Is this just for UIAs or smartcoins also?

Any asset has the potential to enable this feature.

The reason for this warning is that the witness node expects users to first "register" with the database api before they query for database stuff ..
In this case you asked something from the database and haven't requested access to the database yet
http://docs.bitshares.eu/api/websocket.html#requesting-api-access

Not quite.  The reason for this is an assumption that the GUI wants push notifications of changes to any object it has queried. This message was put there to detect instances where the GUI was misusing the API.  However, it can safely be ignored if you don't care about getting updates.  We can probably delete the warning all together.

If we assume that the asset issuer only allocates 50% of trading fees to the incentive program then, the MAKER asset would receive 10% of all trading fees.

A benefit society, fraternal benefit society or fraternal benefit order is a society, an organization or a voluntary association formed to provide mutual aid, benefit, for instance insurance for relief from sundry difficulties.

A blockchain cannot provide insurance as it is traditionally known, but could easily create a community of individuals who help one another when they face difficulties.  These difficulties can be a wide range of things.

We live in a society where most good people standby and do nothing to help those who are the victim of state violence. This includes those who are punished for victimless crimes or laws that violate the constitution or other basic human rights.  Few people are willing to stand up to the government because the costs are very high on an individual.  If we could only stand together then we would all be protected and regain our freedom.

Typically the way this would work is this, each month members contribute funds to an individualized account that can only be used to reimburse authorized claims by other members. Each member would be allowed to make a claim for at most a multiple of funds contributed derived from the ratio of claims paid out.

The process of making a claim involves making a public request for help and getting the request for help certified by an oracle trusted to verify the facts of the claim. Once the facts are certified other individuals may review the claim and "donate" up to $100 from their locked up funds to cover the claim. 

Under this system individuals can only receive benefits if they are a victim, produce verifiable evidence, and have the support of a large number of independent users who individually transfer funds from user to user.

I would start this system for five classes of users:

1. Those who are accused of possessing illegal substances but have not actually harmed anyone
2. Those who are accused of traffic violations for behavior that did not harm anyone
3. Those who are accused of copyright violation
4. Those who are accused of participating in prostitution that did not harm anyone and where no children are involved.   
5. Those who have their assets seized   

In all cases we presume innocence and believe that the accused deserve a fair defense.

This is a unique product that could easily be codified in smart contracts and provide real world utility that does not exist elsewhere.   

This is also a controversial product that would generate a lot of media attention and attract people who might not otherwise care about crypto currency.

So the question is, how much would you contribute each month to join a community of people united in defense against government attacks on peaceful individuals?

If all funds / accounting were done using BTS then the amount you can get paid out will dramatically increase as adoption grows. The locked up funds would take BTS out of circulation until a claim was made.  It could get very interesting very quickly.

Thoughts?

The challenge with gambling is that it exposes the developers of the software to more risk than just about any other thing we could write.

I think it is very easy to present straw-man arguments of my stance that make it sound ridiculous. 

I believe that when it comes to unprovable concepts it makes sense to choose to believe whatever makes the biggest positive impact in your life, whether it is true or not.   At the end of the day, beliefs have power even if they are false.  They lead people to war, to die for others, to give, to steal, to love, and to hate.   If you believe someone is out to get you, then it will have an impact on your life whether or not there is actually anyone out to get you.

So given the choice between believing the following unprovable assertions I choose what makes the most powerful difference in my life.

1. There is no god, no higher power, and everything is made of "matter", consciousness is the result of electro-chemical processes in the brain and we ultimately return to dust.
2. There is a God and he is separate from us, judges us, and tells us how we should behave and punishes us if we disobey. 
3. Life is a dream, I am just a first person avatar, all of life and everything I perceive is part of one consciousness which is beyond my ego and which many would attribute the qualities of God. 

Of the 3 choices of unprovable beliefs, only one has given me positive results in my life by adopting it.  That doesn't make it right or wrong, it just means that it impacts how my brain interprets reality in such a way that I am more likely to be positive, full of love, and not afraid.  This in turn generates measurable benefits in my life.

FYI this bounty has been paid.