Hey, are you guys still looking for coders?
Yes and no. No as in not right now, we've got enough coders. But yes as in we still have a number of projects that are rolling out, begining to or will begin shortly. What's your skillset?(everything not just programming).
|
|
|
With the current model I can do the payout this friday already anyways (I guess the risk of someone buying shares in the few seconds I need to issue the payment is low enough) but it would be a good thing to have for the future.
You can cancel any sell orders so that no one can buy during that time.
|
|
|
Yes, that would be a great solution (along with my suggested datetime tag) "bmc.py paypershare [SHARENAME] [x BTC] [DATETIME in UTC]" Would be the greatest thing to have! [Edit: Bonus points if shareholders get some kind of notification, that a dividend payout is scheduled] I'll get on this, will be Friday before it's ready though.
|
|
|
I leave! I will give the BTC This increase of difficulty on 80 % has made for me unprofitable to continue. It is ready to give the last 16.81 BTC to the one who will send me 0.1 BTC (I will send on the same address) Why oh why this spam every day?! AND WHY THE HELL DO PEOPLE REALLY SEND HIM 0.1 BTC?! http://blockexplorer.com/a/AD5rfAmeq3Because, deep down, in their heart of hearts, people a stupid. Me included.
|
|
|
You're looking to be able to specify how much to pay per share?
|
|
|
Was talking about ASIC with someone not too long ago, we came to the conclusion that we would probably need something along the lines of USD$1Million. We also came to the conclusion that the bitcoin economy couldn't handle a venture that size at the moment as it would essentailly be a 1million withdrawl from the bitcoin economy.
Right now I don't think the price of bitcoin is high enough to justify something like this.
|
|
|
Just to make sure: If I have 100 shares in total issued, 1 single share sold and 1 BTC on my GLBSE account: Will "bmc.py pay [SHARENAME] [100 BTC]" a) fail, because I don't have 100 BTC in my account to split amongst all shareholders (me and the holder of the 1 external share) b) send the 1 BTC to the holder of the 1 external share, setting my account balance to 0 c) try to send 100 BTC to the holder of the 1 external share and fail My expected behaviour would be b), but better be safe than sorry! [edit: or a), though that could be (nearly) circumvented by sending 100 times 1 BTC (as I would only need a second BTC on my account then), so it would only spam your platform with no different outcome] Also, how is rounding done? I might just only send out amounts that are divisible by [amount of total shares] to be sure... If you do not have enough funds to make the payment it will fail as payment is carried out right away, so it will check your account to see if you have enough funds. If you had enough funds in your account to make the payment then it would pay 100btc to the single external share. The system doesn't do rounding, it will try to divide the amount by the number of shares, and give an integer. If it's not exact then the remainder will be left in your account, so you don't need to worry about making an exact payment, you just tell the system what you want to pay and it will do it's best so that everyone gets the same with the remainder being left in the account. Generally the system tends to return errors when state is not as expected (for example you try to pay 100btc but only have 1btc in your account).
|
|
|
Now tested, you can pay shareholders with: bmc.py pay CM400 AMOUNT
With AMOUNT being the total amount (full 64bit integer) that will be split over all shares issued.
Payment won't be made to shares that are in the account of the issuer, so only those who have been given or purchased shares will get the payment.
Any questions please let me know, Nefario.
|
|
|
Dividend payment is now functional, you can now use it to pay dividends to your shareholders.
bmc.py pay ASSET AMOUNT
Asset for you should be UBX, and the amount is the total amount, it will be taken from your account split across all shares (that you don't own) and paid to the shareholders.
Any problems just pm me.
Also we'll have a web interface available to use by June 6th.
Nefario.
|
|
|
Dividend payment is now functional, you can now use it to pay dividends to your shareholders.
bmc.py pay ASSET AMOUNT
Asset for you should be SIN, and the amount is the total amount, it will be taken from your account split across all shares (that you don't own) and paid to the shareholders.
Any problems just pm me.
Also the web interface should be available by June 6th.
Nefario.
|
|
|
Dividend payment is now functional, you can now use it to pay dividends to your shareholders.
bmc.py pay ASSET AMOUNT
Asset for you should be SIN, and the amount is the total amount, it will be taken from your account split across all shares (that you don't own) and paid to the shareholders.
Any problems just pm me.
With regards the web interface it should be available to use by June 6th.
