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 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22
Ladies and gents,

As many of you know, we've been running few nodes for a while (not listed in wallet most of them, but publicly shared and used through various channels). That Collaboration and Contribution will come to an end, unless we can keep those nodes and continue even more professional management through the agreement with BitShares DAC and approval of it's stake-holders through this offer as a Worker Proposal :

Worker is currently not on-chain and here is brought for initial discussion.

We will provide within 24 hours costs (invoices/receipts) that we have paid until now (~$14.800,00) as proof of contribution and ownership/existence of all nodes (even more), Premium SSL Certificates, Testing and Development servers, Current online status of servers (not bitshares api - as half of them requires an upgrade we can't finance), and whatever else is needed or requested by the stake-holders and respected proxies.

P.S. I've personally consider current Witness contribution, BBF active worker and this worker something that would greatly improved stability and performance on much greater global scale and enabled more users to join.


Great work as always and miss chatting with you in TG! No worries, im gonna be off there as well... It kills productivity beyond anything human can bare with.

General Discussion / Re: Internalizing the Hero
« on: July 22, 2018, 10:48:55 am »
Well, thats the tricky part with Committee. They dont have to discuss nothing in public or rely on stake-holder opinion/votes, apart at the only point where those are giving them vote to become Committee. That's also a loophole in Consensus that gives Committee position that goes against transparency.

It's how it is, we can't change it, but any bitAsset should be discussed publicly before any rush decisions. We have a lot of interested party here in growing any part of BitShares blockchain, in many different aspects.

How I got updated with knowledge now, Hero's biggest problem is no high demand, no maintenance and no legal paperwork.

If this can go through as public discussion and generate some idea from it, hit it

General Discussion / Re: Internalizing the Hero
« on: July 22, 2018, 01:18:56 am »

I'm very dissappointed in the "transparency" we bow everyday on this blockchain. Before i start, to be clear:

1) I've spent months investing my time to explain to CNX that they need to make more compromise with the blockchain to restore order and peace. - Check, believe it or not, comparing to December 2017, much more peace and positive progress t the moment. We should keep it that way.

2) I do consider random decision of Committee against initial creator of the Asset, investment followed 1 year and all pre-investors to it, is harsh and unfair. China is trading bitCNY currently with 2.5M USD worth BTS as part of Spring Team project. Is bitCNY legally represented and defined somewhere, or maybe even just in China ? I'm sure that close relations that Thailand has with China and local lawyer can formal statement on it - re bitCNY status. BitAsset is considered valuable and backed asset by BTS and rejection of it, from blockchain itself - not seems normal.

3) I do encourage BitAssets. As John Robert (Conlin), Alex and everyone who has 2 gram of brain does. Compared to all of Stan's other projects, i consider personally bitHero his greatest and most legal achievement in BitShares.

4) Fav - nothing personal - but when I've joined the network 2017 you were holding Hero group in TG and being loud about it same as you are loud now against it. As professional, you being Committee member, involved in bitHero and now going against it is clearly, if not personal, professional conflict of interest and i would be requesting both Committee and yourself to exclude your voice/opinion from the topic - not for my sake, but to avoid more fud between you and Stan, that never ends well...

5) I will wait on Fabian to wakes up and hopefully to give me more details on bitHero, including some details on Whitepaper and rest, and if doable - Move Institute will be happy to transfer ownership to itself for mentioned asset with prior to that signed agreement with whoever is original asset issuer. We can turn it to very normal asset with very decent campaign, legal to

In normal terms if this would be considered Security or legal issue, issuer of the Asset should be immediately contacted and requested for legal documentation. I know we dont have that process defined, but as Committee members you should be better at business management or you not need to be a Committee member. Its my legal right and responsibility of domain that my subdomain and its dex are hosting content and tokens i never approved or they are respecting legal I'm very funny to see that you are doing this to native BitAsset but still dont make problem about hundreds of illegal UIA'a from baloney "legal" gateways circulating our network without single backed BTS or any safety for our users behind, actually not investing to our blockchain but earning from it.

We will come to that point as well.


