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 - tbone

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 43
46

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 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 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:

Thanks for restarting this thread.  Hopefully the idea of more formally applying witness criteria will get more traction. 

Looking at your scoring metrics, it looks like you have proof of commitment twice, once for price feeds and once for collateral.  I think it makes more sense for collateral.  And I think the price feeds can be grouped along with missed blocks under proof of ability.  I would also add latency to that.  So under proof of ability you could have: a) price feeds, b) missed blocks, and c) latency.  What do you think?

It would be great if someone could write some code to measure these metrics and publish them in real time as a resource for proxies and individual voters to assess the quality of witnesses.  Perhaps if this works well it could even be built into the blockchain such that if minimum thresholds are not met, then witnesses can automatically be made inactive (or standby) until they meet thresholds and get voted in again.

As for paying standby witnesses, I assume you mean in a scenario where they would randomly get to produce some % of the blocks.  In the past I have suggested that it might make sense to let standby witnesses produce perhaps 10% of blocks.  This would obviously require a hard fork, but maybe it should be considered.  Either way, it would be nice if we could make some progress on applying criteria as discussed above.

47
Solcert or Solomon and nonsense as my friend @tonyk used to call it does not look very promising either.. I hope that does not end up being a scam but...no updates from @SolomonSollarsNSense for a while does not look good..I remember back in the days I decided to through some bts to solcert instead of peerplays..how stupid was that??

You should expect most projects to not work out.  That doesn't make them scams. 

48
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: March 04, 2017, 10:14:14 pm »
@kenCode is the last chance of bts to succeed together with a coordinated marketing. And more specifically stealth IMHO..if that fails then..

By the way. Seeing bts bleeding and bleeding I am starting to think that maybe someone should fork bts,go back to fixed supply of 2billion which is reduced constantly by burning supply from fees.essentially go back to bts1 but rename it bts3 and sharedrop to bts holders excluding exchanges and let the market decide of that value. apparently cryptoinvestors want deflationary tokens not inflationary and this should be obvious to everyone in this community after 3 years of bleeding. What do u guys think?


Find me a cryptocurrency that isn't diluting its supply FAR more than bitshares is.  In fact, the only Bitshares dilution is witness pay and the somewhat minimally used worker proposal system.  Witness pay is tiny compared to the dilution of, for example, Bitcoin.  So that cost can easily be more than offset by fees as we gain traction. That's kind of the beauty of delegated proof of stake in case you weren't aware of that.   As for worker proposals, are you saying no development should be done at this stage?     

49
this is the block explorer i have been using these days.

https://btsbots.com/

it's not as fancy as cryptofresh.  but it's good for most usage.

also, having a lib does not make a block explorer.  the lib deals with datas, whereas blockchain explorer gathers and shows datas in a organized way.  you still need people who can do front-end (someone like cryptofresh) to build a explorer even you have said lib.

so your title is not correct . in fact, as far as blockchain explorer is concerned, if you don't have expertise like cryptofresh, you can not fire up your own blockchain explorer with this lib.

The language in the title may be imprecise.  But you're missing the point.  Such a library will make it much easier for general developers to integrate with the bitshares blockchain -- not only to create a block explorer, but anything else they may dream up.   Surely you can comprehend the implications of this.

50
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Worker Proposal] Advertisement at 8btc
« on: February 14, 2017, 02:43:15 pm »

low fees
could not be closed
could not be hacked


Yeah right, and after openledger API goes down as usual people who bought this slogans will be embarrassed.
They will learn ..

... how to switch to another API

:)

I think we SERIOUSLY need a better way to deal with API server issues.  If a new user/visitor is browsing the wallet and then is suddenly presented with an API server settings screen, that is embarrassing, damaging and it's an unacceptable user experience. 

How about having the wallet automatically switch to a different API server if it detects high latency?  That should be the default setting, but users should also have the option to lock in on 1 or more API servers of their choice.

