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 10 11 ... 64
Technical Support / Re: Lifetime Membership
« on: October 31, 2015, 04:59:48 pm »
how do i go about getting LT membership, and what are the benefits?

A LT membership let you create/register new user accounts, without which you need to rely on a faucet such as OpenLedger.  When the new user account is created under your name, you become the referrer.  Any transactions by that new account, and by your own LT account, will earn you a commission (eg 80%).  There are other goodies too, like an ability to register a 'nice' account name without the '-' and the digits.  You can upgrade to LT using OpenLedger or you can use the services of another LT member to register a 'proper' account name (via cli wallet) before upgrading it.  I am a LT member and if you like, I can help you to do just that.

If I upgrade my account to LM through open ledger, will I receive 80% of all fees from anyone I refer?  If not, is there a way I can create an account that will give me 80% of all fees from people I refer?

Regardless of referral status, 20% of fees go to the network.  Lifetime members get the entire remaining 80% of their own fees back.

When openledger (or anyone else) registers an account, they fill in who referred the new account and can allocate that 80% between the referrer and themselves.

Technical Support / Re: Worker proposals
« on: October 31, 2015, 04:06:32 pm »
There are already other people building alternate UIs, and those I think make more sense to be paid for by referral income rather than by worker proposals.

If I was going to start contributing to the node, I would start by making some minor requests, pull requesting them, and simultaneously requesting payment with a worker proposal.  The shareholders should be smart enough to know that just taking updates without paying for them isn't sustainable, and developers should recognize that they need some established reputation in order to get prefunded worker proposals passed.

I remember there was a concept of a mesh-chain where each account is its own blockchain.   I cannot seem to find a link now... help
See also:

IOTA/Tangle is slightly similar, but it builds a single transaction tree in which transactions are confirmed more quickly when they increase convergence between the most significant branches.  Each transaction references at least 2 existing transactions, similar to TAPOS.

I remember there was a concept of a mesh-chain where each account is its own blockchain.   I cannot seem to find a link now... help

Pretty sure you're talking about RaiBlocks.

Muse/SoundDAC / Re: MUSE LOGO (suggestions from community)
« on: October 29, 2015, 03:45:18 am »
i also really like pendragon3 approach.. so i decided to recreate his idea and want to post it with 100% credit to pendragon3 Hope this is in your interest @pendragon3 :)

Agreed.  This is better.

The SQP defines the most that a margin position will ever be forced to pay to cover (that is it).   It is there only to protect against thin markets.
A margin position will be forced to sell its collateral anytime the highest offer to buy the collateral is less than the call price (USD/BTS).   

The market defines everything (as it should).
The market sets the value of BTS in terms of BitUSD based on the highest offer to buy BTS with BitUSD.
Once we know the market value, we can trigger margin calls.

There is ONE edge case and that is for thin markets.  In this edge case the market cannot define the value of BTS in terms of BitUSD.  This is where we use the SQP as the lower bound on the value of BTS in terms of BitUSD.

You still do not see how this whole theory of yours hangs on the market participants exhibiting illogical behaviour, do you?

I don't see the illogical behavior.  Please explain.

Do margin calls buy bitUSD left or right of the SQP in your figure abote (0.005 bitUSD/BTS)
if they only buy on the right hand side of the SQP than I do understand tony, because they only execute if there are no orders there ..
so I assume they buy on the left hand side of the SQP .. which would make them pay "more" than the SQP in BTS-terms to aquire bitUSD .. but you said is the "MOST they have to pay to cover" would be misleading since the best they can do (cheapest) is AT the SQP and it only gets more expensive the less orders/volume there are ..

Maybe that is what confuses tony (and me)!?

So, margin calls occure when the highest bid is less than the margin call price (which is a function of the SWAN price and the maintenance collateral ratio) AND the SQP crossed the margin called price and is thus left (read: smaller) of it ..

but WHERE do margin calls execute? which orders are bought at which prices and what are the limits for the margin call?
My understanding is that margin calls only fill if the best offer to buy their collateral is asking for less than feed*mssr BTS per bitAsset unit, but more than the short's call price in BTS per bitAsset unit.

So if there is a low volume of margin calls, bitAsset holders should compete to fill them at a better price for the shorter.  If there are widespread margin calls then there's no need to compete, and bitAsset holders should all place their offers at the edge of feed*mssr. If the mssr is too high, then bitAsset holders can trigger widespread margin calls by all placing their offers at feed*mssr.

