Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments

[tonych]

please try to think about cost of transaction & idea to include it inside the distribution/inflation/total max float  of the BYTEBALL

please think about making byteball a currency with NO TRANSACTION COST

this would be super COOL 

Transaction cost is a basic anti-spam measure, how can you remove it?

[tonych]

Maybe a little bit OT:
I’d was just reading that migrants sending every year 440 Milliarden Dollar home - most to Albanien, Afghanistan und Nigeria.
They use travel agencies, supermarkets and kiosk near the station to transfer the money using Western Union, Moneygram and Ria.

„Use BB.HS (BB- home-send) get 64,2 kB for free” 
„Save transfer around the world in seconds. Your BTC / Byte Dealer (every fu.. kiosk owner) will help you to tranfer.“

Yes, I know the problem ist the interface fiat<->crypto. So, maybe therefore  crypto will be a hidden layer for a very long time…
But people which selling cigarettes and lottery ticket can also sell BTC or Bytes using her mobile..
The problem ist to generate a initial demand - we have a classical problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_or_the_egg
To break the barrier and to initialize a Revolution, the fees have to be so smal against classical competitors (Western Union, Moneygram, Ria) that the people overcoming habits , fears  and prejudices.

That shoud not be a great Problem: I was reading they take up to 8% for sending 200 $.
In my opinion it’s much easier  to rush a existing market than enter a market wich will come in the future (IOTA).

@ lerecidiviste: you will receive some funds

Throughout the history of Bitcoin, there were multiple attempts to tap into this huge market, without much success.  Search for "bitcoin remittance" to learn more.

[tonych]

Why guys haven't you submitted your ios app on App Store, or it got rejected?
If yes what was the reason? I haven't checked the source code but they had a reason if they had rejected.

Apple is cautious about new cryptos https://github.com/byteball/byteball/blob/master/building-for-ios.md.  But you can build iOS wallet yourself.

[tonych]

If you want to support Byteball and also earn some BTC, join our signature campaign https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1666370.60.
The number of slots is limited but we give preference to those who are already active supporters.

[lerecidiviste]

Maybe a little bit OT:
I’d was just reading that migrants sending every year 440 Milliarden Dollar home - most to Albanien, Afghanistan und Nigeria.
They use travel agencies, supermarkets and kiosk near the station to transfer the money using Western Union, Moneygram and Ria.

„Use BB.HS (BB- home-send) get 64,2 kB for free” 
„Save transfer around the world in seconds. Your BTC / Byte Dealer (every fu.. kiosk owner) will help you to tranfer.“

Yes, I know the problem ist the interface fiat<->crypto. So, maybe therefore  crypto will be a hidden layer for a very long time…
But people which selling cigarettes and lottery ticket can also sell BTC or Bytes using her mobile..
The problem ist to generate a initial demand - we have a classical problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_or_the_egg
To break the barrier and to initialize a Revolution, the fees have to be so smal against classical competitors (Western Union, Moneygram, Ria) that the people overcoming habits , fears  and prejudices.

That shoud not be a great Problem: I was reading they take up to 8% for sending 200 $.
In my opinion it’s much easier  to rush a existing market than enter a market wich will come in the future (IOTA).

@ lerecidiviste: you will receive some funds

thanks will re send as soon as i see them

 

[lerecidiviste]

please try to think about cost of transaction & idea to include it inside the distribution/inflation/total max float  of the BYTEBALL

please think about making byteball a currency with NO TRANSACTION COST

this would be super COOL 

Transaction cost is a basic anti-spam measure, how can you remove it?

hello thanks for reply

will try to ARTICULATE the idea & revert asap

gd day

long life to byteball !

[cryptohunter]

null the top 1 to 2 % of btc wallets from getting BB and do random day snapshot would solve all of these issues or not?

One issue is that exchanges and ICO fundraisers hold coins that don't actually belong to them.  So far it looks solvable.  Any other issues?

....

Can you simply explain why you are reluctant to null the top 1 or 2 % of BTC wallets? I see no reason to go to all the hassle of asking exchanges and  ico devs to be fair and distribute the BB ...when we can just take them and BTC whales who already super rich out of the equation.

I mean if you are in the top 2% of BTC wallets can you really not afford to buy some BB if you choose? How many BTC do you have to be in the top 2% at this time??

You get the wide distribution but it will be seen as more fair to the crypto community.

For sure this is your thread and for now you are not getting much criticism over rewarding the super rich with the bulk of your coins since people kiss up to the devs in their own thread. However I can GUARANTEE you if this project takes off that will be the MAIN criticism that you will get going forward. All you will hear in later years is this was the coin that rewarded the already crypto rich. Unfaircoin.

I would even suggest nulling the top 5% of wallets or where ever has the most effect on the distribution curve.

Look at coins that can be seen in any way as being unfair lately... this could be seen as tantamount to a huge premine by BTC whales. It looks a great project I would just hate to see it tarnished with that brush. Imagine the manipulation accusations especially if exchanges don't play ball.