51
General Discussion / Re: how about to raise block reward?
« on: February 14, 2017, 02:29:16 pm »
There has always been talk about adding additional price feeds such as stocks.  If we raise the block reward what about requiring these additional feeds?  Being able to play with stocks would be a nice incentive to use BitShares!
Creating indices for stock (market pegged asset) is a business opportunity and can make the issuer a profit from trading fees. Thus I would think that it should be in his interest to set his own feed producers (which he can) and pay them for the service of providing an accurate feed

I think @Brekyrself was referring to adding additional network-issued MPAs and expecting/requiring witnesses to provide feeds for those assets in order to help justify higher pay. 

I like this idea in theory.  But unfortunately there isn't enough focus on liquidity, so I'm not confident we're making enough progress on that front to expect additional MPAs will ever become viable.

52
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Worker Proposal] Advertisement at 8btc
« on: February 13, 2017, 07:50:24 pm »
I am NOT in favor of spending money on banner ads that I have trained my eyes to ignore.
Even the modal ads that popup in my face and dim out the rest of the screen... my eyes immediately seek to the corner looking for the X to close it.
 
@bitcrab - have you considered paid placement instead? where the "ad" is mixed in with a very interesting, educational article by a Writer that people follow? "in your face" ads are very annoying imo, and if you want to advertise, make it educational to entice interest, and hence clicks. you will get a much better roi. people yearn for these little tidbits of knowledge.
 
@tbone - I really like your proposed default / DEX "Homepage". this dex homepage should be live before @bitcrab posts that ad and links it to the web wallet though.
 
on a side note, I think it would be great to have a reactjs "ticker tape" right underneath of the main menu. spice it up a bit. i bet @svk could do that in two shakes of a lamb's tail if we ask him real nice-like......  :-*

I kind of like the idea of the ticker tape.  But it's not for everyone (some people think scrolling text on a webpage feels very 90s).  So there should be an option to turn it off.  Either way, though, I hope we can get that default / DEX "homepage" in place, as well as the language selector on the header first.

@svk, any thoughts about when that homepage can go up?  Also, can you put the language selector on the header so it's always highly available?  That would be fantastic.

53
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Worker Proposal] Advertisement at 8btc
« on: February 12, 2017, 05:39:09 pm »
hi @tbone your advice is great, I will provide the Chinese text soon.
I have even one more idea, when the new user click the page, can the server get the info of the users' area and change the language setting accordingly and automatically? if yes it will help many new users from China a lot. @svk

I believe IP Geolocation requires an API service, which I'm not sure how many free ones exist.  If we can add a free one, great.  But even if we do, there's no guarantee it will work every time.  And even when it does work, there will be times when the user's actual language does not match their location. 

For these reasons, we really should put the language selector right in the header, so it's highly accessible from anywhere in the wallet.  And I would use country flag icons next to each language in the list.  That way it's obvious that it's a language setting, even when the user is unable to recognize the currently selected language. 

By the way, in addition to improving the initial UX for users who don't speak the default language, there's good marketing value to show very prominently that the wallet supports 8 languages. 



54
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Worker Proposal] Advertisement at 8btc
« on: February 11, 2017, 08:08:23 pm »
I am in favor of giving this a try.  But I agree with @fav that the results should be measured (both by click throughs from the ad, and by new accounts created under a specific referrer). 

Also very important, both in general and to maximize the success of this effort (and the efficiency of the funds spent), the wallet needs a suitable page for new visitors to land on.  The current default page is the account creation page (see 1st image below), which I've been saying is a very unsuitable page for new visitors to land.  Perhaps this is why you are proposing to have people land on the dashboard page.  But this page is also not suitable since it has no information (see 2nd image below). 

Because I believe it is imperative to have a suitable landing page for new visitors (for this ad campaign AND in general), I took the time to create one (see 3rd image below).  I proposed it last week to @Chris420, who liked the idea and encouraged me to ask @svk to incorporate it into the wallet site.  I discussed it with @svk and understand it's currently in progress.  @bitcrab, I hope you will write some similar text in Chinese, or translate the text I wrote so there's a proper landing page in place before spending money on an ad.



