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 - R

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 ... 68
511
General Discussion / Re: New mechanism to handle bad debt (black swan)
« on: October 19, 2018, 01:24:04 pm »
I like the idea of not performing a global settlement if a very small amount is under-collateralized, maintaining the normal function of the bitasset, but it does feel like the individual debt holder in said position is getting off lightly given that they defaulted on their loan.

It'd be great if their account was partially nerfed until their under-collateralized position is bought off the market, like temp-disabling LTM (inflating their BTS DEX fees), perhaps disabling borrowing the same bitasset or even highlighting their account as a known "bad debt holder" within in the BTS DEX UI (similar to known-scammer account warnings)?

Do you not think that global settlement as it's currently implemented should trigger if a majority of a bitasset's supply have defaulted on their loans though? Or should the proposed mechanism operate for the full 100% of supply?

512
Simply adding a smartcoin isn't that impressive a feat for a centralized exchange, I'd fully support these bounties for CEX which allow borrowing bitCNY using BTS from the CEX interface resulting in BTS returning from CEX to the BTS DEX whilst providing BTS buy pressure and bitCNY liquidity within the CEX. Alternatively, if these large exchanges are convinced to create a BTS DEX gateway or bridge, that'd be far more valuable than a single token being added to a CEX.

https://www.bitshares.foundation/workers/2017-10-compliance Already covers this topic, no? "$50,000 worth of BTS in each case we convince an exchange (i.e. Kraken, bitstamp, coinbase, bitcoin.de) to list any asset (pair) that is primarily hosted on BitShares."

I don't think 'Bitfinex' should count, aren't they behind Tether & thus a direct competitor? If Tether collapses then won't Bitfinex too?

Binance doesn't charge for addition anymore, couldn't a community based application suffice?

513
Why pay for SSL certs when you can get them for free using certbot?

I'm not sure of the neccessity of the newsletter, email nor professional inquiry panel, these feel like centralizing BTS around this website.

514
There's still a large amount of BTS users yet to claim their sharedrop; this isn't a traditional snapshot/key-import sharedrop, you can't put off claiming for years - act before its too late to claim your sharedrop!

515
Any updates or blog posts about this WP's re-organization? Waiting for bug report feedback 👍

516
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Legal Council about BTS and No-action
« on: October 06, 2018, 01:08:04 am »
Any update on this worker proposal? Did Bittrex never respond? Users on Telegram are claiming that Bittrex is emailing them about BTS being fully delisted, not just disabled?  :-\

517
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: BSIP22
« on: October 05, 2018, 01:01:50 pm »
Supported on my side under following conditions.

1. Expiring proxy assignments (expiry period longer than proxy's decaying period)
2. Voting portal to counter voter apathy
3. Stateful notifications in UI or voting portal:
   a) Prompt user to check/refresh his voting slate (if sufficiently decayed)
   b) In case of user with proxy set, notifications when proxy modifies voting slate
Raised an UI issue for the 3rd item: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/issues/1932

518
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: BSIP22
« on: September 29, 2018, 10:13:09 pm »
I still support the idea behind BSIP 22, albeit perhaps without the blacklist functionality.

519
Update:

Thanks to everyone + special thanks to whoever was yesterday deciding vote on worker to gets voted in.

We are creating today on github repository and team will start work/logging hours no more late than this Friday. Commits will be available only to the BitShares github team until admin decide/review what is for public release.

@abit

Pinged you on telegram - re Github Repository, Fabian is away, please check when you can.

How are things coming along? We were discussing this WP at the bitfest event last week, looking forwards to the developments.  :)

520
General Discussion / Re: Somebody might enlighten me why BSIP42 on BitUSD ?
« on: September 29, 2018, 05:22:31 pm »
If this is not stopped, this would prove that dpos is a fatally flawed system, which can be easily manipulated just like mtgox.

To be fair, you can avoid these committee issues by creating/using a 'privatized' MPA. Bonus points for transfering asset ownership to null-account for permanent configuration. Under such conditions DPOS has no influence and thus is not flawed.

521
The Whaleshares sharedrop has been extended - https://whaleshares.io/whaleshares/@whaleshares/whaleshares-sharedrop-claim-period-2-is-now-open-instructions-inside

Quote
This second claim period will run for 30 days and end on October 25 at 23:59:59 UTC. Claims will be subject to a 5% reduction during this second claim period. Example: If your original sharedrop was 100 WLS, you will now receive 95 WLS.

522
General Discussion / Re: On The Importance of Bit.GOLD
« on: September 28, 2018, 12:17:07 pm »
MCR is not the key point, how to solve the black swan is the main problem.

BSIP 18 can't solve the black swan,we need other good way to solve the black swan, let the black swan will never happen.
BSIP 18 does offer the ability to resolve global settlement aka 'black swan'. Just follow its steps and it'll reactivate.

523
General Discussion / Re: Somebody might enlighten me why BSIP42 on BitUSD ?
« on: September 28, 2018, 09:23:18 am »
If BSIP42 is implemented on bitUSD, then Hertz will probably need to change its USD:BTS price reference https://github.com/BTS-CM/scripts/issues/2

Does BSIP42 apply to all smartcoins?

524
General Discussion / Re: Economic Abstraction and Network Fees
« on: September 24, 2018, 09:44:28 pm »
The pegging thing can be solved with a program all committee members run that adjusts the fees daily to peg to USD/CNY. Obviously there's hassle in running that program and key safety is a concern as well
After BSIP 40 (https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/blob/master/bsip-0040.md) is implemented, the committee members could potentially create a key for this purpose so as to not risk the rest of their committee account's permissions/functionality.

Such a program wouldn't require a powerful VPS, and perhaps it could be run by one committee member to propose the variable change operation & be manually approved by the committee at their discretion? It'd at least take half the effort out of proposing new fees.

525
General Discussion / Re: Economic Abstraction and Network Fees
« on: September 24, 2018, 01:37:54 pm »
I think fees should still be paid in BTS, however the fees should peg against USD|CNY to be a fixed FIAT value instead of being detached from their intended value when BTS price is volatile (until the committee manually adjusts them). If the committee could set the fee values once then forget about them (until economic policy changes are proposed) that'd be great.

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 ... 68