|
masterOfDisaster
|
 |
December 10, 2015, 12:55:30 PM |
|
While reading the white paper a doubt emerged about market makers / liquidity providers:
(Inside B&C Exchange protocol/structure) Are ONLY core clients (that download the FULL blockchain) gonna be supported for liquidity providers?
OR
Are Simplified Payment Verification Clients (e.g. Electrum) gonna be supported too?
I'm just an onlooker, but I wouldn't be able to tell why SPV clients wouldn't be accepted. That might be related to the fact that I don't know how SPV clients work. Are they capable of multisignature transactions (decode, create)? The question whether it would be acceptable to trust central servers needs to be answered as well. The benefit of using SPV clients is that the requirements for the hardware to run a node of a reputed signer is significantly reduced. This might outweigh the drawbacks partly or in full, because it might allow running such a node in a secure environment and not as virtual server on a cloud server infrastructure that poses threats to the integrity of the private keys. SPV seems to work badly with PoS coins, but they often have quite small blockchains. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally
controlled
networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem
to be holding their own." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
cryptog1
Member
 Offline
Activity: 117
Merit: 10
|
|
December 11, 2015, 04:40:26 AM |
|
While reading the white paper a doubt emerged about market makers / liquidity providers:
(Inside B&C Exchange protocol/structure) Are ONLY core clients (that download the FULL blockchain) gonna be supported for liquidity providers?
OR
Are Simplified Payment Verification Clients (e.g. Electrum) gonna be supported too?
What has been mentioned is that you would be able to export your bitcoin private key to a light weight bitcoin client for dividends distribution. |
|
|
|
|
|
kennyP
|
|
December 12, 2015, 06:38:50 AM |
|
How does staking work with BKS? I've had BKS in my wallet since 20 July but my stake amount is always zero (balance is correct though).
What is the stake % rate per year?
Do you need to keep the wallet unlocked to stake?
When i check coin control it shows "0" for coin days, and every block is exactly "1", what's going on here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurizhai
|
|
December 12, 2015, 06:59:52 PM |
|
How does staking work with BKS? I've had BKS in my wallet since 20 July but my stake amount is always zero (balance is correct though).
What is the stake % rate per year?
Do you need to keep the wallet unlocked to stake?
When i check coin control it shows "0" for coin days, and every block is exactly "1", what's going on here?
You need to keep your client open and unlocked for minting. You can find the unlock button under 'Settings'. |
|
|
|
|
|
masterOfDisaster
|
|
December 12, 2015, 09:29:18 PM |
|
How does staking work with BKS? I've had BKS in my wallet since 20 July but my stake amount is always zero (balance is correct though).
What is the stake % rate per year?
It depends on the ratio of BKS that mint vs. BKS that don't mint. The block spacing is targeted at 1 minute. If more BKS mint, the difficulty is higher and your reward in % over time is smaller than in times when fewer BKS mint. There's no fixed % per year. Do you need to keep the wallet unlocked to stake?
Like @Yurizhai already said: switch the wallet application to "BlockShares" mode and unlock it for minting (via menu "settings -> Unlock Wallet for Minting Only" or debug window:"walletpassphrase [yourPassphraseGoesHere] 99999999 true). The wallet will remain unlocked until you lock it or close it. Minting is only possible with an open and unlocked wallet and a working network connection (to the B&CExchange network). When i check coin control it shows "0" for coin days, and every block is exactly "1", what's going on here?
I don't know about the "0" for coin days, but each unspent transaction output is exactly "1", because you never minted (which would have increased the UTXO value) and the default setting of the wallet is to split the funds into UTXOs of size 1 to increase the minting probability. |
|
|
|
|
bhokor
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 966
Merit: 1000
|
|
December 19, 2015, 12:54:36 AM |
|
i know it is a hard question but i have to do it
Some ETA for decentralized exchange official launch? i know probbaly no data for it but
will be it in 2016?
really we need it for go further in altcoin development
thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
allwelder
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1004
|
|
December 24, 2015, 06:31:14 AM |
|
It's better to add multilanguage.
|
|
|
|
qq3326039814
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 2
Merit: 0
|
|
December 29, 2015, 02:46:14 AM |
|
A month later, what is the development of news?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financisto
|
|
December 30, 2015, 01:36:31 AM
Last edit: December 30, 2015, 02:43:37 AM by Financisto |
|
When launch time comes, which cryptocoins will be available for trading?
My personal "hint" for the first 7 candidates: Bitcoin (obviously); BlockShares (obviously); Litecoin (the second mkt cap and liquidity); Nubits (Nu echosystem); Nushares (Nu echosystem); Peercoin (¿Nu system's dividends?); Dash (or Monero, whichever has higher mkt cap and liquidity - for anonymity concerns).
|
|
|
|
|
Yurizhai
|
|
December 30, 2015, 02:23:37 AM |
|
When launch time comes, which cryptocoins will be available for trading?
My personal "hint" for the first 7 candidates: Bitcoin (obviously); BlockShares (obviously); Litecoin (the second mkt cap and liquidity); Nubits (Nu echosystem); Nushares (Nu echosystem); Peercoin (¿Nu system's dividends?); Dash (or Monero, whichever has higher mkt cap and liquidity - for anonimity concerns).
