Bittrex have sent an email out saying they are going to de-list Kobo. It might be worth sending them a quick email outlining recent developments and future plans to get them to hold-off from this. I've already sent one, but more is better.  |
|
|
|
I expect this has been asked before, but the OP is quite confusing.
It says that the 20% bonus applies to those "who buy WAVES tokens on April,12", but the timing is given in UTC and EST, so is it April 12 UTC or April 12 EST?
Basically, how much longer have I got before I miss the bonus?
20% bonus time is over. 12 hours and 30 minutes more for 20% bonus. If there are still tech issues by then we will prolong the period for the 20% bonus. Public address of ICO funds https://blockexplorer.com/address/3DWBSSAue32YS8PcW2gLs6m52BCCv3UgDAI was just about to bug-out of this ICO, but your reply has given me the confidence to put a little in. Good luck all! |
|
|
|
|
I expect this has been asked before, but the OP is quite confusing.
It says that the 20% bonus applies to those "who buy WAVES tokens on April,12", but the timing is given in UTC and EST, so is it April 12 UTC or April 12 EST?
Basically, how much longer have I got before I miss the bonus?
|
|
|
|
read this on polo trollbox
Then it's not true  Polo do not announce what coins they are going to list, it just happens. |
|
|
|
you need to delete old recordings to keep only your e-wallet, on page 135 there is a post about my solo mining download pack and go 3 easy steps, if you do not need the address of 2), and rejoice mining
Yeah, thanks psyx80, I have been using your packages and they work well.  I am in the gshift folder, but what do I delete to remove the corrupt blockchain and re-download the correct one? Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
Been solo mining over night, but I seem to be on a fork. My client is 500 blocks behind the explorer, but I am unable to get it to reset.
Any tips?
|
|
|
|
Azure is very good
A lot of coins like etherieum is at azure
Azure is just a phase, the novelty will wear off, especially as just about anything can join. Also, IMO, joining Azure is potentially dangerous, there's almost certainly an ulterior motive in Microsoft's eagerness to sign blockchains up. Basically, Azure is giving one click installs on it's servers, this can be achieved in other ways on Azure without signing any draconian agreement. |
|
|
|
You're account could have been compromised. People have no idea who's on the other side of that keyboard. This is the first time I've seen you even in this thread and you think anybody just trusts you because of a retarded rating based off of how much you talk in a forum?
You're fucking unbelievable.... do you remember saying this: Usually the people who are guilty the most point out their own flaws in others. No way you're going to get voted delegate at this rate. You're either nauseatingly indulgent or irrationally abusive... weird. windjc has been around a long time, he is trustworthy and I can say this because I have interacted with him on a number of occasions when we disagreed about something, but we managed it without stupid, petulant, child-like responses. I fucking hate thieves too.... and mooks..... are you sure it's not your wife who's done a getaway in the car? |
|
|
|
lol I already am but It looks like I touched a nerve on you. You mad bro? I was saying that that shit you were spouting is your opinion. You attacked me saying that I don't know shit and you don't expect some shit back? pathetic. Good for you, you can do all those things. Just like how you say that people can just talk shit about making profit sharing delegates, It can be said that you are also full of shit on all those things you say you can do until you fucking do them.
You're the one who's fucked up if you think everyone else is being greedy besides yourself. You're not fucking Robin Hood or Mother Theresa, we're all flawed. Usually the people who are guilty the most point out their own flaws in others.
