Worker Proposal Review

[Pheonike]

As a somewhat trading expert now , I have to say that crypto exchange is not that feasible in reality without pump and dumps by the exchange itself .

Big exchanges have big volumes for a reason .that's manipulation on their part .  I can't prove it , but I know it . While small exchanges like Yunbi with low volume also for a reason ,because they don't manipulate the market .

So , fixing the UI is not gonna change anything substantial in making the DEX more profitable .

I highly doubt the incoming fee for this new UI in a year can make up to the cost .

The trick here is not good developer or good technology , but good money and good manipulators .

Of course , that's just my own view.

You forgot the point of the DEX. Exchanges will be able to pool their order books into one large one which will have significant volume.

[fav]

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.

thanks. makes sense.

now what is the incentive for LT Memberships? the user based referral program would be dead, right?

[Tuck Fheman]

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.

I'm really starting to like this "random coder on the forum".

Why would Cryptonomex have to review code that we (the BitShares Community) paid someone else to write for BitShares?

I thought Cryptonomex was no longer part of BitShares, we are only considering hiring CNX (via a Worker Proposal) and are not obligated in any way to do so.

I'm not saying we wouldn't want code reviewed that was written by another person/group, but I'm pretty sure we have plenty of qualified coders here that could/would do that for next to nothing.

Why are you (Dan) stating this like it's mandatory that CNX would handle that job?

This is a bit confusing.

On one hand CNX can work for anyone they want, hell you've even kind of thrown it in our face that CNX could work for others at a higher rate and have offers to do so, but it's like you're doing poor old BitShares a favor by offering to do this job for 2X the rate anyone else would. And on top of that it sounds like you're saying we're required to use CNX to then review anyone else's code that we chose over you.

It sounds like CNX is operating as a proxy ruler from afar, kind of like the US Government does things.  

Will you be installing a puppet regime next or is this your declaration that CNX is that puppet regime?

"Let my people go!" 

[Ander]

Bytemaster, do you have any thoughts on my idea that maybe we dont need proposal #1, that modifying the fee for cancelled orders to 0.1 BTS might still prevent spam while also not being high enough to make any traders feel that they cannot use BTS? 

If my idea is workable it would save time and not require this change and BTS to be spent on it. 

(Of course, if there are any good reasons why this wouldnt work or if you have any good info that this will still not be okay with traders, then maybe we still need proposal #1.  For example, if a significant exchange had told you "we will adopt bitshares, but only if the fee for cancelled orders is zero", then that alone would be a good reason to need proposal #1.

[clayop]

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.

Agreed with Ander. In my opinion, 0.5 BTS for trading operation would be good (0.1 BTS for LTM).

[btswildpig]

As a somewhat trading expert now , I have to say that crypto exchange is not that feasible in reality without pump and dumps by the exchange itself .

Big exchanges have big volumes for a reason .that's manipulation on their part .  I can't prove it , but I know it . While small exchanges like Yunbi with low volume also for a reason ,because they don't manipulate the market .

So , fixing the UI is not gonna change anything substantial in making the DEX more profitable .

I highly doubt the incoming fee for this new UI in a year can make up to the cost .

The trick here is not good developer or good technology , but good money and good manipulators .

Of course , that's just my own view.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

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.

It will be real nice to have a competition. I am all for it. But let's open a thread for discussing the details, and keep this one for questions / answers regarding this particular bid.
It is first of its kind and it looks like a lot is not made even close to crystal clear.

I agree.. could you get that started with some basic questions that you have?

[donkeypong]

Screw the competition. We need this change in place yesterday. It is essential to our framework and user experience. I don't think the price or time frame is outrageous at all; let's get Cryptonomex and Bunker to put this in place and then we'll have the product to attract actual volume.

If you want to have competitions and invite any out-of-work developer whose skills are not well known to the community, then do this later for add-ons.

[theredpill]

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!

You read my mind Ander! Who else is with us? I have 1.6M votes currently proxy to fav.

[jaran]

The fact that CNX is going to open up the UI so companies of all sorts can copy it then modify it to their needs is worth the cost.

[Method-X]

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

Here, in Germany, I charge $90-$100 per hour for contracting work, and this seems pretty similiar to what BM is proposing. Keep in mind they're specialized in this field and experts. Hiring experts with lots of work experience usually comes with a markup.

You're too cheap if you're charging $60 per hour. Way too cheap.

Well, his company is called Freebie, LLC after all

I would love to see some competition for these jobs though.

[tonyk]

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.

It will be real nice to have a competition. I am all for it. But let's open a thread for discussing the details, and keep this one for questions / answers regarding this particular bid.
It is first of its kind and it looks like a lot is not made even close to crystal clear.

[mindphlux]

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

Here, in Germany, I charge $90-$100 per hour for contracting work, and this seems pretty similiar to what BM is proposing. Keep in mind they're specialized in this field and experts. Hiring experts with lots of work experience usually comes with a markup.

You're too cheap if you're charging $60 per hour. Way too cheap.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

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

Great! 

[fuzzy]

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