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 - Troglodactyl

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 64
General Discussion / Re: BlockPay in Serious Trouble
« on: June 02, 2017, 03:20:16 am »
Here's that previous discussion from 2 years ago for those who would rather read it than repeat it:,16071.msg206458.html#msg206458

Hopefully a technical issue rather than a fractional reserve issue.

General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: May 26, 2017, 02:48:30 am »
Hope everyone enjoyed being rich for a week

Looks like it will recover.  Anytime Bitcoin has a run, most alt's are sold off as exchanges such as Poloniex are mostly traded vs btc.

This could help:,24130.0.html

Indeed, and it's still only down about 20% from the high.

General Discussion / Re: New to BitShares
« on: May 26, 2017, 01:57:26 am »
Settlement is based on the feed price at the time the settlement occurs, not the time it's requested.  This way no one can exploit momentary spikes and the settlement mechanism.  The ability to force settle is designed to create a price floor for the smartcoins.  If the pair has sufficient volume, spreads should be narrow enough that simply trading rather than force settling would be preferable.

I can see that your transfer to OpenLedger went through fine on the BitShares network, so there's nothing any BitShares support team could help you with as it's not a problem with BitShares.  It's either an issue with OpenLedger or the Bitcoin network.

Technical Support / Re: Failed to sync with the API server
« on: May 23, 2017, 08:22:23 am »
The wallet site uses a websocket, generally on port 8090.  If you're internet connection is through a network that blocks a lot of things it may be blocked.  If you have another network available try that and let us know if it works.

Bitcoin has scaling issues and with all the attention it's been getting it can't keep up with transaction rates.  Most likely your transaction will go through in the next day or two, but openledger support can confirm if this is in fact the issue.

You can also go here and search your Bitcoin address in the box at the top right:

If there's an unconfirmed transaction waiting for the Bitcoin miners to get around to it, it should show up there.

It looks like your balance is dust: it's just sufficient to cover the transaction fee, but after covering the transaction fee there's no remaining balance with which to transact so nothing can be done with it.  You can hide the balance in the wallet, or you can wait until the BTC price hits $1,000,000 and then use it to buy yourself a Coke.  :P

General Discussion / Re: Finally
« on: May 22, 2017, 10:11:14 pm »
A lot of activity has migrated to Steem, also.

General Discussion / Re: New serious competition for Bitshares: Waves
« on: April 12, 2016, 10:38:04 pm »
They are a comprtitor for assets listed on our DEX, but they don't do smartcoins, therefore, our smartcoins like bitGOLD will eventually find a way onto their DEX in the same way that their equity will find a way onto ours if their launch is delayed post ICO (like Lisk equity currently).

Their model is more like Ripple's than ours, and their aim is just the same (big player adoption).

They are admittedly going the centralized route through "Leased" POS which is basically DPOS.

It's not hard for them to do smartcoins.

In my opinion in order for Bitshares to remain competitive it needs to integrate into Ethereum ASAP. This way if Ethereum wins so does Bitshares because Bitshares would be even more decentralized because it's smart contracts would run on Ethereum and on it's own platform. Kind of like how Apple actually made iTunes for Windows and Microsoft made software for the Mac.

We could run Ethereum smart contracts on BitShares already without even hard forking.  There's no need to tie execution into block validation, just hire as many executors as you're willing to pay for.  Solves Ethereum's scalability problems too.

Is the chain frozen or is it just me?  I'm seeing a head block 9 minutes old:

