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 - Digital Lucifer

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 25
121
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: dls.cipher
« on: July 29, 2019, 09:45:15 am »
GDEX is a gateway, magicwallet is a mobile wallet, I am the founder of GDEX, but just one of the investors of magicwallet.

in my view, one key factor on whether to support one witness is to check how well the price feeding is done. currently this differenciate witnesses.

the income of BTS witness is not so big.

Currently it isn't, i agree, and thanks for clarifying on your position about both, as i said - all info was collected/acquired personally by me.

Votes amended, GDEX has vote.

Re salary/BP income -> its more perspective than topic for discussion. E.g. I work entire month for around 2500$, while BP's are (at current price of BTS) work much less for more than half of my income that is totaling from 2 diff. workers. If we take "common" price of 7 cents it would be even more, so I'm looking here into fairness between parties doing work around blockchain.

122
TOP! I'll correct myself and real apology goes to Jerry (bitcrab). Thank you for finally hearing me out.

no need for apology, if you can I'd like to see you lobby more big proxies to support 1.5 as bitUSD MSSR. :)

It seems pretty impossible at the moment - as for atomic swaps, wallet UI and a lot of other very GOOD and NEEDED proposals, so I've decided to submit myself for proxy :)

123

The main message of this paper will be that the specific choice of MCR and MSSR can have some strong and surprising effects on the risky behavior of BitAsset shorts (collateral holders), and that a small change in MCR can have a massive effect on the likelihood of a short position becoming undercollateralized. For example, I have one set of simulations that shows that changing the MCR from 1.6 to 1.5 can make undercollateralization 134 times more likely. Now, I'll point out that this doesn't mean I'm going to panic and immediately write a BSIP to argue for MCRs of 1.6; instead, it motivates me to look deeper into this phenomenon and start to understand how we can protect against it without harming liquidity and pegging. As many will be quick to point out, there is certainly a tradeoff involved here: reducing MCR from 1.6 to 1.5 may make the BitAsset less risky, but it will also make people more willing to provide collateral for it, which should improve price pegging. Understanding how to balance these tradeoffs wisely is a major focus of this project.


voted, very interested in how the simulation is done and what further conclusion is reached.

TOP! I'll correct myself and real apology goes to Jerry (bitcrab). Thank you for finally hearing me out.

124
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: dls.cipher
« on: July 29, 2019, 08:53:27 am »
Committee - only with opinion set to Yes with no explanation. Committee is non-paid position around BitShares and they have to work together. Current Committee list is yet to prove itself for activities in 2019, but until then - here are my options:

abit
baozi
bitcrab
evangelist-of-bts
fav
johnr
openledgerdc
roelandp
xeroc

125
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: dls.cipher
« on: July 29, 2019, 08:53:15 am »
Workers - only the ones I'm currently supporting.

ID: 1.14.164
Name: 201902-infrastructure
Reason: Since late 2017/early 2018 - this was the first worker that holders voted in to increase stability and fix issues from the past (out of sync, failed to broadcast transaction, etc.). Team personally provided top-notch reporting and despite my initial fud has proven over past 1,5 year to be amazing addition that improves not just stability but availability of the blockchain across the globe. Will continue support as long as they continue to hold/renew workers.

ID: 1.14.159
Name: 201902-reference-faucet
Reason: Its the main reason why we have "free accounts' and also ONLY worker that is PROFITABLE to the blockchain. Service of this faucet has been here for long and it deserves to be funded by Consensus/blockchain, not privately for the benefits of blockchain. Glad to see its top voted worker.

ID: 1.14.186
Name: 201904-hackthedex
Reason: It's good to have it around. Every software development company is having actual department of these guys who will penetrate and try to violate any piece of software company produce. Dev teams around blockchain are busy enough with on-going development. Making funds available for pen-testers to help us improve our security on overall basis on all code we have - ITS A MUST AND ITS BEEN MANAGED CORRECT WAY.

