Author Topic: Will this community be surpporting BM's "zero fee" proposal to get micropayment?  (Read 32024 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mf-tzo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
    • View Profile
enabling micropayments in bitshares by eliminating fees to antispam is the way to go.. then we can contact "brave"..

https://www.brave.com/


Offline Bhuz

  • Committee member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bhuz
anyone can explain what "zero fee" proposal really mean?

As you already know, with the current fee system, we have to charge a fee on any operation just to prevent possible spam attacks.

We have several operations that really do not represent, for their nature, a revenue for the network; just to list some: call_order_update, account_update, asset_publish_feed, proposal_ops, witness_update and others.

Among these operations, there are a couple that are already preventing some business to move on bts. I am referring to metaexchange, that fairly stated that having to handle order_create and order_cancel operations fee for their costumers, is a no-go.


What Bytemaster come up with on last mumle?

Basically a new fee system that would allow us to really decide *which* operation should have a fee and which don't, *without* the risk of exposing the network to a spam attack.

From mumble:
Quote
"Could you imagine a scenario where the blockchain have no fees at all, instead all the accounts were rate limited proportional to their balance?"

"As far as viewing your bts as owning a percentage of the available network capacity. So if someone own 1% of bts, he can consume 1% of the network capacity."

"Think of it in another way: imagine everyone is doing time-share on the blockchain space and everyone who owns shares can consume some of the blockchain space when they want to do a transaction, and with this method no one would be able to flood the network because they can only consume their allowed allocation of the bandwidth."


What this means?

-We could limit ourselves to remove the fee *only* on operations that do not represent a revenue income for the network, allowing business like metaexchange to easily move their backend on bts platform. All of this without the risk of being attacked by spammers and without losing the ability of the network to be profitable.

-We could push ourselves a bit forward, allowing LTM to have discounts on some operation and actually 0 fee on others. This would allow the network to remain profitable meantime being marketed as *free* for some aspects.
(e.g. profit stream from: trading, account_create, account_upgrade, asset_create, ltm restricted features like bond market etc. plus: marketing bts as the first(?!) blockchain allowing free transfer)

-We could remove *all* fees, being marketed as a totally free blockchain, losing all kind of revenue stream

Fact is: it would give us lot more freedom from fees point of view.
Edit: and could also allow new business to arise, eg. microtransactions, maybe chat on the blockchain...


IMO. In general it is a very nice idea.
I would really like to see the community discussing it seriously.
There are for sure some sensitive points that need to be addressed tho.

« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 11:20:35 am by Bhuz »

Offline betax

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 808
    • View Profile
This is the best announcement and game changer. This will welcome anybody to use the platform, casual users and business alike will use it.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline noisy


Another question...

1. Is there any other cryptocurrency on the market, which do not have fees?

BTW, With not fees I see that UIA can be much more attractive
Take a look on: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,19625.msg251894.html - I have a crazy idea - lets convince cryptonomex developers to use livecoding.tv

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4664
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
is it a big difference for witness to produce a empty block or with many many transaction?
Sure it's different. More transaction means more calculation and more storage.

IMO we're far from needing rate limiting. However we can think/plan ahead.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4664
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
all dex trades will be free or very cheap  and memberships rewards still in effect
I don't understand how the memberships rewards will be in effect if ALL free.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline -banano-

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
its simple

rate limited / time share

all dex trades will be free or very cheap  and memberships rewards still in effect

small players cant make trades and cancel too many times or they get locked out for short period

big players can spam network, but need to purchase big stake first

coupled with % based fees, BTS now is competitive with DAG mesh networks like IOTA and cheaper than Ethereum

also algos make spammer fees go up

big players who dont trade often get priority too

i wish i knew about this feature before IOTA crowdsale because i sold BTS at bottom. Now IOTA ICO money is locked up and BTS go up because of this
« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 08:15:17 am by -banano- »

Offline noisy

is it a big difference for witness to produce a empty block or with many many transaction?
« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 09:52:21 am by noisy »
Take a look on: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,19625.msg251894.html - I have a crazy idea - lets convince cryptonomex developers to use livecoding.tv

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
https://soundcloud.com/beyond-bitcoin-hangouts

BM speaks about this at 22:50

Thanks. Just listened the record, and found that the idea is very interesting. Looking forward to seeing more detailed proposal.
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline twitter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
    • View Profile
it is good sign for BTS in year of golden monkey as Chinese ppl wish
witness:

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

did not you guys attend the weekely Bitshareholder meeting?

are you two not on committee?

So nobody on committee listen to BM no more?

his proposal offers zero fees for small users, reimbursement for lifetime member referrals and is spam proof

low barrier for entry means more new users

Yes.. I am on the committee. How you arrived at nobody on the committee listens to BM anymore is beyond me though. I was the on that gave the Committee update just before BM. So yeah, I stuck around and listened afterwards to answer your question. :)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


Offline -banano-

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
did not you guys attend the weekely Bitshareholder meeting?

are you two not on committee?

So nobody on committee listen to BM no more?

his proposal offers zero fees for small users, reimbursement for lifetime member referrals and is spam proof

low barrier for entry means more new users
« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 04:49:07 am by -banano- »

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1928
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
anyone can explain what "zero fee" proposal really mean?
Email´╝Übitcrab@qq.com

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+