I don't get the fight between you guys  I don't get it either man X) That guy must just like to start fights or something. My app is built upon Poloniex api, which allows you to post loan offers, trade, among other things.
Yes, that's what I assumed. The proposal of my app is to automate the placing of loans at good market rates.
Rates at poloniex lending varies wildly. When you do it manually you either are the whole day checking your repayments and placing new loans, or you put all your loans in auto renew.
Auto renew is bad because the interests might have risen, so you will re offer a loan of, let's say 0.1%, while the market is actually paying 0.2% . Or the other way around, you renew a 0.2% loan while the market is paying 0.1% so your loan will never activate.
That is the motivation to use a bot. To manage your loans automatically so you dont waste interest on non active loans or miss better interst rates.
OK this makes me understand what you're proposing much better. I'm surprised Poloniex doesn't have a feature like that I don't see how is that competing with poloniex. It's a service built on top of poloniex.
Yeah, I knew that. I thought it was a redundant service because it didn't appear to offer anything special. I'm with you on people don't want to setup their own bots. For fun, I see this as "worth it", but if you're trying to make money off it, then no. This will probably require people giving you their Poloniex API keys too right? To me this will raise shit-ton of red flags. The API key gives way too much power (hence all the warnings when you go to activate them - I've done this for my own experimental software). In any case good luck |
|
|
|
Ah, ok. I was wondering how collateral was held. Might do something then since I'm with Poloniex. But I would not use your system (why, when I can have 1st party support?). Nothing personal I would like to thank you for your valued input. This community couldn't bear the agonizing absence of individuals of your kind. @OP I would like to thank you for your strive, yet you must admit there's plenty opensource extremely functional software which make paying for one like yours useless. I do appreciate a good product though and the website looks swell. Keep up the great work! ~scox Are you advocating using a 3rd party service for something Poloniex themselves already offers? How come? The only valuable input I gave was "why use a 3rd party service when I can use Poloniex directly". Other than that, yeah it was pretty useless wasn't it? Thanks for wasting your breath. God, didn't know someone with so many posts would dislike free speech or the ability for someone speak their mind. Their service sounds nice if and only if Poloniex took away their own service. It looks nice too, but currently is not useful to me unless OP can convince me otherwise. |
|
|
|
Ah, ok. I was wondering how collateral was held. Might do something then since I'm with Poloniex. But I would not use your system (why, when I can have 1st party support?). Nothing personal |
|
|
|
|
Bonjour Monsier Steve,
Your web of trust idea reminds me of typical PGP encryption/web-of-trust. To verify you are who you say you are, you have many people sign your key and vice versa.
This is how I feel this system should work as well, without using social media. Social media should be a way to say "Hey, trust me? Please sign my key!".
Other than that...not sure how practical this will be. There is a particular PoW implementation by BURST which solves the efficiency issue which you should check out.
Looking forward to what others say.
|
|
|
|
|
How do these lending systems work? Can't people just take out like 1000x loans and not pay a single one back?
|
|
|
|
I am new to this coin and have done a lot of reading.
And the moment i wanted to step in and buy some this news comes up..
So if i here you talking like this, now and today is not the best moment to get in right?
Maybe in the end of the weekend it will be much lower, and maybe also cheaper to step in right?
I hoped for better news than a asic miner, and it seems a lot of people are losing trust now..
Yeah wait for a few days. There are actually lots of people who are happy too. Depends where you look. ASIC miner is very good news because it ensures the secure future of the coin. The Sia team is in it for the long run. |
|
|
|
Yet it keeps falling and there are huge sell walls.
I think it'll go under 600 before the weekend ends.
Yeah we'll see. I have no idea at this point. Might as well just flip a coin. |
|
|
|
Am I the only one missing the link between the need of PoW on this platform and the development of a miner as well?
How's that a benefit to the ecosystem and SC's premises?
So the network can't be compromised. It's good they are solving this problem early in case Sia takes off quickly. Being preemptive. |
|
|
|
|
It has just been realized that the users in the Sia slack channel hold 10% of Sia for sale. They said they are in it for the long term, and will hold despite any circumstances.
This makes me feel way more comfortable about price fluctuation. Some say they are going to support the ASIC with their Sia earnings.
And there was a 1.3.0RC release for Sia today too! I would say a FANTASTIC day of news.
|
|
|
|
Some accounts on this thread are used most exclusively to encourage other members to hold Sia. Simultaneously, the members who aren't shill accounts are talking about dumping the stock pending tomorrows news. This is troubling...
Here are the questions which people are positing and have yet gone unanswered:
-Is Sia worth $500M? If so, why.
-The accounts on this thread claiming to "HODL" Sia have posited a $.50c/Sia price. No one has yet explained why Sia should be worth $25B, while Dropbox is speculated to have an actual value of $4B+/- with some thinking it's $10B.
-- Some actual underlying math would be highly helpful in this thread: ex: here is a projection of the necessary storage for outgoing years in the Sia target market, if Sia captures x% market share then $x/sia is justified.
The "more" technical analysis of Sia in the previous 2 pages has been scathing.
>What is the valuation of the current Sia holdings, + the cost of replicating the technology? I would imagine an extremely nominal amount compared to the market cap.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the fundamentals?
