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 - karnal

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 72
46
+5%

47
General Discussion / Re: Will it be love?
« on: May 31, 2017, 08:16:08 am »
And thank you [member=49]onceuponatime[/member], it's encouraging that the article appears to be having a positive effect and generating discussion around this topic again .. I retired from steemit for several months now, working on a comeback.. and it's gonna be.. yuuuuuuugee.

(maybe)

:P

48
General Discussion / Re: Will it be love?
« on: May 31, 2017, 08:14:34 am »
Why are stealth transactions valuable to the groups listed?  traders, hedge funds, venture capital, mutual funds

Ask any of them to walk around with a piece of paper in their forehead that says: "I own $gazillion USD in bank account X".

Let's see if they care about privacy or not.

49
General Discussion / Re: BlockPay in Serious Trouble
« on: May 30, 2017, 07:21:34 pm »
https://steemit.com/bitshares/[member=33020]karnal[/member]/bitshares-at-the-crossroads

edit: wow, one single downvote from https://steemd.com/@tombstone and the whole post gets relegated to obscurity .. fantastic.

50
General Discussion / Re: BlockPay in Serious Trouble
« on: May 30, 2017, 07:05:17 pm »
[member=38926]Chris4210[/member], looking forward to your feedback concerning the latest posts in this thread.

51
General Discussion / Re: BlockPay in Serious Trouble
« on: May 28, 2017, 08:05:19 am »
Quote from: chris4210
Without these IP transfer documents, the code is still owned by the original developers and cannot be sold by the company.

Sold to whom?
In this term sold means to commercialize. In general, a company itself needs to own the IP so that it can commercialize and market the software it developed. Also in the case of granting any license to the public, one has to own the IP first.

In our case of BitShares Munich, we have different options how we can use the software we developed.
* Sharing the source code of the mobile wallet with an MIT x11 licence for free
* Selling white label versions of the mobile wallet to clients
* Selling a privatized and modified version of the mobile wallet to clients
* Integrate the source code of the mobile wallet into an existing app and add value to their user base
* Plus many more options

All those potential revenue streams are not possible without the company owning the IP.  Hope I explained it good enough in the examples given above.

Thanks for replying chris, here are my views on your statements:

When we all decided to fund STEALTH development, I don't think anyone had in mind that the resulting code would become a product to sell (and I understand you meant "sell" metaphorically as well as literally here, yeah?).

I think I speak for the majority of the community here when I say we chose to fund this work because it is a fundamental feature that is lacking in the platform.

Frankly speaking, I don't think Bitshares Munich should be salivating to capitalize on earning revenue from (literally) selling this feature - this, to me, is losing track of the original goal: improving the Bitshares platform, so that we ALL benefit.

And so that we carve a nice ever-expanding niche for ourselves in the space, and bring more value to the world.


Perhaps you guys don't have the same opinion I've always expressed about the dire necessity of adding some privacy to the chain, because otherwise it follows that you're willfully delaying implementing what will, at least in my mind, without a doubt be the major game changer in Bitshares.

I've asked around and 9 out of 10 old-school crypto users (that would be our target audience that we've managed to ignore for the better part of 2 years now) just are NOT comfortable with stashing their hundreds of thousands of USD in Bitshares, in small part because of the possibility of a black swan event, but mostly because it would be there for all to see and they are not comfortable with that.

It doesn't have to mean they're doing some shady or illegal to think like this, for instance, I'm about to go take a real nice shit (morning coffee, eh?), I'm doing nothing wrong, but also, I'd like my privacy.

We don't take privacy seriously enough around here. And it's costing us. Big time.

Chris, Ken, sort this out .. think of the bigger picture. We'll all benefit.

52
General Discussion / Re: BlockPay in Serious Trouble
« on: May 27, 2017, 08:56:50 pm »
I think private/stealth transactions are heavily discussed, maybe not in this community, but in blockchain in general. When I spoke to merchants, banks, and SME they were very interested in keeping their financial transaction history private. On the other side, all transactions are documented on a blockchain forever and are full publicly visible for everyone because we all love transparency. Especially government and the public sector financial transactions should be more transparent in my point of view.

I agree with you on the government being more transparent, the big difference when compared to private companies and individuals is the tremendous difference in power between the government and these.

Making the government more transparent empowers us the people and lets the government know that obvious corruption will not be tolerated - the power balance gets a bit more balanced.

Forcing private companies and individuals to have total lack of privacy in their financial affairs, on the other hand, further shifts this balance of power in the direction of the government. This, I believe, must be resisted.


Quote from: Chris4210
In my personal opinion, the bitshares stealth feature should be developed in such a way that it gives individuals the protection they seek for a reasonable small price. On the other side the transaction type "stealth" should be too expensive or "unattractive" for criminal activities so that they look for easier alternatives. In this way, we could keep the balance between the two sides.

I'm in complete disagreement - here's my reasoning.

