Anyone working on such a free open source client a minimum of 10 hours or more per week is also eligible for DeVCoin disbursements as long as they continue such development / testing / documention etc. Actually, that applies not just to such a client but to Open Transactions work in general (or at least as long as it isn't somehow designed to preclude being useful to DeVCoin) since Open Transactions is an important building block in the DeVCoin world. There is already an Open Transactions server up and running supporting DeVCoins and numerous other coins, it has its own thread at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53329.0 and is ready for Grandma to come trade DeVCoins, BiTCoins, LiTeCoins, NaMeCoins etc etc, and even some shares, just as soon as she gets her client working... (It could help in fact to have the server contract and a few asset contracts pre-imported into the client...) (Also some third party "market makers" would probably help too, see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=102316.0 there could be good money to be made there helping grandma get her assets in and out of servers...) -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Namecoins are difficult enough that we have not found any blocks yet. Groupcoin is easy enough that we find lots of blocks.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
Well I don't have any code for doing this yet so this is somewhat improvised, done manually. I have based it on the TeraHashes (of "area") shown on the "month" scale of p2pool's graphs page. I figure if I only do it once a month hopefully it will not be too much of a burden and I can look into automating it somehow in the meantime. Transaction fees in DeVCoin are pretty large, I have to check exactly I think they are a thousand times as large as in bitcoin but I wasn't sure so for now figured on not paying out totals less than 50 coins (in case fee is 50 whole coins; I think it is certainly 50 somethings.) Address TeraHashes DeVCoin
---------------------------------- ---------- -------
12FPQHMqG6NXBK8K8Tn435svYQJLyt5c7y 0.0129 1.84104819 (< 50)
13dA3V8DHJMqTcwEFZvzSVzZeieEoaJEdn 0.0301 4.29916495 (< 50)
17CDYJvGEF4W2gdP2TQANySc2hAcuNtdmQ 244 34853.15757736 (sent)
1CfKYCAnu52amEtfXtrhigZH7mwKPfpr7C 31 4428.06371787 (sent)
1DjFMfzBWfFBkbsB2K51DP6tLmWEdKnqKT 0.133 18.99707796 (< 50)
1EFhXfX9uXsbXBF3LC69GiVfS3SHCsyMR1 4.34 619.92790475 (sent)
1HwVHpYBjernATw2ewiApEqdE97vCSs2qa 3.65 521.36707236 (sent)
1MdvCt2qHUj7mnGcZDgCfciCUnQ6YtDUhr 0.601 85.84617266 (sent)
1Sexyf79rohiAeFRHKj2LHwpLEzfK5CBf 453 64706.88657434 (sent)
markm 1040 148554.44271582 (that's me)
---------
Total 1777.7670
---------
Coiledcoin 0
Devcoin 5000 = 5000.00000000
Groupcoin 35550 * 6.65191256 = 236475.49150800
I0coin 1200 * 6.57103825 = 7885.24590000
Ixcoin 384 * 11.91912568 = 4576.94426112
Namecoin 0
-----------------
Total in DeVCoin 253937.68166912
-----------------
Thus DeVCoins = (TeraHashes / 1777.7670) * 253937.68166912
sendtoaddress 17CDYJvGEF4W2gdP2TQANySc2hAcuNtdmQ 34853.15757736
efee3e8025ce2712086538325a52d31f734758d0c6096af14113a451923581fb
sendtoaddress 1CfKYCAnu52amEtfXtrhigZH7mwKPfpr7C 4428.06371787
1d8449fb92347be85c265f1c9d393d413872947620c0149e3b0d58afdbf6f046
sendtoaddress 1EFhXfX9uXsbXBF3LC69GiVfS3SHCsyMR1 619.92790475
2b607a81204b7ec9a641cf08e634f26f038850a1cff2a353fe186f419f4136fc
sendtoaddress 1HwVHpYBjernATw2ewiApEqdE97vCSs2qa 521.36707236
efdf8799c1e51173ce3062c9e917b47a5104f09656c9611bd17489859b8c046a
sendtoaddress 1MdvCt2qHUj7mnGcZDgCfciCUnQ6YtDUhr 85.84617266
d56eb5e0927031e9be9f1c34313b0637fc6c9ea363f28a7b3ef958d7a886c8a6
sendtoaddress 1Sexyf79rohiAeFRHKj2LHwpLEzfK5CBf 64706.88657434
55f396b07d7c67b014bc11df47029a6464cdbb9eaf5290e0e641e734b6e13f49
This looks like pretty reasonable set of calculations and if others agree then I will likely do same again at end of the month. Any comments/suggestions? -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Does this include the bugfixes luke-jr merged into his copy?
