Author Topic: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)  (Read 1679 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
[Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« on: February 21, 2020, 10:35:56 pm »
Dear BitShares,

After spending some time with assembling original core team (what's left of it), discussing roadmap individually with holders and proxies and detailed review of 2019 worker, I came up with the following draft:

https://github.com/dls-cipher/workers2020-drafts/blob/master/2020-core-part1.md


Please read carefully and ask any questions if you have.

Chinese translation will be processed soon by Linda Tian and thread will be updated.



Worker details and roadmap has been updated. For more info click here.

Chee®s
« Last Edit: March 20, 2020, 08:34:11 am by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #1 on: February 21, 2020, 11:28:25 pm »
Wait part two.

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2020, 11:34:05 pm »
Wait part two.

2020 core worker = 1 year has 12 months.

Part 1 = 6 months worker.

Read the worker PLEASE before commenting.

Chee®s
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #3 on: February 21, 2020, 11:52:51 pm »
Wait part two.

2020 core worker = 1 year has 12 months.

Part 1 = 6 months worker.

Read the worker PLEASE before commenting.

Chee®s

OK,  Part 2=4 months worker.

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4212
    • View Profile
    • Steemit Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2020, 12:10:13 am »
I think it's too early to discuss the part 2 right now. Things can change a lot in 6 months. If part 1 worked well, we may start discussing part 2.
BTS account: abit
BTS committee member: abit
BTS witness: in.abit

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2020, 12:17:45 am »
I think it's too early to discuss the part 2 right now. Things can change a lot in 6 months. If part 1 worked well, we may start discussing part 2.

Got it.

Development for BSIP 64: Operational HTLC preimage length, HASH160 addition, and memo field (up to 12 hours)
Development for BSIP 69: Additional Assert Predicates (up to 25 hours)
Development for BSIP 74: Margin Call Fee Ratio (up to 60 hours)
Development for BSIP 77: Require Higher CR When Creating/Adjusting Debt Positions (up to 80 hours)
Development for BSIP 86: Share market fee to the network (up to 60 hours)

If we can make a small Mainnet Release for these BSIPs asap? in the next two months?

Offline bench

Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2020, 12:30:49 am »
Got it.

Development for BSIP 64: Operational HTLC preimage length, HASH160 addition, and memo field (up to 12 hours)
Development for BSIP 69: Additional Assert Predicates (up to 25 hours)
Development for BSIP 74: Margin Call Fee Ratio (up to 60 hours)
Development for BSIP 77: Require Higher CR When Creating/Adjusting Debt Positions (up to 80 hours)
Development for BSIP 86: Share market fee to the network (up to 60 hours)

If we can make a small Mainnet Release for these BSIPs asap? in the next two months?

I like the idea.
Be part of the change and vote for the bitshares-vision proxy!

Offline Bangzi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • View Profile
    • Steemit: Bangzi
  • BitShares: bangzi
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #7 on: February 22, 2020, 04:20:32 am »
Bitshares Chinese Forum
https://dpos.club

China block some web sites including Github. Users from China even have difficulty to post a reply in this forum.
Bitshares DEX - Over 1000 Coins, Buy, Sell, Transfer & List Any Coins |Free Signup Today: https://wallet.bitshares.org/?r=bangzi
Please Vote for My Witness: Bangzi |Witness Update: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=26459.0

Offline ebit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1818
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ebit
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #8 on: February 22, 2020, 04:47:51 am »
Quote
BSIP 70: P2P Lending (up to 400 hours)
I like this .We need new DEFI application scenario for spreading.
telegram:ebit521
https://weibo.com/ebiter

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1754
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2020, 07:31:12 am »
BSIP64,69,70,80,85 haven't got a higher than BSIP-Threshold voting power, I don't think it's appropriate to include them.

and in my view some of them need more discussion, maybe it's better to put them into next part after voting up.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2020, 07:37:27 am by bitcrab »
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2020, 08:21:32 am »
Wait part two.

2020 core worker = 1 year has 12 months.

Part 1 = 6 months worker.

Read the worker PLEASE before commenting.

Chee®s

OK,  Part 2=4 months worker.

Will it be 4 months or 6 months and end in February 2021, as long as it's starts in 2020 its part of 2020 worker. Idea is to do Part 1 before we even start discussing Part 2. :)

I think it's too early to discuss the part 2 right now. Things can change a lot in 6 months. If part 1 worked well, we may start discussing part 2.

Got it.

Development for BSIP 64: Operational HTLC preimage length, HASH160 addition, and memo field (up to 12 hours)
Development for BSIP 69: Additional Assert Predicates (up to 25 hours)
Development for BSIP 74: Margin Call Fee Ratio (up to 60 hours)
Development for BSIP 77: Require Higher CR When Creating/Adjusting Debt Positions (up to 80 hours)
Development for BSIP 86: Share market fee to the network (up to 60 hours)

If we can make a small Mainnet Release for these BSIPs asap? in the next two months?

Even I love the idea of having 64, 77 and 86 asap as tomorrow - unfortunately the answer is no.

Why ?

