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.

Topics - santaclause102

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

General Discussion / Filling up votes with proxy voting?

« on: August 31, 2015, 09:59:12 am »

On Mumble session 8/28 BM said that you can either vote yourself or direct your voting power entirely to someone else.

What about voting for as many delegates as you feel like and have the slate of proxy-1 fill up the rest of the votes and proxy-2 again fill up the rest in case your votes and the votes of proxy-1 are not enough (101 votes) and so on?

Related question: Are there still 101 votes in 2.0. I heard that the number of witnesses would be flexible in 2.0...

General Discussion / Curiosume money theory

« on: August 29, 2015, 06:57:33 pm »

I have watched this https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=2601&v=CMeQ_rNkGKU and the mumble hangout https://beyondbitcoin.org/bitshares-dev-hangout-bytemaster-consensus-august-7-2015/.

I have not understood the economical concept Dan Robles talks about where the goal is to give a virtual currency intrinsic value by backing it with the "productivity of engineers".

To me an asset can either have value because it is backed by a promise (everything a user issued asset (UIA) can represent: stocks, debt obligations etc.) or something has value because it is a resource which is demanded itself for whatever reason:, examples: Gold (demand drivers: industry use, speculation), Bitcoin (demanded because it has been identified as money for utility reasons (divisible, ease to transfer etc)).

When Dan R. talks about (like in the 7.8 hangout) about money being backed by productivity that in the end can be subsumed under the UIA > debt obligation case:
I go to some institution (bank) which issues money that is used widely and the reason the institution (a bank) issues money and gives it to me based on the mutual agreement that I will pay it back is that I have convinced the bank that my future productivity will allow me to pay back the loan that I was just granted.

I may have made wrong assumptions above on dan r.'s concept of money so skip the below if you are just interested in the money theory of curiosume and think my assumptions are wrong.

The questions are:
How would it be different from today's system I described above?
If the proposed system is different from today's money issuing system in the way that everyone can issue money (not only those with a state issued banking license) and there is no state enforced minimum central bank money reserve rule for banks and also no central bank money to serve this purpose then the questions are:
How do you convert to one common currency?
And where does the currency get it's value from if the supply is not limited by the central bank via the limited (very relative these days

) supply of central bank money and the consequent limitations on the ability of banks to lend money into existence (minimum reserve rule)?

General Discussion / Curiosume profile matching

« on: August 29, 2015, 06:25:29 pm »

I understand the idea of curiosume (as far as I know there is not working application yet) to be a collaboration platform where people can state something about
1) being associated with certain topics (wikipedia entries)
2) and whether they want to teach others about a certain topic or collaborate with others or learn from others about it.

My concept about how this could be implemented using a blockchain:
A curiosume profile would be an advanced user issued asset which is defined by the two points above (1 and 2).
At the very end of this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=2601&v=CMeQ_rNkGKU Dan Robles also talks about how this could be used for matching job descriptions and contractors to take the job. He says: A curiosume profile (short: curiosume) could not only represent the skillset of a person but also a job description (e.g. c++, database systems, crypto currencies, team leadership, ability to learn, and whatever other skills are needed for the job). This list of attributes that all would have an entry in the wikipedia (public one or a private customized one) would all have been assigned an identifier and the set of these identifiers would make up the curiosume profile that represents a job description.

The functionality blockchain wise that would be necessary to make this work would be an automated matching or suggestion algorithm that matches job profiles and contractor profiles on the blockchain.

This is just wild thinking, public brainstorming and I even can't see atm what advantages it would have to realize it via a blockchain than with a centralized database. I also don't know whether the amount of information (all the identifiers) of the profiles wouldn't be too big for a user issued asset / transaction as they exists today in Bitshares.

General Discussion / Digital hiring trap

« on: August 28, 2015, 06:43:25 pm »

There is a tricky combination we are faced with:

1) Most delegates that are hired by shareholdervote don't go through the same due diligence process a normal employee would have to go through: Real World ID known, professional history / proven track record checked etc.
2) There are social bonds on the forum and beyond despite most just have a digital / forum ID.

A problem occurs when obligations due to social bonds mix with close to non existing due diligence.

Solution: Over time "the workers" that are hired will be out there with their real ID (and in 2.0 there will be no marketing workers anyway, thank god because it's hard to measure). But in the mean time I propose that a culture of asking tough questions helps. It can be perceived like a fun checking of each others concepts and finding the best truth together.

General Discussion / Active (un)voting initiative

« on: August 26, 2015, 06:19:51 pm »

These are just proposals... Me bringing a few unproductive delegates to the attention of larger bts holders than me:

Bitscape Media delegate: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18080.msg232042.html#msg232042

TradeBts (gulu):
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=17782.0

MineBitshares (6 (!) 100% delegates!)
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,16340.msg232666.html#msg232666

Btw, this is nothing personal... and everyone can come out debating their value in puclic...