It just seems sensible to null the top x% of wallets and do a random snapshot.  Unless there is a good reason not to that I'm not seeing.

It is another issue you are raising.  Seems like you want to exclude (or significantly restrict) from the distribution all those who are rich, not just exchanges and ICO funds, but all those who are in the top x% percentile of BTC balance per address.  Your reasoning, it seems, is "just because they are already super rich".  While I do not agree it is enough of a reason, I also try to avoid a situation when a large percentage of bytes are owned by a single person, as this would be not a healthy decentralized financial system.  

Unfortunately all well-intentioned attempts to achieve a more even distribution by capping the balances per address or nulling the top x% are not only not bullet-proof, they can even have the reverse effect.  All these restrictions are gameable, one can simply split a big balance into many smaller ones and mix the coins in multiple steps.  It can be speculated how much they really want to go at such great lengths, many probably won't, but even if a few do game the rules, we'll arrive at a system with a few mega-whales (which are not readily identifiable because they hide behind thousands smaller addresses) when we could have a system with dozens of smaller whales if we didn't put the restrictions in place.  Is this what you want?

So, it seems, the best way to counter a big stake of a single whale, is with the stakes of other whales.

I am very keen on this project. It looks very interesting. I have a reasonable amount of BTC and although not a whale at all as it stands I will get a reasonable share of BB.

The thing is you are going to make this coin a pariah project with the current method of initial distribution along with rewarding your competition with a huge amount of your coins and letting them dump them to fund their own different projects?

Most people attracted to alts and crypto in general are those that do NOT like the enrichment of the already super rich.

With a random date snapshot even one taken now.. it will be a trivial to devise a method for a far fairer form of intial distribution based upon BTC ownership. Simply giving the vast bulk of BB to those that own the vast bulk of BTC is a non-starter.

I am only trying to help you get this project in the best possible position to go forward. Give people any excuse to call it a scam or unfair and they will do so. Make it fairer and see a much brighter future.

In fairness to you I would change it to 3-5% retained for yourself and for future development. 1% seems far too small compared to what devs of icos and even POW coins are retaining. For something of this standard I think most would see 3-5% and a more sensible amount for continued and on going development. Of course that's just a suggestion.

[grzem]

@cryptohunter
There is enough ICOs and premined coins, some devs are taking 10% of every distributed coin. You can hunt there.
Byteball is pretty different, and many users can see that.

[cryptohunter]

@cryptohunter
There is enough ICOs and premined coins, some devs are taking 10% of every distributed coin. You can hunt there.
Byteball is pretty different, and many users can see that.

Not disputing this at all.

[rozee]

i see on the first post indonesian translation not available yet
can i translate it? If its not reserved yet?
Thank you in advance

[galaxiekyl]

null the top 1 to 2 % of btc wallets from getting BB and do random day snapshot would solve all of these issues or not?

One issue is that exchanges and ICO fundraisers hold coins that don't actually belong to them.  So far it looks solvable.  Any other issues?

....

Can you simply explain why you are reluctant to null the top 1 or 2 % of BTC wallets? I see no reason to go to all the hassle of asking exchanges and  ico devs to be fair and distribute the BB ...when we can just take them and BTC whales who already super rich out of the equation.

I mean if you are in the top 2% of BTC wallets can you really not afford to buy some BB if you choose? How many BTC do you have to be in the top 2% at this time??

You get the wide distribution but it will be seen as more fair to the crypto community.

For sure this is your thread and for now you are not getting much criticism over rewarding the super rich with the bulk of your coins since people kiss up to the devs in their own thread. However I can GUARANTEE you if this project takes off that will be the MAIN criticism that you will get going forward. All you will hear in later years is this was the coin that rewarded the already crypto rich. Unfaircoin.

I would even suggest nulling the top 5% of wallets or where ever has the most effect on the distribution curve.

Look at coins that can be seen in any way as being unfair lately... this could be seen as tantamount to a huge premine by BTC whales. It looks a great project I would just hate to see it tarnished with that brush. Imagine the manipulation accusations especially if exchanges don't play ball.

It just seems sensible to null the top x% of wallets and do a random snapshot.  Unless there is a good reason not to that I'm not seeing.

It is another issue you are raising.  Seems like you want to exclude (or significantly restrict) from the distribution all those who are rich, not just exchanges and ICO funds, but all those who are in the top x% percentile of BTC balance per address.  Your reasoning, it seems, is "just because they are already super rich".  While I do not agree it is enough of a reason, I also try to avoid a situation when a large percentage of bytes are owned by a single person, as this would be not a healthy decentralized financial system.  

Unfortunately all well-intentioned attempts to achieve a more even distribution by capping the balances per address or nulling the top x% are not only not bullet-proof, they can even have the reverse effect.  All these restrictions are gameable, one can simply split a big balance into many smaller ones and mix the coins in multiple steps.  It can be speculated how much they really want to go at such great lengths, many probably won't, but even if a few do game the rules, we'll arrive at a system with a few mega-whales (which are not readily identifiable because they hide behind thousands smaller addresses) when we could have a system with dozens of smaller whales if we didn't put the restrictions in place.  Is this what you want?

