Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments

[Pinstripe]

I am still stuck At Cryptopia (fine exchange for the rest BTW). I cannot buy extra GBYTE either because they suspended the Byteball market.

I'm sorry to hear that. I was very nearly trapped myself - my sympathies. I began to get worried when a test withdrawal failed - it was simply luck that saved me.
But it sure was an adventure and a revelation getting out... the fees and currency swaps were killer.

Anyway, suffice it to say that it is really too bad that it happened. Sorry to say, but I think it could have been prevented.


As you can see, I'm a newbie here, who is only allowed to post once before being shut out...kinda inconvenient for a busy Byteballer like me,
but I just wanted to say a quick thanks for your help earlier when I had an issue with the full install wallet - and thanks also to CryptKeeper and Wekkel and Michail1 for a warm welcome and attempt to help me with my troubles (unsuccessful unfortunately) but that's a story for another day.

...and no, Glynmoor, it was not me - but If it was, I could not say. Thanks for making me laugh...and it was just over the top hilarious when folks on the Reddit started to speculate who it was that jammed the price so high - what an intro to the world of ByteBall.

I think the community is really well served by folks like you (and so many others I cannot name).

one last thing, I have been posting on our Reddit platform under the name CryptoBest - hope to see you there sometime.

cheers.

[1714024257]

1714024257

[1714024257]

1714024257

[1714024257]

1714024257

[1714024257]

1714024257

[1714024257]

1714024257

[Apraksin]

The advantage of ByteBall is also its biggest disadvantage  - the total token supply, with such low supply the investors are happy but it harder to user many zeros in front.

That is the first impression, but then you realise how many billion token you are sitting on when you think in bytes. And how undervalued it still is.

the problem is people have unit bias. if everyone wants a GB they will choose cheaper looking coins like ripple. the mass, unfortunately, at this time does not look at total supply.

Indeed, but the developers position on the matter is quite clear. https://www.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/7og0x6/update_from_tony_on_5_january_2018_regarding_the/

[filsid]

Byteball asset registration and issuance under the hood

Custom assets have been first class citizens in Byteball since the launch of the live net. Few may know that blackbytes, a widely distributed currency for private payments, is the first asset issued in the Byteball network. While creating new assets requires some programming skills, Byteball Market makes it easy for anybody to issue custom Byteball assets.

In general, assets can be created with certain characteristics: they can be made private, defined with different denominations or they can require cosigners or attestation when transferring etc. We call these as the asset definition. When creating an asset via Byteball Market, some of these features are not available yet

In addition to the asset definition, Byteball Market allows the user the option to associate additional metadata to the asset such as decimal places, short name, ticker symbol, description, issuer name or contact information. Important to note, however, that most of these metadata are only stored in the database of Byteball Market and are only displayed in the asset directory within the Byteball Market website.

Byteball Market performs a number of steps on behalf of the user when creating an asset for a small fee since these steps require to post permanent and immutable data in the Byteball database.

Once the user fills in the asset order form, the process starts with a payment cycle: the user has to transfer the fee in order for the asset creation steps to start.

https://medium.com/@byteball.market/byteball-asset-registration-and-issuance-under-the-hood-c030ea6739ac

[zaliass]

Hi All, let me just say that i love this project. Been following for a while.

Registered to say i can help with Lithuanian translations if needed.

[cryptohunter]

The advantage of ByteBall is also its biggest disadvantage  - the total token supply, with such low supply the investors are happy but it harder to user many zeros in front.

That is the first impression, but then you realise how many billion token you are sitting on when you think in bytes. And how undervalued it still is.

the problem is people have unit bias. if everyone wants a GB they will choose cheaper looking coins like ripple. the mass, unfortunately, at this time does not look at total supply.

Indeed, but the developers position on the matter is quite clear. https://www.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/7og0x6/update_from_tony_on_5_january_2018_regarding_the/

This is why BB is way down on MC compared to iota and XRB

Sorry but a dev who can not see this and also not see why giving huge amounts of BB to competing project managers for free then pissing off real investors by stopping the full moon distributions as promised is not a dev I can say inspires much faith.