List the one you think is not providing value anymore...

EDIT: I have added MineBitshares to my personal list above.Why? Because it has 5 (!!) 100% delegates in the Top 101 and 2 more 100% percent delegates at 102 and 104. I think Jonathan is a good guy with many talents but the total of 7 100% delegates we are talking about here is A LOT OF DILUTION for an unproven marketing effort! See https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,16340.msg232666.html#msg232666
Note that I asked questions first and tried to get an objective measure for effectiveness of this effort. There was no convincing answer.

General Discussion / Building apps on Bitshares

« on: August 24, 2015, 11:21:53 am »

I have a very specific question:

How much and what type of (front end / back end) development work is needed to realize a colored coins application (say a brownie points style gift economy platform) if Bitshares (2.0) already supports these features (user issued assets and trading of them). I know you can do all that just by using the bitshares wallet but in order to commercialize it an entrepreneur would need to market it with that specific use case. So a website / webapplication that offers tools for a brownie points style gift economy an without all the added functionality of the bitshares wallet would make sense.

Would an entrepreneur build his own front end /web wallet or would it make sense to customize the bitshares whitelabel wallet?
And do you see a chance that for the above use case (brownie points style gift economy) adding features to bitshares (shareholder approval needed) might be required?

General Discussion / Two System (private & public) Multisig

« on: August 04, 2015, 09:39:03 am »

The idea is simple: Some big financial corporation or someone that builds an "(financial) industry standard" blockchain wants maximum trustlessness without having to rely on a set of (partly) anonymous validators (miners / witnesses), in other words they don't want to ask the world to trust the bank itself (or a number of banks) but need legal liability (someone who guarantees the finality of tx).

The solution would be to do a "subjective multisig": The bank keeps a ledger (also on a blockchain that is verifiable but with the bank or a few banks as the validators) that settles transactions if they had x confirmations on the public blockchain (say Bitcoin or Bitshares). The rule is: If there is a revision of tx history on the public blockchain that is x-1 blocks or longer or a "more serious problem" (something like a nothing at stake attack where social consensus / intervention on the public chain would be required) with the public ledger occurs the "private ledger" counts, otherwise the public ledger counts.

Remaining questions:
What are "more serious problems" and how objectively would they be detectable?
How would the "synchronization" of public and private ledger work in case there was a tx history revision that was longer than x-1?

My guess is that this is what Counterparty and Eris are doing. Just a guess no actual (insider) information.

...you could even do a several systems multisig. Not a super strong argument but Bitshares has the advantage that its consensus process is relatively unique (no other DPOS chains out there) so it would make sense to use Bitshares as one of the public chains.

...in that sense consensus is a public utility. The utility is the higher the more neutral the system is (no special interest groups that control the consensus process) and the more expensive it would be to corrupt the consensus process.

General Discussion / [Proposal] Long term strategy on fees: % based tx fees

« on: July 24, 2015, 06:42:40 pm »

If the assumption is that (1) we want to keep fees as low as possible so to not deter anybody from using bitshares and (2) we want to maximize revenue (earn as much as possible from tx fees), I would argue that adopting a % based fee is the superior strategy.

Let's say we have 2 transactions tx where we overall want to maximize (1) and (2): Transaction (a) is transferring 1$ and transaction (b) is transferring 1 million $.

-> With a flat fee structure of let's say (simplified) 40 cents per tx we we would deter the users from transaction (a) and we would only earn 40 cents in total from the two transactions.

-> With a % based fee structure, let's say (decreasing % with increasing volume) it would be 10% (should be close to the networks actual costs the lower the volume gets) at 1 $ and 0.01 % at 1 million USD. The network would then earn 10 cents + 100 $.

Summary: A % based fee structure would help to bring the tx fees closer to the perceived value BitShares provides.

Beyond Bitcoin [closed] / Mumble not working

« on: July 24, 2015, 01:45:40 pm »

can't access the mumble server. mumble says the server password (i used "w0rldCh@NG3rsUN!t3") is wrong. I also reinstalled mumble. That happened to me often which is why I rarely attend mumble (besides being busy sometimes). Did anyone have the same problems?
edit: more specifically the error msg is: wrong server password for unregistered users.

Technical Support / Questions on BitAssets in 2.0

« on: July 23, 2015, 10:44:12 pm »

I have a few questions:

I heard BM say that BitAssets can be backed by anything (I assume Bitassets and UIA).

