It's a remnant of a very large smear campaign that was directed at the Blocknet way back in 2014. Fortunately, we've (a) not just disappeared with the ICO funds years ago, as some people suspected we'd do, and (b) we put our heads down, got to work, and delivered a functional decentralised exchange. |
|
|
|
any news about OP roadmap?
An new OP is coming pretty soon. As for our feature backlog, I'm preparing it, and will be putting features to a public vote in order for us to gauge their importance relative to one another. This, then, will generate a roadmap. |
|
|
|
|
Just to let you all know that the OP now links to the correct Windows wallet.
If anyone has further antivirus issues, please let me know:
- which antivirus program you use
- on which OS
- and either screenshot or paste the details of the report
Thanks
Arlyn
|
|
|
|
anyway we can get a snapshot for easy sync and some backup servers like drop box
mega is slow
a lot of new people coming in and convenience is something you cant underestimate really.
For the Blocknet's chain, you can try this: https://1drv.ms/f/s!AnokJf3LD1CMmvc5EE0duFZDnpp4kA |
|
|
|
Is an exhange node the same as a trade node ?
I'm asking because there are two types of nodes (I'm sure you already know) one is a trade node and the other is a service node.
I think you mean trade node am I right, so a trade node is the same as an exchange node and its 5000 Block.
I'm asking because I'm trying to figure out how much Block is required to become a service node.
Does anyone know ?
There are service nodes and trading nodes. Service nodes collect amd distribute trade fees, and you need 5000 BLOCK to run one. Trading nodes are what you'd run when you use the decentralised exchange. You do not need any particular BLOCK balance to run one. |
|
|
|
|
Work on the UI for the decentralised exchange has begun!
Now who'd like to see some early mockups?
|
|
|
|
makes me wish i bought more
Now that I have a little bit more understanding of how the DEX works, I am not really that bullish on this project anymore. The way I understand it, it requires everyone to download the full blockchain of each coin they want to trade. How inconvenient... If that stays a requirement, then I'm not sure how big this can get (as far as volume/liquidity on the exchange). Dan said he will be working to address this. Yes, and there's no need to adopt a less decentralised architecture to achieve this. We simply need to adopt Satoshi Nakomoto's SPV concept. Practically, SPV nodes compiled into a multiwallet would be ideal. And we'd not need to build a multiwallet ourselves; we'd just need to integrate to an existing one like Jaxx or Exodus. That way, you could use our architecture in an identical way, without having to download entire blockchains. |
|
|
|
Some great fundamental analysis on the Blocknet's market activity
|
|
|
|
|
Hi folks
What Asian exchanges would you recommend we approach to list BLOCK?
|
|
|
|
As far as I can tell this is the only coin that does actual trustless atomic trading between separate chains.
I read somewhere Dan did the first trade almost a year ago. Surprising it's taken this long to start getting recognition.
We weren't happy with the implementation. We've effectively built this thing three times, and now the security approach is where we want it to be, and the architectural direction is clear (i.e. how to best function as infrastructure for the token ecosystem). As for the risk that a new project may steal our thunder, I'm not concerned. We have a solid community, widespread awareness of our first-mover status, a growing user base of cryptocurrencies, and increasing developer interest. Who'd contribute to some random fork when they can contribute to the main branch? That's the appeal of open source software, really. Additionally, we're the ones who've pioneered the token ecosystem and the "inter-chain era" and have led the market by three years. It's not too likely that another team will have grasped the intricacies of supporting this vision and will be able to steer development in a strategic way. But hey, one of the beauties of open source is that anyone is welcome to clone us. My feeling is that attempts of this nature will only lend further credibility to our work and boost our visibility. |
|
|
|
As far as I can tell this is the only coin that does actual trustless atomic trading between separate chains.
I read somewhere Dan did the first trade almost a year ago. Surprising it's taken this long to start getting recognition.
