Holy Grail BOUNTY

[Explodicle]

Are these bounties related in any way?
[BOUNTY] 185+ BTC - Open Transactions Client (for Grandmas)
Open Transactions Client (for Grandmas) - Rugatu

[1715583933]

1715583933

[1715583933]

1715583933

[1715583933]

1715583933

[1715583933]

1715583933

[Binford 6100]

Are these bounties related in any way?
...

I doubt that. It's the same bounty btw. The sponsor or author of OP for the bounty has not been active on this forum in half a year. You better not rely on him to appear and evaluate submitted code.

[solidaria]

Obsi has not been active, but code is on FellowTraveler github, and it's been upgraded constantly.

Better wait for an answer, but if someone is going to countribute, better following this Holy Grail topic and donate through CIYAM.

[bytemaster]

All, I want to state that I support this effort, but will be withdrawing my bid to pursue any part of this bounty due to the progress and funding I am receiving for the development of BitShares.   

   

[JaSK]

Had my last day of work yesterday so I'll be able to start developing holy grail code full-time now.

Good luck with BitShares and have fun, bytemaster

[becoin]

I would like to see this project created as a multi lingual application - added language menus, translation files etc. If that is done I pledge additional 5 BTC. Anyone has experience with Qt Linguist?

[fellowtraveler]

I would like to see this project created as a multi lingual application - added language menus, translation files etc. If that is done I pledge additional 5 BTC. Anyone has experience with Qt Linguist?

If you'd like to hold the 5 BTC at a specific address (and name the address) then I will create a task within the project for internationalization, and your 5 BTC will show up as allotted for that task.

[becoin]

If you'd like to hold the 5 BTC at a specific address (and name the address) then I will create a task within the project for internationalization, and your 5 BTC will show up as allotted for that task.

I don't see much difference between my promise to pay 5 BTC for that task and keep 5 BTC on a specified address under my ownership. This is why I shall gladly transfer 5 BTC to an address you specify. Just PM me a bitcoin address of your choice?

[CIYAM]

I think it would probably be better from for FT to create the task with an address that you can send 5 BTC if you so wish (keeping the Project Management side separate from the donation).

I think it would be better for FT to "be in charge" of that so that there aren't any future arguments about payment (perhaps @becoin was thinking the same thing).

Understand that so far for FT's project *all* the BTC addresses are under FT's control.

[bytemaster]

Since this thread seems to be where everyone serious about seeing Open Transactions succeed is posting and actively funding development, I wanted to present an enhancement to OT that could truly be the Holy Grail!

Some of you may have been following BitShares, but you may not have seen the latest white paper:  http://the-iland.net/static/downloads/BitSharesWhitePaper.pdf

In this paper I outline an approach that integrates OT-like solution for enabling fast, anonymous, transactions and trades.   

1)  All reserves in all currencies are held on the BitShare block chain.   The OT Server would no longer have to deal with issuer contracts.
2)  An OT server can register with the blockchain by posting a surety bond with one or more escrow agents who are also registered in the blockchain.
3)  Deposits are made to the OT server via the blockchain which will hold / control the funds.
4)  The blockchain will honor the last-signed receipt from the OT server + User to withdraw funds.
5)  Any user may 'challenge' any withdraw transaction posted to the blockchain, these 'challenges' will be performed by automated audit-bots.
6)  When a transaction is challenged, the escrow agent (also an automated bot) validates the latest audit and determines who is at fault:
       1) the server  (in which case the server's escrow funds are lost and all accounts are frozen at the last successful audit)
       2) the person making the withdraw ( in which case the withdraw is denied and transaction fee kept)
       3) the person challenging the withdraw (in which case they forfeit a deposit made with their challenge request)

Escrow agents (bots) are anonymous and also post surety bonds with other agents.    They make money on transaction fees charged by all withdraws/deposits to many different OT servers and thus have a reputation to maintain to protect their revenue stream.  Escrow agents are also unable to steal funds because they can only deny withdraw requests AND they are also bonded and their actions can be challenged.   Besides, an OT server would probably have N different escrow agents that must all agree for a withdraw to occur.  Users would only deposit money with an OT server if they trust at least one of the escrow agents who in theory have a trusted track record serving many other OT servers.

Transaction servers make money on transaction fees and are unable to 'steal funds' because the funds are controlled by the blockchain gated by the escrow agent.

All that is needed is an automated audit protocol that keeps accounts 'anonymous' while they are on the server.    OT can then use the block-chain exchange for pricing information while enabling users to transact anonymously, instantly, and trade in real time. 

I have found some significant backing / funding for the development of BitShares and am attempting to put together a budget / development plan / team.   If there is anyone on this thread that would be interested in a job integrating OT-like functions into BitShares and/or developing a trading GUI that has dual use for OT and BitShares then please contact me.