Committee - to explain decision made in the background and to wait with decision against issuer.
Issuer (Cryptonomex if I understand this well) - To contact me or Move Institute (Zavod Premik) for legal discussion and arrangements for transferring ownership (threshold) for the Asset.

Offcourse unless there is proof that BitHero was illegally used or harmed blockchain in any way. Will wait Committee for answer.

Many thanks.
P.S. If you wanna reply to me that i support Stan for any reason of .org ownership or whatever, reminder, not long ago i was publicly going against Stan in TG when he was wrong. I'm taking as always NO SIDE, except to hold side of the Blockchain.

Technical Support / Re: Public testnet is not working?
« on: July 20, 2018, 02:41:31 pm » is pointing to but its not working? Is there no longer a public testnet available? is pointing to a domain without ssl (http), while testnet MUST have ssl (https) like .eu does.

Problem: Link in outdated documentation as per disclaimer.

I would also like to ask why the rest of Committee is not welcoming new member proposal and fees discussion ?

I see few of them active around but not in this specific thread for a week, is that a way to welcome new initiatives ?

LTM Users too, they'll only get 50% instead of 80% cashback.
Right .. that's somewhat of a show stopper assuming LTM upgrades were made with the expectation to spare 80% of the fees .. :-/
I'd say, the most fair approach, if committee chooses to change network percentage was to have it changed independent of the other fees and have a proposal expire after 4 weeks. That at least gives everyone sufficient time to do their math ..

I support the limit order fee increase. I would suggest that the prominent gateways specifically get informed on that with a weeks notice to adjust their market fees. Additionally, if the committee feels like network fee % is a to deep-cutting decision the BTS holders can always be asked.

Since we are setting up Newsletter and Support departments for new - Committee can have department to issue newsletter/updates to gateways who submitted their respective legal contacts for it. If they not comply with it, in worst case can be delisted from

I support fully these movements towards more success for BitShares as Priority 1 - enforcing some Compliance with 3rd parties.

It is ready for grading, but later additions that are less integral to the lore correctness of this proposal are planned.

I don't understand what you are saying here, could you please elaborate?

It's a spam bot. I've been sending Fav PM's on Telegram but he has not removed it yet. :D

use the report link please

Hahaha, ok i'll raise blind :)


It is ready for grading, but later additions that are less integral to the lore correctness of this proposal are planned.

I don't understand what you are saying here, could you please elaborate?

It's a spam bot. I've been sending Fav PM's on Telegram but he has not removed it yet. :D

Hey everybody!

A couple months ago, while working with the UI/app team in my spare time, I realized that we don't have a formalized method for reporting serious vulnerabilities.

If a security researcher/hacker found a critical bug in the DEX, they might be tempted to exploit the bug, and attempt to steal funds from unsuspecting users. Without a public bug bounty system, hackers do not have an obvious path of disclosure for reporting their findings. They also do not have any incentive to share their exploits and techniques, rather than using them for personal gain.

With this proposal, we’d like to start a BitShares bug bounty program for security researchers and penetration testers (...aka hackers!) to disclose important security vulnerabilities they find within the BitShares core protocol, reference wallet, and related code repositories.

The proposal will use allocated funds to reward those that step forward with exploits, relative to the overall risk assessment of the exploit. The higher the payout for critical bugs, the more incentive there will be to attract higher quality researchers, and ultimately providing better security coverage for the DEX.

Funds will also be used to build and maintain a website ( for reporting vulnerabilities. The website will include all the information needed for researchers to report a vulnerability, as well as an archive of bounty reports and a leaderboard to encourage a little friendly hacker competition. It will also lay the groundwork for future HackTheDEX worker proposals to improve the security and safety of BitShares as a whole.

Thanks to coordination with the foundation, worker proposal funds will be held in a BBF escrow account and unused funds will be refunded back to the network at the end of the proposal period.

For your consideration:


-- Matt

Glad to see this level of stepping up to secure the Blockchain.

You have full support from me personally and all partners/collaborations I can affect to give you vote. Although, I would be asking for some proper time-tracking soft/app for those Audit hours, before any complicated workers with chaotic structure of many layers of teams get our votes in the future.

