Worker Proposal Review

[bitcrab]

sounds good, I'll translate a summary to chinese to collect feedback.

[donkeypong]

Sounds great. I am in favor of the proposal. Let's get this done and get some more users/volume in here!!!

[kuro112]

Am I the only one here who actually read the costs?

can some one explain to me how its going to cost 16 thousand dollars to adjust pre existing code?

seriously id like a breakdown of why it will take 8000$ in man hours to adjust the fee code, no ones writing a large amount of new code, its an adjustment to a pre-existing system...

the same goes for market fees ?


16 thousand to plug in kyc and deposit / withdrawal ? seriously?

is anyone buying these numbers?

not trying to be a naysayer, i think all this work needs to be done, but for 3x what it actually costs in man hours and expertise? nah bro.


please provide us a breakdown of how the hours will be allocated and why they will add up to 32 thousand dollars for the features i think will take a fraction of the time and work...?

no one?

Software development is pretty expensive in reality.  $8000 is like two or three people working on something for a week.

im a software dev who charges 60$ an hour and im telling you theres no way it will take 8000$ worth of man hours to accomplish this task.

Great!  I will tell you what, lets specify this task a little bit more fully and we will hire you to deliver it. If you can do it faster and cheaper then by all means! We will charge a small fee to review your work and verify that it is of suitable quality.  Lets see a competitive bid.

interestingly lets take a look at the average salary for a google software engineer (arguably the most advanced on the planet)
http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Google-Salaries-E9079.htm

looks like its around 170k a year which puts the hourly at just above 80$ per hour...

if its an open bid then by all means freebie is willing to tackle these two tasks. however charging us a fee to review our work? really?
aren't you the ones trying to find developers to work for you? thatls pretty redic... I should be charging you the fee.

i just want to make sure the community isnt being asked to fund software development with inflated numbers, freebie is willing to step up and solve this problem if we see people trying to take advantage of this insane concept that somehow development will require a team of 3 working at 200$ an hour on... changing fees? really? its pre existing code.

[tonyk]

Also missing from the worker proposal are things that need to be finished for the current state of BTS 2.0:

- much needed things in the GUI

- api documentation and missing essential functions in said api

to name a few [you know the one I care the most about is not in that list]

What is the plan for those? Not do them? Do them for free?

[bytemaster]

Am I the only one here who actually read the costs?

can some one explain to me how its going to cost 16 thousand dollars to adjust pre existing code?

seriously id like a breakdown of why it will take 8000$ in man hours to adjust the fee code, no ones writing a large amount of new code, its an adjustment to a pre-existing system...

the same goes for market fees ?


16 thousand to plug in kyc and deposit / withdrawal ? seriously?

is anyone buying these numbers?

not trying to be a naysayer, i think all this work needs to be done, but for 3x what it actually costs in man hours and expertise? nah bro.


please provide us a breakdown of how the hours will be allocated and why they will add up to 32 thousand dollars for the features i think will take a fraction of the time and work...?

no one?

Software development is pretty expensive in reality.  $8000 is like two or three people working on something for a week.

im a software dev who charges 60$ an hour and im telling you theres no way it will take 8000$ worth of man hours to accomplish this task.

Great!  I will tell you what, lets specify this task a little bit more fully and we will hire you to deliver it. If you can do it faster and cheaper then by all means! We will charge a small fee to review your work and verify that it is of suitable quality.  Lets see a competitive bid.

[bytemaster]

Am I the only one here who actually read the costs?

can some one explain to me how its going to cost 16 thousand dollars to adjust pre existing code?

seriously id like a breakdown of why it will take 8000$ in man hours to adjust the fee code, no ones writing a large amount of new code, its an adjustment to a pre-existing system...

the same goes for market fees ?


16 thousand to plug in kyc and deposit / withdrawal ? seriously?

is anyone buying these numbers?

not trying to be a naysayer, i think all this work needs to be done, but for 3x what it actually costs in man hours and expertise? nah bro.


please provide us a breakdown of how the hours will be allocated and why they will add up to 32 thousand dollars for the features i think will take a fraction of the time and work...?

no one?

Cryptonomex has offers from other companies that are willing to pay market rates for our time. The market rate for outsourcing development is between $100 and $300 per hour in the USA, and is more expensive for more specialized work (C++ / Blockchain). If these tasks take 2 people 1 week to complete (with testing/deployment/etc) then than is a mere $100 per hour.

Is this more expensive than hiring a random coder on the forum, yes it is.  But it is also far less than our opportunity cost.

Every hour worked/billed has to cover all kinds of business overhead costs (admin, legal, accounting, business development, etc).  The cost of earning this business includes all of the time it takes to navigate the political process of BTS and work with partners.

In other words, find someone who can do it cheaper if you can and do a quality job.

[kuro112]

Am I the only one here who actually read the costs?

can some one explain to me how its going to cost 16 thousand dollars to adjust pre existing code?

seriously id like a breakdown of why it will take 8000$ in man hours to adjust the fee code, no ones writing a large amount of new code, its an adjustment to a pre-existing system...

the same goes for market fees ?