So, it seems, the best way to counter a big stake of a single whale, is with the stakes of other whales.

I am very keen on this project. It looks very interesting. I have a reasonable amount of BTC and although not a whale at all as it stands I will get a reasonable share of BB.

The thing is you are going to make this coin a pariah project with the current method of initial distribution along with rewarding your competition with a huge amount of your coins and letting them dump them to fund their own different projects?

Most people attracted to alts and crypto in general are those that do NOT like the enrichment of the already super rich.

With a random date snapshot even one taken now.. it will be a trivial to devise a method for a far fairer form of intial distribution based upon BTC ownership. Simply giving the vast bulk of BB to those that own the vast bulk of BTC is a non-starter.

I am only trying to help you get this project in the best possible position to go forward. Give people any excuse to call it a scam or unfair and they will do so. Make it fairer and see a much brighter future.

In fairness to you I would change it to 3-5% retained for yourself and for future development. 1% seems far too small compared to what devs of icos and even POW coins are retaining. For something of this standard I think most would see 3-5% and a more sensible amount for continued and on going development. Of course that's just a suggestion.

this isn't false..but like yu said..a équitable distribution means a heavy process like KYC for example..crypto doesn't allowed that..dev have already change distrib method in allowed to little fish of re-claim after snap shot..for this time i dont see better distrib méthod to this process..i'm not whale also  

maybe do a distrib of 50% BBs for verified member on forums bitcoinalk..gitub..reddit...kind of Proof Of Equity and to serve btc claimer after would have been best..but new forumer would have been ban of project..or receive small part..i dont know maybe it's not bad.

[galaxiekyl]

update wallet well done but i a error message when i submit an transac like this : uncaught exception : error : unexpected validation error : bad signature at path r.O can yu help me pls

[tonych]

update wallet well done but i a error message when i submit an transac like this : uncaught exception : error : unexpected validation error : bad signature at path r.O can yu help me pls

Is it multisig wallet?  Please describe all steps before the error.

[Daffadile]

whether it is still in test phase or testnet?

It's still on testnet, the launch of mainnet is on dec-25:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.msg16569906#msg16569906

Ohh nice profile pic crypt. I am going to insteall the wallet now then when it is synced I will get the two free lots of coins and see if i can make sense of this all. I hope interest here is not lost and the price goes well and remains stable. I still don't understand how distribution works though.

[loremipsum]

Is there any signature campaing or social media bounties? Or none is reserved for promotion?

[SmartIphone]

Why guys haven't you submitted your ios app on App Store, or it got rejected?
If yes what was the reason? I haven't checked the source code but they had a reason if they had rejected.

Apple is cautious about new cryptos https://github.com/byteball/byteball/blob/master/building-for-ios.md.  But you can build iOS wallet yourself.

I wouldn't say that because I have a windows PC and I can't build iOS/MacOS apps because I can't install xCode.
Maybe Apple is rejecting new crypto apps because of their privacy, security or anything else which can damage the user.

[galaxiekyl]

update wallet well done but i a error message when i submit an transac like this : uncaught exception : error : unexpected validation error : bad signature at path r.O can yu help me pls

Is it multisig wallet?  Please describe all steps before the error.

yes multisig but not activat (1 of 2#1)..when i send BBs at adresse wallet it isn't exe..error messa close my wallet..just that.

i activat multisig on my andro wallet paired with pc wall..when i submit transac..i have other error message : an exeption occurred: bitcore. Error invalid argument: invalid argument: no valid string was provided; cause: undefined

but  simple wallet work..its multisig wall wich has problem

[cryptor0th]

Is there any signature campaing or social media bounties? Or none is reserved for promotion?

Indeed there is. I am helping coordinate the same.
Take a look at this thread and drop in your application :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1666370.0

I will be batch processing pending applications once I wake up in a few hours, so send in your application soon.
Also, feel free to reach out via PM to inquire if you have any queries regarding the same.

[tonych]

update wallet well done but i a error message when i submit an transac like this : uncaught exception : error : unexpected validation error : bad signature at path r.O can yu help me pls

Is it multisig wallet?  Please describe all steps before the error.

yes multisig but not activat (1 of 2#1)..when i send BBs at adresse wallet it isn't exe..error messa close my wallet..just that.

i activat multisig on my andro wallet paired with pc wall..when i submit transac..i have other error message : an exeption occurred: bitcore. Error invalid argument: invalid argument: no valid string was provided; cause: undefined

but  simple wallet work..its multisig wall wich has problem

Let me confirm that understand you correctly:
1.  You tried to created a 1-of-2 multisig wallet on PC+android, correct?
2.  You created it on PC but didn't approve it on android
3.  You try to send a transaction from this wallet on your PC and receive error "bad signature at path r.0"
4.  At the same time your android says "invalid argument: no valid string was provided"

[Skatebird]

When will we have to link our btc wallet to be part of the distribution ?!