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 - santaclause102

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 166
121
General Discussion / Re: Let's Lower Trading Fee
« on: October 22, 2015, 11:00:41 am »
The trading fe is about 5 US cents atm which NO trader cares about! Traders have 0.1 % upwards on the volume of their trades (roughly) on centralized exchanges. On the other side these fees can be a substantial income stream to fund development.

Plus there is the subjective perception that things only have value if the cost something.

So it is clear to me that lowering fees, especially trading fees, has more cons than pros.

122
Technical Support / Re: Privacy warning
« on: October 22, 2015, 10:26:34 am »
Quote from: xeroc on October 22, 2015, 10:18:43 am
Quote from: delulo on October 16, 2015, 12:11:17 pm
So first create an account with a random account name and then import my keys from my BTS 1 wallet? If I do this does it matter to the purpose of keeping my privacy whether my BTS1 account name from which I exported the keys that I now import is linked to my identity?   
Account names in BTS1 are not linked to the balances/funds you are going to claim.
That is exactly what I needed to to know :)

123
General Discussion / Re: Pseudo market research about transaction fees in BTS2
« on: October 21, 2015, 04:15:26 pm »
jakub, can you make the poll to include the possibility to view results without having to vote? (otherwise people that dont have anything to say vote just to see the results)

124
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares Poker
« on: October 21, 2015, 01:36:12 pm »
For a Bitshares poker project you shoudl contact the OP of this post: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,14372.0.html

He wrote up a very insightful post but seems to have deleted the content again.

125
General Discussion / Re: Charles Hoskinson on Virgin Media talking about Cryptocurrencies
« on: October 20, 2015, 05:33:59 pm »
Quote from: IOHKCharles on October 20, 2015, 05:26:55 pm
It requires vetting because first the model is unique and interesting and could benefit from brilliant minds iterating and refining. You get this for free after the bootstrap. Second, the system is experimental and thus cannot be safely used by legacy systems and actors sensitive to risk.

The more peer review the model gets, the more adoption and respect your system gets. Notice how the bitcoin core developers grudgingly accept ethereum's contributions? The entire valley is rushing to have a smart contract solution? But they do not acknowledge that bitshares has a value stable currency? They never discuss DPoS. This isn't a conspiracy it's a lack of respect for the project because the rules keep changing and the technology never is properly explained or vetted. You can ignore this or say I'm wrong but it doesn't change the reality of the matter.

Quote
It.. does ?

Yes notice the only PhD on the project left? Dr. Charles Evans
I totally agree! But this academic game is, besides the real and free value it brings, a social game. Science often is a way to make something socially acceptable.
But you are totally right, much could be done here. On the other side it's a trade of between fast iteration and keeping the social proof up. I would claim that Ethereum did many things right in the latter category but is left behind technology wise compared to Bitshares ALTHOUGH someone that operates within the constraints of social proof can't admid it ;)

126
General Discussion / Re: Fee Adjustments
« on: October 20, 2015, 05:27:30 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on October 20, 2015, 05:24:33 pm
Percent based fees are slightly more complex to implement universally, especially with user issued assets for which the network has no idea what the value being transferred is.
hmm I get that. Maybe a long term goal like you said on mumble...

127
General Discussion / Re: Open Ledger Market Pages Updated
« on: October 20, 2015, 04:58:07 pm »
Nice!  +5%

Two things that don't work for me:

- The scroll bar on the right side is hard to use: First I wasnt sure whether the bar is actually black or white and what to grab on. It could be thicker and always there to make it easier to grab it.
- The skin / design is too dark / black for my taste.

128
General Discussion / Re: Fee Adjustments
« on: October 20, 2015, 04:49:57 pm »
Quote from: lzr1900 on October 20, 2015, 04:09:54 pm
这么高的手续费，你自己玩去吧。
I transfer 100000bts,cost me 40 bts fee
I transfer 1 bts,cost me 40 bts fee,too.
why don't adjust by the amount

I'd suggest percentage based fees where the increase in fees decreases exponentially (not sure i expressed that accurately but what I mean is: liniear growth of the fee first and the higher the tx volume is the less does it increase). The result would be that there would either be a limit regarding total tx fees or the fee would hardly increase the higher it gets. I m not a mathmatician :)

