Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments

[tarmo888]

For the weekly draw, the bot wants me to sign a message confirming that I own an address.  But when I click on the request to sign message, it signs it with a different address (I have bytes in 2 different addresses).  How can I sign the message with my other address?

What address is that? A change address or just another the wallets in the app? Just select the wallet you want to add from the burger menu and then select "Insert my address" from the chat "..." button. It is easiest to do that with single-wallet address because on multi-address wallets, you need to add a new address every time you spend from that wallet because change is sent to your new address. So, if you use multi-wallet address, it makes sense to send all to your current address on "Receive" screen.

[sbt77]

... when I click on the request to sign message, it signs it with a different address (I have bytes in 2 different addresses).  How can I sign the message with my other address?

What address is that? A change address or just another the wallets in the app? Just select the wallet you want to add from the burger menu and then select "Insert my address" from the chat "..." button. It is easiest to do that with single-wallet address because on multi-address wallets, you need to add a new address every time you spend from that wallet because change is sent to your new address. So, if you use multi-wallet address, it makes sense to send all to your current address on "Receive" screen.

I mean another address in the same wallet.

Is there a general interface that lets me sign any message, with any address that's in my wallet?  The only interface I've seen is in Chat, when the bot sends me a "Request to sign" message, and clicking on that doesn't let me pick the address used to sign it.

I guess a workaround is to send everything to a single address, but I'm surprised that there isn't a general message signing interface.

[afbitcoins]

Good. Thank! It seems I understand a little more.

And what else does that shared address (based on hash of smart-contract definition) do?

For example, in my smart wallet 5 GB frozen for a year.

Can I use this smart wallet in Weekly Draw? Or is it theoretically impossible?

That would be cool, but I don't know if it's possible because if that smart-contract is between you and steem attestation bot then draw bot has no idea what this address is about until somebody withdraws from it. Maybe it could guess that it's locked reward address by who funded it, but I am not sure.

Better to post here like the Byteball founde:  https://www.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/9yfbvt/i_am_tony_byteball_founder_and_lead_developer_ask/ 

Tonych. Ie THE Byteball creator to you. Is using this thread on bitcoin talk, as evidence on this page. So how about f**k off.

 

[afbitcoins]

About the new distribution methods. I really hate them! Full moon airdrop were beautiful things. I looked up at the sky and saw the full moon waxing. I thought beautiful things about the project. I looked forward to an airdrop. I was content being an early adopter and rewarded as such. The elegant simplicity. But this. This is ugly. This is blacklisting addresses, lotto style gambling, proving ID, changing your mind, and other ugliness. It is the broken promises of how the coins would be distributed. It is a never ending distribution. With unofficial halvings as the distribution diminishes. central control and ID verified. Privacy a forgotten token. Byteball bytes the broken promises.

[afbitcoins]

For the weekly draw, the bot wants me to sign a message confirming that I own an address.  But when I click on the request to sign message, it signs it with a different address (I have bytes in 2 different addresses).  How can I sign the message with my other address?

What address is that? A change address or just another the wallets in the app? Just select the wallet you want to add from the burger menu and then select "Insert my address" from the chat "..." button. It is easiest to do that with single-wallet address because on multi-address wallets, you need to add a new address every time you spend from that wallet because change is sent to your new address. So, if you use multi-wallet address, it makes sense to send all to your current address on "Receive" screen.

Hmm.. I don't see why ppl still post here, Byteball founder is on Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/9yfbvt/i_am_tony_byteball_founder_and_lead_developer_ask/

Bot ?

[whotheff]

he is not a bot, see him speaking a few posts above. I clicked "Ignore"
and the world is a better place ever since.

Regarding distribution. This was an issue whn i intered Byteball
and from what I can see, devs are still trying to give away
something for free to people without allowing them to cheat.

Unfortunately their methods have always proven exploitable so far.
My proposition to make byteball PoA (proof of advertisement)
where you have to write articles and make videos about Byteball
as a massive bounty to get any Byteballs was rejected.

Working to get Byteballs would be also a barrier which will
chase away the lazy exploiters as it would require actual work.