ID: 1.14.183
Name: 201905-wirex-integration
Reason: This will be first actual move to global mass adoption as integration. BitShares has never been integrated into anything apart to CEX's, which is completely not point of fastest technology/blockchain around. Bringing BTS to card/payment processors is what will drive masses if not to use it, at least to learn more about it. Wirex is brand within top 3 positions around that industry.

ID: 1.14.209
Name: 201907-steemfest
Reason: We've been through hell and back together in a way. Roeland enabling this bridge to still work (BitShares & Steem) is amazing effort. I see it as a fun for people to meet and know more and to enable more marketing for BitShares.

ID: 1.14.206
Name: 2019-06-decentralized-partnership
Reason: It's first official partnership announcement BitShares ever had, and it's 100% beneficial for BitShares. Having in mind that we seen Decentralized 2018, with this current one we can only grow more in the right target of the right industry.

ID: 1.14.203
Name: NABTS2019
Reason: Same as Decentralized, but with different approach - this is amazing addition to enable coverage on global/world-wide scale in 2019. Great approach and effort for better branding of BitShares in US.

ID: 1.14.199
Name: DEXBot WP3 - Liquidity for the DEX
Reason: It does what it says - Liquidity for the DEX ever since 2018. If you were long enough around, you would know that we had one in the past that ended up abandoned. Thanks to Cabinet team we got even better tool than before.

ID: 1.14.198
Name: 201906-bitshares-mobile-app
Reason: Compared to Rossul and what i've seen around as attempts/offers this is the best alternative with mobile version of current Wallet UI which includes a lot of functionalities of the blockchain. Team was very collaborative to help bitshares.org worker in terms of legal and proper publishing of app (yet to come). Not to mention that team handed over source-code along with this worker to the GitHub BitShares organization.

126
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Proxy: dls.cipher
« on: July 29, 2019, 08:53:00 am »
Witnesses

1. gdex-witness

Voting:
Yes,
Reason: After discussion with Jerry (bitcrab) and explanation about his position around GDEX & MWallet vote is back. As GDEX has been active exchange with enough liquidity/volumes to be on a pair with OL.

2. in.abit

Voting:
Yes,
Reason: It's one of the "Top Dog's" for years around main development of bitshares-core, various BSIP's and stability/future of this blockchain. It would be idiotic not to vote for him. If you're not voting him, you should.

3. btspp-witness
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: These guys HANDED over responsive, both ENG/CN version of mobile wallet for BitShares and are actually being part of it. Worker or not, they should earn and they've been a dedicated team around.   

4. bangzi
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: Even if i tend to disagree of few ocassions in his public opinions around here that doesn't make him poor/wrong candidate for a block producer. Maybe it's language barrier, maybe its different set of opinions, but he has been producing blocks for long time without issues.
   
5. magicwallet.witness
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: MagicWallet is fiat enabled bitCNY/CNY product/service which is one of the biggest achievements around - thanks (huge kudos) bitcrab for it. We should fund it at least through BP to show true support to one of the good gateway operators around.
    
6. openledger-dc
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: Ronny OpenLedger was actually first DEX around new BitShares. Since there was no way that US company such is CNX could start one, BM and co. did smart move making collaboration with OL on that time. If nothing, we should show respect on amount of time spent around here. Not to mention that OL holds best hardware around API/BP's.

7. xn-delegate
Voting:
No,
Reason: There is not topic for the witness and it links to btsgo.net which is another Chinese revamp of DEX with very broken node list.
Possible solution: Create proper topic, update your witness, explain the value you bring to the community and I would be voting for it.
   
8. zapata42-witness
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: Monster dev and addition to blockchain. Fork and revamped xeroc pricefeed script in early stage that is currently being used - i personally believe by 70% of active witnesses. Stable and solid Block producer.
   
