76
Technical Support / How do I open my wallet with just a .json file
« on: October 01, 2015, 10:08:10 pm »
I got 9.3 up and running, but all I have is an old .json file
How do I import it?
How do I import it?
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.
77
General Discussion / Re: All problems with DPoS solved with one easy change
« on: September 26, 2015, 11:03:57 am »but after time expires you open up the same attack we are trying to avoid? better to lock away until you stop signing blocksWhy wouldnt you lock as long as you are witness? You remove witness status to get collateral back.
Because you don't have any idea how long you are going to be a witness. When we say lock, we mean locking it in an unacceptable smart wallet that is programmed to only give it back after a certain amount of time that you decide prior to locking.
If you lock 1000 away for 6 months, then I can lock 1000 away for 7 months, and I get the votes. This promotes political activity, and healthy competition. Now you must lock more away to compete with me for the apathetic vote.
Maybe the apathetic vote should only apply to 50% of the total number of allowable witnesses!?
Yes, of course, the lock out period is also dependent on their tenure as witness, so you cannot remove funds until your are no longer a witness and your lock away period is over.
78
General Discussion / Re: All problems with DPoS solved with one easy change
« on: September 25, 2015, 03:10:31 pm »
correct, there is a sweet spot, and if we set these as voting parameters, then we will surely find it, in the same manner that we will find the sweet spot for total witnesses.
79
General Discussion / Re: All problems with DPoS solved with one easy change
« on: September 25, 2015, 03:03:53 pm »Why wouldnt you lock as long as you are witness? You remove witness status to get collateral back.
Because you don't have any idea how long you are going to be a witness. When we say lock, we mean locking it in an unacceptable smart wallet that is programmed to only give it back after a certain amount of time that you decide prior to locking.
If you lock 1000 away for 6 months, then I can lock 1000 away for 7 months, and I get the votes. This promotes political activity, and healthy competition. Now you must lock more away to compete with me for the apathetic vote.
Maybe the apathetic vote should only apply to 50% of the total number of allowable witnesses!?
80
General Discussion / Re: All problems with DPoS solved with one easy change
« on: September 25, 2015, 03:02:32 pm »And if someone locks up 1000 BTS for 1000 years?
The algo curve drops off after the length of a lifetime. Draw the curve to fit the process. Simple.
81
General Discussion / Re: All problems with DPoS solved with one easy change
« on: September 25, 2015, 02:54:39 pm »
The algorithm should place more weight on the length of time that the funds are locked up for.
For example:
Poloniex signs up to be a witness and locks up 10,000,000 BTS in a smart wallet that is inaccessible for 1 month (before transferring automatically to a wallet accessible to them).
I sign up to be a witness and l lock up 10,000 BTS for 30 years (similar smart wallet).
The default, apathetic, non-vote goes to me and not them.
Dig?
The risk is not only money but time. Someone who locks up 10,000,000 BTS does not deserve to get the default apathetic votes unless it's for a long time.
There should be a floor, or minimum (time and money), Like you must lock up at least 100,000BTS for 2 years in order to even be eligible to get the apathetic non votes. Because if you do go through with this, then these "money witnesses" will get substantial votes. I hope you realize this. In fact, we might want to put a limit on the total number of witnesses that these money votes are automatically applied to (certainly not 100%), such as 25% or 50%. That way the money votes have influence, and power, but can't take over the system entirely.
This logic is very similar to the "burn your BTS for more voting power" discussion.
For example:
Poloniex signs up to be a witness and locks up 10,000,000 BTS in a smart wallet that is inaccessible for 1 month (before transferring automatically to a wallet accessible to them).
I sign up to be a witness and l lock up 10,000 BTS for 30 years (similar smart wallet).
The default, apathetic, non-vote goes to me and not them.
Dig?
The risk is not only money but time. Someone who locks up 10,000,000 BTS does not deserve to get the default apathetic votes unless it's for a long time.
There should be a floor, or minimum (time and money), Like you must lock up at least 100,000BTS for 2 years in order to even be eligible to get the apathetic non votes. Because if you do go through with this, then these "money witnesses" will get substantial votes. I hope you realize this. In fact, we might want to put a limit on the total number of witnesses that these money votes are automatically applied to (certainly not 100%), such as 25% or 50%. That way the money votes have influence, and power, but can't take over the system entirely.
This logic is very similar to the "burn your BTS for more voting power" discussion.
82
General Discussion / Re: Best Selling Option
« on: September 24, 2015, 11:31:45 pm »absolutely the most realistic (economic motive based) solution I've heard yet. And isn't that what we are essentially developing:The problem with a high number is voter apathy, so like i said, becoming a delegate should require you to submit a collateral bid, then the client is set to automatically vote for the highest 101 collateral bids unless you choose to manually vote.r0ach makes one of the best suggestions/proposals I have heard lately!
a framework of economic incentives?