The only good think i can see after a few months of not checking
Byteball is the creation of many new bots. I always liked how good
they work within Byteball.

[tarmo888]

Regarding distribution. This was an issue whn i intered Byteball
and from what I can see, devs are still trying to give away
something for free to people without allowing them to cheat.

What's wrong with trying to minimize cheating? Would it be better if most bytes would be distributed to cheaters?

Unfortunately their methods have always proven exploitable so far.
My proposition to make byteball PoA (proof of advertisement)
where you have to write articles and make videos about Byteball
as a massive bounty to get any Byteballs was rejected.

I have been on Bitcointalk longer than my registered date shows. I can remember that there has been and still are many bounty competitions, which reward people for doing actual work, but these have been exploited too and IMHO, they were not that high quality to be beneficial. In reality, 21% of distribution fund that is left to distribute is too much to distribute on bounties alone.

There has been many work-based distributions and some of them have been exploited too:
* twitter bounty (was mostly spam)
* Crowdin translation bounties (no replaced with Utopian.io translators because random translators just used machine translation)
* bitcointalk signature campaign (was mostly spam)
* youtube video campaign
* 2 use-a-thons (one in university and another on Steemit)
* campaign for writers (just recently)
* campaign for bot developers (just ended)
* development grants (still open, many great stuff built with it)
* ... maybe some more that I don't remember

Goal is to have as wide and fair distribution as possible. Every distribution can be cheated so the idea is to find, which works best and find those where the amount of cheaters can be minimized using code.

[tarmo888]

About the new distribution methods. I really hate them! Full moon airdrop were beautiful things. I looked up at the sky and saw the full moon waxing. I thought beautiful things about the project. I looked forward to an airdrop. I was content being an early adopter and rewarded as such. The elegant simplicity. But this. This is ugly. This is blacklisting addresses, lotto style gambling, proving ID, changing your mind, and other ugliness. It is the broken promises of how the coins would be distributed. It is a never ending distribution. With unofficial halvings as the distribution diminishes. central control and ID verified. Privacy a forgotten token. Byteball bytes the broken promises.

You are romanticizing the moondrops, there was nothing beautiful about them other than 70 000 addresses (not users) were linked. In reality, whales like Lisk Foundation got huge chunk of bytes for nothing. Weekly draw is better, you don't have to wait for full moon, you just need to wait for Friday and maybe you win. Not sure why you would be against excluding cheaters if that increases your chances to win, unless you are the cheater. Rules are not changed on a whim, they are adapted to situation. ID attestation is not needed, it is voluntary, you either attest your ID or get a bigger bag to increase your chances to win.

You know what else has very long distribution (100 years is more appropriate term for "never ending" than 10 years) - Bitcoin. When SHA256 will be broken by quantum computers, you can be sure that they will change it to make the mining more difficult with some other hashing function, SHA256 will not last for 100 years. SegWit already enables them to have stronger signatures for transactions and Bitcoin distribution is not written in stone. It adapts, otherwise it would be dead already.

[jbreher]

You know what else has very long distribution (100 years is more appropriate term for "never ending" than 10 years) - Bitcoin.

While this is true, the fact that the distribution of the tail in Bitcoin is not subject to the whims and caprice of a single individual makes this an entirely different thing.

[tarmo888]

You know what else has very long distribution (100 years is more appropriate term for "never ending" than 10 years) - Bitcoin.

While this is true, the fact that the distribution of the tail in Bitcoin is not subject to the whims and caprice of a single individual makes this an entirely different thing.

Except it is not whims and caprice, it based on what works and what doesn't, it gets adapted to situation when needed. If Bitcoin airdrop wouldn't have been stopped then there would be even more whales today. Everybody is welcome to come up with better distribution methods, there is no reason why there shouldn't be more distribution methods, just before posting you idea there, somewhat solution how to fight abuse should be considered. There are many ideas for alternative distributions, which are really easy to abuse https://www.reddit.com/r/ByteBall/comments/a7p5nd/distribution_methods_revisited_have_your_say/

[Malek17]

may be there should be a lottery option for loyal Bytball hodlers who never moved their coins since first airdrop or at least have hodled for a year or more

[jbreher]

You know what else has very long distribution (100 years is more appropriate term for "never ending" than 10 years) - Bitcoin.

