[Worker] Reference faucet via BitShares.eu

[xeroc]

Just noticed that you're not voting for the worker either.

I should

Just saying, if it became a for-profit service, it's no longer appropriate to be the only faucet listed in the "official" web wallet. Also, in that case, please use another account. IMO the community has the right to deal with future referral income accumulated to the account, that said, the account's owner authorities should contain only committee-account if not yet configured like so.

I'll leave that to the committee to change.

The underlying accounts will surely have to change.

[sschiessl]

The reference faucet account is exclusively committee-owned (onboarding.bitshares.foundation).

No, there is a key in the owner authorities.

Code: [Select]

>>> get_account onboarding.bitshares.foundation                                                                                                        {
  "id": "1.2.450921",
...
  "name": "onboarding.bitshares.foundation",
  "owner": {
    "weight_threshold": 1,
    "account_auths": [[
        "1.2.0",
        1
      ]
    ],
    "key_auths": [[
        "BTS6btTaW67ix1BnUwZ868CFi9X2qyhFPjFcBxVnCrTBcCJLDeS2D",
        1
      ]
    ],
    "address_auths": []
  },
...


Ah ... I must have accidently mixed up the accounts (I was both checking workers.bitshares.foundation and the onboarding account ...)

[abit]

The reference faucet account is exclusively committee-owned (onboarding.bitshares.foundation).

No, there is a key in the owner authorities.

Code: [Select]

>>> get_account onboarding.bitshares.foundation                                                                                                        {
  "id": "1.2.450921",
...
  "name": "onboarding.bitshares.foundation",
  "owner": {
    "weight_threshold": 1,
    "account_auths": [[
        "1.2.0",
        1
      ]
    ],
    "key_auths": [[
        "BTS6btTaW67ix1BnUwZ868CFi9X2qyhFPjFcBxVnCrTBcCJLDeS2D",
        1
      ]
    ],
    "address_auths": []
  },
...


[sschiessl]

Just noticed that you're not voting for the worker either.

He should

Just saying, if it became a for-profit service, it's no longer appropriate to be the only faucet listed in the "official" web wallet. Also, in that case, please use another account. IMO the community has the right to deal with future referral income accumulated to the account, that said, the account's owner authorities should contain only committee-account if not yet configured like so.

There exists already precedence in the matter. The referral rewards were not considered important enough to be turned over to the community for other community funded projects, even though the numbers there were significant. The reference faucet account is exclusively committee-owned (onboarding.bitshares.foundation). I'd like to mention that a for-profit service would then build a budget for the BBF, which is a non-profit entity that dedicates all resources to the support and benefit of the BitShares Blockchain. Details on how to transition away from a worker funded faucet are still tbd.

In conclusion, best would be to keep the reference faucet funded and running for the benefit of the community. See this now as a poll to the community which direction it should go to.

[abit]

Resurrecting this old thread as the reference faucet is currently not approved.

As of today, the reference faucet worker is not approved. This is not a big deal as the worker has some funds left to (probably) pay for the rest of its runtime (end of January 2020).
However, the fact that one of the only profitable workers is not approved by the community makes me question if the community appreciates this service and whether it is worthwhile
setting up another worker to fund expenses after January 2020.

Currently, the worker has a balance of >160k BTS and >12k bitCNY with >9k BTS, >2k bitCNY, >100bitUSD and a couple other assets still in vesting balances (others have been burned in the past).
These numbers stand against the costs of  280€/month.

I'll leave the decision to the shareholders if it is worth setting up a new worker to have these profits directed to the community (by burning).
Please express your opinion by approving the existing worker. In case it is not approved by January 2020, I read that the community no longer
prefers to pay for the service so that a subsequent worker is meaningless.

In case the community does not appreciate this service, I will request the BBF to continue operating the reference faucet as a for-profit service and have expenses paid from those profits.
The use of left over funds will be at the discretion of BBF.

Disclaimer: I do **NOT** talk for the BBF but deal with operations of the reference faucet as well as the corresponding worker.

Just noticed that you're not voting for the worker either.

Just saying, if it became a for-profit service, it's no longer appropriate to be the only faucet listed in the "official" web wallet. Also, in that case, please use another account. IMO the community has the right to deal with future referral income accumulated to the account, that said, the account's owner authorities should contain only committee-account if not yet configured like so.

[xeroc]

Resurrecting this old thread as the reference faucet is currently not approved.