9. fox
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: Ryan R. Fox is a name that just sound when saying it rings up all the achievements around and efforts in and around BitShares. If you're not aware of some, just google up his name and start going one by one. Core team manager - manager of witness group and core releases.
   
10. delegate.freedom
Voting:
No,
Reason: URL leads to this forum without specific topic. What, why and who is Freedom its not even easy to find out. Proper introduction and more social/report activity as a witness should encourage proxies to vote and newcomers to feel safe about who they are voting on.

11. delegate-zhaomu
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: Self-explanatory from his witness topic.
   
12. verbaltech2
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: Thom has been here for a while and despite disagreements that exists - he has been sharp as a Block Producer and providing witness reports for very looong time, that I not see many (almost none) of BP's do. As a reliable veteran, as long as he wants to do this task - everyone should support him. I see no reason to not support him.

13. xman
Voting:
No,
Reason: Another Chinese exchange built on top with 0 volumes on their assets and activity. Why we are supporting it when they do nothing about it by themselves - i'm clueless. No topic or person to discuss with.
   
14. xeldal
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: Has been around here since 2014 and haven't seen any issues in his work as Block Producer.    

15. roelandp
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: Known for price-tracking on witnesses, long-term block producer, passionate supporter and believer of 2 very first Graphene products.    

16. bhuz
Voting:
No,
Reason: No topic, not even google search returned anything. I just don't have idea who is the person/Block Producer.
   
17. witness.yao
Voting:
No,
Reason: Proper introduction in both languages, proper activity at some period, but haven't seen any activity around here for past 3 months. Vote removed, as soon as person become active again - vote will be restored.
   
18. witness.hiblockchain
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: BTS.ai and his block production deserves a bit more than bottom of the list of active block producers in my HUMBLE OPINION. By being a proxy it might change.

19. delegate-1.lafona
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: Lafona is here since 2017, been very good at job of Block Producer and is still active around forums/community. Should update witness to provide existing URL of submission topic (Also another block producer that deserves more than bottom of the list)

20. blckchnd
Voting:
Yes,
Reason: Top block producer of various Graphene forks, great developers and devoted group around BitShares - also running one of the Faucet for onboarding new accounts. Sad to see its just a backup block producer.

127
Stakeholder Proposals / Proxy: dls.cipher
« on: July 29, 2019, 08:31:53 am »
Dear BitShares,

I've been active here since 2017 and am involved full-time with BitShares. Seeing what happened in past 2 years, how we shifted from voting apathy to proxy mess, divided communities between East and West, GS for voting on wrong BSIP's, Right and Wrong, for-profit and non-profit to the point where CEX cold wallets are giving us power to manipulate blockchain... I'm not happy with most of it, but I'm still here, fighting in my own way (bag-less) to make BitShares a better place.

Proxy spotlights of 2019: this year Alt (and Thule) came back from the dead and did some quality proxy work. Have to say that OL and MichaelX also supported chain lately in a no different way. On the other hand, xeroc lost his position, as many others, during the BTS lockdown of BEOS rainfall, and many more are completely inactive ( => still voting apathy).

For the others we know already - no need to mention, just keep doing the good/hard work or start doing a better one - it's never too late for a change.

MY CURRENT WORKERS(2018-2019):
I hold 2 workers, and 2 more are coming. All workers I hold are here for the benefits of the BitShares network, holders and wider Community.

Worker 1.14.126 - BitShares.org domain/website management worker (worker focuses on bitshares.org new website, dns services and legality around it, emails, support, news.bitshares.org and is constantly working on better SEO/reach towards domain)
Worker 1.14.173 - BitShares.org Exotic Infra worker with currently 20 API mainnet nodes ( check STATUS PAGE )

And I'll be pushing Community UI Part 2 and Professional Support Center workers very soon.

