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 - FreeTrade

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... 47
166
LottoShares / Re: Provably fair algorithm.
« on: May 28, 2014, 10:19:06 am »
My current thinking is that the least trust/verification approach is that

1. Central entity (eg FreeTrade) accepts the first block received that is built on the existing chain as final, and immediately broadcasts the time at which the block is first seen. This immediately becomes a checkpoint.

2. Waits for next set of NY lottery numbers (every 4 minutes) and then broadcasts these together with the blockhash to the network as a transaction.

3. A block including this transaction resolves winning bets and pays winners in blockchain.

167
General Discussion / Re: MirrorChain--to solve the security threat during the new DACs distribution
« on: May 28, 2014, 10:05:45 am »
Might be possible to have the PTS client sign the first transaction to release funds from the genesis block.

Steps:
1: Enter public key into new DAC client
2: New DAC client creates unsigned transaction
3: PTS/Trusted client signs transaction
4: Signed transaction posted into new DAC client

168
General Discussion / Re: Airdrop concerns with Lottoshares
« on: May 27, 2014, 08:17:38 pm »
Quote from: gamey on May 27, 2014, 07:40:03 pm

The word endorse should never be used in these relationships.

I3/Bitshares should not be in the business of endorsing, just supporting the ecosystem which means DACs using the ecosystem.  The support should be seen as technical support and basic announcements, but no value judgement by I3.  They really need to make that clear all over the place. 

I agree. From a dev point of view, I see the 20% distribution as a cost to the rights to use the Bitshares codebase and a way to distribute shares to investors who, by and large, understand what's happening. Wrt Lottoshares, I don't seek nor expect any support from I3 nor PTS/AGS investors except where that is freely given.

169
General Discussion / Re: Airdrop concerns with Lottoshares
« on: May 27, 2014, 08:10:22 pm »
Again with the lies, Newmine.

Points have all been addressed repeatedly.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2288.0


170
General Discussion / Re: Airdrop concerns with Lottoshares
« on: May 27, 2014, 04:31:36 pm »
Quote from: asenski on May 27, 2014, 04:05:41 pm
Also there is a way to make this provably fair, and not have to use his own seed, which he can control. If I was running this coin, that would be my priority.

Yes, having seen ChanceCoin's approach I'm leaning more towards using the NY Lottery data feed for randomness, however it still creates possibilities for cheating by forging blockstamp timestamps. Provable fairness for centralized services is a solved problem, but decentralized provable fairness is proving a very difficult nut to crack. It might be that there will always need to some remnant of centralization to it.

171
General Discussion / Re: Airdrop concerns with Lottoshares
« on: May 27, 2014, 09:24:05 am »
Newmine is a crank and has been hounding me ever since I called him greedy and stupid to discourage others from joining him in his short-sighted behavior with MemoryCoin. He has lied about me many times and his statements continue to be deliberately skewed and misleading. He is continuing to conduct a personal butthurt vendetta.

MemoryCoin 1 was a public project that everyone could take part in. MemoryCoin 2 genesis was discussed in public and everyone was free to take part in that discussion. Salaries in MemoryCoin 2 are voted on in public, are transparent and are a major feature of the coin.

LottoShares is a new project. It is a DAC of which I could choose to keep 100% if I so decided. That's the same as founding any other corporation. I'm giving away the vast majority of it, over 98% to encourage participation.


172
MemoryCoin / Re: MMC -> LottoShares
« on: May 26, 2014, 05:38:56 pm »
Quote from: asenski on May 26, 2014, 05:20:25 pm
FreeTrade, this is confusing and you need to clarify. When you say "dumping their shares" do you mean their LottoShares?

I.e. LottoShares will be issues based on snapshot as of end of May, however they will not be spendable until some random date? Or is it that they will have to hold their MMC, PTS, etc. from end of May till the vesting date?

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. No

173
General Discussion / Re: DAC employees
« on: May 26, 2014, 05:35:55 pm »
Quote from: luckybit on May 21, 2014, 04:20:27 pm
Several ideas exist for this such as Role Based Bounties and I think the Memorycoin team implemented exactly something like this.

It's a good idea to let DACs hire but we need to have an effective way of voting. It's actually harder to hire for long term role based bounties than for short jobs which can be easily defined in a smart contract.

Yes, this idea is very similar to the voting in MemoryCoin.  There was a lot of positivity about the idea from the outset, but also considerable criticism and some outright hostility about my management of it. It hasn't fared well and it's difficult to separate shortcomings in the idea from shortcomings in my launch of it.

From experience, the main problems you have to solve are

1. Shareholder disengagement - most shareholders, even those with large positions won't vote and won't educate themselves on the options - allowing proxy voting might help . . you might just be able to motivate enough shareholders to nominate a proxy they trust to vote for them.

2. Attracting talent - you need to advertise and attract talented individuals to fill the roles. Like with any company, recruitment is difficult. MemoryCoin had reasonable salaries at the start - around $300 a day, but few candidates.

3. Greed - some shareholders will try to abuse the voting system by voting funds for themselves. No amount of explaining will dissuade them. I assume this is greed, but there is a possibility it is motivated by ideological opposition to the idea of 'taxation'.