According to the last update, 4.0 will allow shareholders to decide which assets will be initIally tradable. |
|
|
|
|
|
Financisto
|
|
December 30, 2015, 02:52:53 AM |
|
"Democracy" as its best, huh?  |
|
|
|
|
Yurizhai
|
|
January 07, 2016, 07:19:47 PM |
|
Version 4.0 is almost ready. It took more time than expected because asset voting has important consequences on the design of the trading protocol that will be implemented in the next release. We had to adjust the design a few times. But it has been finalized and we just need a last review of the pull request before we can finalize 4.0.
This release will enable reputation and asset voting. So shareholders will be able to start deciding which assets will be initially tradable and who will be the first reputed signers.
While asset voting was finalized we also started writing detailed specs of the trading protocol that will be implemented in version 5.0.
Been radio silence for awhile now.. |
|
|
|
|
yohanip
Member
Offline
Activity: 118
Merit: 100
A Programmer
|
|
January 10, 2016, 08:49:29 AM |
|
About these decentralized exchange concept..
please add a way to simplifies changing the currencies to fiat.. something like a built in localbitcoin..
|
|
|
|
|
JordanLee
Member
Offline
Activity: 88
Merit: 10
NuBit and B&C Exchange Architect
|
|
January 16, 2016, 04:07:19 AM |
|
NuBits and B&C Exchange share the same team. This gives B&C the advantage of having people work on it that have worked with the code base for a year or two in most cases. It has the disadvantage of meaning that when the team is focused on NuBit development, B&C Exchange development necessarily gets less attention and work.
The NuBit 2.1 release has been a major undertaking. We thought we were nearly done with it a month ago, but testing revealed some important performance issues that were difficult and time consuming to track down and remedy. The NuBits 2.1 release is very close to being ready for beta release. As a result, the team is once again turning its focus to B&C Exchange. The B&C Exchange 4.0 release will receive additional testing in the coming days. Over the course of the last month, glv has continued to make progress on developing the exchange messages (to be released after 4.0).
Sigmike and I are discussing a couple ways we could bring additional developers to the project to speed implementation. While I regard the pace of development as a disappointment to date, we have effectively conserved our funding and I am more convinced that B&C Exchange has a viable design than I was six months ago. Progress has taken longer than expected due to lower availability of developers than was expected, but the project is still very viable and is in fact moving forward.
|
Bitmessage: BM-2cXS5ezep1jUqeu8CwC6M4aTmMSxcFEHNN
|
|
|
irritant
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 473
Merit: 250
Sodium hypochlorite, acetone, ethanol
|
|
January 16, 2016, 12:32:46 PM |
|
nobody can predict the future
|
|
|
|
|
cryptog1
Member
Offline
Activity: 117
Merit: 10
|
|
January 16, 2016, 11:25:19 PM |
|
NuBits and B&C Exchange share the same team. This gives B&C the advantage of having people work on it that have worked with the code base for a year or two in most cases. It has the disadvantage of meaning that when the team is focused on NuBit development, B&C Exchange development necessarily gets less attention and work.
The NuBit 2.1 release has been a major undertaking. We thought we were nearly done with it a month ago, but testing revealed some important performance issues that were difficult and time consuming to track down and remedy. The NuBits 2.1 release is very close to being ready for beta release. As a result, the team is once again turning its focus to B&C Exchange. The B&C Exchange 4.0 release will receive additional testing in the coming days. Over the course of the last month, glv has continued to make progress on developing the exchange messages (to be released after 4.0).
Sigmike and I are discussing a couple ways we could bring additional developers to the project to speed implementation. While I regard the pace of development as a disappointment to date, we have effectively conserved our funding and I am more convinced that B&C Exchange has a viable design than I was six months ago. Progress has taken longer than expected due to lower availability of developers than was expected, but the project is still very viable and is in fact moving forward.
Tks for the update, Jordan. I am wondering: what about the contribution from erasmospunk ? If you need more developers, maybe we should advertise it on social networks? |
|
|
|
|
bruter
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 18
Merit: 0
|
|
January 17, 2016, 12:22:46 AM |
|
Sigmike and I are discussing a couple ways we could bring additional developers to the project to speed implementation. While I regard the pace of development as a disappointment to date, we have effectively conserved our funding and I am more convinced that B&C Exchange has a viable design than I was six months ago. Progress has taken longer than expected due to lower availability of developers than was expected, but the project is still very viable and is in fact moving forward.
Thank you, JordanLee. Have you tried to contact with @creon? |
|
|
|
|
|
Sentinelrv
|
|
January 17, 2016, 03:42:14 AM |
|
Thanks for the update Jordan. I think it's also important to mention that any performance updates added to Nu 2.1 will ultimately be incorporated into B&C as well, so this outside development of Nu will positively benefit both projects in the end. So you could probably get away with saying that you were working on B&C improvements, even though they will first be incorporated into Nu.
|
|
|
|
|
sabreiib
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 40
Merit: 0
|
|
January 19, 2016, 01:27:36 AM |
|
Are we going to see B&CExchange in operation in 2016?
--------------------
Perhaps in very late 2016, because we have only three part time developers.
|
|
|
|
|
NuCoinGame
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 7
Merit: 0
|
|
January 19, 2016, 05:41:09 PM |
|
Just to quickly follow up on Jordan's words regarding the development pace. Things slowed down a bit late last year because of the holidays, traveling, and new year administrative tasks. Things should be picking up from here on out. 4.0 development/testing is in full swing. Once everything is cleared BlockShares owners will be able to start voting on the available assets for trading and reputed signers.
Year end/start is a very busy time for people, and Nu had a similar development slump around the same time last year. I'll try to produce some regular updates regarding testing and development from here on out as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