Criminals (and let's use the term here to mean not just someone who is breaking the law, but someone who is being immoral/evil, or in other words, not committing a victim-less crime) become criminals because they are attracted to the high rewards from this high risk (imprisonment, bodily injury) activity. It won't be a few more cents or even a few dollars that will stop them.

Day to day people, on the other hand, would suffer from absurd fees for transferring value privately with such a fee structure: and this would hit the poorest people (think people who don't live in 1st world countries) disproportionately.

Whether it be sending my buddy 2k, or paying for a coffee, I want my transactions to be private.
Any other way, the system is leaking a lot of data, and it can't be said to be private at all. All stealth transactions automatically become targets of much higher attention if most transactions are not private.

This, I believe, is not the right path.

Quote from: Chris4210
I want to avoid that the BitShares Platform and our company BitShares Munich is getting into any legal troubles for providing criminals a platform.

You or Bitshares Munich can't be held responsible for criminals using Bitshares.

Criminals use encryption all day long, no cryptographic researchers or open source developers have to answer for that.

The technology itself is neutral. If we begin tailoring it to only cater to the "good" guys, what ends up happening is that it ends up being no good for bad and good guys alike.

The bad guys, however, will find somewhere else.
The good guys stay, and have their privacy compromised.


53
General Discussion / Re: BlockPay in Serious Trouble
« on: May 27, 2017, 08:26:00 pm »
Quote from: chris4210
Without these IP transfer documents, the code is still owned by the original developers and cannot be sold by the company.

Sold to whom?

54
General Discussion / Re: BlockPay in Serious Trouble
« on: May 27, 2017, 07:53:36 pm »
Stealth is a very sensitive technical feature for the BitShares Platform and is also highly debated. One the one side Stealth can be used to protect the privacy of the users, on the other end it can be used for illegal and criminal activities. Both sides have to be considered and evaluated while developing this feature.

I don't think it is highly debated at all.

This is akin to saying that encryption can be used for illegal and criminal activities, ditto for language, ditto for the internet, and so on.

These would all be true, however, what is the alternative? A world where certain governments have privileged backdoor access ?

I believe we have enough evidence by now (not that it wasn't clear even 15 years ago, but by now it is irrefutable) to know what some have known all along: you cannot trust anyone with that kind of power.

And even if you could, then we would be left with the question of what happens when the privileged few are hacked, and this privileged access is made more broadly accessible.

Even the CIA and the NSA can and have been hacked, I don't see much room for debate here. Backdoor access to cryptographic systems has always been and will always remain a stupendously bad idea.


Thus it is a good thing that the encryption works, in spite of unsavory characters leveraging this same technology to conduct their unsavory business.

There are other ways to catch fish without massive dragnet surveillance, that is a bad habit that is relatively recent (indeed, the technology that makes it possible is itself recent, which only speaks to the nature of the person who feels the desire to control and subject everyone else -- as soon as the technology became available, such systems began spreading like wildfire)


In the crypto space, only the monero team got this right. Privacy in transactions has to exist, and it has to be on by default.

Anything else is not "crypto" at all, and more to the point, continues to facilitate the kind of systems that are eroding so many of our rights away.

More surveillance is not the answer, and transparent blockchains allow for perfect surveillance.

55
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: May 27, 2017, 03:14:28 pm »
Well, it was good fun while it lasted.

Let's hope we don't fall all the way down to <$0.01 again at least.

56
Do we have any Japanese / South Korean members around here?

57
General Discussion / Re: Finally
« on: May 22, 2017, 06:13:24 pm »
Pretty sure we lost a few members to sudden heart attacks when they opened their wallets and saw the equivalent fiat amount in the wallet.

58
General Discussion / Re: Dan's Next Project - EOS Rears its Head
« on: May 22, 2017, 06:11:18 pm »
but I do think the community should take action to claim their piece of the eos pie.

Please clarify?

59
A bigger source of value is smartcoins.
You need BTS to issue them.
Demand for smartcoins should result in demand for BTS.

Something tells me that when private transactions finally arrive, sprinkled with some good marketing / raising awareness from us, will result in much higher demand for smartcoins.

All other crypto-communities would benefit from storing profits in bitUSD and other smartcoins.
Wow
How many traders are out there who would take profits in USD if they didn't have to give ID

Indeed. This stuff could be cryptoland's bank, but people are naturally reluctant to store their loot under a named account using software that has no built-in proxy support (tor - and yes, relatively easy to work around, IF you're technically inclined.. which most people are not) with full transparency.

"Here Mister Thief [and I don't mean the government, altough, that too :D], look at my 300k in bitUSD, I login from IP A.B.C.D, have a great day!"

60
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: May 22, 2017, 05:55:09 pm »
Bitshares has grown in value by 2500% over three months.

That's really amazing.

It is .. but what are the fundamentals for this astronomical rise?

I think we could easily x50 with STEALTH in the picture from here ..

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 72