We weren't happy with the implementation. We've effectively built this thing three times, and now the security approach is where we want it to be, and the architectural direction is clear (i.e. how to best function as infrastructure for the token ecosystem). |
|
|
|
|
Thank you Dave for the analysis! Much appreciated.
I shared it on the Blocknet's thread.
P.S. @Cryptohunter you're welcome to rejoin the Blocknet thread if you'd like to.
|
|
|
|
Some cursory analysis from Dave Zimbeck of a trade on our decentralised exchange:Note:
I'm super excited about organically attracting analysis and technical review.
As we approach release, we can expect more people to start digging into the code as we move forward.
Hopefully they will spot issues or suggest improvements too.
OP_IF 4 OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY OP_DROP OP_DUP OP_HASH160 1482743eb5d9a986192273431c1d575537a29c5b OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG OP_ELSE OP_DUP OP_HASH160 409434b90caf84e237ccaf1d517584dbaeb953b5 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY OP_HASH160 06918c0662e80bdfd18b6436d6d03c7dc4b2640d OP_EQUAL OP_ENDIF
Thats the part right there....
I edited my post above, I haven't like totally dissected the script but yeah at first glance looks good. The CLTV is there.
Its saying if the time is one way it goes to the one account if its the other way it goes to the other account. There is a hash in there to redeem
it most likely the hash of the secret that unlocks the TX.
But that online decoder is really messy... I would have to decode it elsewhere and look more closely at it when I wake up.
But yeah seems like its okay so far.
that is great news, without the centralised exchanges making the markets then better projects will have more chance of rising to the top  Well maybe just ask Dan for more insight into the script itself... that way you can break it down to other communities and better understand it. He maybe can simply show where its scripted in the code. I doubt they will give away any hints to the secret sauce and besides I am banned from their thread for calling him and synchist a couple of wimps who ran from bct because they got some heat from scamp dash back in the xc days. I just think they should have stuck it out on this board. I am in favour of their dex though. I mean the market making on the exchanges is terrible right now. We need a dex or several dx's right now. Anyway back to bitbay discussions I see we are holding stable at our new M cap. This is great even though we deserve far more really just a matter of time. I like stacking like this anyway gives time to move out of other projects with profit to accumulate a few more bays. oF course would not complain if i wake up to 20k -50k sats one day. But its no secret... here is part of the hex of the sys redemption TX hash 06918c0662e80bdfd18b6436d6d03c7dc4b2640d which is in this script... 02ec6c520a16732221299d4e1086361178a6b8915c74b22628dc3243af03b214f7 3045022100c5be42d6eb9b23634c038217f07401a9928b9819cfeb96ddf2c003775032276702205 e53936e44b2c1f7e7fb9c1b58a7c42a8ac51485049cdce3ff49bd6ad7afa160[ALL] 03345a1703469b66af61c17c5db392a152d8199da7f6b97b4e0ece5bf75f9b0b37 0 6354b17576a914409434b90caf84e237ccaf1d517584dbaeb953b588ac6776a9141482743eb5d9a 986192273431c1d575537a29c5b88ada91406918c0662e80bdfd18b6436d6d03c7dc4b2640d8768 Which matches the hash of the first BITCOIN script i checked... OP_HASH160 06918c0662e80bdfd18b6436d6d03c7dc4b2640d OP_EQUAL meaning... that the hash unlocked this transaction: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/sys/tx.dws?175335.htmSo publishing the secret hash on Bitcoins chain unlocks Sys transaction because it used the same hash. Like I said, I'm not really going too deep into it but superficially it looks good. I already know how to do AT but have no time to work on it as my workload is already crazy. So yeah excited to see where they go with this. Wish I bought more honestly... hopefully they get a really nice UI. There is a lot left for them to do but this looks like a good start.
|
|
|
|
|
There will be a new OP on this thread soon.
|
|
|
|
As far as BLOCK began growing up fast and more and more new members join Blocknet everyday, we will need a FAQ section for our new comers. I hope synechist will find time to make a good FAQ.