1) Process, development structure and corporate execution/deliveries are a must. Randomness will not be allowed
       a) If you take a close look at the worker roadmap you'll notice there is suddenly 60-80 hours for Mainnet 4.0 Release that was scheduled for November 2019. After careful review, release is not fully prepared and first 7-10 days of worker will be going to that release. 3 Core devs has total availability for that period is 130 hours and we have to give it some testing. Abit will be more utilizing hours on Audit than on coding if we want to keep some process.
       b) there is no such thing as "asap Mainnet release" and it never was unless fix takes 1-5 hours and usually it's halt of the blockchain. Each development has to be implemented on the testnet upon delivery and tested for minimum period of 25-30 days prior to mainnet release. This worker has no budget or plan to change to process for 2 release as it states clearly little bit below under the section called "New Schedule for Releases". First sentence and current schedule pretty much confirms explanation.
       c) To avoid another a) in this worker - each dev will be assigned to BSIP's if worker becomes active. Their deliveries will be reflected through available hours we defined per each team member against ETA's on BSIP's/task being assigned to.

Bitshares Chinese Forum
https://dpos.club

China block some web sites including Github. Users from China even have difficulty to post a reply in this forum.

Much appreciated for link. Yeah, I completely lost though of GitHub with China GFW. Apologies will update the links in a moment.

Quote
BSIP 70: P2P Lending (up to 400 hours)
I like this .We need new DEFI application scenario for spreading.

Idea is yes, to not just satisfy holders but also to actually bring benefits and profits to the protocol as well.

BSIP64,69,70,80,85 haven't got a higher than BSIP-Threshold voting power, I don't think it's appropriate to include them.

and in my view some of them need more discussion, maybe it's better to put them into next part after voting up.

I'll quote important part of worker then ill explain myself

Quote: "This worker's agreement is crafted as a middle path between the desires of BTS core token holders, priorities for the blockchain and technology, as well as availability of core development team."

Explanation:
- Worker is crafted as balanced offer between holder's desires and necessities for the blockchain as protocol/tech to gain more visibility, profits and power in the real world outside our private interests.
- Worker includes needed amount of hours for documentation, BSIP's and discussions as well as delivery of each at the lower rate.
- Worker defines they will be delivered and released will be only the ones voted in. This is a development offer that satisfy both sides. What will be released its up to holders. What will be developed is result of holders desire and market demand.

If holders have issue with above terms it will certainly become a problem, since the terms are more fair than ever to the both BLOCKCHAIN and HOLDERS itself.

Now I've been hearing how bitassets are irrelevant and obsolete but i still see few BSIP's related to their mechanics and terms of use, so to stop pretending - let's just make a compensation and think about blockchain as well for once.


Chee®s
« Last Edit: February 22, 2020, 08:24:37 am by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline JohnR

  • Committee member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 93
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #11 on: February 23, 2020, 08:36:54 pm »
Fully support this plan for Phase I of Core Development.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12912
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2020, 11:30:44 am »
+5%
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4212
    • View Profile
    • Steemit Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #13 on: February 27, 2020, 09:39:58 am »
I think it's too early to discuss the part 2 right now. Things can change a lot in 6 months. If part 1 worked well, we may start discussing part 2.

Got it.

Development for BSIP 64: Operational HTLC preimage length, HASH160 addition, and memo field (up to 12 hours)
Development for BSIP 69: Additional Assert Predicates (up to 25 hours)
Development for BSIP 74: Margin Call Fee Ratio (up to 60 hours)
Development for BSIP 77: Require Higher CR When Creating/Adjusting Debt Positions (up to 80 hours)
Development for BSIP 86: Share market fee to the network (up to 60 hours)

If we can make a small Mainnet Release for these BSIPs asap? in the next two months?
If to add features into 4.0.0 (and postpone the release date), I'd like to have "BSIP 85 Maker Order Creation Fee Discount" in it, since it's important to increase chain income.

Also "BSIP 87: Force Settlement Fee Ratio".

In addition, if to attract gateways building businesses on top of the chain, "BSIP 81 Simple Maker-Taker Market Fees" would be helpful.

Each of these changes is relatively small. However, more BSIPs means more development work and more time is needed.
BTS account: abit
BTS committee member: abit
BTS witness: in.abit

Offline sschiessl

Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #14 on: February 27, 2020, 09:54:27 am »
I think it's too early to discuss the part 2 right now. Things can change a lot in 6 months. If part 1 worked well, we may start discussing part 2.

Got it.

Development for BSIP 64: Operational HTLC preimage length, HASH160 addition, and memo field (up to 12 hours)
Development for BSIP 69: Additional Assert Predicates (up to 25 hours)
Development for BSIP 74: Margin Call Fee Ratio (up to 60 hours)
Development for BSIP 77: Require Higher CR When Creating/Adjusting Debt Positions (up to 80 hours)
Development for BSIP 86: Share market fee to the network (up to 60 hours)

If we can make a small Mainnet Release for these BSIPs asap? in the next two months?
If to add features into 4.0.0 (and postpone the release date), I'd like to have "BSIP 85 Maker Order Creation Fee Discount" in it, since it's important to increase chain income.

Also "BSIP 87: Force Settlement Fee Ratio".

