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 - bytemaster

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 656
We have secured ~80% of the initial STEEM via mining.  Our plan is to keep 20%, sell 20% to raise money, and give away 40% to attract users / referrers.

One would think that is instamining as well as ICO, exactly the opposite of the announced on Bitcointalk


pre-mine: mining tokens without publicly announcing the network or pre-allocate tokens
ico: directly selling pre-mined coins, often selling coins before the network exists
instamine: having the majority of tokens mined in the first day

People like to get loose with definitions of words (like scam) but also the above words are thrown out.

pre-mine: implies "pre-*SOMETHING* mine", the question is what is *SOMETHING*?   I take it to mean "before public announcement" which
is the only objective measure.  There are degrees of public announcement,  but announcing on BItcointalk in the announcement section seems like it was announced where people look for such announcements and not someplace where people are not looking.

ico: reselling a mined coin is not an ICO any more than reselling a new car after driving it off the lot is considered selling a new car.

instamine: the vast majority of tokens within STEEM will be created in the future.   The introduction of vesting makes it harder to directly compare to other coins. They did lock up a 56.3% stake in the network that is more or less protected from dilution.  On the other hand, to lock up that STEEM means they cannot sell most of it for years.

Then factor in their intent to give away much of what they did mine, and it can be interpreted as a move to make sure that new users can get into STEEM long into the future.  Giving it away to new users does not create sell pressure if they give the new users VESTS.   

The conclusion I gather from this is that STEEM will end up in the hands of more people by having Steemit, Inc distribute VESTS to unique users than it would have ended up in if only miners and botnets could mine. 

So how much has Steemit, Inc acquired:

2,998,914.000  STEEM Supply
2,417,426.000  VESTING STEEM  (80.6%)

373,870.665560 VESTS Supply
261,585.400566 VESTS held by account steemit (69.9%)

STEEM held by steemit   .699 * .806 => 56.3%

sounds like a well prepared April Joke!


Yea, something about this stinks.


These are the commands available to the cli-wallet
Let's start some speculations about them

so... you can mine STEEM and then request to have them converted into VESTS to wear when it's getting cold?

Funny man :)  Perhaps Steemit should have called it H20... you can then condense your STEEM into H20 and it takes time to boil it back into STEEM.


We didn't announce this on BitShares earlier because we figured this community would better understand the value of what we are doing and make it
difficult execute the strategy bytemaster recently blogged about:

We have secured ~80% of the initial STEEM via mining.

So the main innovation is  secretly premining in open view? It is pretty sad where "innovation" effort go in this community as of late.

Thanks, but no thanks... I have experienced a 1,5 years of constant sell pressure by whales that openly quick mined PTS, to have the desire to experience the same by people that found a way to premine, sorry "secure " 80% stake for themselves secretly in open view.

Q: Is there STEALTH in steem's GUI?

At the moment Steem has no GUI and the blockchain doesn't support stealth.

I wanted to make sure Steem didn't compete with BitShares market.  In fact, one of the reasons I was willing to help with Steem was that its feature set is fundamentally incompatible with BitShares and we could not hardfork BitShares to implement what Steem does.

Steem is designed to encourage long-term holders and discourage the dumping that BTS has experienced. It is good for them to have a large stake and not give it away to miners who will dump it.  Now they can give it away strategically to grow Steem.

I highly recommend everyone look into Steem.  It has a lot of promise and is worth your time.

General Discussion / GUI 2.0.160330 Released
« on: March 31, 2016, 12:58:00 pm »


Proposed transactions
Add a 'Reset settings' button to Settings and InitError page
Split workers table into proposed and active workers
Remove negative votes
Add set of known proxies, add lists of active witnesses and cm's to voting pages
Add name replace for asset symbols in fee selection dropdown
Improve worker approve/reject logic and add status coloring
Add explanation of vesting balances
Add memo support to asset issue modal and display memos in Operation/Transaction