- I WILL USE MY PROXY POWER TO VOTE ON MY OWN WORKERS.  (Anyone setting me as proxy should be giving the trust in my current work and plans for the future and it's not conflict of interests)
- I HAVE NOTHING TO SHILL AROUND BITSHARES. NEVER HAD NEVER DID NEVER WILL. I DON'T SUPPORT FORKS AND I'M HERE TO STAY.

BitShares over the past 2 years became my home, my business, my baby, my school, my friend, and much more... Many of you veterans know very well that feeling and how sometimes it hurts to see injustice around. Proxies should be here to adjust it. To see better tomorrow for everyone, not just for themselves or markets where they're sitting in as whales.

As most active chain regarding development and innovations, I truly believe that with all those workers who should be incentives for proxies to vote, we proxies should also provide incentive towards new workers to move up and stay around. Nobody wants to spend time working on a project that will suddenly lose funding (become inactive) and nobody wants to come back to the same client/employer who already damaged him in the past. We don't want to be that client/employer anymore. At least I don't.

Below (in next post) are my 100% PRIVATE OPINIONS and are based on WHAT I DID FOUND, LEARNED, KNOW, RESEARCHED or WITNESSED TO (EXPERIENCED). Some of them are lacking of info, and if I'm wrong about anyone/anything please correct me - that's why this topic is here.

We have a lot to do, support and discuss - even not being paid for it, but it's our choice. If you changed your mind or you can't do your proxy job well, step out with some dignity and let others step in to do better job if they want.

I'm humble enough to play no God or pretend to be perfect cause im not (nobody is), been wrong many times in the past and will listen to reason to improve myself always.
But, I'll always deliver and do my part correct/right way.


Chee®s

128
I'm well under way generating preliminary results for the potential Decentralized 2019 paper. If all goes well, this may be the first publication resulting from this project, and will pose several of the important questions that we will focus on.

The main message of this paper will be that the specific choice of MCR and MSSR can have some strong and surprising effects on the risky behavior of BitAsset shorts (collateral holders), and that a small change in MCR can have a massive effect on the likelihood of a short position becoming undercollateralized. For example, I have one set of simulations that shows that changing the MCR from 1.6 to 1.5 can make undercollateralization 134 times more likely. Now, I'll point out that this doesn't mean I'm going to panic and immediately write a BSIP to argue for MCRs of 1.6; instead, it motivates me to look deeper into this phenomenon and start to understand how we can protect against it without harming liquidity and pegging. As many will be quick to point out, there is certainly a tradeoff involved here: reducing MCR from 1.6 to 1.5 may make the BitAsset less risky, but it will also make people more willing to provide collateral for it, which should improve price pegging. Understanding how to balance these tradeoffs wisely is a major focus of this project.

To support our work, please speak with your proxy and ask them to vote for worker 1.14.204, "201907-uccs-research-project."

Many thanks to the proxies who are currently voting for our proposal:
  • evangelist-of-bts
  • openledger
  • xeroc
  • beos
  • clockwork
  • fractalnode
  • abit
  • bitshareseurope
  • bitspark-delegate

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=28670 - re MCR 1.5 bitUSD

You should also buzz bitcrab for vote, how privately that publicly, he is a bit ignorant towards any other worker than his own, but in this case - pretty much aligned opinions between two of you.

Chee®s

129
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Poll] BSIP59:Reduce MCR of bitUSD to 1.5
« on: July 29, 2019, 05:28:58 am »
I would be supporting 1.5 as the final low MCR for bitUSD.

bitcrab

a) You should start voting on anything else apart your own workers as a whale who is crying why other whales don't support yours one. E.g. If you ever took time to read University Colorado research worker on BitUSD assets, you would be able to understand - THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE WHO THINK LIKE YOU.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=28542.msg332738#msg332738 - biophil explains in details why from economical and liquidity reasons bitUSD should have MCR 1.5. You - not voting on that worker. Shame.

b) "now my team advices not to vote, sorry." - Sounds like OL.

c) "I am conservative, not tend to support this" - Sounds like a core dev that was here from the birth of chain and respect that "minimum 180% collateral" as a letter in Bible. Should respect that - devs usually have no backgrounds in economics or trading to understand these efforts.

d) "some whales tend to accumulate bitUSD, they benefit from the scarcity of bitUSD and do not like the growing of supply." - George BitSpark for instance.