Decentralised projects should have decentralised governance if one person holds the vast bulk of the coins, controls the network, does not listen at all to the entire community then that is already a project that has failed to be trustless and decentralised.

Not trying to appeal to stupid people is not a good arguement when every thread on the main board is about finding the cheapest per unit coins.

[JesusCryptos]

Our ICO bot now supports BTC and ETH (meaning you can pay in BTC or ETH to buy a token issued on Byteball platform).

https://github.com/byteball/ico-bot

Now, almost all pieces are in place to become an ICO platform.

Wonderful news! Now only the issue of the broadcasting of the assets' names has to be completed. Any news about the project for the registrars of such names?

[ByteFan]

Our ICO bot now supports BTC and ETH (meaning you can pay in BTC or ETH to buy a token issued on Byteball platform).

https://github.com/byteball/ico-bot

Now, almost all pieces are in place to become an ICO platform.

Wonderful news! Now only the issue of the broadcasting of the assets' names has to be completed. Any news about the project for the registrars of such names?

Already completed:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.msg27702792#msg27702792

[djpitagora]

The advantage of ByteBall is also its biggest disadvantage  - the total token supply, with such low supply the investors are happy but it harder to user many zeros in front.

That is the first impression, but then you realise how many billion token you are sitting on when you think in bytes. And how undervalued it still is.

the problem is people have unit bias. if everyone wants a GB they will choose cheaper looking coins like ripple. the mass, unfortunately, at this time does not look at total supply.

Indeed, but the developers position on the matter is quite clear. https://www.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/7og0x6/update_from_tony_on_5_january_2018_regarding_the/

I'm deep into this project for almost a year now. I started out when 1 GB was worth 700$, then it went down to 200$ for a few months, now it's back. Once it tested the 1000$ resistance but fell back. Like it or not, psychology is part of the financial world. Otherwise there would have been no resistance at that level. Sticking your head in the sand doesn't help.

I guess I'm just frustrated and at the end of my hope. BB is my favorite project, but until today it has been one huge loss of opportunity, and I don't see end of it. IOTA and XRB sky rocketed because of the unit price. We are not, because tony is stubborn and fails to understand that he is slowly loosing the community by doing this. Today he lost me. I will be back when tony starts listening for a change and stops being a dictator. Until then, we have no chance.

[scambust]

The advantage of ByteBall is also its biggest disadvantage  - the total token supply, with such low supply the investors are happy but it harder to user many zeros in front.

That is the first impression, but then you realise how many billion token you are sitting on when you think in bytes. And how undervalued it still is.

the problem is people have unit bias. if everyone wants a GB they will choose cheaper looking coins like ripple. the mass, unfortunately, at this time does not look at total supply.

Indeed, but the developers position on the matter is quite clear. https://www.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/7og0x6/update_from_tony_on_5_january_2018_regarding_the/

This is why BB is way down on MC compared to iota and XRB

Sorry but a dev who can not see this and also not see why giving huge amounts of BB to competing project managers for free then pissing off real investors by stopping the full moon distributions as promised is not a dev I can say inspires much faith.

Decentralised projects should have decentralised governance if one person holds the vast bulk of the coins, controls the network, does not listen at all to the entire community then that is already a project that has failed to be trustless and decentralised.

Not trying to appeal to stupid people is not a good arguement when every thread on the main board is about finding the cheapest per unit coins.

As far as I remember, the real unit of Byteball is in bytes which means there are 1,000,000,000,000,000 bytes. I remember the discussion that Internet of Things will require smaller and cheap units. So 1 byte costs $0.00000073761.

[jbreher]

if one person holds the vast bulk of the coins, controls the network, does not listen at all to the entire community then that is already a project that has failed to be trustless and decentralised.

Yet Byteball has a market cap of about $450 Million USD. Perhaps this is prima facie evidence that decentralization is not necessarily the be-all, end-all in crypto value?

