Author Topic: Greedy delegates  (Read 10055 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Riverhead

hmm, the 'delegate' system is essentially just politics, is it not?  i'm a bit confused as to their purpose.   is it supposed to ensure integrity of block chain or somesuch?    i don't really see how the voting system helps this, seeing as how just a few people have 50% or more of the voting power (if they actually used it)?

Can you show me proof of this?  I am genuinely interested..

Based off some old list that showed who held the most PTS.  There's probably some site out there that shows the top holders?  shrug..  I don't imagine it's changed *too* much

Voting is weighted based on # of coins, correct?  that would inevitably lead to a handful of people controlling the 'delegates', great deal if you like the good old boy system
There's really only so much a delegate can do. So even if a lot of the votes are controlled by a few "old boys" they still don't have much power.

Offline zvs

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
oh, I am gonna shut my node down also, it maxed out at around 90 peers, running 82 right now.   is there some chart somewhere that shows propagation times, ala http://bitcoinstats.com/network/propagation/    ?  that was fun to mess with.

was experimenting with it in late march and it coincided with some 30% drop on transaction propagation times for the days I put 'em up.  started full time in mid-may.  bitcoin.sipa.org/seeds.txt is more like 2 1/2 to 3 months, not 30d, lol.

was running four, but now just 5.9.24.81 full-time

if this is anything like bitcoin, peers with crap upstream clog the whole system...   i could run bitcoind on my home connection (768kbps upstream) and when blockchain.info reported that i found a block ""first"", my upstream would be saturated for a good 3-5 minutes & essentially all from just the new block requests (used tcpkill on anyone trying to DL blockchain from me).  i have timeout set to 100ms now to avoid as many of the home users as possible, makes it much smoother
Pls to join Primedice 3 and frolic about merrily whilst gambling awe-inspiring quantities of bitcoins. The power of Christ compels you.

I have a dogecoin p2pool at Nogleg.

Offline zvs

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
hmm, the 'delegate' system is essentially just politics, is it not?  i'm a bit confused as to their purpose.   is it supposed to ensure integrity of block chain or somesuch?    i don't really see how the voting system helps this, seeing as how just a few people have 50% or more of the voting power (if they actually used it)?

Can you show me proof of this?  I am genuinely interested..

Based off some old list that showed who held the most PTS.  There's probably some site out there that shows the top holders?  shrug..  I don't imagine it's changed *too* much

Voting is weighted based on # of coins, correct?  that would inevitably lead to a handful of people controlling the 'delegates', great deal if you like the good old boy system
Pls to join Primedice 3 and frolic about merrily whilst gambling awe-inspiring quantities of bitcoins. The power of Christ compels you.

I have a dogecoin p2pool at Nogleg.

Offline fuzzy

hmm, the 'delegate' system is essentially just politics, is it not?  i'm a bit confused as to their purpose.   is it supposed to ensure integrity of block chain or somesuch?    i don't really see how the voting system helps this, seeing as how just a few people have 50% or more of the voting power (if they actually used it)?

Can you show me proof of this?  I am genuinely interested..
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline zvs

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
hmm, the 'delegate' system is essentially just politics, is it not?  i'm a bit confused as to their purpose.   is it supposed to ensure integrity of block chain or somesuch?    i don't really see how the voting system helps this, seeing as how just a few people have 50% or more of the voting power (if they actually used it)?



 
Pls to join Primedice 3 and frolic about merrily whilst gambling awe-inspiring quantities of bitcoins. The power of Christ compels you.

I have a dogecoin p2pool at Nogleg.

Offline Riverhead

There really aren't any users yet. The only transactions are voting, exchange transfers, and playing around by mostly the folks on this forum. That'll all change soon...

Offline zvs

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
Quote
It is not correct to call people greedy when they're really not even breaking even on their time/VPS cost.  When the money actually becomes significant to any meaningful degree, then market forces will kick in.  If delegates are providing no value then they will be removed.  Pushing for such a really low rate at this point is doing nothing but inviting centralization. 

Most budget VPS are rather godawful.  Most VPS in general are pretty crap as application servers (obv if you're paying like $80 a month for something on linode, that wouldn't be true).

I have i7-3930 with 64GB of RAM w/ Intel EXPI9301CT NIC, which is usually what I use for bitcoind or p2pool or anything like that... that or an i7-4770 or e3-1240v3 with 32GB of RAM.  This way you can keep everything on ramfs partition?

the bitcoind blocks can burst it up to 100MB/s w/ hundreds of clients requesting it simultaneously.   ive had this running for a while and dont think ive seen over 200kb/s

oh, and,

Peer 106.5.241.47:52856 disconnected us: You offered me a list of more sync blocks than could possibly exist

i get that every 10 or 15 minutes
 
« Last Edit: August 04, 2014, 12:54:17 am by zvs »
Pls to join Primedice 3 and frolic about merrily whilst gambling awe-inspiring quantities of bitcoins. The power of Christ compels you.