In addition, if to attract gateways building businesses on top of the chain, "BSIP 81 Simple Maker-Taker Market Fees" would be helpful.

Each of these changes is relatively small. However, more BSIPs means more development work and more time is needed.

First step would be to get them voted in. Please keep in mind that 1.14.158 - threshold-bsip is yet to be established, and at least I don't see it as the threshold for BSIPs as approved by BTS holders. If you do see it as the active threshold for BSIPs, please explain why.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #15 on: February 27, 2020, 09:59:58 am »
Spend little time, get a big influence.

I think what we need most now is change the trading method of market, which will take a big influence to the bitasset.

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4212
    • View Profile
    • Steemit Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #16 on: February 27, 2020, 06:48:48 pm »
Spend little time, get a big influence.

I think what we need most now is change the trading method of market, which will take a big influence to the bitasset.
I don't understand.
BTS account: abit
BTS committee member: abit
BTS witness: in.abit

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4212
    • View Profile
    • Steemit Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #17 on: February 27, 2020, 06:49:26 pm »
I think it's too early to discuss the part 2 right now. Things can change a lot in 6 months. If part 1 worked well, we may start discussing part 2.

Got it.

Development for BSIP 64: Operational HTLC preimage length, HASH160 addition, and memo field (up to 12 hours)
Development for BSIP 69: Additional Assert Predicates (up to 25 hours)
Development for BSIP 74: Margin Call Fee Ratio (up to 60 hours)
Development for BSIP 77: Require Higher CR When Creating/Adjusting Debt Positions (up to 80 hours)
Development for BSIP 86: Share market fee to the network (up to 60 hours)

If we can make a small Mainnet Release for these BSIPs asap? in the next two months?
If to add features into 4.0.0 (and postpone the release date), I'd like to have "BSIP 85 Maker Order Creation Fee Discount" in it, since it's important to increase chain income.

Also "BSIP 87: Force Settlement Fee Ratio".

In addition, if to attract gateways building businesses on top of the chain, "BSIP 81 Simple Maker-Taker Market Fees" would be helpful.

Each of these changes is relatively small. However, more BSIPs means more development work and more time is needed.

First step would be to get them voted in. Please keep in mind that 1.14.158 - threshold-bsip is yet to be established, and at least I don't see it as the threshold for BSIPs as approved by BTS holders. If you do see it as the active threshold for BSIPs, please explain why.
I mean to include them if they're voted in.
BTS account: abit
BTS committee member: abit
BTS witness: in.abit

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #18 on: February 27, 2020, 09:19:51 pm »
@everyone

Worker Roadmap is being edited and budget recalculated. Posting update later today. It will follow with escrow submission after re-discussion.

Chee®s
« Last Edit: February 27, 2020, 09:24:25 pm by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline Thul3

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #19 on: March 05, 2020, 11:26:28 am »
Is there a worker coming ?


Am asking because if not i will open one myself to push it forward
« Last Edit: March 05, 2020, 11:29:20 am by Thul3 »

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #20 on: March 13, 2020, 12:03:44 am »
Yes it's coming. Sincere apologies that I was completely unable to communicate or dedicate myself to work lately, I've had some private/family issues to take care of.
 
Before actual new draft, in simple terms:

Mainnet 4.0 will be rescheduled
Mainnet 4.0 will have few additional BSIP's added
Mainnet 4.0 will execute "reserve pool negative balances" fix
Mainnet 5.0 will not be included in 2020 core part 1 worker
Testnet 5.0 will be final point of the new worker draft

Chee®s
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1754
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2020, 02:35:49 pm »
Yes it's coming. Sincere apologies that I was completely unable to communicate or dedicate myself to work lately, I've had some private/family issues to take care of.
 
Before actual new draft, in simple terms:

Mainnet 4.0 will be rescheduled
Mainnet 4.0 will have few additional BSIP's added
Mainnet 4.0 will execute "reserve pool negative balances" fix
Mainnet 5.0 will not be included in 2020 core part 1 worker
Testnet 5.0 will be final point of the new worker draft

Chee®s

I believe release 4.0 will be a milestone in BTS evolution.
hope the reorganized core team can start to work on this ASAP. Time does not wait for people.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2020, 02:38:32 pm by bitcrab »
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #22 on: March 20, 2020, 08:32:14 am »
After long and productive discussion with holders from the East, we agreed that some implementations and fixes cannot wait, but we also agreed that we cannot squeeze 2 mainnet releases in 6 months worker.

As a compromise and demand for urgent deployment before actual full core worker, I'm coming here on behalf of holders and core team to present you new 2020-core-prelude mini worker

2020-core-prelude 2 months (8.7 weeks) worker

Github - English version
PDF - English version (accessible from China)

Worker is sent to Linda Tian for translation and to the escrow to go on-chain, more updates to follow.

Chee®s

« Last Edit: March 20, 2020, 08:34:53 am by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #23 on: March 20, 2020, 10:16:58 am »
After long and productive discussion with holders from the East, we agreed that some implementations and fixes cannot wait, but we also agreed that we cannot squeeze 2 mainnet releases in 6 months worker.