Yeah yeah yeah, am I on your list yet? |
|
|
|
yes, people are already working on profit sharing delegates
Are they actually working on it or is it just promised? Because, if it's technically possible and payments can be enforced, I think I might STFU. It's not perfect, but it is a way forward. From what i can tell and have read and seen. yes , they are actively working on delegate pools that have profit sharing Do you mean delegates running voter pools or a pool operating as a delegate? Because a pool operating as a delegate seems rather pointless. |
|
|
|
The same could be said to you fuckface. Do you just assume that they ARE NOT? do you have proof or are you just trying to seem smarter than thou to feed your narcissism? I can just as easily throw shit out there like you. So why don't I STFU.  Wow. Your self-promotion is falling apart today, isn't it? Did I touch a nerve? Do you feel your easy income being threatened? I'm going for delegate, I offer all proceeds to my voters in ratio to the lisk they spend voting for me minus running costs Public accounts Hosted at work on a static IP or some VPS, whatever I'm told to do. Using whatever Dapp (being developed) will allow me to pay out the voters. and I can get Max, Oliver or both an invite to a very prestigious event in London where they can give a speech to several hundred International politicians and business leaders. The event is towards the end of the year and is held in a seriously fucking prestigious and world renowned venue.  |
|
|
|
yes, people are already working on profit sharing delegates
Are they actually working on it or is it just promised? Because, if it's technically possible and payments can be enforced, I think I might STFU. It's not perfect, but it is a way forward. |
|
|
|
This is a problem all smart contract technology has , even ethereum , augur especially . they might as well be called "dumb contracts "
The blockchain is a ledger , secured by a consensus mechanism that is economically difficult to attack the larger it gets . any smart contract that requires any sort of "proof" of the contract being fulfilled , be that an escrow , and exchange , a betting market , anything outside of the blockchain. Then you have shifted the consensus to outside of the security of the blockchain.
People need to confirm the events that took place for the smart contract to be fulfilled, this is why augur runs on reputation because inside the blockchain the smart contract has no single clue what happened outside of the blockchain it is beyond its powers to be able to confirm or verify. So you have to rely on people to confirm what actually happen , Offering an incentive for them to not lie , because the consensus of people is centralized and a hell of alot less secure than the mathematical proofs of a blockchain ledger.
101 delegates isn't exactly fully decentralized but any coin with smart contracts cant be currently , it is impossible, they rely on an outside source to confirm the actions and fulfillment's of the smart contracts that aree outside of the blockchain.
With things like AT (atomic transactions) now there are ways to be able to do trades cross different currencies while still not needing someone to confirm that the transaction went thru , the smart contract can confirm for itself , it has bridged the gap and expanded the purview of the blockchain to another connected blockchain , but still for the majority of tasks people claim smart contracts can deal with, the inescapable truth is , that without a centralized authority that can confirm consensus to events outside of the blockchain , smart contracts are useless.
This is what i think Mal is talking about, this is a temporary solution to the fact that outside consensus is impossible for smart contracts to function without something in place to allow outside consensus , 101 delegates does seem like one of the best solutions currently to allow smart contract to function outside of the blockchain. but obviously as technology develops in the coming years and there are expansions to blockchain tech and the ability to reach consensus on events that take place outside of the blockchain , then it can become more deentralized , more secure and remove any potential bad human actors within the system
Yes, I do understand all of this, but it's not really relevant to my main concern, which is about the way delegates claim their position. However, if the delegate pool was to be made substantially larger, wouldn't any centralisation claims be easier to fend off? Here's an interesting little thing about predicting voters turnouts... at least, I find it interesting: There is an (admittedly disputed) formulae for this: PB + D > C, P is the probability that an individual's vote will affect the outcome of an election, B is the perceived benefit that would be received if that person's favored political party or candidate were elected, D originally stood for democracy or civic duty, but today represents any social or personal gratification an individual gets from voting, and C is the time, effort, and financial cost involved in voting. For an average Lisk voter, we can already see that both P and B are essentially zero and I can't imagine D would be very high. C would likely be quite/very high due to the effort of reading about delegates and especially paying to vote. Now look at it from a (selfish) large Lisk holders/group point of view: P would be high, because a high Lisk holder or group can put a lot of Lisk into voting and quite possibly affect the outcome. B would be astronomical because he's hoping to get a delegate out of it. We'll leave D as before because we can afford to, and C would be possibly quite high due to cost, but not as high as B, because B is where the profit is. |
|
|
|
and if your answer is lazy people wont vote! My answer is how the fuck do you know?
We know because virtually all elections in any sphere have poor turnouts - and this is when people don't have to pay to vote. It also unfair to class non-voters as "lazy", they could just not have much Lisk, - this will get worse if Lisk's value lifts to any significant degree. I am trying to find some stats from the Crypti voting, which I intend to use how such a voting mechanism is open to simple, cheap manipulation. So, if anyone knows where I might find this, I'd be grateful.
