Worker Proposal Review

[fav]

-snip-

proxying my  there

#btstip "Tuck Fheman" 100 NEWBIE

[BTSdac]

it is a biggest mistake that make transfer higher than trading fee.
I know many of us include me are trading user , just consider our-self benefit to reduce the trading fee , it is so shortsighted.

[Tuck Fheman]

I'd also like to see a proposal for bond market
And also prediction markets.

 

There should be resources included on the site, you shoudnt have to go hunting for it otherwise expect people to go elsewhere.

 

I think fees are not that big of a deal really. If you have a good product people will pay for it. Of course they could be a little lower, yes, but not worth all this huge discussions.

 

I'm ready to vote for 2-5 now. those are solid proposals in my opinion.

 

Cnx states that they will open source the entire ui for multiuser implementations if they are hired for all proposals... Which is a very very good reason to hire cnx for all proposals

 

We have retracted #1.

 

To those in this thread that says the community always just rubber stamps everything, this is evidence that we dont just rubber stamp everything.

 

this guy has a point

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/12hWyasMJ5mL1fboAt9ZK8FEf0c7o_q-1bwm5ItsLNGo/edit#

 

[mint chocolate chip]

[clayop]

For me, upgrading to higher machine only takes 10 to 30 min. (Most of the time is downloading chain).
I agree 1 BTS has advantages. Then how about 0.5?

[theredpill]

Not really because at the current maximum TPS is going to take a while to get the 67108864 tx through and so the network can prevent from happening or maybe decide to put 20k usd and buying more memory

[CryptoPrometheus]

Just a quick note.

DEX orders stays in memory for ever, so at current market cap and 0.1 BTS fee for limit_order_create operation, it will take ~20K USD to exhaust all witnesses memory. ( Assuming 4GB mem witnesses )

Code: [Select]

0.003186*0.1*4*1e9/64 ~= 20K USD
64 = memory usage of 1 limit_order_object
0.1 = fee
4*1e9 = 4GB
0.003186 = USD per BTS

Memory exhausting protection need to be taken into account also.

Thanks ElMato, this is good information to have. However, I think at this stage the difference between 0.1 BTS and 1 BTS is negligible. In other words, we could easily raise the cost of spamming the network from $20,000 to $200,000 and still require only 1/3 of a cent (1BTS) fee.

The question is, would $200,000 in new income from the attack be enough to justify paying the witnesses more money so they could upgrade their RAM? Probably yes. Especially since Ram is cheap. However, would this be a security risk in the interim? I don't know the answer to that. Wouldn't the network technically survive if just some of the witnesses were using more than 4 GB or RAM at the time of the attack?

Edit: Seems like Xeldal beat me to the punch ^^

[Xeldal]

Just a quick note.

DEX orders stays in memory for ever, so at current market cap and 0.1 BTS fee for limit_order_create operation, it will take ~20K USD to exhaust all witnesses memory. ( Assuming 4GB mem witnesses )

Code: [Select]

0.003186*0.1*4*1e9/64 ~= 20K USD
64 = memory usage of 1 limit_order_object
0.1 = fee
4*1e9 = 4GB
0.003186 = USD per BTS

Memory exhausting protection need to be taken into account also.

At 100 tx/s It would take 174 hours or 7.23 days to place 62.5 million orders
with a fee of 1BTS its ~200k , 10BTS ~2M
Whats an acceptable figure?  And whats the worst that happens? the network is down while witness upgrades server?  Is 7 days enough time for a witness to upgrade his hardware in such an event?  would the upgrades be less than it cost to attack?  I think even 20k event is manageable. Unless I've done my math wrong. But 1BTS fee is a significant advantage.

It might be worthwhile to keep it low to temp someone to try it, and fail. 

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Just a quick note.

DEX orders stays in memory for ever, so at current market cap and 0.1 BTS fee for limit_order_create operation, it will take ~20K USD to exhaust all witnesses memory. ( Assuming 4GB mem witnesses )

Code: [Select]

0.003186*0.1*4*1e9/64 ~= 20K USD
64 = memory usage of 1 limit_order_object
0.1 = fee
4*1e9 = 4GB
0.003186 = USD per BTS

Memory exhausting protection need to be taken into account also.

  for looking ahead and at the bigger consequences.

[ElMato]

Just a quick note.