As a compromise and demand for urgent deployment before actual full core worker, I'm coming here on behalf of holders and core team to present you new 2020-core-prelude mini worker

2020-core-prelude 2 months (8.7 weeks) worker

Github - English version

PDF - English version (accessible from China)

Worker is sent to Linda Tian for translation and to the escrow to go on-chain, more updates to follow.

Chee®s

Which holders from east?

Why BSIP87 is more important than BSIP77?  need some reason.

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #24 on: March 20, 2020, 10:21:05 am »
After long and productive discussion with holders from the East, we agreed that some implementations and fixes cannot wait, but we also agreed that we cannot squeeze 2 mainnet releases in 6 months worker.

As a compromise and demand for urgent deployment before actual full core worker, I'm coming here on behalf of holders and core team to present you new 2020-core-prelude mini worker

2020-core-prelude 2 months (8.7 weeks) worker

Github - English version

PDF - English version (accessible from China)

Worker is sent to Linda Tian for translation and to the escrow to go on-chain, more updates to follow.

Chee®s

Which holders from east?

Why BSIP87 is more important than BSIP77?  need some reason.

1) Everyone I was able to reach by WeChat and it's respective groups.
2) It's not that it's less important. It's more important to people with significant stake who are publicly agreeing to it and requesting it to be implemented. From the developers perspective, BSIP87 is far easier implementation that requires less time in testing over BSIP77.

Chee®s
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #25 on: March 20, 2020, 10:45:23 am »
After long and productive discussion with holders from the East, we agreed that some implementations and fixes cannot wait, but we also agreed that we cannot squeeze 2 mainnet releases in 6 months worker.

As a compromise and demand for urgent deployment before actual full core worker, I'm coming here on behalf of holders and core team to present you new 2020-core-prelude mini worker

2020-core-prelude 2 months (8.7 weeks) worker

Github - English version

PDF - English version (accessible from China)

Worker is sent to Linda Tian for translation and to the escrow to go on-chain, more updates to follow.

Chee®s

Which holders from east?

Why BSIP87 is more important than BSIP77?  need some reason.

1) Everyone I was able to reach by WeChat and it's respective groups.
2) It's not that it's less important. It's more important to people with significant stake who are publicly agreeing to it and requesting it to be implemented. From the developers perspective, BSIP87 is far easier implementation that requires less time in testing over BSIP77.

Chee®s

1. En, i can't get any informations from this respective groups in any public outlet,seems they are mysterious.
2. I can't get any enough reason for BSIP87, maybe just they like it.

I think BSIP74 and BSIP77 is enough for this mini mainnet releases, maybe incloud BSIP 64, so we may make a deployment in 1 month.

Besids, BSIP74 still have some problems need to check.

Ok, they can do what they like, wish they can destroy the bitassets totally.

Best regards.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2020, 10:54:58 am by binggo »

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #26 on: March 20, 2020, 11:13:53 am »
After long and productive discussion with holders from the East, we agreed that some implementations and fixes cannot wait, but we also agreed that we cannot squeeze 2 mainnet releases in 6 months worker.

As a compromise and demand for urgent deployment before actual full core worker, I'm coming here on behalf of holders and core team to present you new 2020-core-prelude mini worker

2020-core-prelude 2 months (8.7 weeks) worker

Github - English version

PDF - English version (accessible from China)

Worker is sent to Linda Tian for translation and to the escrow to go on-chain, more updates to follow.

Chee®s

Which holders from east?

Why BSIP87 is more important than BSIP77?  need some reason.

1) Everyone I was able to reach by WeChat and it's respective groups.
2) It's not that it's less important. It's more important to people with significant stake who are publicly agreeing to it and requesting it to be implemented. From the developers perspective, BSIP87 is far easier implementation that requires less time in testing over BSIP77.

Chee®s

1. En, i can't get any informations from this respective groups in any public outlet,seems they are mysterious.
2. I can't get any enough reason for BSIP87, maybe just they like it.

I think BSIP74 and BSIP77 is enough for this mini mainnet releases, maybe incloud BSIP 64, so we may make a deployment in 1 month.

Besids, BSIP74 still have some problems need to check.

Ok, they can do what they like, wish they can destroy the bitassets totally.

Best regards.

To be clear, I've personally originally have wanted full workers and list of BSIP's that satisfy all sides. Result is that there is a requirement for this to happens and here we are. Even though i respect your sentiment, i would still advise you to cheer up. Overlapping worker will be published in less than 2 months that will include both of mentioned BSIP's and will be proper worker as original intentions were.

Hence why worker name has `prelude` in it.

Chee®s
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline Thul3

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #27 on: March 20, 2020, 11:44:59 am »
Bsip64 has not been voted active.


« Last Edit: March 20, 2020, 11:46:34 am by Thul3 »

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #28 on: March 20, 2020, 12:10:22 pm »
Bsip64 has not been voted active.

Quoted from the English version of worker above:

"Important Notice to BTS Core Token Holders

By approving this worker you're not approving BSIP's available for voting on chain that are included in this worker. To avoid any delays with mainnet release upon delivery of this worker, please provide vote of support to listed BSIP's within 45 days from the worker start."