Language settings not persisting in light client
Fix some bugs and typos in AccountStore authority check
In serializer for transactions, sort addresses and public keys in descending order
Handle nested authorities for hierarchical multi-sig
Set new accounts voting proxy to 'proxy-to-self' account #700
Improve RecentTransactions sorting function #793
Add Settings link to mobile menu #759
Make sure negative votes are removed when updating votes #798
Fix vesting balance styling #722
Fix init loader white background
Fix orderbook onClick not syncing after order has filled #768
Translate csv and tooltip and move closer to title #780

General Discussion / Re: Witness Alerts and Status
« on: March 31, 2016, 12:55:46 pm »
A bug-fix HARD FORK has been released:

All full nodes will be required to upgrade to this release by Mon Apr 4 17:00:00 UTC 2016.


Fix an incorrect asset ID returned by cli_wallet for non-BTS vesting balances #625
Fix a bug causing multisig to (incorrectly) fail in some cases #631
Restore p2p shutdown logic fix which was unintentionally excluded from the previous release #598 #637
Restore extension serialization fix which was unintentionally excluded from the previous release #599 #637


Fix slightly buggy verify_asset_supplies() check in unit tests #639
Build system

Various fixes to make install target
Fix out-of-tree builds #633

General Discussion / Re: Looking for help with Social Media
« on: March 30, 2016, 08:31:04 pm »
I think the best case scenario is to have the committee own these and have a few select people be able to post from them. such as [member=602]fuzzy[/member] [member=19864]BunkerChain Labs[/member] [member=38926]Chris4210[/member]  and myself.
This is to make sure the content stays neutral.

I currently control the proper twitter and facebook handles which I acquired from someone who was using them for bitcoin posts.
I paid $2800 to acquire and would like to find a way to recover these funds and then transfer ownership to the comittee.

Jonny, great news.  I agree the committee should have control and think it is worthwhile for you to be reimbursed.   We just need someone to post on a daily basis and keep the users engaged.

General Discussion / Re: Looking for help with Social Media
« on: March 30, 2016, 02:49:10 pm »
I would be more than happy to let Bunker and Fuzzy share this role.  Any objections?

General Discussion / Looking for help with Social Media
« on: March 30, 2016, 01:15:35 pm »
We are looking someone who would like to take over day-to-day management of the BTS Social Media (Facebook, Twitter, etc). 

If you have skills in this area and think you can improve things post here for community feedback.  Let us know how you would run them.

Technical Support / Re: Run Your Own P2P Decentralised Exchange Node
« on: March 29, 2016, 02:22:59 pm »
Great docs

Those accounts are owned by my grandmother and uncle and managed by Stan.  I do not control them and neither does Stan.  Stan was helping them take control of their funds, but you can imagine that crypto isn't easy for someone in their 80's. 

General Discussion / Re: Mutual Aid Societies in the news
« on: March 28, 2016, 10:41:48 pm »
I haven't lost interest.  I have been busy laying the foundation for them :)

General Discussion / Re: Importance of early adopters
« on: March 28, 2016, 08:38:51 pm »
Therefore, I would appreciate if the core developers at bitshares could tell me definitively and unambiguously as soon as possible, if bitshares is truly ready and stable enough to handle thousands and potentially tens of thousands of people downloading and starting to use bitshares accounts and wallets, over the next six months and beyond.

[member=120]xeroc[/member] [member=5]bytemaster[/member]

The protocol is ready. The GUI is ready.  The server infrastructure and support staff at Open Ledger would have to grow quickly with the increase in demand. It should be able to grow.  I think we can easily scale to Bitcoin's user base without any major hiccups.

Technical Support / Re: How much witnesses earn?
« on: March 28, 2016, 06:25:09 pm »
Here is better formula:

[block reward] * (60 / [block interval time]) * 60 * 24 * 30 / [total number of witnesses] = [witness salary for one month]
Almost correct. Due to maintenance intervals, currently there are 3 less blocks produced in every hour.

Is the '3 blocks' value hardcoded? And maintenance takes nowhere near that long in reality, right?

Correct, maintenance takes a fraction of a second (today). 

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 656