IOTA and XRB sky rocketed ...

Yes...

... because of the unit price.

This assertion is made, bereft of any evidence to support it. Why do you claim A is the cause of B?

Perhaps those so insistent they know better than tony how to 'make this coin a success' should fork the code and create a new coin. Here ya go: https://github.com/byteball/byteball

[Malek17]

The advantage of ByteBall is also its biggest disadvantage  - the total token supply, with such low supply the investors are happy but it harder to user many zeros in front.

That is the first impression, but then you realise how many billion token you are sitting on when you think in bytes. And how undervalued it still is.

the problem is people have unit bias. if everyone wants a GB they will choose cheaper looking coins like ripple. the mass, unfortunately, at this time does not look at total supply.

Indeed, but the developers position on the matter is quite clear. https://www.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/7og0x6/update_from_tony_on_5_january_2018_regarding_the/

This is why BB is way down on MC compared to iota and XRB

Sorry but a dev who can not see this and also not see why giving huge amounts of BB to competing project managers for free then pissing off real investors by stopping the full moon distributions as promised is not a dev I can say inspires much faith.

Decentralised projects should have decentralised governance if one person holds the vast bulk of the coins, controls the network, does not listen at all to the entire community then that is already a project that has failed to be trustless and decentralised.

Not trying to appeal to stupid people is not a good arguement when every thread on the main board is about finding the cheapest per unit coins.

As far as I remember, the real unit of Byteball is in bytes which means there are 1,000,000,000,000,000 bytes. I remember the discussion that Internet of Things will require smaller and cheap units. So 1 byte costs $0.00000073761.

I believe mimimum transaction fee is 500 bytes so we can’t use bytes you need to use at least kbytes

[cryptohunter]

if one person holds the vast bulk of the coins, controls the network, does not listen at all to the entire community then that is already a project that has failed to be trustless and decentralised.

Yet Byteball has a market cap of about $450 Million USD. Perhaps this is prima facie evidence that decentralization is not necessarily the be-all, end-all in crypto value?

IOTA and XRB sky rocketed ...

Yes...

... because of the unit price.

This assertion is made, bereft of any evidence to support it. Why do you claim A is the cause of B?

Perhaps those so insistent they know better than tony how to 'make this coin a success' should fork the code and create a new coin. Here ya go: https://github.com/byteball/byteball

450M is still small next to 11BN so perhaps with the adjustments suggested it could do a lot better.

Having said that MC value is not firm ground for any real argument imho. This metric is one of the most easily manipulated.

I am simply stating that whilst other projects move toward decentralised governance BB is one of the most proven centralised projects in many ways out there. The developer does what he wants when he want with no consideration nor consultation of the entire community. He actually takes many actions that are directly the opposite of what the community wants, retains a huge bulk of the coins and alters the distribution rules as and when he sees fit.

This is not in the spirit of crypto. 450 M is nothing for the design and implementation here. Tonys actions outside of his coding are actually damaging to the project. He should be left to code the core product and decentralised governance structure should be the first thing he gets to work on.

If giving huge amounts knowingly to other ico managers whilst having to cut promised full moon distributions to investors many of which invested on that premise is not enough indication of terrible mismanagement of this project then i am not sure what it will take for you to recognise tony is best kept to the coding and design whilst others who understand market psychology and marketing are best to work in those areas.

Investing in BB right now with so much central control is actually very high risk and if you want to cut out the non savvy investors and treat their investment as invalid and then cut out the savvy investors who see the high risk of the entire project in the hands on one person who does what he wants when he wants and often makes terrible choices only to 180 turn on them ....then you have far less investors left that you could have.

I mean just saying we dont want to appeal to stupid people who dont understand per unit value is crazy talk. Their investment funding is as valid as the smart investors. More so because sadly there are probably more of what some would class as stupid investment money than smart money.

It's like movies... what makes more shrek or some high brow indy movie? you can say I don't care about appealing to fools or even children but you will lose every time in market share sadly. There are simply more foolish than smart.