Chee®s
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline GBAC

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #29 on: March 23, 2020, 03:05:39 pm »
After long and productive discussion with holders from the East, we agreed that some implementations and fixes cannot wait, but we also agreed that we cannot squeeze 2 mainnet releases in 6 months worker.

As a compromise and demand for urgent deployment before actual full core worker, I'm coming here on behalf of holders and core team to present you new 2020-core-prelude mini worker

2020-core-prelude 2 months (8.7 weeks) worker

Github - English version
PDF - English version (accessible from China)

Worker is sent to Linda Tian for translation and to the escrow to go on-chain, more updates to follow.

Chee®s

Chinese version is updated in dpos.club
https://dpos.club/t/topic/792

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #30 on: March 24, 2020, 12:08:47 am »
Thanks to GBAC and Linda for translation.


I've seen in DPOS forums that few Chinese members are against BSIP for market fee sharing and is complaining on how blockchain already collect fee from users, and in general against this worker. But I haven't seen them last 30 months doing nothing apart stiring fire, being unhappy and constantly "knowing" for better but never doing it themselves. Step up with solutions if you have better, nobody stops you and nobody ever did, but stop saying shit that has no sense or brain behind closed doors because ill be reading them. Always.

And to be clear for one fact about this project. BitShares exists 7 years, and NOT A SINGLE GATEWAY made it profitable for the blockchain in that period of time. It did made it for themselves. Fees collected from the blockchain would not be sufficient even if we would be having 100M USD volume a day with our fee structure over the past and to not mention that only reason WHY BITSHARES IS NOT PROFITABLE IS BECAUSE EVERYBODY CAN BUILD AND EARN FROM IT FOR FREE WHILE BLOCKCHAIN GETS NOTHING.

So, yes, it's time to stop doing everything and giving everything for free. Thanks for your support.

Chee®s
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 12:10:42 am by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #31 on: March 24, 2020, 01:37:32 am »
Thanks to GBAC and Linda for translation.


I've seen in DPOS forums that few Chinese members are against BSIP for market fee sharing and is complaining on how blockchain already collect fee from users, and in general against this worker. But I haven't seen them last 30 months doing nothing apart stiring fire, being unhappy and constantly "knowing" for better but never doing it themselves. Step up with solutions if you have better, nobody stops you and nobody ever did, but stop saying shit that has no sense or brain behind closed doors because ill be reading them. Always.

And to be clear for one fact about this project. BitShares exists 7 years, and NOT A SINGLE GATEWAY made it profitable for the blockchain in that period of time. It did made it for themselves. Fees collected from the blockchain would not be sufficient even if we would be having 100M USD volume a day with our fee structure over the past and to not mention that only reason WHY BITSHARES IS NOT PROFITABLE IS BECAUSE EVERYBODY CAN BUILD AND EARN FROM IT FOR FREE WHILE BLOCKCHAIN GETS NOTHING.

So, yes, it's time to stop doing everything and giving everything for free. Thanks for your support.

Chee®s

Must be clear,nothing in BTS is free,every transaction will pay the transaction fee.

If BTS can't feed himself with these transaction fees,why not to increase the transaction fee?

If we charge the fees from BSIP86, so give a reason to these GATEWAYs:

why they should build a business in BTS,not in other block chain?

why they should build a Gateway not a Bridge?



Quote
    Valid range of that parameter is [0, 100%].

why is 100%,not should be [0, 1%]?

I think no one like this valid range of that parameter is [0, 100%], too dangerous for a business.

What i want to say:We shouldn't have too much hope on BSIP86.


Must be clear: i have gave the solutions long time ago,and seems nobody like them,people just want to do what they think is “right”,so let we see what will happend.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 02:27:10 am by binggo »

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #32 on: March 24, 2020, 02:35:33 am »
Thanks to GBAC and Linda for translation.


I've seen in DPOS forums that few Chinese members are against BSIP for market fee sharing and is complaining on how blockchain already collect fee from users, and in general against this worker. But I haven't seen them last 30 months doing nothing apart stiring fire, being unhappy and constantly "knowing" for better but never doing it themselves. Step up with solutions if you have better, nobody stops you and nobody ever did, but stop saying shit that has no sense or brain behind closed doors because ill be reading them. Always.

And to be clear for one fact about this project. BitShares exists 7 years, and NOT A SINGLE GATEWAY made it profitable for the blockchain in that period of time. It did made it for themselves. Fees collected from the blockchain would not be sufficient even if we would be having 100M USD volume a day with our fee structure over the past and to not mention that only reason WHY BITSHARES IS NOT PROFITABLE IS BECAUSE EVERYBODY CAN BUILD AND EARN FROM IT FOR FREE WHILE BLOCKCHAIN GETS NOTHING.

So, yes, it's time to stop doing everything and giving everything for free. Thanks for your support.

Chee®s

Must be clear,nothing in BTS is free,every transaction will pay the transaction fee.

If BTS can't feed himself with these transaction fees,why not to increase the transaction fee?

If we charge the fees from BSIP86, so give a reason to these GATEWAYs:

why they should build a business in BTS,not in other block chain?

why they should build a Gateway not a Bridge?



Quote
    Valid range of that parameter is [0, 100%].

why is 100%,not should be [0, 1%]?