16 thousand to plug in kyc and deposit / withdrawal ? seriously?

is anyone buying these numbers?

not trying to be a naysayer, i think all this work needs to be done, but for 3x what it actually costs in man hours and expertise? nah bro.


please provide us a breakdown of how the hours will be allocated and why they will add up to 32 thousand dollars for the features i think will take a fraction of the time and work...?

no one?

Software development is pretty expensive in reality.  $8000 is like two or three people working on something for a week.

im a software dev who charges 60$ an hour and im telling you theres no way it will take 8000$ worth of man hours to accomplish this task.

[Ander]

Am I the only one here who actually read the costs?

can some one explain to me how its going to cost 16 thousand dollars to adjust pre existing code?

seriously id like a breakdown of why it will take 8000$ in man hours to adjust the fee code, no ones writing a large amount of new code, its an adjustment to a pre-existing system...

the same goes for market fees ?


16 thousand to plug in kyc and deposit / withdrawal ? seriously?

is anyone buying these numbers?

not trying to be a naysayer, i think all this work needs to be done, but for 3x what it actually costs in man hours and expertise? nah bro.


please provide us a breakdown of how the hours will be allocated and why they will add up to 32 thousand dollars for the features i think will take a fraction of the time and work...?

no one?

Software development is pretty expensive in reality.  $8000 is like two or three people working on something for a week.

[monsterer]

This would indicate the sender pays nothing and the receiver pays the fee. The discount is for RECEIVING transactions then, not SENDING transactions, if I may interpret that.

This is a pretty radical change if so. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me either - why should you pay to receive a transaction that somebody else sent?

[bytemaster]

The proposal reads specifically:

Because this is a matter of appearance, transfer fees will be adjusted to be paid by the receiver of the funds, rather than the sender.

This would indicate the sender pays nothing and the receiver pays the fee. The discount is for RECEIVING transactions then, not SENDING transactions, if I may interpret that.

This is PURELY a cosmetic change.  The minimum transfer would be fee + 1 satoshi and the merchant would only see a gain of 1 satoshi.  From the user's perspective they paid the merchant $0.20, but the merchant only pocketed $0.01.  In no case can one user drain funds from another by spamming.

[kuro112]

Am I the only one here who actually read the costs?

can some one explain to me how its going to cost 16 thousand dollars to adjust pre existing code?

seriously id like a breakdown of why it will take 8000$ in man hours to adjust the fee code, no ones writing a large amount of new code, its an adjustment to a pre-existing system...

the same goes for market fees ?


16 thousand to plug in kyc and deposit / withdrawal ? seriously?

is anyone buying these numbers?

not trying to be a naysayer, i think all this work needs to be done, but for 3x what it actually costs in man hours and expertise? nah bro.


please provide us a breakdown of how the hours will be allocated and why they will add up to 32 thousand dollars for the features i think will take a fraction of the time and work...?

no one?

[Ander]

Thanks for this, its nice to have something of a roadmap going forward.


My feedback:
#2-5 look good.


Regarding proposal #1:

This seems to me to be a very complicated solution which requires additional code to get around spamming. 
Before we do this, do you really think that an order fee of 0.1 BTS instead of 0 would not be sufficient to achieve these goals instead? 

Imo, the problem with the perception of the fees for orders is because they are currently large, but 0.1 BTS would probably be small enough that this would no longer be the case.  At 0.1 BTS, the attacker would have to pay to fill up our TPS with spam, but the fee would seem negligible to traders.  A percentage based fee for trades of 0.2%, plus a 0.1 BTS fee per order (cancelled or not), looks good to me.

I do not think that a 0.2% fee +flat 0.1 BTS would feel different to users than current crypto exchanges.



Could you discuss your thoughts on needing to implement this new system rather than simply change the fee for cancelled orders to only 0.1 BTS?  Are you really sure that a chance to just 0.1 BTS would not be sufficient to solve the problem, or that it would still be perceived as a problem by users?


Thanks!

[tonyk]

Under this proposal, 100% of all trading fees for the BTS token will be subject to the same division as other fees (currently 20% to the network, 80% to the referral program).  Trading fees for other assets (including Smart Coins) will not be subject to the referral program. Assets such as BitUSD or BitGOLD will still be able to charge a market fee, the proceeds of which will be denominated in BitUSD or BitGOLD and will be in the control of the committee account to be spent with stakeholder approval.

What is this supposed to mean?

In the current system, at the end of the day, all fees are paid in BTS.

Are you proposing changing that and not giving all, but just some of the fees back to the BTS holders.

If yes, this needs serious discussion, not just a paragraph in a worker proposal

[edit]
Also if nothing else[BTS holders aside] - it seems the Lifetime members will not get discount on those...and if we talk about traders as LM, this is pretty counter productive.

[Pheonike]

By becoming a fully hosted wallet solution for some ppl, would that put us in control of user funds? Would that make this a Money Services Business in the US which would then require licenses?

[mindphlux]

and dump to the poor market?
NO!!!!!

I think this can be prevented with a vested fee schedule. @bytemaster @BunkerChain Labs can you please comment on how you are going to prevent to further damage the thin BTS market by dumping 21M BTS?