See the general proposal here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=17721.0

129
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: fav - Journal
« on: October 20, 2015, 01:17:05 pm »
This proxy wittness monitoring is so incredible valuable! Thanks fav!  +5% +5% +5%

130
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: jakub - better execution / implementation / communication of BM's ideas
« on: October 20, 2015, 12:06:07 pm »
Quote from: jakub on October 20, 2015, 11:07:50 am
Quote from: delulo on October 20, 2015, 10:13:06 am
I really like the potential of proxies.
It took me a while to realize how important the proxy concept is.
It's a practical tool to exercise our power to influence the BTS short-term and long-term strategy as opposed to the theoretical power we had before.
(It's worth noting that in 0.x we had a similar concept of voting slates but to me it was too obscure and not clearly promoted on the GUI level)

Quote from: delulo on October 20, 2015, 10:13:06 am
One simple service to shareholders you could do is to identify which identity (real world or forum id) the delegates (maybe we could establish "delegate" as a term that encompasses witnesses, committee members and workers; helpful of one tries to refer to all three!) and belong to if that is not obvious. The two candidates from your list I have in mind are: bhuz and mrs.agsexplorer.
This takes away a lot of effort (research /ask what ids these belong to) that would have been done by each shareholder indidvually (more or less) otherwise.
I'm looking forward to dposhub being released as I see it as a perfect tool to implement identity differentiation between the delegates.
Right now all I could do is go through the October 5 Test Network thread and check who was doing what.

Undoubtedly @fav is doing a great job of micromanaging the witnesses but I won't be able to approach this level of detail.
Hopefully this won't be necessary once 2.0 settles down.
A natural consequence to me would be to integrate a froum with BTS, a forum (social media focused) webwallet / front end application for Bitshares (as opposed to the exchange interface of openledger). See https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=17388.0

131
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: jakub - better execution / implementation / communication of BM's ideas
« on: October 20, 2015, 10:13:06 am »
I really like the potential of proxies. One simple service to shareholders you could do is to identify which identity (real world or forum id) the delegates (maybe we could establish "delegate" as a term that encompasses witnesses, committee members and workers; helpful of one tries to refer to all three!) and belong to if that is not obvious. The two candidates from your list I have in mind are: bhuz and mrs.agsexplorer.
This takes away a lot of effort (research /ask what ids these belong to) that would have been done by each shareholder indidvually (more or less) otherwise.

132
Openledger / Re: os.merkabahnk.io will join OpenLedger's Network
« on: October 19, 2015, 05:39:29 pm »
Welcome! 

This is one of the best looking websites I have seen related to Bitshares! All referal revenue be well earned ;)

Did I understand that right that you gonna use a bitshares private bitasset for the outcome of the Colombian Peace Treaty? That would be a premiere I guess!

133
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Please vote for banxio witness node
« on: October 19, 2015, 05:31:31 pm »
Quote from: ByronP on October 19, 2015, 04:43:51 pm
Yes I am the dev of banx.io, you don't have to support banx capital but supporting my node is good for bitshares and my projects. You would be voting for me as a developer since I am spending a lot of time on bitshares projects.
Thanks for the info.
Are you aware of the distinction between witnesses and workers? The witness pay is barely enough to maintain the server (atm) I guess.

134
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Please vote for banxio delegate
« on: October 19, 2015, 12:54:06 pm »
Does banxio have something to do with banx capital?

135
General Discussion / Re: Banx, future plans and BTS
« on: October 19, 2015, 12:52:57 pm »
Quote
I realise some people who are part of the BTS community are not fans or myself and Banx
All my critique was never directed towards you as a person but to your products and the way you sell things. You can sell something in two ways, both of which require trust. You can tell them everything you know, the good and the bad (often hard truth that don't look all rosy) or you can try to create an illusion. banxplatinum to mee (certainly subjective) is of the second sort, see https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17148.msg244528.html#msg244528

But there is nothing wrong at all with offering anything. Everyone is free to do whatever he / she wants - for you to offer what you do in the way you do and for me to point things out to people as I see them :)  I just think that officially associating Bitshares / CNX with Banx is not desireable for reasons I pointed out above.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 166

Page created in 0.206 seconds with 24 queries.