I think no one like this valid range of that parameter is [0, 100%], too dangerous for a business.


FEES/INCOME ISSUE:

1) Why Gateway not pay for software to fork ? Why Gateway not pay listing in wallet ? Why bitshares.org owner has to bare legal responsibility for free ? Why gateway not call itself BitShares so it marketing more people to the blockchain itself ?
2) You can't increase fees on transactions when you have no business or customers. Binance can, we cannot.
3) DEX is NOT BITSHARES. It's time to filter businesses who "wants to build" to the one who are legit and have liquidity (wanna do business) and ones who dont wanna do business and are illegal.
4) What sane business&development manager will let everyone fuck his project for free ?

CB perfect example what happens when you let someone run for free for so long without any legal due dilligence, and what consequences it leaves on us.


BSIP86 ISSUE:

We already had discussion and nobody will push 0,100 as even me was never ok with it who isnt gateway owner. You just failed to follow up on time or participate when consensus actually did, now you're just creating fire for nothing. 

25% is tax in some countries, VAT on operations and sales - so we are not asking anything here that is not reasonable. Maybe we dont like governments, but they still do make money and we are not. Guess we are doing it wrong, not them.

Now for a holder who missed discussion on github for MONTHS, failed to respond in all groups when it was actually discussed and not being willing to read or do proper due dilligence -

https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/pull/253

Check this out.

I have nothing against you, but you really need to start participate more quietly and spend more actual effort participating - now you're being classified as a spammer just because you THINK you know but you DONT want to read/hear.

Chee®s
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 02:38:39 am by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #33 on: March 24, 2020, 04:13:14 am »
Quote
Why Gateway not pay?
2) You can't increase fees on transactions when you have no business or customers. Binance can, we cannot.

“chicken-or-the-egg”

This is a very complex problem.

Quote
3) DEX is NOT BITSHARES. It's time to filter businesses who "wants to build" to the one who are legit and have liquidity (wanna do business) and ones who dont wanna do business and are illegal.

ok,want to learn the Binance DEX(https://www.binance.org/)?I don't think so.

Quote
4) What sane business&development manager will let everyone fuck his project for free ?

en, the project still get the transaction fees, not free.

Quote
BSIP86 ISSUE

Just a small group people discuss it, even me just have a little words in the ISSUE, no body want to think and read it seriously,and even no Chinese version,how many members of CN-VOTE know what‘s the means of this BSIP? only less.

I don't like this BSIP86 in this mini mainnet releases as it is not so important, just can get a very little income from it.

I have quit all the groups of BTS long time ago, as i can't get any valuable discussion, maybe they more like to participate in the battle of steem.

I even don't like quietly any more, somebody have injured the bts holders and bitassets once and once again, and can't or not want to get any lessons from it. maybe i should be quietly like blocktrads, sell 35M bts and hold 7M BTS of community, and say “ i don't trust them.”

Quote
spammer

I like this words, abit and bitcrab call me that, i like to be it, they think they know and right, let the time show.

or you can ban me as a spammer for a year,so i will can't question anything in here,they also have a quiet environment to do what they like or want to do, that's very equal and reasonable.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 04:36:55 am by binggo »

Offline twitter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 246
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #34 on: March 24, 2020, 06:45:03 am »

Mainnet 4.0 will execute "reserve pool negative balances" fix


Chee®s

Can you elaborate  how to execute "reserve pool negative balances" fix?  by reducing the amount of current pool balance ?
thanks in advance
witness:

Offline bench

Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #35 on: March 24, 2020, 10:37:20 am »

Mainnet 4.0 will execute "reserve pool negative balances" fix


Chee®s

Can you elaborate  how to execute "reserve pool negative balances" fix?  by reducing the amount of current pool balance ?
thanks in advance

Max. supply is the same and the reserve pool gets reduced.
Be part of the change and vote for the bitshares-vision proxy!

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #36 on: March 24, 2020, 10:37:41 am »
Quote
Why Gateway not pay?
2) You can't increase fees on transactions when you have no business or customers. Binance can, we cannot.

“chicken-or-the-egg”

This is a very complex problem.

Quote
3) DEX is NOT BITSHARES. It's time to filter businesses who "wants to build" to the one who are legit and have liquidity (wanna do business) and ones who dont wanna do business and are illegal.

ok,want to learn the Binance DEX(https://www.binance.org/)?I don't think so.

Quote
4) What sane business&development manager will let everyone fuck his project for free ?

en, the project still get the transaction fees, not free.

Quote
BSIP86 ISSUE

Just a small group people discuss it, even me just have a little words in the ISSUE, no body want to think and read it seriously,and even no Chinese version,how many members of CN-VOTE know what‘s the means of this BSIP? only less.

I don't like this BSIP86 in this mini mainnet releases as it is not so important, just can get a very little income from it.

I have quit all the groups of BTS long time ago, as i can't get any valuable discussion, maybe they more like to participate in the battle of steem.

I even don't like quietly any more, somebody have injured the bts holders and bitassets once and once again, and can't or not want to get any lessons from it. maybe i should be quietly like blocktrads, sell 35M bts and hold 7M BTS of community, and say “ i don't trust them.”