It's similar to the successful DASH model (pay to play).
It's just a brilliant baseline for competition among our miners (witnesses).
voter apathy, so like i said, becoming a delegate should require you to submit a collateral bid, then the client is set to automatically vote for the highest 101 collateral bids unless you choose to manually vote.Not a bad idea... but it is effectively buying your way into power which is less accountable and has different risks.
But only if there is zero voting participation, and at zero voting participation, we are at worse risk without this implemented. It's true. It's basically black swan protection in the event we suddenly experience massive widespread voter apathy. It's like our current government where the rich run it until the voters get pissed, and try to exercise the political process. In other words, people will understand this mechanism as a reflection of our own government structures.
A witness could put up a million bitUSD as collateral, but without the required votes, it buys him nothing. But someone who does not know the BitShares team, might see this collateral as proof that this guy isn't going to risk losing his collateral. It will have potential benefit. If Donald Trump wants to run for witness, and puts up $$$$$$, isn't that a good thing for us? More people active in the political process. You are never going to be able separate money from politics, so at least make a fair framework for honest competition, where capital has its place within the system, instead of pretending like money has nothing to do with politics. Lets be realistic, and set the rule set accordingly. Heads out of the sand. The world is corrupt, and money is at the heart of every political decision.
It's the same security model, you've already bought your way into power by purchasing a bunch of stake to vote with. I am simply offering users the fastest, most seamless, least time consuming possible way to identify the best game theory candidates to serve them, then letting them do it automated if they desire.
Exactly, because they will at least have some skin in the game, and it will cost them some money if they want to take down the system (instead of being able to do it for free). The marriage of politics and economics has always been inseparable. We should not deny this basic law of human nature, but embrace it within the elegant design of the BitShares monetary & political structure. Otherwise, we risk having a an unnatural hole, gap, or void within our political structure.
83
General Discussion / Re: BITCOIN NOW OFFICIALLY A COMMODITY!
« on: September 18, 2015, 08:31:06 pm »
It just got much harder to run a crypto company.
Unless you're distri-buted and auto-matic and of course, public. I'd say we're 3 for 3.
Unless you're distri-buted and auto-matic and of course, public. I'd say we're 3 for 3.
84
General Discussion / Re: 9 Big Banks Taking The Blockchain!!
« on: September 17, 2015, 05:03:16 pm »
urg...I honestly have this feeling too, to a degree. Anything we can do to disintermediate their power structure should be done (barring violence, naturally).
No need. Place a BTS ATM next to a Cyprus Bank ATM and don't feel sorry for those who choose to donate a percentage to the Banks. The best thing we can do is blur the lines between public and private blockchains, so that they are never banned. Max Keiser, for instance, keeps saying that banks are using "Bitcoin technology" instead of "blockchain technology". See?
87
General Discussion / Re: Please stop changing the rules of the game
« on: August 21, 2015, 08:35:18 pm »
the number one rule of this game is called :
freedom to issue your oun social currency or UIA and create as much value for it as u can dream
toi tell another man what they are not allowed to do is not cool
BM is free to do what he wants here. so am i. so are you.
freedom to issue your oun social currency or UIA and create as much value for it as u can dream
toi tell another man what they are not allowed to do is not cool
BM is free to do what he wants here. so am i. so are you.
88
General Discussion / Re: What is the focus of BitShares now?
« on: August 19, 2015, 04:19:08 am »Hitler said Tuesday that the government should have broad surveillance powers of Germans and private technology firms should cooperate better with intelligence agencies to help combat "evildoers."
Just a slight change for perspective.
Isn't that what Dentist Bits are for?
89
General Discussion / Re: What is the focus of BitShares now?
« on: August 19, 2015, 04:14:48 am »
The answer to the OP will be obvious once 2.0 is released:
The focus will be whatever the global BTS consensus votes for. No discussion or debate will be necessary, just full steam ahead, while bitcoin and Ethereum foundations form subcommittees eternally debating weather or not to raise the debt cieling, while wasting resources in the process. BitShares is a coin community of action, not gridlock, with a top priority always clearly and undisputedly elected.
You may want to re-name this thread to:
I wonder what the first elected crypto community proposal in the history of planet earth will be?
The focus will be whatever the global BTS consensus votes for. No discussion or debate will be necessary, just full steam ahead, while bitcoin and Ethereum foundations form subcommittees eternally debating weather or not to raise the debt cieling, while wasting resources in the process. BitShares is a coin community of action, not gridlock, with a top priority always clearly and undisputedly elected.
You may want to re-name this thread to:
I wonder what the first elected crypto community proposal in the history of planet earth will be?
90
Technical Support / Re: ETA on 2.0?
« on: August 01, 2015, 09:50:52 pm »
Yea, it's funny how all of a sudden Ethereum was "officially" released in "July", just as all the money and market sentiment was moving into the "August" bet 