This is good suggestion to put FAQ for newbies now block is growing rapidly after adding the support for LTC it will be huge more people will join this. I am ready to run my node after few days with when this will be open for public trade. Yes, a FAQ is in the works (especially after I get a message sequence diagram from the devs). I intend to keep it regularly updated on the website. |
|
|
|
haha yeah your right almost forgot  I also have to get moving clean the house before the girlfriend is coming and sees this mess  Really curious about what he has to say on the differences between block, ark and waves Happy Eastern everybody Regarding ARK, I just read the relevant section on inter-chain tech ("Smartbridge") in their whitepaper, browsed Bitcointalk, and elsewhere, and I can see no mention of their actual technical approach, of the security scenario, and/or of what services this tech can actually support. This doesn't mean it's bad tech - for all I know it's great - but from what I can see it's essentially a system of "dumb oracles" by which a node on one chain can be informed of a state change on another chain. That is, it doesn't look like a system that can achieve "trustless" monetised inter-chain service delivery, but I'm open to being corrected. Regarding waves, it's just a coloured coin approach. As such, as a trader, you'd have to deposit your coins for some underlying token in order to trade. This does not decentralise deposits. Additionally it requires you to trust some manner of intermediary to redeem your coloured coins for a real coin when you want to withdraw. My opinion on this is that if you're building a decentralised exchange, the main objective is to provide an alternative to having to trust some intermediary with your coin deposits. Coloured coins cannot achieve that, and so I cannot consider any exchange of this type a decentralised one. |
|
|
|
I think that any coin that activates Segwit and the Lightning Network may also be a competitor to this project.
One of the benefits of the Lighning Network:
"Securely cross blockchains: payments can be routed across more than one blockchain (including altcoins and sidechains) as long as all the chains support the same hash function to use for the hash lock, as well as the ability the ability to create time locks."
It's not impossible that a lightning network may support a competitor, but (a) I doubt it, and (b) even if so, then not for some time. Here's why I think this: Lightning networks are vulnerable to collusion attacks. (Thanks to Dave Zimbeck for noting this.) Lightning network does 2 of 2 accounts. Then it creates Pune Dryja channels in an asymetric way to make a HTLC to connect two unrelated 2 of 2 accounts.
So if Bob and Alice are in the 2 of 2
Alice is also in a 2 of 2 with Steve
If Steve owes money to Bob he create a HTLC with him so Bob may withdraw at any time. But if Alice is actually Steven she holds both keys and can withdraw effectively defaulting
If Alice is the one routing all payments owed to Bob it works fine. But Alice needs the physical funds in her account.
So using her as the intermediary between the two... it routes payments like such: Steve owes Bob he routes HTLC to Alice who routes it to Bob
If Alice doesn't have the phyiscal funds in the 2 of 2 it won't work.
Therefore the proper architecture of a Lightning network is for EVERYONE to hold money with an extremely rich Bitcoin holder like a bank or winklevoss twins. Because they are the ones who can successfully route all of those payments P2P without clearing them
From https://www.reddit.com/user/dzimbeckSo, currently, the only workable decentralised exchange solution is the use of atomic swaps that exploit OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY, plus other techniques for decentralising order broadcast and order matching. |
|
|
|
When a transaction is made, The node's owner 'll be paid in BLOCK.
if the fees 're in BTC or SYS is does mean that its 'll be exchanged automatically in BLOCK to be able to pay the node's owner?
For the current release, we've moved the standalone XBridge app's functionality into the Blocknet wallet. As a result, for the moment, trade fees are charged directly in BLOCK with no conversion, which is nice and simple. If you're starting out for the first time and need some BLOCK to pay trade fees, you simply trade whatever you have for a tiny bit of BLOCK and move on. Trade fees are paid by liquidity-takers, so if you add liquidity, you don't need BLOCK beforehand to make that initial trade. This is temporary. Future releases will streamline this and enhance it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