Quote
spammer

I like this words, abit and bitcrab call me that, i like to be it, they think they know and right, let the time show.

or you can ban me as a spammer for a year,so i will can't question anything in here,they also have a quiet environment to do what they like or want to do, that's very equal and reasonable.

Ill be simple with math and numbers, since words means nothing in this case and there is no "chicken-or-egg" in business terminology. Maybe it does in agriculture, but not here.

Currently BitShares blockchain has
Weekly: <1400 unique accounts
Daily average: 200 unique accounts
OPS Average: 215000
TX Average: 1.44 per second

24 hours = 86400 seconds

Total daily TX average: 124416

Basic member regular transaction fee to place order: 0.04826 BTS
Lifetime member regular transaction fee to place order: 0.00965 BTS

If we TAKE MID AVERAGE between basic and lifetime we get

Average member regular transaction fee: ‭0.019305‬ BTS

Moment of truth...

124416 TX * ‭0.019305‬ BTS = 2401.85088 BTS per day (if we have full day of regular transactions)

At the current ticker price of BTS this blockchain and project is making

DAILY PROFIT FROM FEES: 2401.85088 BTS @ 0.017224 USD = 41.37 USD

Monthly: Daily * 30 = 1241.1 USD


Costs of bitshares.org and news.bitshares.org monthly are x3 that.

What profits you are talking about and why i still need to let anyone build for free or list for free or operate on TOTALLY UNPROFITABLE BLOCKCHAIN AND OUR OWN BUSINESS FOR FREE ?

Chee®s

 
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 12:11:50 pm by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #37 on: March 24, 2020, 12:39:57 pm »
The math and numbers is simple,i have got these numbers and the questions long time ago, it seems nobody care.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=26759.0

The fundamental questions is:

Why we found these questions so late, it should must be clearly in the beginning of the project: How this project can feed itself?

Even have the BSIP86, the system still can't get enough income to feed itself, BSIP86 only can earn a very very little income, we can find the result and truth from these closed gateways. Bitcrab knew that very clearly.

now we have 0.04826 BTS transaction fee to place order, the only problems is we lost very much transactions in the bitassets.

So BSIP86 is not so important in this mini mainnet releases, it can be put into a max mainnet releases.

About BSIP74, i have asked for this fee long longs time ago, even i open an issue in github for it, still nobody like and care about it, this is the problems.
BSIP74 will be the maximum income for bts in the future(if we have a suitable feed price, without BSIP76 and a reasonable risk management mechanism).
The bitasset still will own the largest group of clients from past to the future, this is the truth,we have to admit these.

About BSIP87, i don't like it, the reason i have said very clearly, the price fluctuation only must be spreaded and transferred, shouldn't be destroied, this is a very simple finance concept, BM didn't understand that, most of bts holder didn't that, but the other people outsids know that.
They just want use BSIP87 to charge fees and destroy the pledgor with a non-normal means.
So i think it shouldn't be in this mini mainnet releases, it just wastes money and time.

BSIP77 is more important than BSIP86 and BSIP87 together, seems nobody clear about it, just want to charge fees charge fees.

The most of DEX income is inadequate to meet the expense, this is the cruel reality, even we make a BSIP86, only defi can give the help for now.

and everything is not free on the BLOCKCHAIN, every operations have paid fees.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2020, 08:16:20 am by binggo »

Offline startail

Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #38 on: March 26, 2020, 09:15:00 pm »
It's nice to see that the Core worker has been accepted by the community. To move forward in bad times we need to continue supporting development.

The Bitshares UI needs your support as well, and is at the moment 60% supported. The team from last year stands ready to continue development when the community supports their work. Read more about the worker here.

« Last Edit: March 26, 2020, 09:26:03 pm by startail »

Offline Thul3

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #39 on: March 27, 2020, 08:06:49 pm »
I agree with Bingo that majority of BSIPs the workers plans to focus on are a waste of resources.

Anybody counted how much time will pass till even the coding cost have been paid back ?

I disagree agree on BSIP87 as i think thats something which would lower the force settlements dramaticly which are hurting the ecosystem.
Quote
The most of DEX income is inadequate to meet the expense, this is the cruel reality, even we make a BSIP86, only defi can give the help for now.

I made the same demand as Bingo and also clearly said before that thats something which needs to be included to get my vote.

The proposed BSIPS have no real impact based on our volume thats the reality.Instead of focusing on getting new users and fresh money on dex we only focus on DEX parameters.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2020, 08:27:21 pm by Thul3 »

Offline Thul3

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #40 on: March 27, 2020, 08:31:10 pm »
Really asking myself if this team is suitable for that job if they are even unable to see if something is profitable or not for bitshares.

Let's even assume we get our golden days back where we have 10.000.000 bts volume on BTC.

Thats $160.000 volume in USD.From that GDEX is charging 0.1%

Thats $160 per day from GDEX .
How much is GDEX going to share? 20% ?   That's what $32 income for DEX on a 10.000.000 BTS volume ?