Why? We have 4 contacts total, 2 for 2 teams, where 1 contact is on both teams, and 1 contact with no team on this proposal is Audit on one of the teams in another worker. That contacts are assigning audits to specific devs, and without proper time-tracking, those devs can be wronged or network can be charged for more hours than it was done.

I'm calling Ryan Fox here to suggest a solution, as most experienced Business Dev around.

My personal suggestion would be TopTracker (FREE - Web, Mac, Win). Unlimited projects(workers), teams, members. Very nice exports in both CSV and PDF.



Good Initiative. I am wondering do you have plan to extent the bounty program to gateway build on top of Bitshares especially those who develop their own wallet?

+5% +5% +5%

Tried for free 1 year ago, didn't went well. Now, if i get it right - Gateways (as 3rd party private businesses) with UIA tokens, earning fortune from fees and preventing market liquidity having highest market fees world wide, needs Reserve Pool to pay security audit and developers ? Over my dead body :)

If they wanna contribute, can make their gateways open-source, maybe then it makes sense. Until then, please a bit care about our precious funds rather than private businesses around.

P.S. I know you're good guy Bangzi, but advice based on personal experience... don't be too good. Be fair, its better :)


1) I do support this proposal as individual, not as representative of any 4profit or non-profit organization/business.
2) Previous proposal showed downtime:

nodes - except bad SSL deployment at the very own beginning, working quite well ever since with uptime over 85% which is for me as hosting owner and bts nodes manager quite good.
faucet - it's an unknown bug where everybody spent hours on, trying to fix it and simply it's just random. Simple as Reset is bringing it back.

3) Importance of having committee owned faucet and onboarding account that is paying fees and regulating half of the network is something that currently only BBF offers. Rest of the Faucets are 3rd party owned and nobody can affect them, Vouch for them or provide to users of BitShares any word of guarantee that they are safe and processed "by the book".

4) Automation of services deployment such as Docker is quite important for Linux newbies. I believe this should be continued and maybe even setup as separate proposal where team could be bigger and specially focused on automation/distribution packaging of our software/services. I think it would encourage more people to step up and contribute, where both core and bbf would got less to do, just more to manage. As my personal opinion this would be bold move.

5) I guess i'll see burned back that 800$ for WildCard SSL since you were/are running LetsEncrypt. Will Premium SSL's be this time from Positive/Comodo or you have something else in mind ?

I have nothing more to say as individual.

All from me, for now :)


John, after this discussion and after I've seen you are on-chain Committee member to be voted, i have nothing else to say, except:

Me, not as any 4profit or non-profit organization/company gave you my vote (with my account steem-not) to become an Active Committee Member.

And be careful if you get upvoted... how easy is to get some, its more easy to lose all ;)

All the best wishes and good luck in this election!



To add that missing Scorum review:

While we agree that it is quite important to do an UX research and design, the quote for this type of work that was provided is puzzling, to say the least. Just to see if it has something to do with a reality we've contacted Lebedev design studio ( who are the top design studio in Russia with hundreds of projects for top banks in Russia and worldwide and got a quote from them.

We've got their reply (which is in Russian, but they are willing to provide another one in English) their quote is 3 times lower than the one that Scorum team provided, and as they have a lot of experience in UX design we are sure it is much more grounded in reality. After researching Bitshares they are interested in proceeding with this via payment through worker proposal. If the community response is positive, they will proceed with creating a worker proposal. We will be talking about this topic a little bit during Bitshares hangout this Saturday, so please come if you have any opinion on the matter.

pdf screenshot

the prices in Russian rubles
 usd rub exchange rate: 63 RUB for 1 USD

As a reminder: the Committee is approved by stakeholders and formally tasked with setting policy for the BitShares blockchain including:

Transaction and trading fees;
Blockchain parameters, such as block size, block interval; &
Referral and vesting parameters such as cash back percentage and vesting periods.

re Fav and seems like its perfect set of tasks for someone with B.A. in Economics.

Yep, that's the paper description.

I get your point on this one... :) Lets see what Candidate will answer to Active Member of Committee.

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22