Very good points. I think the most important to focus on is: Is Sia worth more than Dropbox? At the moment, no. Lets be conservative, and say Dropbox's value is 4B. Pretending Sia offers the same service as Dropbox, Sia's potential value can be 4B at best too. But at worst...Well, I think 500M is reasonable. Someone said that's the current value? So @ 500M, Sia is 700sats. To get to 4B, we just multiply by 8. 700sats * 8 = 5600sats Again, AT BEST. Short of a miracle would be surpassing this 4B cap. For Sia to reach 1400sats, it must reach 1B value I guess. That's already 1/4th the value of Dropbox...And Dropbox has been around for a looong time. To me that screams overvalue right now. But, if Dropbox's value is 10B...We could see 1400sats no problem in the next couple months or even today based on the news coming out. |
|
|
|
Siacoin is a shit coin with no realistic use, despite you believing it has for the storage thing.
It doesn't work (from a practical and economical point of view), it never will.
Maybe rumours and speculation will drive this coin higher, that I don't know. But Siacoin will never work as it indends to do.
People keep hyping it "because real use! people need storage! omg next dropbox", but they didn't spend 10 minutes with a calculator in their hand to understand how it works and if it is convenient for the hosts or the customers (even less practical for both).
Exactly. It's a nerds wet dream, a cool concept, but a dream. Corporations aren't going to use it before it's tried and true which leads to my next point. Normies won't use it because it doesn't work, yet, and it's still too god damn complicated to buy SC for them. Going to crash after the news. Like it always does. Doesn't work yet? What kind of bullshit are you spouting. It works, even has a nice UI. The only barrier to entry is obtaining SC. Could be a good business opportunity for someone there. Fiat to SC service integrated in a fork of the native Sia client. I agree with your point on corporations adopting it. We'll be seeing small to mid-sized businesses using it first. And crash after the news? Probably. If not, yippie! |
|
|
|
I don't think people realize how efficient redundancy has become... It isn't a 1:1 as some foolishly think.
Not only that, I don't think they realize efficient redundancy has been around since the 80s. Reed-solomon error correction was figured out in the 60s. |
|
|
|
Alright, well...Hold onto your seatbelt From Wikipedia: It is able to detect and correct multiple symbol errors. By adding t check symbols to the data, a Reed–Solomon code can detect any combination of up to t erroneous symbols, or correct up to ⌊t/2⌋ symbols.
Lets start small, with a 16 byte file. We will go back to your 100GB example very shortly. In order to repair any 2 missing bytes, we need to store 2 "check symbols" or also called "parity bits" (in this case 16 parity bits). That alone is pretty amazing. The upper limit of this correction as Wikipedia says is floor(t/2). Makes sense... 16 byte file, 8 random bytes in the file go missing. We need 16/2 check symbols to reconstruct the entire file. Now in reality, with say a ton of image files at 1-2MB, it will be very rare for half the file to go missing. With 100GB that's even more true. Practically you would never store 50GB of check symbols, but instead 1GB or maybe even less. The beauty is Reed-Solomon can be used with other error correction or redundancy techniques. It's up to Sia developers to determine how many check symbols each file is assigned. This may be a fixed percent or something that could be user-adjustable in the future! |
|
|
|
So to store 100 gigabytes, an effective 3 terabytes is used in 10-to-30? One has to pay 30 hosts for that? No, because the full file doesn't need to exist on all 30 hosts - if you read the page I linked, Taek links to Reed-Solomon error correction encoding. These are codes that can reconstruct missing parts of a file. You would pay 30 hosts, but not for 30 copies of the file. In other words, you'd pay for the 100Gb usage, plus whatever's needed for the reed-solomon error correction. |
|
|
|
|
The benefit of decentralized storage is redundancy/availability, mostly. In theory, more redundancy means faster download speeds and also cheaper prices. If every single person in the world shared their hard drive there would be a lot of empty space up for use! I would say the majority of the time I see relatives only using 40% of their hard drives. I would say this is a fair estimate, up to 70%.
That's really my only point! To me it's up to the people if Sia succeeds or not. They either care about the ideologies and benefits behind decentralized storage, or they don't! So it will be interesting. The announcement of the ASICs was fantastic news because it puts more power into the hands of the people - now we just have to see if they want that power or not.
If we look at history, people have a tendency to not want power/hold responsibility. Otherwise we'd all be running our own businesses and powering our houses off the grid.
We have a very anti-share world right now.
So...yeah I hate to say it, but I think ultimately because of social constructs, Sia will fail unless it's used *transparently*. People using Sia without even knowing. I think there is real money to be made there. Linking many powerful storage hosts together sounds god damn fantastic (Google drive, Dropbox, Skydrive combination anyone?). Again, Sia's power is in its contract-based logic.
|
|
|
|
|
So what is your go-to solution for decentralized storage then?...Because unless there is incentive to host a file (money), decentralized storage is never going to fly. Just look at torrents. There are many torrents where there are no seeders anymore for a file.
I've invested in Sia too and I'm open to good advice. I will be transparent and say I have not run the storage/price numbers myself, but you bring up a very valid point. I will get back to this aspect of the conversation later.
Skipping ahead: if you have 10-15 big host providers, I can't see why Sia would fail. There is already 1 definite one. Sia is simply the middle contract layer.
Users -> Storage provider businesses -> Sia -> Storage host businesses
Now the next question might be: why not cut out the middle man?
Because storage provider businesses may offer on-site storage as well as decentralized storage or a mix of both. I can see this working out well.
What are your thoughts on this?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