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
The Corp has been taking a beating on CDN/DVC exchange rates, as CDN has been going up in price faster than the difference between the interest rate they borrowed from the Canucks at (denominated in CDN) and the interest rate they gave to the folks they refinanced (denominated in DVC). Finally the Corp has obtained refinancing from the Martians, paying off their CDN loan in its entirety. Hopefully the lower interest the Martians have given them will allow them some margin even though MBC/DVC exchange rates are also not favourable lately. ( Recent exchange rates can be derived from figures at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/digitalisassets.html ) -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
A CFD is free? Why does anyone offer them then? What is their business model?
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I like futures (calls and puts) better than contract for difference. It is more obviously related to what you are doing, too. YOu want a hundred bitcoins in future for similar price you borrowed at, and someone agrees they will sell you them at that price.
It even lacks the gambling aspect more, as you aren't going to end up getting an even better price die to random fluctuations of some oracle.
It seems my main objection really is the oracle. It just seems too manipulable to me in bitcoin's case way too volatile.
Would some kind of smothing be acceptable for an oracle? I expect gamblers will want the most volatile oracle to be used, but for your serious purpose would a smoother one work? It kind of seems like really a call option would be best for your purpose?
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
After some thinking, I like raw CFD's the best. There is the risk that the opposite party won't pay, but what's the point of having a shortcoin if it cost you 3 BTC?
Yes, contract for difference, especially leveraged, is doubtless the most appealing approach for sure, and bound to attract gamblers like crazy with its lure of cheap easy massive profit if you bet the right way. I have two problems though with actually implementing it: One, it requires a price/value oracle, some source from which to magically "know" what price/value is par compared to which higher or lower is to be determined to see whether those who bet it would be lower win or those who bet it would be higher win. Two, the oracles I have seen used seem to me crazily volatile, which I expect is most of their appeal but creates a constant threat of changing too far too fast, leaving the service unable to balance its bettors' bets against each other, so that the service takes a loss. Which could be a pretty huge loss. This danger leads to having to charge high fees to even begin to be able to plan on covering against it. Now possibly if one were allowed to use, say, a 48 hour volume-averaged price, or in some other such way use a price that isn't so likely to be able to skyrocket or drop to nothing in a matter of moments, the risk could be mitigated, but, so would the appeal to the gamblers, so you'd likely lose all your business anyway to some shop that is going to vanish with everyone's money when it finally does get unlucky. There is though also the problem of who can influence the oracle. Some think that merely by having half a million coins to play with, Pirate could in theory have manipulated prices. So basically by using an oracle you are maybe just turning yourself into a pawn of some manipulator. (Some have even suggested that bitcoinica helped manipulators by providing a bunch of trigger points where people would get margin calls forcing them out of the manipulator's way or something...) So although I see how nice and efficient CFD could be if you truly had a reliable, stable way of determining an actual value of an asset instead of letting someone''s ability to starve or flood a specific venue manipulate "price" (potentially quite distinct from actual value), I have so far been forced to think really it is more a gambling thing than a serious investment/hedging thing... -MarkM- |
|
|
|
There were ideas in the past of making cryptocurrencies that would try to somehow stick to fiat prices, but the idea tended to get shot down. The Brits and the Canucks, however, actually tried it, with UKB (United Kingdom Britcoin) and CDN (Canadian Digital Notes). Unfortunately though it did indeed fail to work. It just didn't turn out to be practical to try to push the value down to be one to one par with fiat, maybe because fiat can be printed in arbitrary quantities whereas UKB and CDN, like BTC, are limited to only 21,000,000 total quantity of each. However, I have started keeping archives from which to generate HTML tables ( http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/digitalisassets.html ), and looking at those tables it seems to me that maybe being one for one exchange against fiat might not be as important as simply being pretty darn stable in value, albeit, it seems, with a slow drift upward in value. I think if people want to specifically hedge against, or long, or short, a specific type of fiat the Long+Short baskets idea might work, but where the concern is really about volatility rather than the exchange rate versus a specific individual fiat currency, simply using something a lot less volatile than BTC, yet that is not fiat, might suffice? -MarkM- |
|
|
|
Part of why I generated the pages at http://galaxies.mygamesonline.org/digitalisassets.html was to be able to eyeball the columns to get some idea of how stable various assets have been. Obviously some kind of calculations on the data would be better but I wanted to get an actual look first so that if I do code some actual calculations intended to tell me how stable they have been which is most stable and such I would have some basis to be able to guess whether the code was actually working or not. (I'd expect it to be telling me ones that look relatively stable to my eye rather than ones that I can see at a glance are highly unstable.) I have actually been thinking of using Martian BotCoin (MBC) as backdrop/ballast for many simply because it is larger than most, though not as large as a bitcoin, and seems to have been quite a bit more stable than bitcoins. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Okay, nice example. But does it lead to thinking yes this does seem a useful/workable idea, or to thinking heck all that for only 15 LTC, not worth the trouble?
