[DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated

[sidhujag]

BTER has deposits and withdrawals enabled for DVC. So it's almost ready!

Looks like those emails work! Lets double up efforts to get on other exchanges espeially those chinese ones!

[1714137171]

1714137171

[1714137171]

1714137171

[1714137171]

1714137171

[1714137171]

1714137171

[sidhujag]

What about a mobile wallet using bitcoinj?  Now that we have qr support would be nice to make payments on your phone via nfc or qr.

[Eddie2013]

Hello, great news guys, bter.com one of the biggest altcoin exchanges in china has reply to me that they accept devcoin, and has announced officially dvc will soon be on shelf

http://bter.com/ (the english page has not updated, you could visit chinese page, and search for word "Devcoin", incase you know chinese)


Edit: It's on now http://bter.com/trade/dvc_cny

Great news emfox!! Good job

[davidltc]

Hello, I installed it, and my Anti-Virus (Eset Smart Security 4) said it an 'Unknown NewHeur_PE virus", and the devcoin.exe was removed. don't know what happened...

Edit: I use the one from http://dls.21stcenturymoneytalk.org/dls/devcoin/devcoin-win32.7z, also said it's the same virus. I suppose this is the official devcoin.exe ? so not the installer fault, there's something error with the original exe.

Very interesting! Yes, this is the devcoin-win32.7z from that same link simply packaged in to an installer. I know quite a few coins come up as false positives--could this be similar? Here's looking forward to a newer build!

Hello,
Eset Antivirus continues detecting devcoin.exe --> probably unknown NewHeur_PE.


It's safe to use???


https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/9e92e9f1959414903e80a0c1e2c159d29b1644910df325ddf6a173b41b9b7bc8/analysis/1387896494/

thank you

[markm]

BTER unfortunately is broken as far as supporting eight digits of decimals goes.

It has weird things happen like not being able to use all the decimals when placing an order on the website, and displaying with different numbers of decimals on different parts/tables of a page, yet you see offers appear on the orderbooks that have more decimals than you can type in on the page.

It looks like maybe their API si allowing bots to make use of all the decimals while the webpages are inconsistent about how many decimals there are.

The only reason I ever used BTER was BBQcoins, which I have not been able to work with properly over there because of this weird glitch that forces ten satoshi jumps between prices for humans using the website, leaving huge gaps therefore between prices, while bots or the system's own internal manipulations or something gets to jump in-between all your prices by making use of those decimals that you the human are not permitted/enabled to use.

In fact when I started using BTER the extra digits of decimals that the bots or the internal manipulators or who-ever or what-ever were using were not even visible in the order-book, so you'd find you could not buy an offer at its displayed price because it was not displaying the full price, the last one or more decimals were concealed.

Basically the script they are using, which I believe is a commercial script that they sell to other sites or that they along with other sites buy from someone, is broken as far as dealing with bitcoin-based cryptocurrencies go; it was maybe hacked up from some code originally intended for fiat forex (in which one usually uses five decimals and trades blocks of ten thousand units of a currency so that the 10000 units in play at a time makes up for the five decimals, balancing them out by multiplying by 10,000).

Still, it was better to deal with BBQ over at BTER despite the broken scripts than to contemplate the ghastly idea of having Vircurex, which seemed to have been designed for eight decimals all along, get flooded with garbage crapcoins. I certainly do not recommend anyone use any of the scam-central exchanges that specialise in enabling all the new scamcoins that keep coming out, I merely happened to use it because I dabbled in BBQcoin, which was kind of an early proof of how scammy all those new scrypt coins are.

(Think of BBQ as an experiment to see whether having more scrypt coins would be viable; what it seemed to demonstrate was that in fact having another scrypt coin was not viable, yet nonetheless despite the demonstrated lack of viability of an increased number of such coins, more and more such coins keep coming out...)

-MarkM-

[georgem]

After the video is created, we can convert it to something more available to the masses. Who cares what he writes it in initially? Let him choose his method, then we will be thankful we have someone talented enough to create it and just convert it after the fact if we dont like flash.

We care because bounties and shares are paid only for free open source stuff, not proprietary stuff. Its the same thing as all the audio files in Linux distributions being .ogg, they apparently have to be because the common alternatives are not free open source codex / codices. (I think we also don't use GIF anymore too, similarly, ever since the big burn the GIFs campaign a decade or so ago or more.)

So sure if his flash authoring tool can also put out a free open source codex or he can convert it as you seem to expect to be possible (googling reveals google themselves made a converter to convert flash to HTML5) then fine, but we don't do bounties or shares for proprietary stuff so any bounty or share would be for the HTML5 or whatever free open source thing not whatever proprietary formats he used internally in his studio to create the free open source end-result.

If he cannot produce free open source but you can by converting his stuff, then it would be you who should get the bounty, and you'd share it out among your team as you see fit, such as to give him most or all of it for creating the flash thing you used to produce the actually rewardable end result.

-MarkM-

I wanted to reignite the discussion concerning

1) open source vs free stuff

2) using proprietary methods to create free stuff

and what this would mean for every artist who would want to contribute.

I reposted an earlier statement by mark that concisely describes his viewpoint.

In my opinion there are many rather confusing and strange implications that make no sense for me whatsoever and are even potentially baffling and deterrent for any artist who would want to participate.

For example... (emphasis added by myself)

If he cannot produce free open source but you can by converting his stuff, then it would be you who should get the bounty, and you'd share it out among your team as you see fit, such as to give him most or all of it for creating the flash thing you used to produce the actually rewardable end result.