There is no need for some this, some that - we are here for transparency, right ?

So, since you all proxies are total mess when it comes to unity for the benefits for the blockchain, please exit that nugshell of yours and start voting AND PARTICIPATING other workers around.

I do support 1.5 as LOWEST MCR for bitUSD, but no more.

Chee®s

130
Why does all the links for the page for "BitShares Asset Exchange" link to Open Ledger?
Currently redirects users to https://bitshares.openledger.info/*

It also links to http://cryptofresh.com/assets, shouldn't this be https://bitshares.org?

It also seems there is a warning posted for all listings for the exchange.

Quote
Please visit the exchange's website for details regarding scheduled downtime.

I'll be reaching out CMC directly using my bitshares.org email on behalf of Move Institute. I'll cc Fabian and Ryan as well. After initial response from them we can organize better who needs to do what. Basically i'll ask for extension, explain our community/holders process (consensus) and force update of data there.

If anyone is against this action, 6 hours from this message complaints are acceptable. We have 11 days left, and I'm not into time-wasting when it comes to something this important.

"Prevent rather than cure".

Chee®s

131
General Discussion / Re: New BSIP:GS protection via core code
« on: July 21, 2019, 08:43:05 pm »
Agree on that "manipulation" part from Abit.

And lets clear it up once and for all.

We have "bad debt" situation. In real life, if i wanna lend someone cash he needs to provide security (car, house, depends on the cash). If he fails to return the debt per agreement, he loses his security and debt is "cleared".

Why it's such a problem here to recreate same event ?

Simplified definition by me:
MANIPULATION would be something done for personal/selfish/unfair interests of individual or certain group, while here it would be MANAGEMENT for the safety of entire population.

You can all google up both terms for better and more refined definition, but facts are facts.

Lets do simple test:

- Block producers are being manipulated in order to keep their job ->> Block producers are being managed in order to keep their job.
- CNY market is manipulated by Chinese. ->> CNY market is managed by Chinese.
- Price feeds are manipulated by BTS Holders through block producers. ->> Price feeds are managed through block producers by BTS Holders.

Back to point from Abit:

IF IT DOES THE JOB AND SAVE THE DAY WHO THE F**K CARES WHAT TERM YOU WILL USE AS EXCUSE FOR THIS OR ANYTHING ELSE ?

This is not science anymore, it's turning into bullshit and endless drama.

Bad debts are the problem, core needs mechanics to deal with them more efficiently.

Remove the bad debts and we will get liquidity back to bitUSD as well.

End of discussion from my perspective.

Chee®s

132
Phase 1 (Exchanges): Trade and order book data
[Mandatory by June 14, 2019]
To start, the following data will become mandatory for all exchanges, broadening the span of data users can infer on the site:

Live trading data: Ongoing live trade data provided via API (example)
Live order book data: Ongoing order book data provided via API (example)
These data points will enable analyses to determine measures such as liquidity, order book depth, spreads, and other meaningful measures. With these additional data points, users will be better able to contextualize the pricing and volume being reported on the site and API.

Any exchange that does not provide this mandatory data to us via a new or updated summary endpoint will be excluded from all price and adjusted volume calculations on the site.

There is a 45-day grace period for all exchanges to send this new endpoint to us, and changes will go into effect on June 14, 2019.

Phase 2 (Exchanges): Enhanced data and metrics
For phase 2, we are planning to grow the types of data available for analysis and enable filtering to allow deeper analyses and views into the exchanges’ operations.