It's all guesses based off of narrow circumstances that need specific types of things to happen in order to be successful.
It's not. Lots of people have admitted this is a potential problem. This is a reply from Max on the Lisk forum: "In my opinion people shouldn't concentrate so much on the forging, delegates and DPoS part of Lisk. It's only "a means to an end". They should concentrate on the dapp part. "This is, as far as I know, the first statement by Max on this subject and he seems to be telling us to not worry our pretty little heads about it - I'm doing my best not to read something into this, but it's getting more difficult not to. I would have thought consideration of all aspects of Lisk was paramount - it's not like there's a shortage of people to spend time on it. It's also the only contribution I can realistically provide, I'm not a coder, not much of a techie, but I have had an interest in voting and election systems for some time, I do know a little about it. I'm not sure that Lisk can be called decentralised when it relies on an effectively closed group of 101 delegates. Rohit Khare's definition of decentralisation states: "An open decentralized system is one in which the entry of peers is not regulated. Any peer can enter or leave the system at any time."Does Lisk meet this definition? I have invested a lot (for me) of BTC into this, so I am not fudding, I want it to work, but this issue is only going to get more pronounced as more money and trolls come into the scene - it needs sorting, one way or another. I was originally fairly keen on the lottery idea, but my thoughts are changing. It seems to me that if any voting system is going to give advantage to the already well-off, why not just auction the delegate positions? I don't see that there is much difference between an auction and the DPOS voting system as it stands, except it would be more honest. It would also remain true to the ideals of "the market". |
|
|
|
Has left-pad disaster affected Lisk?  Do all investors understand, that Lisk is very dependant to third parties via hundreds of megabytes of node modules?  It's not a disaster, it's an inconvenience. It can be got from the Github, no problem. |
|
|
|
|
Does anyone have a link to some delegate voting stats for Crypti?
I'm after things like number of voters, amount spent, votes received etc..... as much detail as possible.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
True, but in the long run, people will know who to vote for, just believe in the power of the people.
This has nothing to do with "the power of the people" and everything to do with the power of the wallet. It is based on Lisk holdings, not individual persons. Sorry about the run of posts everybody, just got in and I'm keen to catch up. |
|
|
|
What are the voting intervalls?
Voting is continuous and never stops. Anybody can be voted up or down at any time. This is why it is so important to have hot-swap Standby Delegate nodes (at zero reward) ready to go continuously to take the place of a $300K-per-year Active Delegate node that is suddenly voted down. What could possibly go wrong? This is where an attacker outside the 101 could DDoS individual delegates until they lose their position and the attackers delegate gets moved up into the 101. I can't believe for one minute that, if there's enough value involved, this won't happen. |
|
|
|
Cost of running my azure node is 89$ a month lol.Costs of running node, keeping reputation up, developing dapps, helping and contributing to Lisk and at the same time living the life of a normal human being with work, education, food and other expenses? = who knows. Delegates may earn a lot, but some people have lives as well, and that's why delegates may have the unwritten responsibility of helping everyone else apart from just Lisk I don't think you've followed the debate very well and everybody has a life. Let's be clear here, running a delegate node is not a full time job, it's actually easy money.... which is where the problems begin. |
|
|
|
About delegates and revenue.
As some mentionied above acitve delegate makes a 10k $ in year at the ICO price.
But, as I understand, you should have a 1% stake to be elected in any case (voting for yourself).
1% stake is 140 btc * 415 = 58k $. So, investing 58k $ you get a revenue 10k $, it's about 17% by year.
It's not big and, if I correct, same revenue level exists in DASH.
Another thing that many people sure to become an active delegate for free (without 1% stake).
But I don't think this way is works. Maybe for a few must respected and notable.
P.S. Maybe I don't right about 1% election, documentation is not clear for that moment.
As I understand it, anyone with a Lisk wallet can be voted for delegate, 1% holdings are not required and it rather fucks-up your maths. Also, the free delegates make no difference to the possibility of fraud. Finally, you're wrong, it is big. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