Current DEX default page:




Current dashboard page:




Proposed default / DEX "Homepage":

55
As mentioned in my previous post, a trading contest could be very effective, but there is no point wasting time and money on such an effort unless some basic things are in place first.  This includes at least one market maker in key pairs, and resolution of some wallet UX issues. In this post I'll talk about the UX issues that need to be resolved.  In a later post I'll talk about the liquidity issue.


Wallet UX - Charting
Currently the charting does not offer a proper experience for traders despite the great work @svk has done to upgrade the chart engine.  The problem lies with the API servers which do not make available the minimum required timeframes. 

Currently the only timeframes available are 5m, 1hr and 1d.  Whereas a proper chart offering includes 1m, 5m, 15m, 30m, 1hr, 2hr, 4hr, 6hr, 12hr, 1d, 3d, 1w, 1mo.  We don't need all of those at this stage.  But we should AT LEAST have 5m, 15m, 30m, 1hr, 4hr, 1d.  That should be the absolute bare minimum.  Although ideally it would also include 2hr, 12hr, 3d, and 1w (and even 1m, 6hr, and 1mo if we wanted to get really serious).  But anyway, before launching any trading contest we should at least have the minimum required timeframes.

Another charting issue is that the data doesn't go back far enough.  Again, I understand this is a limitation of the API servers.  This needs to be cleared up either way, but especially before conducting any trading contest.


Wallet UX - Deposit/Withdraw

Right now the deposit/withdraw page is too confusing and it's scaring people away.  I believe @svk is working on this, which is great.  I don't know what the timeframe is.  But until this is resolved, running a trading contest would be counterproductive. 

56
Chris,  thanks for taking this initiative.  I would model it largely on the linked Forex contest.  So I would suggest that the contest runs monthly.  Anyone can join.  Required starting funds should be low (maybe ~$25 equivalent).  Winner should be based on percentage gain during the contest period.  Bots have to be allowed because there is no way to distinguish bot trading from human trading. 

Regarding live Mumbles, it would make sense to discuss the contest on one or more regularly scheduled, live Mumble sessions that take place during the contest period.  Initial contest announcement and ongoing standings should be published on bitshares.org website.  I think it would be helpful to have new bitshares.org website in place already when contest is announced. 

As for the main markets to trade, we should carefully consider this.  Although this should be fun, the whole point is to jump start liquidity.  So we need to be strategic about it.  Generally speaking, it should probably be a few key pairs involving bitUSD and bitCNY.

I also think there are some serious pre-requisites before conducting such a contest: a) we need proper market makers on key pairs otherwise we're just wasting our time, and b) certain aspects of the wallet UX need to be ironed out. I will write another post discussing these items.

57
General Discussion / Re: Integrate Hardware Wallet into the Bitshares DEX??
« on: February 04, 2017, 04:25:23 pm »
@svk .. maybe we should work together and get the BTS/Steem integration going. Lets have a chat about this .. it shouldnt take too much efforts to bring trezor to BTS given our current status .. maybe we could do a crowdfund for development ..

This would be fantastic.  But I think OPs question is different than whether or not BTS can be integrated with trezor wallet.  He wants to know about the possibility of incorporating other native wallets with the bitshares wallet. This is something I've been thinking about lately too.  It would be amazing if we could incorporate other native wallets, similar to the way Exodus Wallet has...which would enable in-wallet, shapeshift-like exchange of assets over which the user controls all keys.

Obviously this wouldn't be a traditional exchange-like orderbook trading experience.  But the storage of the supported coins would be decentralized, which would add another important decentralized aspect to the bitshares wallet experience.  What would it take to accomplish this? 