General Discussion / Re: IOTA + Bitshares
« on: October 28, 2015, 12:56:46 pm »
I want to say it again, don't give up micro-transactions.

That's why collaboration is great. As a product designer you quickly learn that by trying to create a swiss army knife that has an application for 'everything' you will always end up with only mediocre solutions to each of these things. This is like a law of product development called 'Feature Creep' ( By introducing ever more features and applications you invariably have to do trade-offs, this is fine for a swiss army knife which's design is not to be the best knife, cork opener, scissor, file or anything else, but to be 'acceptable' in as many different environments as possible. However it is not fine for a chef's knife or a hair dresser's scissor.

This is a recurring problem in product design, especially software and I see it happen all the time in crypto too. Each platform wants to be *the* 'universal key' that solves all problems. But that's just not doable. This is why we elected  to keep IOTA the absolute best solution possible for micro-payments instead of trying to add more and more and more features and end up with a mediocre micro-payments design as a consequence.

Looks interesting.  Have you also looked at RaiCoin?  They seem to have similar goals.

As an exchange, BitShares generally needs single threaded transaction sequencing, which is abandoned in both IOTA and RaiBlocks to optimize for microtransactions.  I certainly think an offchain microtransaction could be complementary to BitShares.  Ideally a trustless integration system would be desirable, but the easiest way to get functional integration initially would just be to get IOUs for your tokens issued by CCEDK,, and MetaExchange on BitShares.

Openledger /
« on: October 26, 2015, 11:12:28 pm »
Is this coming soon?

General Discussion / Re: Bitshares for Savers
« on: October 26, 2015, 01:02:44 pm »

What I'm driving at is the GUI seems to be for traders which for someone who isn't a trader, can be a little confusing.

My interest, and I'm sure I can't be the only one, is to use crypto for saving. Where else can I have the freedom to save in gold, silver, Swiss francs and oil if I so choose. The thrust of my question is although I can do that today, can you really only earn interest through the bond market when it comes online? Also, how big do you think bitshares needs to be before you consider it big enough to use as your bank account?

Now I understand from other posts that people can build an independent GUI, I wonder if anyone has thought about creating one geared towards savers. Just a thought.

Do you find the account overview and explorer pages of the current UI confusing, or just the exchange pages?  Can you let us know specifically what you think should be different in a saver targeted GUI?

General Discussion / Re: Bitshares for Savers
« on: October 26, 2015, 04:08:17 am »

I was wondering when people think that BitShares will be stable enough to be used for saving.


I'm going to guess he means when the platform will be stable enough to store savings in BitAssets, not when the BTS price will be stable enough to put savings in that.  Either way though the answer is both that it already is for some people and that it never will be for others.  The same is true of gold and national currencies.  Where you put your savings and how much you diversify those savings depends on which risks bother you most.

Excellent.  You're most welcome.


I believe the filename for the export is an absolute location, so what you did would export to the root of your filesystem.  The application may not be running with privileges to create files there, so try entering a full path in quotes instead.

Muse/SoundDAC / Re: MUSE blockchain information site
« on: October 23, 2015, 02:43:41 am »
Very basic place to point people to.

Nice.  Do you want typos/edit requests sent anywhere in particular?  Is this site on github somewhere?

General Discussion / Re: Added balance as portion of total supply
« on: October 22, 2015, 11:24:51 pm »
I saw people talking about this, so I added it to play with the ui code a bit.  It displays in your account overview as a new updating "PPM" (Parts Per Million) column for each balance.  So the new column is just (balance/current_supply*1,000,000).  Showing it as a straight percentage would just be depressing for anyone who isn't a whale.

Not sure I want to pull request it since 4 columns may be a bit messy there, but it's there for anyone who wants it.

Excellent!  +5%

To expand on this, some people might want to publicly broadcast that they have a certain minimum percentage of the total supply without actually revealing the exact number. It should be possible to reveal that they are over that threshold while keeping their precise balance secret.

This way we can use that threshold as a metric. I still prefer the percentage even if it is depressing to some people because the goal isn't to make people feel like they hold more than they do but to give them the most accurate representation of what they hold.

Parts per million is just as accurate as a percentage, just without as many leading zeros to count when you read it.  Arguably more accurate since all digits displayed can be meaningful.

General Discussion / Re: Graphene Real-Time
« on: October 22, 2015, 11:18:43 pm »
Something like this should be built into the GUI.

What in particular do you want from this that isn't in the GUI yet?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 64