Wow what a game changer

In 1-2 years we may have the coding cost back

Offline Digital Lucifer

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 355
  • 13 years of being Slackware abUser
    • View Profile
    • BitShares 3.0
  • BitShares: dls.cipher
  • GitHub: dls-cipher
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #41 on: March 28, 2020, 02:52:03 am »
20$+ to the pool is better than 0$ to the pool. Is there any other bsip profitable for reserve pool you holders came up with ?

And how is illegal P2P lending profitable for the blockchain ?

Chee®a
« Last Edit: March 28, 2020, 07:28:31 am by Digital Lucifer »
Milos (DL) Preocanin
Owner and manager of bitshares.org
Move Institute - RN: 2098555000
Murska Sobota, Slovenia, SI.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1754
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #42 on: March 28, 2020, 09:02:10 am »
The proposed BSIPS have no real impact based on our volume thats the reality.Instead of focusing on getting new users and fresh money on dex we only focus on DEX parameters.

I believe that charging 1% on force settlement will not lower the volume dramatically.

Yes the current trading volume in DEX in low, but definitely we need BSIP86 as a tax infrastructure.

and charging on margin call is also a must.

Yes we need DeFi, P2P Lending is on discussion in the next core worker, but we need this core prelude worker first. 

I hope you and @alt be the contributor, not the obstructor of BTS evolution.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com

Offline Thul3

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #43 on: March 28, 2020, 12:49:00 pm »
I'm going to open my own worker with proposals which are real progress for bitshares to catch the big money flood which will accure soon because of negative interest.

You can focus on your $20 BS .

The political game of CN-Vote and BEOS is disgusting.

I supported old CN-Vote because their demand made sense but todays CN-Vote control demand is out of control.

Making inside deals with BEOS which is hardening BEOS position on bitshares because of some workers which creaters are in their favour/debt .

I supported CN-Vote because their policy at the beginning were my policy like:
"Being a witness is a privilage for supporters"
"Being a committee member is for supporters to change something activly"
"Approving only workers which are effective which is the reason to support refund400k"

Current CN-Vote lost totaly its old policy.

I don't know who took over power on CN-Vote that old leaders had been kicked out.You are currently clearly ANTI-Bitshares.

You vote witnesses active based on inside deals which did nothing for bitshares (where did you left the privilage of being a witness?)

You vote committee members active who never participated in committee for over a year.
For what purpose did you voted in inactive committee members ?

Now you push shitty workers which effectiveness is ZERO same as your stupid scammy exchanges on which we wasted so many BTS for nothing.


You guys are sure you are able to handle right decissions when supporting these kind of staff ?

Seriously ?



IMF is going to publish soon the new monetary system with negative interest rates which is being talked everywhere on closed financial news
and you focus on a worker to get $10-20 per day on fees instead on how to catch big cake of money which will flood crypto to avoid negative interest rates ?

You have no Defi......no HTLC Gdex and Rudex being the only two gateways  and so many problems which need to be fixed as soon as possible......

But you instead focus now on Fee sharing which is stupdity high ten.

Based on your comments i can tell you that you start focusing on Defi etc when it's already over and money have flooded crypto......

Always running the golden eggs behind because being unable to even predict what will happen in next 6 months and what to focus on on given time.


Also bitcrab please stop your manipulative games it's not working on me.

I can be called a tyrann or anything else i don't care.What i care is bitshares and my blood boils when i see the never ending stupidity from cn-vote which is coming from the past months.


You want to add your own and dead accounts to witness and committee .....
Ok no problem then also do the work .......

From today i also stop my activitiy as committee member so the inactive CN-Vote and BEOS puppets who are voted in by inside deals can do it themself.

« Last Edit: March 28, 2020, 01:20:41 pm by Thul3 »

Offline binggo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
    • View Profile
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #44 on: March 28, 2020, 12:53:53 pm »
I believe that charging 1% on force settlement will not lower the volume dramatically.

Yes the current trading volume in DEX in low, but definitely we need BSIP86 as a tax infrastructure.

and charging on margin call is also a must.

Yes we need DeFi, P2P Lending is on discussion in the next core worker, but we need this core prelude worker first. 

I hope you and @alt be the contributor, not the obstructor of BTS evolution.

Quote
BTS evolution
?

I think you even didn't understan what's that mean.

How are you so definitely in this? how to prove?  In my mind, you have defined something in the past.

This mini mainnet releases spent too much, but got less, only BSIP74 have its role, but BSIP76 and BAIP2 may make it useless.

I think you still didn't have any clear and whole framework for bitasset or defi,what role these BSIPs in this worker will play in the further?  what‘s the correlation between them?

Maybe you just want to charge fees and charge fees, and defined what you still didn't know.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2020, 01:00:50 pm by binggo »

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1754
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: [Worker Proposal] 2020 Core Development (Part 1/2)
« Reply #45 on: March 31, 2020, 03:31:19 am »
Also bitcrab please stop your manipulative games it's not working on me.

perhaps you do not understand, but that's the way bitCNY is on, it is not a decision made by any single person, but by the whole China community.

we just updated one BTS derivative design, initially it based on the real time BTS price, now it base on one function of BTS price.

calm down, buddy, I'd like to see how you catch the big money flood which will accure soon because of negative interest.
Email:bitcrab@qq.com