58
General Discussion / Re: Liquidity, Liquidity, Liquidity
« on: February 04, 2017, 02:21:24 pm »


You are NOT properly stating the alleged "imbalances".  The fact is, the required collateral is less than 200% (175% in bitshares.org/wallet, and a little more in the OL wallet).  And what do you do after borrowing (let's say butUSD, for example)?  You short it.  So you're selling it to someone for 100% face value.  So now your collateral goes from 175% to 75%.  Which means you actually have NET LEVERAGE when shorting BitAssets.  So there really is no imbalance with collateral. 



This is correct. Although 75% MCR is bit higher than other exchanges require for shorting (polonoex requires 40% initial, 20% maintanence collateral). It may be safe to have high collateral initially, but as market spins up, we need to assess posibility  of reducing MCR to be competitive.

 Yes, good point!


59
I don't think it's reasonable to compare steem and bitshares witnesses.  steem witnesses get paid a ton.  But beyond true witness duties, there's a general expectation they will engage in various non-witness activities that benefit the steem ecosystem.  The value of their contributions is very subjective, and what you end up with is a situation where each witness is contributing to a different degree.  So in some cases, the network may get good value in exchange for the witness pay, and in some cases money is wasted. 

Bitshares, on the other hand, has a worker proposal system that enables us to keep the witness duties separate while being able to scrutinize worker/development proposals and track their progress to completion.  This is much more sophisticated and sensible.  So please, let's maintain the separation. 

Having said that, I do think the witness pay is a bit too low for this important role, which includes price feeds as one of the responsibilities.   Let's not forget that if we want to be considered a decentralized exchange, our value proposition must be rooted in our offering of MPAs.  Otherwise there is NOTHING decentralized about bitshares beyond the core token. 

So let's define specifically what we need from witnesses, let's incorporate an objective witness reliability scoring (WRS) mechanism (e.g. server uptime, latency, missed blocks, etc) into the witness selection process (along with the current reputation-based voting), and let's increase the pay modestly in order to a) create a little more competition and b) ensure the pay is sufficient enough that witnesses won't have to cut corners.  This is just reasonable and sensible.  Let's not be penny wise, pound foolish.
 

60
General Discussion / Re: Liquidity, Liquidity, Liquidity
« on: February 03, 2017, 02:20:50 pm »
Lets not complicate, lets dive in for simplicity.
Adding liquidity is not a task or a goal. It is consequence of joining two interest parties, that make honest deal.
Who are those interest parties? Is there a balance of risk/reward between two parties.

One interest party is known and it is the one that wants to use convenience of bitUSD. Has no additional risk when buying except that of significant price drop. But since it is relatively stable you could only expect to lose gain if price of crypto goes high, fast.
The other party has to provide at least two times the value (BTS lightwallet actually recommends 2,3:1), and expose it self to a price fluctuation risk that is disproportional to possible reword.

There are two equitation that needs balance here:
two_times_value vs one_time_value
high_fluctuation_risk vs none

,obvious resolution here would be to provide incentive for shorter in from of transaction fee, that would compensate for those two inbalances. All other possible measures only rectify or reduce this mayor one. It would make mmbots unprofitable? I doubt.

You are NOT properly stating the alleged "imbalances".  The fact is, the required collateral is less than 200% (175% in bitshares.org/wallet, and a little more in the OL wallet).  And what do you do after borrowing (let's say butUSD, for example)?  You short it.  So you're selling it to someone for 100% face value.  So now your collateral goes from 175% to 75%.  Which means you actually have NET LEVERAGE when shorting BitAssets.  So there really is no imbalance with collateral. 

The rest of your post points I already addressed below.  As a BitAsset shorter, you can be rewarded by proposed liquidity rewards just like anyone else adding liquidity to the market (incuding proper marker makers).  Between 1. the leverage, 2. the liquidity rewards, and 3. having more liquidity on the books thanks to market makers (enabling you to get out of your position when you want to), there would be MORE than enough incentive to short BitAssets.   So there's no reason to introduce the kind of market distortion you're proposing. 



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 43