Give people what they want. People right now want cheap per unit tokens look at the market it is telling you this even if you ignore the fact every other thread in the main board is titles...what coins under $1 OR which cheapest coins are going to go x100. Then you look and there are projects being suggested that are in the top 10 or 20 cmc that just have huge mintings and low per unit price.

Also let's get some polls for BB so we can tell really how many people want things and dont want it.

I wonder how many people would vote for a nulling of the other ICO managers BB wallets. I mean if trustless immutable decentralised are no longer important then lets get changing everything that will benefit the vast majority of BB holders.

[jbreher]

if one person holds the vast bulk of the coins, controls the network, does not listen at all to the entire community then that is already a project that has failed to be trustless and decentralised.

Yet Byteball has a market cap of about $450 Million USD. Perhaps this is prima facie evidence that decentralization is not necessarily the be-all, end-all in crypto value?

IOTA and XRB sky rocketed ...

Yes...

... because of the unit price.

This assertion is made, bereft of any evidence to support it. Why do you claim A is the cause of B?

Perhaps those so insistent they know better than tony how to 'make this coin a success' should fork the code and create a new coin. Here ya go: https://github.com/byteball/byteball

<redacted due merely to inability to clearly thread counterpoints>

We really have two arguments going here. One is: what is objectively correct to raise the value price of Byteball; and the other is what can be done with it.

Let's deal with the second one first, as it is shorter and more direct. I already gave you the answer: https://github.com/byteball/byteball. Go forth and forkify thyself.

With that out of the way, let us discuss the first. You claim that 'the community wants a lower denomination'. First, where is your data? Seems to me all you have to point to is some handful of disembodied names on some forum on some corner of the internet.

And you decry the lack of decentralization. Frankly, I agree with you here. Though I find your specific worry to be trivial - certainly tonych's control over all the validators is a fundamentally more severe problem than some 'control' over the denomination. But again, in practical matters, tonych has pointed out that the fundamental unit is a byte. The fact that it is typically discussed as Gbytes is a triviality. You want decentralization? Lobby the exchanges to make the change. Get off your ass and do it yourself.

Amuses me that you go on about decentralization while pleading with the 'central point of control' to make a change.

And WhoTF are you to claim that "Tonys actions outside of his coding are actually damaging to the project."? The way I see it, he has put scads of money in my pocket. You? Not so much.

And while you seem to assert that decentralization is a necessary property for a coin to succeed, the counterexample of XRP's #2 market cap quite clearly disproves your assertion.

"Also let's get some polls for BB so we can tell really how many people want things and dont want it."

OK, now you are on to something. Without hard data, your claim of 'what people want' is mere bullshit. So figure out a way to implement a scientifically-valid means of polling the community, and run it. Perhaps with unassailable data, tonych can be persuaded. Or are you waiting for the 'single centralized point' to do that work for you?

I get it. The centralization is sub-optimal. I actually agree with you. What can be done about it? Tonych's position is rather clear. Quit whingeing and do something.

With all due respect.

[cryptohunter]

if one person holds the vast bulk of the coins, controls the network, does not listen at all to the entire community then that is already a project that has failed to be trustless and decentralised.

Yet Byteball has a market cap of about $450 Million USD. Perhaps this is prima facie evidence that decentralization is not necessarily the be-all, end-all in crypto value?

IOTA and XRB sky rocketed ...

Yes...

... because of the unit price.

This assertion is made, bereft of any evidence to support it. Why do you claim A is the cause of B?

Perhaps those so insistent they know better than tony how to 'make this coin a success' should fork the code and create a new coin. Here ya go: https://github.com/byteball/byteball

<redacted due merely to inability to clearly thread counterpoints>

We really have two arguments going here. One is: what is objectively correct to raise the value price of Byteball; and the other is what can be done with it.

Let's deal with the second one first, as it is shorter and more direct. I already gave you the answer: https://github.com/byteball/byteball. Go forth and forkify thyself.