I have a dogecoin p2pool at Nogleg.

Offline Myshadow

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Thats a good point. if delegates can only destroy shares and not create then running a 0% node is greedy!

Has there been any discussions re: delegates being allowed to create shares as well as destroying them? a somewhat elastic supply vs a deflationary supply might be a good thing?

Offline Riverhead

One could make the case that I, at 5% income, am the greedy one.  Let me explain as perhaps I've misunderstood the economics.

As a delegate my income is based off transaction fees.  The lower the pay rate that I take the higher fees I'd need to break even which would cost our customers more since they're the ones paying the transaction fees.

On the other hand lets assume I own a million BTSX.  I am much better served by increasing the value of those million BTSX than I am by collecting transaction fees from issuing blocks.  So I set my pay really low to destroy the most shares while still attracting votes.

What appears at first as non greedy is really self serving.

Disclosure: I do not own even close to a million BTSX :-\
« Last Edit: August 03, 2014, 07:27:54 pm by Riverhead »

Offline fuzzy

I believe the system must run as lean as possible to improve future returns. I'm here for the long run.

Lets see how the post below progresses:

Node6 Delegates Group List - PAY RATE ≤ 6%
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6410

Who isn't in this for the long run?  Do you not think the market will adapt when the money actually matters ?

What were you contributing before ?  Why didn't we hear much from you previously?

I see 3 posts from you at the top of this forum.  You're pretty much spamming the board and calling everyone else greedy.

You contribute far less in "savings" than someone like happypatty, svk (sp?), or alt contributes.  It isn't even comparable.

At your cost you are probably just completely centralized.

For the record I am not even running a delegate. My plan is to create tools that people appreciate and help offset the costs.

(btw, I am currently running at a loss, but that's OK, because I still learn in the process)

At this stage, unfortunately just about anyone who isnt operating at a loss is "centralized".  It was no different in the early stages of bitcoin mining.  The only difference here is that with DPOS, delegates are competing with one another to produce the most value for the ecosystem long term. Trust earned early on will pay off very well later on.
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline bytemaster


help wallet_set_priority_fee
Usage:
wallet_set_priority_fee [fee]                                                                         Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.
Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.


Parameters:
  fee (real_amount, optional, defaults to "0"): the wallet priority fee to be set


Returns:
  asset


aliases: set_priority_fee, settrxfee

Looks like the client will enforce the fee, when I set the fee to 0.001, the client will tell me "RPC error: insufficient fee"

This is a bug that needs to be tracked down.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline kokojie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
    • View Profile

help wallet_set_priority_fee
Usage:
wallet_set_priority_fee [fee]                                                                         Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.
Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.


Parameters:
  fee (real_amount, optional, defaults to "0"): the wallet priority fee to be set


Returns:
  asset


aliases: set_priority_fee, settrxfee

Looks like the client will enforce the fee, when I set the fee to 0.001, the client will tell me "RPC error: insufficient fee"

Offline Riverhead


help wallet_set_priority_fee
Usage:
wallet_set_priority_fee [fee]                                                                         Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.
Used to set the priority fee for new transactions. Return current fee if no parameter is provided.


Parameters:
  fee (real_amount, optional, defaults to "0"): the wallet priority fee to be set


Returns:
  asset


aliases: set_priority_fee, settrxfee

Offline kokojie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
    • View Profile
It is up to the market users can set the fee in their client and delegates can set the fee in their client anyone who sets a fee that's too low and just have a pending transaction forever users can then voting delegates that approve at reasonable fee.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

users can set the fee? I always paid 0.1 btsx on transfer, how to set the fee?

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
It is up to the market users can set the fee in their client and delegates can set the fee in their client anyone who sets a fee that's too low and just have a pending transaction forever users can then voting delegates that approve at reasonable fee.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great! So delegates get two knobs:
1) Fees accepted
2) % of fees that are destroyed

This is another economics/game theory problem (you can write a book on this delegate game):
1) If there is no limitation to block size, delegates should accept any fee >0. A delegate gains nothing by turning down a fee. A delegate that turns down a fee is essentially just paying the next person in line a tip. So the first knob won't do anything. However, if there is a universal limit on blocksize, every delegate will accept the largest fee per byte transaction first.

The delegates are paid the average fee per round.  So there would be no tip passed on to anyone else except the average on the next round if someone accepts the transaction on the next round.  AFAIK.
I speak for myself and only myself.