Nefario.
|
|
|
Dividend payment is now functional, you can now use it to pay dividends to your shareholders.
bmc.py pay ASSET AMOUNT
Asset for you should be DISHWARA, and the amount is the total amount, it will be taken from your account split across all shares (that you don't own) and paid to the shareholders.
Any problems just pm me.
Nefario.
|
|
|
Sorry about bringing the market down for longer than planned, I hope it didn't cause anyone to suffer too much.
The latest change includes some bug fixes as well as functionality.
Share/Asset issuers can now pay their shareholders dividends using the pay command.
Please keep in mind when making a payment that the amount that is being paid (in the command) is the total amount, and will automatically be split over issued shares.
Payments will only be made to shareholders who are not the share issuer. So as it stands share issuers are not getting dividends.
Also, all the history commands only return the latest 5 entries in bitcoin,market, and asset history.
Any problems or issues please let me know.
Nefario.
|
|
|
Nefario, what amounts are typically seen coming from "smaller investors". I'm just curious wether I should consider it as well.
glbse can handle very tiny amounts, so it depends on the price of a single share, thats the barrier to becoming an investor, buying a single share, which for many listed items is around 1 bitcoin.
|
|
|
Would you have have any problems if somebody (probably not me) took you up on your offer and divided that action up on GLBSE? (Of course they'd take a small management fee)
It is none of my business what my clients do with their mining capacity, as long as I am not burdened with significant administrative overhead. Funding it via GLBSE and than distributing 'results of calculations' as dividend might be a great idea for someone. Moreover, it is certain that I will not list on GLBSE myself, because my legal counsel wont let me. Therefore, whoever uses GLBSE for this will not face competition from me directly. Wise move, GLBSE is not suited for everyone. We'll have it up in about 8 hours, and the payment function will be working at that time.
|
|
|
Depends on the client installed. usually anything below 0.01btc will get a min charge of 0.01 resulting in that tiny amount being wiped out.
The only way to avoidvthis is to use a central service that allows this.
|
|
|
I agree that there is great opportunity for startups with services in bitcoin.
There is already a resource for getting startup capital, glbse.com, and it's worked very very well for most of those who have used it. UBX, DISHWARA, and SIN are just 3 ticker symbols(two mining operations and an exchange service Ubitex) that I was personally invovled with in helping them get started on the exchange. They all managed to get all or most of the funding they needed to begin.
I think you could help a lot of startups (Keep in mind I build glbse.com) through the stock market, many just need help in getting their contract written and shares set up. The work involved isn't too much if you know what you're doing, but it's already put a few people off.
Help startups by helping them get listed on the exchange, and you don't need to find any rich investors, as there are plenty of smaller ones willing to invest (as well as the big ones).
As of writing it's a little difficult to use (the client, getting started buying and selling is not easy). Right now we have heavy development on a web client which should be available to use by the 6th of June, and will kickstart usage on the exchange.
I've also got a looooong list of features that I'm adding as fast as I can.
btcvc, pm me if you're interested and I'll train you up so you can help get startups listed and funded through the exchange.
Nefario.
|
|
|
Apologies , market is staying offline for anther 12 hours.
When we return all issues will be fixed, the ability to pay shareholders has been tested and can be used, and we're working on getting sub-ticker symbols working correctly.
Nefario
|
|
|
Bringing the market down for 24 hours, will make a good few changes, fix a good few bugs, do a good bit of testing.
|
|
|
At .25 BTC it's not a big deal, but as the sums go up the risk increases substantially.
RE: estimating fees beforehand: what is the use case where that is actually useful? What do you want the user experience to be? And what happens if the estimate turns out to be wrong? The use case is when processing a transaction for an account (of which there may be many), we need to know whether there is enough bitcoin in the account to cover the cost of the transaction and the fee, or what would be even better is if the fee is taken out of the amount sent. This is to prevent accounts getting into negative balance, and being thrown out of balance with any other accounting data held in the system using bitcoin. It's really for accounting purposes. If the estimate is wrong? I don't know, don't send?, Should'nt we as the senders be able to decide what we're willing to pay for a transaction instead of it being taken from our wallets with nothing to be done about it after the fact? This results in a real market for transaction fees, with bids and asks. The whole thing would then balance itself out, and people could decide on urgency vs. price. But really I just want to know what the fee's going to be, right now I've got a dirty dirty workaround, that so far has been ok but isn't guaranteed in the future.
|
|
|
|