With that out of the way, let us discuss the first. You claim that 'the community wants a lower denomination'. First, where is your data? Seems to me all you have to point to is some handful of disembodied names on some forum on some corner of the internet.

And you decry the lack of decentralization. Frankly, I agree with you here. Though I find your specific worry to be trivial - certainly tonych's control over all the validators is a fundamentally more severe problem than some 'control' over the denomination. But again, in practical matters, tonych has pointed out that the fundamental unit is a byte. The fact that it is typically discussed as Gbytes is a triviality. You want decentralization? Lobby the exchanges to make the change. Get off your ass and do it yourself.

Amuses me that you go on about decentralization while pleading with the 'central point of control' to make a change.

And WhoTF are you to claim that "Tonys actions outside of his coding are actually damaging to the project."? The way I see it, he has put scads of money in my pocket. You? Not so much.

And while you seem to assert that decentralization is a necessary property for a coin to succeed, the counterexample of XRP's #2 market cap quite clearly disproves your assertion.

"Also let's get some polls for BB so we can tell really how many people want things and dont want it."

OK, now you are on to something. Without hard data, your claim of 'what people want' is mere bullshit. So figure out a way to implement a scientifically-valid means of polling the community, and run it. Perhaps with unassailable data, tonych can be persuaded. Or are you waiting for the 'single centralized point' to do that work for you?

I get it. The centralization is sub-optimal. I actually agree with you. What can be done about it? Tonych's position is rather clear. Quit whingeing and do something.

With all due respect.

Okay let's enter discussion of these points.

With that out of the way, let us discuss the first. You claim that 'the community wants a lower denomination'. First, where is your data? Seems to me all you have to point to is some handful of disembodied names on some forum on some corner of the internet.

Is it reasonable to conclude that there is a significant proportion of the community wanting these changes since I notice from this thread that there are many voices asking for this and few voices opposing? It is not hard data but if you cant see that is a probable outcome of a poll on here then that is up to you.

Are you saying you believe the majority is not in favour given the last 20 pages of this thread?

If i go to far in asserting the majority want these changes then that is my mistake although I find it probable that is the case as i said and does not invalidate my point really. The poll again could be problematic on here in many ways

Calling bct a strange little corner of the internet in relation to crypto currency is probably again unrealistic. It is crypto central and the very place byteball was born.

Your point about requesting the point of central control to bring about more decentralised measures is again unrealistic . I mean if there is only centralised control at this point how else could it become more decentralised without his involvement other than creating a hostile takeover which again is more far fetched? Actually ever going from such a point of central control arguably means the project can never be trustless fully in the future.

And WhoTF are you to claim that "Tonys actions outside of his coding are actually damaging to the project."? The way I see it, he has put scads of money in my pocket. You? Not so much.

It does not matter who presents an argument nor and idea it is merely the merit of such argument or idea that is important. I present the argument that it was damaging to knowingly go ahead with a distribution where you knew the ICO managers from other projects were going to take huge swathes of your minting. I say also it was foolish to encourage investors with the notion of full moon distributions only to tell them that that was false and that is now not going to happen since we need those coins for dev and marketing.... when the opposing ICO managers have huge bulks of coins that could have been used for that.  I mean if you don't think these obvious mistakes even though many persons advised against it are damaging..then again that is a strange view which I would have you justify. Else join me in my view that these knowing actions were damaging.

And while you seem to assert that decentralization is a necessary property for a coin to succeed, the counterexample of XRP's #2 market cap quite clearly disproves your assertion.

I never said this please find and post where i said that. If you deem success as a huge collusion and market making move to generate a huge market cap then that is a view I can understand. I simply said that these actions do not denote a trustless decentralised project. Success is not something easy to define here. I would define success as a huge REAL natural market cap whilst ensuring a trustless and decentralised project.

Let me say though here that i very much LIKE tonych as a peron and I FULLY respect his genius in design and coding. I do not however think he has a clue about market psychology nor marketing nor installing investor confidence. I promote byteball out of respect for his coding and design and actually i think he is very honest too. I have way less financial stake here than i do in many projects that i never promote.

