because of its low fees -- you don't see the same bot activity on other platforms due to the relatively high transaction costs on those platforms.  Increased fees just might kill the growing bot ecosystem, which Bitshares gravely needs.

If the referral system can be improved without disrupting the other factors that make Bitshares great, I'm all for it.  But don't kill it with substantially higher fees.

I agree in 100%  !!!
+ "0 fee" for sharedroping.
Maybe this could be some new type of transaction.

71
General Discussion / Re: Changes I think Openledger needs
« on: November 21, 2016, 01:24:35 pm »
ad. 2
I strongly disagree!
First of all, this is Bitshares Wallet and openledger is one of the companies out there that emits its IOU,
there is no reason to be in any way favor

72
Technical Support / Re: !!! Stupid Questions Thread !!!
« on: November 18, 2016, 11:42:35 am »
1. Why these trades are in yellow?




2. Why this transaction is Virtual?


73
General Discussion / Re: [Public Testnet] testnet.bitshares.eu
« on: November 03, 2016, 12:02:06 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on November 03, 2016, 11:05:38 am
Quote from: marcobitshares on November 03, 2016, 02:07:49 am
what do we need, to restart testnet?
why would we?
when I told restart testnet I mean restart project because I thought that did not work for some time.
For me still doesn't work as a web page.
but today I added new  API connection  wss://testnet.bitshares.eu/ws to my wallet and now works fine i that way.

74
General Discussion / Re: [Public Testnet] testnet.bitshares.eu
« on: November 03, 2016, 02:07:49 am »
what do we need, to restart testnet?

75
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Worker Proposal] Chronos Crypto Videos #2
« on: November 03, 2016, 01:26:00 am »
Quote from: Chronos on November 02, 2016, 05:31:38 pm
Quote from: marcobitshares on November 02, 2016, 04:41:04 pm
Could You add/make Video about Margin Trading on DEX
http://docs.bitshares.org/bitshares/user/dex-margin-mechanics.html
or we need another proposal for this ?
This is the perfect worker proposal for this feature, and it's on the list of potential videos. I'll increase its priority. Which do you think is most important to produce first?
  • A presentation about the mechanics of BTS Margin Trading, to make the blockchain rules easy to understand
  • A demonstration of using Margin Trading in the web wallet, while glossing over some of the specific details of the blockchain mechanics

I think the most important is to produce (all) the differences in relation to the systems they are familiar with, I mean exchanges such as Bitfinex and Poloniex – new users will come from thease exchanges.
Honestly show some lack of functionality as it appears at this stage, maybe there will be new ideas on how to improve it.

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

Page created in 0.043 seconds with 24 queries.