[Loozik]

1. Does the construction of Bitshares, a P2P electronic brokerage system provide for dark pools / enable them / prohibit them / others?

[bytemaster]

You can never "prevent dark pools", but an OT transaction server acting as a high-speed exchange would be a dark-pool unless the trx server could be trusted to publish all exchanges.

With bitshares, all trades, bids, and asks end up in the block-chain and thus a public.

In summary:  the 'backing' of everything and ultimate price setting is public and is not a 'dark pool'.     Dark pools could exist outside the chain and the chain would *enable* trustless OT servers.

[bytemaster]

Assuming the audit protocol is 'atomic' and thus all signed receipts are instantly valid in any audit then the data published to enable the audit could go into the blockchain and the blockchain could then release the funds if presented with a receipt.

There would be no need for an escrow agent. 

All that is needed is a secure 'anonymous' audit protocol that does not tie accounts together like the blockchain does.

Then you could have instant transfers, 0 trust, and high-speed trading.  Only if you used the 'cash' feature would you have to trust the server and that may even be audit-able if all 'spent' tokens are published and the signature is publicly verifiable. 

From what I have read, the audit protocol is not throughly defined (in detail) nor is it defined how one would keep it anonymous.   If that is defined somewhere I would be VERY interested in seeing it.

[Loozik]

With bitshares, all trades, bids, and asks end up in the block-chain and thus a public.

Good, because with all the dark pools at different stock and futures (fiat) exchanges like CME I get the impression the data feed although showing proper price, has lots of volume missing (due to underreporting the volume generated by dark pools).

My gut feeling is that the volumes generated by dark pools at Bitstamp and MtGox are not shown in data feed availed to retail traders thus making it difficult to asses the real (retail + super-whale) volume.

Then you could have instant transfers, 0 trust, and high-speed trading.

Excellent

[fellowtraveler]

If you'd like to hold the 5 BTC at a specific address (and name the address) then I will create a task within the project for internationalization, and your 5 BTC will show up as allotted for that task.

I don't see much difference between my promise to pay 5 BTC for that task and keep 5 BTC on a specified address under my ownership. This is why I shall gladly transfer 5 BTC to an address you specify. Just PM me a bitcoin address of your choice?

Okay I have created this address: 1CHmSeTMYzJMshQhgYiUkMbUY1rATPovzY

If you want to send the 5 BTC there, then I will set up a task on the Holy Grail bounty for that address, for the purposes of Internationalization of the project.

Thanks for your interest and thanks in advance for your donation!

[becoin]

If you'd like to hold the 5 BTC at a specific address (and name the address) then I will create a task within the project for internationalization, and your 5 BTC will show up as allotted for that task.

I don't see much difference between my promise to pay 5 BTC for that task and keep 5 BTC on a specified address under my ownership. This is why I shall gladly transfer 5 BTC to an address you specify. Just PM me a bitcoin address of your choice?

Okay I have created this address: 1CHmSeTMYzJMshQhgYiUkMbUY1rATPovzY

If you want to send the 5 BTC there, then I will set up a task on the Holy Grail bounty for that address, for the purposes of Internationalization of the project.

Thanks for your interest and thanks in advance for your donation!

5 BTC sent. Thanks.

[phelix]

Would it not be easier and better to maintain to use a higher level language like python? Encrypting messages is only a handful of lines for example. RPC and http calls are easy to do.

Would it be ok for parts to call into python dlls (.pyd on windows) ?

BTW: What I never quite understood is: why not do the holy grail (= price finding) in Namecoin, too. Should be quite simple. Maybe one could even use atomic transactions to match orders. Speed and order volume might be limited but I think that is the case with Bitmessage, too.

[HeRetiK]

BTW: What I never quite understood is: why not do the holy grail (= price finding) in Namecoin, too. Should be quite simple. Maybe one could even use atomic transactions to match orders. Speed and order volume might be limited but I think that is the case with Bitmessage, too.

I guess once such a system is written for BTC, a client for merged mined coins or other alt coins will be just around the corner.

[marcus_of_augustus]

BTW: What I never quite understood is: why not do the holy grail (= price finding) in Namecoin, too. Should be quite simple. Maybe one could even use atomic transactions to match orders. Kiss Speed and order volume might be limited but I think that is the case with Bitmessage, too.

Because it would grow the namecoin blockchain for what? ... price quotes and bids? Namecoin is not a good idea for messaging. Bitmessage only holds a 2.5 day cache in a secured state.

People need to think a little harder about the cost implications of carrying around an ever-growing data load on thousands of machines. Quickest way to kill a blockchain would be to make it unusably unwieldly.

[boonies4u]

Quickest way to kill a blockchain would be to make it unusably unwieldly.

+1