As of today, the reference faucet worker is not approved. This is not a big deal as the worker has some funds left to (probably) pay for the rest of its runtime (end of January 2020).
However, the fact that one of the only profitable workers is not approved by the community makes me question if the community appreciates this service and whether it is worthwhile
setting up another worker to fund expenses after January 2020.

Currently, the worker has a balance of >160k BTS and >12k bitCNY with >9k BTS, >2k bitCNY, >100bitUSD and a couple other assets still in vesting balances (others have been burned in the past).
These numbers stand against the costs of  280€/month.

I'll leave the decision to the shareholders if it is worth setting up a new worker to have these profits directed to the community (by burning).
Please express your opinion by approving the existing worker. In case it is not approved by January 2020, I read that the community no longer
prefers to pay for the service so that a subsequent worker is meaningless.

In case the community does not appreciate this service, I will request the BBF to continue operating the reference faucet as a for-profit service and have expenses paid from those profits.
The use of left over funds will be at the discretion of BBF.

Disclaimer: I do **NOT** talk for the BBF but deal with operations of the reference faucet as well as the corresponding worker.

[iamredbar]

FYI:
Due to a distributed attack on the onboarding faucet, account registration for account names that are shorter than 6 is now forbidden. The (now stopped) attacker tried to have hundreds of thousands of accounts registered with community funds.

Thank you for being diligent in dealing with the attack. I wouldn’t be sorry about the restriction, one person can ruin things for many people.

As far as dealing with it, that is a hard call. I really like how easy the onboarding process is for new members, it is difficult for me to suggest anything that really inhibits the process. Maybe account names that are shorter than 6 have to be a premium account? This wouldn’t slow down the process and it would give incentive to purchase the shorter names.

[xeroc]

Options to resolve this from the top of my head:

1. One option to prevent this kind of issue going forward would be to implement a two-step account registration that requires verification of an email address or even better a mobile phone (SMS). However, this is considered too aggressive w.r.t. privacy concerns and barriers of entry by many.

2. Another option to reduce this kind of attack would be to require an invitation code for account registrations which could be tightly integrated into bitshares.eu and anyone with an account there could get an invitation code that fills up to a certain threshold within 24hr or so. (might be interesting in combination with becoming the referrer). Obv, people would need to have an account on bitshares.eu.

3. Yet another way could be to require a *signed message* from a life-time member that could then be set as referrer. This does not require people to have an account on bitshares.eu but signed message are longer and more cumbersome than simple invitation codes.

Anyone with another way of dealing with this?

[xeroc]

FYI:
Due to a distributed attack on the onboarding faucet, account registration for account names that are shorter than 6 is now forbidden. The (now stopped) attacker tried to have hundreds of thousands of accounts registered with community funds.

The way the attacker misuses the faucet made me force this limitation onto everyone. I am truly sorry that, after having tried to slow him down by other means, the ultimate answer to the attacker is to restrict account names to a length of 6 or more.

If any business relies on account creations that are no longer possible, please contact me directly and have your setup whitelisted. Thank you.

[sschiessl]

Also, it has never stopped to operate for the community!

[xeroc]

Thanks everyone for your support. The reference faucet worker is active now and account creation continues as usual.

[sschiessl]

Latest voting statis shows that another roughly 30 million votes are needed! Dare I say it is the sole worker that is profitable through referral rewards that are being burnt (and it will only get more the longer it runs)!

Please have a look, and if you like them consider them for your next voting update!

[xeroc]

This is the kind of statistics information that I am talking about in the post above:
https://i.imgur.com/jq2tUuT.png

[xeroc]

I would like to bump this proposal in case people missed it.
This proposal was supposed to start fund ongoing operations of the faucet starting today.

The previous contract for operating onboarding.bitshares.foundation with the BBF has expired since the bitshares.ws infrastructure worker
has expired too.

Of course, the BitShares community is free to deploy their very own faucet somewhere. I merely offer to use BitShares.eu's redundant deployment including
detailed logging and reporting.

In the mean time, even though the worker is not yet approved, the faucet will operated as usual within a grace priod to give every BTS voter a chance to voice their opinion.

Cheers
 -- Fabian
     BitShares Europe

[xeroc]

if you use this repo:
https://github.com/bitshares/tapin

and point it to the testnet api (wss://node.testnet.bitshares.eu), it will setup a local faucet for testnet

For a private testnet?

For a private testnet, you need to add your chain id and prefix to
python-bitshares/bitsharesbase/chains.py

Else, the library will complain when connecting to an unknown network.