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
Oh gosh I was not thinking of exposing to the internet! Gosh no!
I was thinking of usernames who run stuff that needs some info the daemon can provide. I do not like the idea of having such a username know the password that can do actual wallet stuff, transactions, etc.
For example, a CGI script to provide some info or other that somehow relies on some info the daemon can provide.
I would not want the user that CGI runs as to have any access other than exactly what it needs to do its job.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
money does not appear because you wish it to.
I don't understand? Isn't money just like rock star fame and land deeds? If you will it, it will come. Ah but the evil critics cause a dark force backlash that has been known to scupper even the most positively thinking pira^H^H^Herson. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Yeah its actually the reverse of how I expressed it, looking at new calls made me think it'd be nice to be able to disable old calls for some users.
Basically I thought wow some nice harmless info-providing calls now, but what use are they really if giving access to them means also giving access to the wallet, the ability to send coins, and so on... all the original old things you don't have any good reason, probably, for letting anyone else have access to.
-MarkM-
EDIT: Of course being able to have multiple daemons use the same blockchain would also work, you could have a wallet-less daemon for the info calls, without needing a whole new copy of the blockchain for it. But that doesn't seem to be on the way any time soon so ACL seems a good alternative.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe instead of thinking of building a server and client from scratch you could take a look at open transactions? Work on the client end of that, it has a test client right now just for the ability to test the various functionalities, but could sure do with spiffing up to be useful to normal people...
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
btc-e doesn't support many types of coins but namecoins, along with litecoins, are there.
Vircurex supports both plus some others.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think there is a GUI that really supports all the things namecoin can do. If there is one that still works at all.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
You could also take a look at vircurex.com ... I think maybe btc-e also might carry them though in the past I have had a hard time finding particular currency-pairs there (as a not logged in visitor).
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
Hmm, I had been thinking that my Long+Short baskets idea would not have worked for this due to needing as much bitcoin as one was trying to hedge, which in this case would have been as much as one borrowed. But it just struck me... what was really used out in the world was fiat, not bitcoin. So maybe a BTCslUSD basket type of thing could have been useful. Buy the baskets, sell the long on fiat piece, hold the short on fiat piece. That would leave you short on fiat, which is basically what borrowing fiat amounts to. This stuff still confuses me though so maybe that is totally wrong/confused view of it... Maybe exactly the wrong way around? -MarkM- |
|
|
|
Yes its a good idea for sure. As soon as I saw the latest list of commands my first thought was gosh wouldn't it be nice to disable some of those for some callers. I would have ended up having my shell scripts check args before passing them to the daemon but if the shell script knows the password a caller would have had to be able to execute it without being able to read it, which strikes me as an unlikely combination of permissions, or the password would have to be hidden in a config file but, again, setting up a user to be able to execute the script as a user who can access the config file, but not be able to read the config file itself sounds kind of tricksy, just the kind of thing that is going to be one of those nasty little nitpacky things that bites you next time you set everything up from scratch on a shiny new blank machine... So yeah, great minds think alike. (That fools seldom differ is irrelevant, of course...  ) -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