DEX orders stays in memory for ever, so at current market cap and 0.1 BTS fee for limit_order_create operation, it will take ~20K USD to exhaust all witnesses memory. ( Assuming 4GB mem witnesses )

Code: [Select]

0.003186*0.1*4*1e9/64 ~= 20K USD
64 = memory usage of 1 limit_order_object
0.1 = fee
4*1e9 = 4GB
0.003186 = USD per BTS

Memory exhausting protection need to be taken into account also.

[GaltReport]

I'd also like to see a proposal for bond market / margin trading, which should be linked imo, with the bond market providing the lending for the margin trading, like at polo.
And also prediction markets.

Then these proposals could form the roadmap for all the things bitshares needs now.

  - Yes, me too.

[Ander]

I'd also like to see a proposal for bond market / margin trading, which should be linked imo, with the bond market providing the lending for the margin trading, like at polo.
And also prediction markets.

Then these proposals could form the roadmap for all the things bitshares needs now.

[tonyk]

I think it is appropriate to remind every one in this thread, of some great words of wisdom form our founding father...ehhh worker to be.

Technically all Brownie Points mean is that you are on my good side.  Brownie Points are not redeemable for anything and do not create any obligations between me and anyone else.   BROWNIE.PTS is a tool that allows me to keep track of everyone who is in my good favor and to what extent. ]You will want to make sure you claim your BROWNIE.PTS because it would just be rude to refuse the BROWNIE.PTS and one day you may regret it; Karma can be a Bitch. 

BROWNIE.PTS is merely a tool for my own use and I may choose to stop issuing brownie points at any time for any reason.   I may reward them (or not) as I see fit, in the amounts I see fit, for the reasons I see fit.   I may also seize brownie points from any account if you fall out of favor and anyone who complains in any way about how Brownie Points are issued or how I use Brownie Points is certainly not in my favor and may lose any Brownie Points they have earned.

[Empirical1.2]

Sounds good. It might be good if the receiver pays the fees but the referral income goes to the senders referrer.

What, what what? How is this working, exactly?

I think now when Bob sends to John, Bob pays the fee and Bob's referrer gets the income but they are considering changing it...

transfer fees will be adjusted to be paid by the receiver of the funds, rather than the sender.  This means merchants will see the fees (which will be much less than credit cards) but users will not.

If we change to Bob sends to John, John pays the fee and John's referrer gets the income then we change the incentives a bit from signing up regular users (medium senders) to signing up merchants (high volume receivers) 

However if we change to Bob sends to John, John pays the fee, but BTS sees it was sent by Bob and & gives Bob referrers the referral income, then it still keeps a bit of the incentive to sign up regular users.  While if John upgrades to an LTM those fees go to John's refferer so there is still a big incentive to sign up merchants and upgrade them. 

Provided the minimum transfer size is greater than the maximum transfer fee. I think it works.

I don't know though, there could be a simple reason why this dumb 

So before John's upgrade the Bob's referrers get the fees (well cut of them). Yes.

After John's upgrade his  referrers get the same fees.  Yes. John's referrer gets his big cut of 20 000 BTS LTM if John upgrades.

Bob will never upgrade, that part is clear. But why will John do it? Is it a 2 level  marketing?
If John is receiving a lot of transactions he can significantly reduce his cost by upgrading. (Example, If he receives 100 transactions a day, he will pay receiving fees of $15 a day which he can reduce by 80% by upgrading to a LTM)

Also for the Bob's referrer - finding customers that shop at non upgraded merchants (assuming the upgrade makes sense for merchants and is 100 bucks? is not very...profitable)

Correct. But it will be even less profitable if all the referral fees go to John's referrer which I think is how it would work in the new proposal. 

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,19890.msg255464.html#msg255464

[mike623317]

A dollar denominated pay is fair for everyone, both the founding team and the shareholders. They get their assured payment and the shareholders know that the current price has not been manipulated by them to grab extra BTS. I wonder what is the reason that they do not want to accept that.

Yeah obviously shareholders choose dollar denominated pay. I'm sure that won't be a problem as the jobs are priced in dollars & that's how BM is promoting it.

Hopefully this will help kickstart a bunch of businesses and remove artificial barriers while helping to fund ongoing maintenance and improvements.  Just $90 per day.

I think we should ask people who want to incorporate bitshares in to their business what the issues are. Adam levine posted on here only a week or two ago and had trouble finding good information. There should be resources included on the site, you shoudnt have to go hunting for it otherwise expect people to go elsewhere.
It always seems to comeback to usability and execution as far as i can tell.