I still think BB even with Tony making glaring mistakes in marketing and bringing investors confidence will end up a top 10 project merely on the basis of that he will turn out to be honest and distribute the entire minting in an honest way and that his design will be better than most of the other projects here. He is just making it a way more drawn out and tough route to success.

My intention is merely to demonstrate Tony should code and design and other teams for marketing should be formed and that it should move to a more decentralised process for decision making and for securing the network as soon as possible.

I am totally willing to discuss any points with you or anyone else in a reasonable manner and if I am proven wrong  I would gladly embrace other views.

As yet I remain convinced I am correct in what i have said.

Your suggestion for me to fork Byteball if I am not happy with the way tony is handling all matters is sadly not going to be possible at this time nor any other time  so I will stick with as you say pleading suggesting he decentralises all aspects of byteball as soon as possible and also takes on board feedback from the community as far as they can give valid input.

[Ckjnow]

I fully agree with cryptohunter. 
Go with the times or be gone in no time.

[bottacoin]

*** BinaryBalls trading report ***

Global trading stats since launch date of 2017-11-13 :

Contracts made: 3271 MBytes traded: 83911 Winning contracts: 1769 Global payout rate: 97%

And the top 3 best rush traders :

Rank 1: RBAMD7 (330 MBytes 24h net profit with 5 contracts) Rank 2: VJ5OES (315 MBytes 24h net profit with 15 contracts) Rank 3: PH627A (292 MBytes 24h net profit with 16 contracts)

Will you manage to be on the best rush traders list ?

https://byteball.fr/bandeau.png

BinaryBalls.com
1st Binary Options Trading Platform with Byteball Bytes

[Frank37]

The advantage of ByteBall is also its biggest disadvantage  - the total token supply, with such low supply the investors are happy but it harder to user many zeros in front.

That is the first impression, but then you realise how many billion token you are sitting on when you think in bytes. And how undervalued it still is.

the problem is people have unit bias. if everyone wants a GB they will choose cheaper looking coins like ripple. the mass, unfortunately, at this time does not look at total supply.

Indeed, but the developers position on the matter is quite clear. https://www.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/7og0x6/update_from_tony_on_5_january_2018_regarding_the/

This is why BB is way down on MC compared to iota and XRB

Sorry but a dev who can not see this and also not see why giving huge amounts of BB to competing project managers for free then pissing off real investors by stopping the full moon distributions as promised is not a dev I can say inspires much faith.

Decentralised projects should have decentralised governance if one person holds the vast bulk of the coins, controls the network, does not listen at all to the entire community then that is already a project that has failed to be trustless and decentralised.

Not trying to appeal to stupid people is not a good arguement when every thread on the main board is about finding the cheapest per unit coins.

The price per unit is one thing, but changing the rules makes me stop to further invest. I will hold all BB, but don't buy new one, because changing the rules is like poison for investors.

[MawsonPeak]

I also agree with cryptohunter.

It is tonychs project and he has done a great job on the technical side. I can fully understand that he wants to stay in control. But Byteball currently is not a decentralized currency which is run by a community like Bitcoin was from the very beginning. My impression is it is more or less run by a single person.

A community does not come out of nowhere just by doing airdrops. You need to give people the chance to get involved.

[djpitagora]

I also agree with cryptohunter.

It is tonychs project and he has done a great job on the technical side. I can fully understand that he wants to stay in control. But Byteball currently is not a decentralized currency which is run by a community like Bitcoin was from the very beginning. My impression is it is more or less run by a single person.

A community does not come out of nowhere just by doing airdrops. You need to give people the chance to get involved.

which is probably one of the reasons we don't have much of a community. Look at other projects: people getting involved, creating events, marketing, even contributing to the code.

[ByteFan]

A community does not come out of nowhere just by doing airdrops. You need to give people the chance to get involved.

Agreed.