0. Is that officially documented? I didn't find it here https://bitshares.org/technology/price-stable-cryptocurrencies/

1. Does the price calculation of an assets that serves as collateral take liquidity of the assets at a certain price into account? It might be that liquidity is very low where asks and bids meet but high further down one side of the order book. Who decides how much volume / liquidity is sufficient for an asset to servce as collateral?

2. In addition to liquidity assets that may serve as collateral also differ in how volatile they are. How is that taken into account and who decides how much it is taken into account?

2. Does the "any asset can serve as collateral" only apply to private Bitassets?

General Discussion / Aligning incentives between Bitshares and Cryptonomex

« on: July 23, 2015, 07:31:10 pm »

Incentives are relatively well aligned but it could be better. I heard (on mumble) and read (https://bitshares.org/blog/2015/06/15/the-history-of-graphene/) that some core developers had to sell most of their BTS in order to continue to work on Bitshares / Graphene. They basically traded BTS for CNX shares this way because they bought themselves time because they didn't have to work some other job to pay their bills and invested that time into building Cryptonomex.
Bitshares would profit from a CNX team that has aligned incentives with BitShares. For example when deciding whether graphene is used for something that could compete with Bitshares or when negotiating whether someone acquiring a graphene license is honoring BTS etc.

The idea is to partly reverse that trading of BTS for CNX shares again (voluntarily of course, but I will try to show how everyone involved could profit form it below).

Maybe some of the core devs that had to sell lots of BTS and are low in BTS can come forward and explain their situation and what they would want.

What could be done to align incentives more?
1. Some BTS whale (or a few) that is not a CNX shareholder could be found that is willing to exchange some BTS for CNX shares.
2. A fundraiser. Would be preferable to (1) if the participants in the fundraiser would receive CNX shares in return. If not the question is whether enough funds can be acquired with the fundraiser without financial incentives. The disadvantage would be legal questions...

In any case an exchange of BTS for CNY shares would be a plus sum game for...
1) ...the BTS givers because a) they receive CNX shares and b) they create more alignment of interests between BTS and CNX holders which is good for them as BTS holders (see above).
2) ...the CNX holders as they can dampen their investment risk. CNX holders have, especially if they are low in BTS, a much higher percentage of all shares in CNX than of all shares in BitShares. An exchange of CNX shares for BTS would distribute the risk of company/startup failure (risk reduced by 50%).
In addition BTS is much more liquid for the foreseeable future than CNX shares.

Do you agree with the overall goal (aligning incentives)? And what is your opinion on the means of achieving that goal?

Technical Support / Password worked yesterday not today

« on: July 23, 2015, 10:10:32 am »

I post quite frequently in the support section atm. Thanks to anyone who looks at it!

So yesterday I replaced the complete wallet folder in .bitshares with a wallet folder I backed up a while ago. I logged in with a password that is stored in a password manager. That worked.

Today I started the client again and used the same password. This time it didn't work. the client also didn't say that the password is incorrect. When I go to "Accounts" -> "go to my accounts" it also asks me for the password. If I enter the password there it replies that the password would be incorrect.

I have made a backup of the wallet when I was logged in yesterday. When I import the wallet the client just shuts down.

Anything I have overlooked?

Update: I have replaced the wallet folder again with the wallet folder I backed up month ago. Here my password works again. A solution might be to change the password of the wallet but "File" -> "change password" is grey.

Technical Support / Screen problem

« on: July 22, 2015, 08:41:34 am »

When I run the client (linux) the top of the client (with "File" and "Account") is not there and I also can not pull it down

The client seems to be too far up on the screen.
Any idea whether why that is? It might just have to do with Linux, not Bitshares...

Technical Support / Syncing issues

« on: July 19, 2015, 10:19:42 am »

I have compiled the latest Linux client version (0.9.2). I said should because I downloaded it 1 month ago and there was no new release here since then: https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/releases. Is there a formal way to check what version I have?

The issue: I synced and got stuck at 33% yesterday. I have let it sync for the whole night and still was at 33% this morning.
After having deleated the .bitshares folder I started syncing again and I am now stuck at 3% since a few hours.

It says: Severe network problems. Last block synced 355 days and .. hours and ... seconds ago. And that amount of time is growing.

Any ideas?

General Discussion / Technical trading: Time frames

« on: July 06, 2015, 05:18:11 pm »

The bigger / smaller the volume you are trading compared to the daily trading volume the more / less will you move the market. A big volume trader will therefore not be able to profit from small short term swings. A small volume trader can trade all paterns / time frames. I hope that makes sense?

I know a few things about technical trading but not too much... I asked myself whether there is a formula or a rule of thumb that tells you what time frames the patterns should have that you are trading depending on the ratio of your trading volume compared to the daily trading volume of the respective asset. Is anyone are of something like that?