While this is true, the fact that the distribution of the tail in Bitcoin is not subject to the whims and caprice of a single individual makes this an entirely different thing.

Except it is not whims and caprice, it based on what works and what doesn't, it gets adapted to situation when needed.

Whatevs. Whatever the intent, we all must put our _trust_ in tony to 'do the right thing'. If he goes rogue, we have no recourse. OTOH, the Bitcoin emission is clearly bound in an algorithmic manner, destined to never change due to the underlying game theory.

IOW, COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. The attempted equivalence is beyond the pale.

[tarmo888]

You know what else has very long distribution (100 years is more appropriate term for "never ending" than 10 years) - Bitcoin.

While this is true, the fact that the distribution of the tail in Bitcoin is not subject to the whims and caprice of a single individual makes this an entirely different thing.

Except it is not whims and caprice, it based on what works and what doesn't, it gets adapted to situation when needed.

Whatevs. Whatever the intent, we all must put our _trust_ in tony to 'do the right thing'. If he goes rogue, we have no recourse. OTOH, the Bitcoin emission is clearly bound in an algorithmic manner, destined to never change due to the underlying game theory.

IOW, COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. The attempted equivalence is beyond the pale.

There is no such thing as "never change", it is very likely that total supply will never change for Bitcoin because no miner would agree to change that, but it is also very likely that hashing function will change for Bitcoin because SHA256 will not last for 100 years, there is no doubt about it, only question about it is what will miners accept next. Whether rest of the algorithm for mining changes is unknown because it is difficult to predict that because the distribution period is very long, intentionally. Even the block size is not set in stone, it will change, it's more of question "when?".

You have put your _trust_ in Bitcoin miners and coders that they make decisions that are beneficial for you. You are trusting unknown number of people who have access to cheapest electricity and most powerful computers. You can't guarantee that your fork will always stay with this same distribution because people who have access to cheapest electricity and most powerful computers will eventually win. That's called economy of scale.

Current game theory is that Bitcoin mining reward is at same ballpark as it costs to mine and due reward halvings, Bitcoin value will go up and eventually it will be so high that miners will live purely on transactions fees. But what if that won't work? You think coders would sit thumb in their ass for 10 years and not try to fix it if it becomes an issue? "never change" is BS, Bitcoin has already changed a lot and will change a lot in the future, that is normal thing for software that needs to stay relevant, otherwise we would still have Windows 95.

[umarucchi]

I want to sell byteball asset. pm me for price and do smart contract.

[tonych]

Byteball is now O_byte

https://medium.com/byteball/byteball-rebrand-the-next-step-to-real-world-adoption-6a0a924390de

[Wekkel]

Ha ha, I was already wondering what the nam Obyte was in my unread topics 

[o48o]

I have to say that Obyte is way more sexier name then byteball so congratz on that and the new logo. Even though that could be even more minimalistic

[LoyceV]

Byteball is now O_byte
https://medium.com/byteball/byteball-rebrand-the-next-step-to-real-world-adoption-6a0a924390de

That'll take a while to get used to

The agency we eventually selected is Skriptor Zigilla, the #1 European Naming Agency with impressive international clients like Oppo, Heineken, ING, Philips, Roche, Shell, Vodafone, Bayer and Novartis.

If that's the selling argument, it doesn't make any sense: those companies (or at least the ones I know) are much older than Skriptor Zigilla is, and several of the company names are the names of the creator. They may be clients for sub-products, but those aren't the names everyone recognizes.

It looks a lot like O₂.


I'll probably get used to it, give me some time

[tyz]

Byteball is now O_byte

-snip-

In my opinion, Obyte is a much better name than Byteball. I am wondering what the short will be? GByte should be replaced by OBytes since it confuses people a lot.

[tarmo888]

Byteball is now O_byte

-snip-

In my opinion, Obyte is a much better name than Byteball. I am wondering what the short will be? GByte should be replaced by OBytes since it confuses people a lot.

IMHO, ticker should be compatible with ISO 4217 currency code, so maybe XOB (since XGB is conflicting).