Exchange hot/cold wallet addresses: Proof of Solvency/Reserves/Liabilities, or at least indicative numbers to enable users to determine solvency of selected exchange
Live market-pair trading status (example “status” field): More granular trading data at the market-pair level for further analysis
Live wallet status (example “can_deposit” and “can_withdraw” fields): Summary status of all possible deposits and withdrawals across currencies
Historical trade data (example): All time-stamped historical trades for tracking, and in some cases, compliance
While these are not finalized yet, DATA partners have pledged to observe and fulfill these new conditions if they are required.

Phase 3 (Exchanges & Crypto projects): Self-reported information
To give every project on the site a chance to demonstrate the effort it has put into promoting accountability and transparency, we will be introducing self-reporting channels for projects to provide additional information.

We stress that these are purely voluntary reporting, and every field is optional.
The level to which each project self-reports the data will be factored into its ranking. This is in line with DATA’s intent to incentivize greater levels of disclosure and transparency without the need for censorship or arbitrary judgment calls.
Projects already listed on CoinMarketCap that do not self-report additional information will continue to be listed without prejudice.
These are the fields that will be introduced, for cryptocurrencies and exchanges respectively (subject to changes/additions):

For cryptocurrencies:

Industry/Sector
Platform (e.g. Ethereum, Stellar, Neo)
Consensus Algorithm
Team information
LinkedIn URLs, team page
Investor information
Supply schedule (with block explorer links and reserve addresses)
Github/Developer Activity
Traction/Progress updates/Partnerships/MVP/Independent media coverage
Community/Social initiatives
Location
Project team
Company registration – Business registration proof online
User base breakdown (by geography)
Targeted
Existing
History of Rebrands
History of Swaps
Licenses
Milestones/News
Events
Major project milestones/news (e.g. halvenings, swaps, announcements)
Community/conference events
Available jobs at the project
For exchanges:

Launch Date
Tagging (e.g. centralized / DEX / derivatives, fiat on/off-ramps, trading incentives)
API documentation
Summary API endpoint
Account Termination/Freezing policies
Exchange should support direct links to specific market pairs without the need to log-in
CMC ID mapping (to minimize confusion arising from projects sharing identical tickers)
Team/Backers information
LinkedIn URLs, team page
Traction/Progress updates/Partnerships/MVP/Independent media coverage
Global page rank/traffic
Community/Social initiatives
Registered business address
Company registration – Business registration proof online
Licenses
User base breakdown (by geography)
Targeted
Existing
Cybersecurity measures
Fiat on/off-ramps (please specify the fiat pairs)
Fee structure
Trading Incentives (e.g. transaction mining, zero fees)
KYC (None | Optional/Tiered | Mandatory)
OTC/Derivatives (e.g. Options, Futures, CFD, Leverage/Margin)
History of Rebrands
Milestones/News
Events
Major project milestones/news (e.g. halvenings, swaps, announcements)
Community/conference events
Available jobs at the project
________________________________________________________________


What's update on this ? Have we sent all requirements (i can see CMC ok)



133
General Discussion / LJK424 HAS BEEN BANNED!
« on: July 15, 2019, 08:46:05 am »
User Ljk424,

received 7 days BAN from posting for his very un-ethical and very non-professional behavior around ecosystem.

If any Admin/Moderator have objections, please state reason for BAN removal before you do so, ill be monitoring logs.

I'm available by PM here or Telegram.

Appreciate if we craft basic rules on posting that will not include insults, fud and crazy talk that is completely unreasonable. Keep in mind we are not only one reading these topics.

On behalf of all reasonable BTS holders and fellow colleagues,

Chee®s

P.S. Latest example of behavior just 20 minutes after a very fair warning to not do so.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=28658.0

134
You've been warned over 10 times in past 60 days and as from it now,

You are having 7 days BAN until you sort out yourself or get basic manners somehow.


135
Daniel Schwarz (liondani) has been PMed as well.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 25