Author Topic: [Video] How to post messages on the wall of any account  (Read 6008 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline graffenwalder

Shouldn't the burn wall, only have the option of burning BTS?
You will always have to burn BTS when writing on the wall .. though you can give a 'like' (+ burn) or a 'dislike' (- burn) .. both time, you will end up with less BTS ... it's just a matter of weighing your burned BTS positively or negatively for the wall!

Quote
Burning bitassets, would lead to fractional reserves right?

edit:
Fractional reserves might be the wrong term.
But if we allow bitassets to be burned, it would hurt the black swan resolution, because there would be less bitassets to liquidate.
How so? the amount of BTS hardly has anything to do with a black swan?! .. unless you could burn bitUSD .. which you can't ..
Yes, that's what I meant, the gui (windows) shows an option of what to burn, including bitassets.
Luckily if you select a bitasset it gives an Assert Exception.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Shouldn't the burn wall, only have the option of burning BTS?
You will always have to burn BTS when writing on the wall .. though you can give a 'like' (+ burn) or a 'dislike' (- burn) .. both time, you will end up with less BTS ... it's just a matter of weighing your burned BTS positively or negatively for the wall!

Quote
Burning bitassets, would lead to fractional reserves right?

edit:
Fractional reserves might be the wrong term.
But if we allow bitassets to be burned, it would hurt the black swan resolution, because there would be less bitassets to liquidate.
How so? the amount of BTS hardly has anything to do with a black swan?! .. unless you could burn bitUSD .. which you can't ..

Offline graffenwalder

Shouldn't the burn wall, only have the option of burning BTS?

Burning bitassets, would lead to fractional reserves right?

edit:
Fractional reserves might be the wrong term.
But if we allow bitassets to be burned, it would hurt the black swan resolution, because there would be less bitassets to liquidate.

http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2015/01/27/BitAssets-and-Black-Swan-Events/
« Last Edit: February 10, 2015, 12:46:25 pm by graffenwalder »

Offline svk

And how can a burn be positive or negative?

None of the answers in this thread address this question. What does a negative burn actually mean? Printing BTS?

Here's the explanation:

Code: [Select]
help wallet_burn
Usage:
wallet_burn <amount_to_burn> <asset_symbol> <from_account_name> <for_or_against> <to_account_name> [public_message] [anonymous]   Burns given amount to the given account.  This will allow you to post message and +/- sentiment on someones account as a form of reputation.
Burns given amount to the given account.  This will allow you to post message and +/- sentiment on someones account as a form of reputation.

Parameters:
  amount_to_burn (real_amount, required): the amount of shares to burn
  asset_symbol (asset_symbol, required): the asset to burn
  from_account_name (sending_account_name, required): the source account to draw the shares from
  for_or_against (string, required): the value 'for' or 'against'
  to_account_name (receive_account_name, required): the account to which the burn should be credited (for or against) and on which the public message will appear
  public_message (string, optional, defaults to ""): a public message to post
  anonymous (bool, optional, defaults to "false"): true if anonymous, else signed by from_account_name

It's a reputation system basically, you always burn the BTS but when burning to someone's "wall" you can make that burn count positively or negatively.
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline monsterer

And how can a burn be positive or negative?

None of the answers in this thread address this question. What does a negative burn actually mean? Printing BTS?
My opinions do not represent those of metaexchange unless explicitly stated.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc


Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...

Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.

BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead

Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig

SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.

Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..

And how can a burn be positive or negative?

You can convert the key to the account name.
If the account ID is negative then it is against the abs value of the account. 
blockchain_get_account( key ) will give you what you need.

I just had a look at the database and what I referred to as the public key is actually a balance id for the deposit operation, and unless that's a truncated key I can't use it. blockchain_get_account returns empty... So it seems to me there's no data indicating who made a particular burn operation in the current transaction output.

Oh and I searched through the database and no burns have negative account ids, so guess no one's done that yet. Not surprising since no one knew about it I suppose.

The signature on the burn op can be used to recover the signing account.  We will probably update the RPC API to make this info easier to get at.
Is this also how you identify the delegate name on publish_slate ops?

Offline bytemaster



Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...

Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.

BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead

Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig

SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.

Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..

And how can a burn be positive or negative?

You can convert the key to the account name.
If the account ID is negative then it is against the abs value of the account. 
blockchain_get_account( key ) will give you what you need.

I just had a look at the database and what I referred to as the public key is actually a balance id for the deposit operation, and unless that's a truncated key I can't use it. blockchain_get_account returns empty... So it seems to me there's no data indicating who made a particular burn operation in the current transaction output.

Oh and I searched through the database and no burns have negative account ids, so guess no one's done that yet. Not surprising since no one knew about it I suppose.

The signature on the burn op can be used to recover the signing account.  We will probably update the RPC API to make this info easier to get at.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline svk



Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...

Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.

BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead

Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig

SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.

Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..

And how can a burn be positive or negative?

You can convert the key to the account name.
If the account ID is negative then it is against the abs value of the account. 
blockchain_get_account( key ) will give you what you need.

I just had a look at the database and what I referred to as the public key is actually a balance id for the deposit operation, and unless that's a truncated key I can't use it. blockchain_get_account returns empty... So it seems to me there's no data indicating who made a particular burn operation in the current transaction output.

Oh and I searched through the database and no burns have negative account ids, so guess no one's done that yet. Not surprising since no one knew about it I suppose.
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline Riverhead


Sort by cost. It could get very expensive to get your message up in lights....  8) +5%

Offline svk



Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...

Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.

BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead

Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig

SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.

Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..

And how can a burn be positive or negative?

You can convert the key to the account name.
If the account ID is negative then it is against the abs value of the account. 
blockchain_get_account( key ) will give you what you need.
Ok, thanks. I only tried to search my own accounts database for that key and couldn't find it, will add the RPC call then if necessary.
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline bytemaster



Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...

Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.

BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead

Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig

SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.

Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..

And how can a burn be positive or negative?

You can convert the key to the account name.
If the account ID is negative then it is against the abs value of the account. 
blockchain_get_account( key ) will give you what you need.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline svk



Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...

Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.

BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead

Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig

SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.

Sorting by total burn is a good idea actually, but as far as i can tell the who part isn't explicit, we only get the key which isn't very helpful. I wanted to add an issue for that actually..

And how can a burn be positive or negative?
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
You can already send message TO someone with the transaction memo. Is this Wall function how we are supposed to rate one another? In that case, I think it's way too open for abuse. But if this is just for fun (getting our kicks while burning some BTS) then I'm fine with that.

Offline bytemaster

Ouch, this feature is open to massive abuse if you can't moderate the posts...

Yep, there are already people burning walls of texts, might be a good idea to set a mimimum fee at least that depends on the length of the message to be burnt.

BM's delegate's wall is kinda funny:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=bm.payroll.riverhead

Here's a real spammy one and a good reason for setting a minimum fee based on message length:

http://bitsharesblocks.com/accounts/account?name=wildpig

SVK: can you please sort wall posts by total "burn" and indicate who did the burn and wether it was positive or negative.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Riverhead

I like it. It's entertaining and gives yet another reason for people to burn BTS. Like anything else said in public by a stranger I take it with a grain of salt.