  "id": "2.0.0",
  "head_block_number": 487946,
  "head_block_id": "0007720a7459ca264f0d8d36bbeaf8d1d8053f48",
  "time": "2016-04-10T20:43:42",
  "current_witness": "hermes",
  "total_pow": 2287048,
  "num_pow_witnesses": 103,
  "virtual_supply": "12261564.000 STEEM",
  "current_supply": "12261564.000 STEEM",
  "confidential_supply": "0.000 STEEM",
  "current_sbd_supply": "0.000 SBD",
  "confidential_sbd_supply": "0.000 SBD",
  "total_vesting_fund_steem": "11197510.765 STEEM",
  "total_vesting_shares": "406164.162729 VESTS",
  "total_reward_fund_steem": "975892.000 STEEM",
  "total_reward_shares2": "60578182426832701",
  "sbd_interest_rate": 1000,
  "average_block_size": 118,
  "maximum_block_size": 131072,
  "current_aslot": 495274,
  "recent_slots_filled": "340282366920938463463374607431768211455",
  "last_irreversible_block_num": 487925,
  "max_virtual_bandwidth": "5208434761002210645",
  "current_reserve_ratio": 24398,
  "head_block_num": 487946,
  "head_block_age": "9 minutes old",
  "participation": "100.00000000000000000",
  "median_sbd_price": {
    "base": "0.000 STEEM",
    "quote": "0.000 STEEM"
  "account_creation_fee": "100.000 STEEM"


./steemd —miner='["accountname","${WIFPRIVATEKEY}"]' —witness='"accountname"' —seed-node="" —mining-threads=2

who can explain how to get accountname  and WIFPRIVATEKEY?

 :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

The account name you just make up.  Pick something unique that no one else would use.  The WIFPRIVATEKEY you can get conveniently by running the STEEM or BitShares cli_wallet and using the suggest_brain_key command.

Technical Support / Re: Voting section empty
« on: February 25, 2016, 08:24:04 pm »
Did you click a tab within it?  Recently when I opened the voting section of an account I noticed that it didn't open any particular section by default, which could make it look like something went wrong.

I don't think people parking money in BitAssets and letting it sit there has enough value to us to justify this.

By the way, it looks like you modified your post before I got a chance to respond.  But since you were wondering why I wasn't taking your explanation at face value, it's because you're not the expert.  So I continue to address @bytemaster with my questions since he IS the expert.  And I asked for @abit's opinion since he is a developer and, for all we know, he could be the one to code this up ultimately.  Surely you can understand where I'm coming from.

Thanks for trusting me, but sorry, I'm not a bitcoin expert, I don't know how to deal with the bitcoin multi-sig thing at all.

@abit:  This is a Bitshares question, not a bitcoin question.  It's also not a multi-sig question.  Let me ask in a different way.  Could you write code in Bitshares that calls an external API which returns a value that could then be stored securely (i.e. not accessible to any human) on the Bitshares blockchain to be used by the code at a later time?  I would imagine this is possible, but could you confirm?

Yes, it is possible and doable.  There is a way to make RPC call to bitcoin to monitor the blockchain for incoming fund for example.  Once there is a value returned, it needs to be stored encrypted in the blockchain.  I think pc is thinking of a new function to store data securely in bts blockchain.

Great.  So we can make remote procedure calls to the API, for example, to programatically create a bitcoin wallet, correct?  Calling the create_wallet method of that API returns the new wallet's private key, which could then be stored encrypted on the Bitshares blockchain. 

So now we have a wallet that is controlled by the Bitshares blockchain and can hold BTC deposits for DEX users.  When a user deposits BTC to this wallet, they are issued a corresponding amount of SIDE.BTC which can be used on the DEX.  Later, when a user is ready to withdraw, any remaining SIDE.BTC is wiped from their account and BTC in an amount equal to the quantity of SIDE.BTC the user had remaining can be sent to a bitcoin wallet of their choice.   

If I'm not mistaken about the feasability, this solution would serve our purpose, it's trustless, and it shouldn't be very difficult to implement not only for BTC, but for any cryptocurrency that has an api with a create wallet method.  Thoughts?  Am I missing something?

@bytemaster @cube @abit

So, if the private key is stored encrypted on the blockain, who controls the private key to decrypt the private key that's stored?
Indeed. I don't think this is actually possible.  Data stored on the blockchain is accessible to everyone either in plaintext or encrypted.  If it's encrypted it's useless unless someone has the decryption key stored somewhere.  You cannot store a private key on a public blockchain that is usable by the chain but not by any set of individuals without the chain, because the blockchain itself isn't a real actor; it's a virtual entity composed of participants following its rules.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 64