 

174
LottoShares / Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« on: May 26, 2014, 12:00:46 pm »
Quote from: delulo on May 26, 2014, 11:41:36 am
The shitty site doesnt allow me to see it in the english version. With me it says Costs per tx given in USD. That would be 38 USD per tx atm. Do you see something different? Either the graph is ussposed to show the tx fees and they messed s.t. up or takes the dilution into account and is about correct.

Yes, something amiss there alright. I assumed the error was that it was based in cents, not dollars. But looking at recent blocks, number of transactions and total transaction fees . . . it's more like a 10 cent average per transaction. Still high though, and I expect it to get a lot higher.

175
LottoShares / Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« on: May 26, 2014, 11:08:36 am »
Quote from: AdamBLevine on May 24, 2014, 02:31:39 pm
How similar is this to CHA?  http://chancecoin.com/  They have a 1% rake and launched recently.

One problem ChanceCoin will have is high transaction fees on the Bitcoin blockchain.

Average transaction cost is 30 to 40 cents at the moment -
https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction

You can certainly pay less, but then you may have to wait longer for your transaction to be included. I expect the situation to get worse over time, not better. I believe in a world of multiple competing blockchains, and the Bitcoin blockchain is not where you want to be long term for microtransactions (or even millitransactions).

I don't mean to bash them - it's impressive what they've done, but I'm seeing a few problems with it on closer inspection (this one may be structural) and areas where LottoShares can be competitive.

176
LottoShares / Re: Provably fair algorithm.
« on: May 26, 2014, 10:55:36 am »
ChanceCoin uses the hash of the block which includes the bet and the next set of NY lottery numbers (picked every 4 minutes) to resolve the bet.

It's an interesting idea that I think we could adopt aspects of, but it has two problems as currently implemented-

1. Vulnerable to attack by bitcoin pool operators using inaccurate timestamps - (or discarding blocks if rewards become sufficiently large)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=528023.msg6409544#msg6409544

2.  This is the code being used to fetch the numbers - I can see a few problems with doing it this way, but they are fixable.

String lottoUrl = "http://nylottery.ny.gov/wps/PA_NYSLNumberCruncher/NumbersServlet?game=quick&action=winningnumbers&startSearchDate="+lottoDate+"&endSearchDate=&pageNo=&last=&perPage=999&sort=";
String lottoPage = Util.getPage(lottoUrl);

Modifications
----------------
Problem 1 - If adopting this strategy a trusted entity would be required to broadcast a guaranteed accurate time at which the block had first been seen.

Problem 2 - a trusted entity would fetch and relay the drawn numbers to the blockchain to avoid every client hammering the ny.gov site, and to be able to take action when this servlet is inevitably pulled.

Overall this would require less trust and easier verification than my original proposal.

177
MemoryCoin / Re: MMC -> LottoShares
« on: May 25, 2014, 08:27:51 pm »
Quote from: Delinquency on May 25, 2014, 08:19:20 pm
Quote from: city19akro on May 25, 2014, 02:54:20 pm
How can we cash in those Lottoshares?

 +5%

Make sure to hold your MemoryCoin at an address where you control the private key at the end of this month.

To prevent AGS, PTS, MMC holders from immediately dumping their shares on the market, the distributions are vested and mature at a random dates between 3 and 15 months from launch.


178
LottoShares / Re: House Edge Too High?
« on: May 25, 2014, 03:16:33 pm »
Quote from: Agent86 on May 24, 2014, 02:37:36 pm
You don't want to create demand by appealing to people who want to make money by overcharging others to play a game that there's no reason for it to cost that much to play.

This is a subtle insight into how the coin might play out. Given that ChanceCoin seems to be floundering on a very price competitive 1% house rake . . . we might indeed do better by offering a 10% commission to ticket sellers/processors. I think usually people choose to play a lottery for reasons other than price competitiveness . . . excitement, convenience, timing etc.

179
LottoShares / Re: LottoShares DAC - Launch Suspended
« on: May 25, 2014, 03:05:32 pm »
Quote from: AdamBLevine on May 24, 2014, 04:38:30 pm
FreeTrade, do you gamble at Casinos and do you anticipate being a user of your services?   Put another way, are you scratching your own itch or is a casino coin one on a list of interesting and potentially profitable coins to prototype?

I feel like the "interested in Cryptocurrency" and "big gambler" isn't neccesarily a huge demographic overlap which is why it's interesting to hear people who develop these solutions (like Bytemasters Mining-as-playing-the-lottery proposal of a few months ago) don't actually want to use the product, they just see the percieved market void.

No, I don't usually enjoy gambling on games of pure chance. Yes I see it as an interesting technical challenge and a potentially profitable coin. A small tax on gambling may also be a way to subsidize transactions processing / blockchain security.

Aside from turning a profit, I'm interested in encouraging the spread of crypto-currency. I think the best way of achieving that is through continual speculative manias.

180
LottoShares / Re: LottoShares DAC - Launch Suspended
« on: May 25, 2014, 11:36:16 am »
Updated:

Snapshot date for AGS, PTS, MMC remains the same, but other aspect are under review.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... 47

Page created in 0.033 seconds with 23 queries.