-MarkM-

So this would open the door for everyone who has better means of converting something someone created for free, even giving the converter the claim over the bounty and the power to decide how much money the actual artist would recieve.

This is unsettling to say the least.

Wouldn't that create incentives for similar behaviour like we see with patent trolls (a little far-fetched I agree), introducing a new species of competitor, no more only the creator species, but also the converter species who acts not necessarily in accordance with the creators?

[markm]

We want the free open source version.

So we should reward the team that produces it.

This does not mean some dude with a converter gets to steal an artist's license.

It means, rather, that the artist needs to authorise the conversion of his art into a free open source form/format.

The artist's permission is still needed.

I was merely addressing the apparent inability of artists to output their art in free open source formats.

Basically an added layer: bundle the artist into a team that includes someone who can arrange the production of a free open source result, whether that person ends up having to do some kind of a converter or re-train an artist to use something that produces free open source output, or find a different artist, one that is capable of using free open source tools or whatever it takes to get what we want, (which is, I thought, the development of free open source stuff, thus includes the development tools used to develop free open source stuff and the stuff produced using such stuff...)

Presumably part of the hoped for results of our rewarding free open source developers to develop free open source art and music and so on is an increase in the number of artists and musicians who choose to use free open source tools and components and inks and brushes and instruments and such or to develop such things.

Remember we are about development.

It is the development of art and music that we are trying to reward / incentivise, many specific items of art or music might really amount to merely samples / examples of what can be developed under the free open source rubric; we are presumably more interested in the capability to develop such art and music than in any particular items of art or music that are developed.

-MarkM-

[georgem]

It means, rather, that the artist needs to authorise the conversion of his art into a free open source form/format.

The result of his art (the final picture, music piece, 3d model)

or the whole creation process?


Please define what you mean with "his art".

Art is also a state of mind.


Would you accept someone creating a video using proprietary software like flash, but converting the final product into a free video format using FFmpeg.?

[georgem]

I was merely addressing the apparent inability of artists to output their art in free open source formats.

-MarkM-

It depends.

I think we should respect the artist by only imposing rules on the finalized work of art.

Certainly not on the means he used to create his work.

Certainly not on the process of creating the art.

(he should decide if he wants to be all secretive about it, or explain the process indepth)

[markm]

It means, rather, that the artist needs to authorise the conversion of his art into a free open source form/format.

The result of his art (the final picture, music piece, 3d model)

or the whole creation process?


Please define what you mean with "his art".

Art is also a state of mind.


Would you accept someone creating a video using proprietary software like flash, but converting the final product into a free video format using FFmpeg.?

Remember that we kind of need to bootstrap the whole process to some extent, and hobble along hobbled by various problems such as needing the free open source tools with which to develop the free open source tools, and needing artists and musicians and so on to use the free open source tools in order to create demand/market for improvement of the free open source tools and so on.

For example some people say free open source tools are not good enough so real artists and musicians do not use them.

I do not think rewarding artists and musicians for not using the free open source tools seems a likely way of encouraging the improvement of such tools.

Partly because free open source does not tend to proceed along a trajectory of "if you build it, then they will come".

Rather the opposite seems more normally / usually the case: unless they come, there is no point building it.

That is why some people claim that much of free open source software seems to be written for the software's developer rather than for masses of people who never even bothered to get involved in the development of the stuff.

Basically the programmers had already come, so what they - the people who did already come - wanted got built.

So if we reward artists and musicians for using free open source tools, and those tools could be improved / could be better, maybe the fact that they need to use those tools in order to get those rewards might cause those artists and musicians to apply more effort and finances and lobbying and so on toward getting those tools improved instead of just running off with some non free open source tool to go do some non free open source project or something.

Presumably the tools work just fine for the programmers who wrote them; maybe it takes a certain amount of knowledge or skill to even perceive whatever problems artists and musicians have with such tools.

-MarkM-

EDIT: Notice that for authors, we reward authors for using a free open source wiki program/site, not, for example, for uploading microsoft word document files...

[georgem]

We want the free open source version.

Remember we are about development.

It is the development of art and music that we are trying to reward / incentivise, many specific items of art or music might really amount to merely samples / examples of what can be developed under the free open source rubric; we are presumably more interested in the capability to develop such art and music than in any particular items of art or music that are developed.

-MarkM-

Programming is about developing, creating algorithms is about developing.

But not art. (certainly not the whole process of it)

Let me introduce an example, a story rather by a musician and how he came to create a song.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Clapton

Eric Clapton created the song "Tears in heaven" to express his grief of losing his 4 year old son who died after falling from the 53rd-floor window.

So let me get this straight, and make an open source development specification for a song like "tears in heaven"


1) first have someone die in your family. It is imperative that the death could have been easily prevented.

2) be depressed for years, preferably drowning your grief in drugs that increase psychological disorders you might already have like latent scizophrenia.
Add suicidal tendencies as desired to increase the necessary feeling of hopelessness (to create authenticity)

3) let everything "ferment" for a few years until you find the power (and help of friends who want to get you out of the depression) and finally...

4) create a wonderful song, honouring the short life of someone you loved.

[balanghai]

DVC is neat project. Hoping more people will adopt the coin, I'd like to see more developers funded.

[georgem]

It means, rather, that the artist needs to authorise the conversion of his art into a free open source form/format.

The result of his art (the final picture, music piece, 3d model)

or the whole creation process?


Please define what you mean with "his art".

Art is also a state of mind.


Would you accept someone creating a video using proprietary software like flash, but converting the final product into a free video format using FFmpeg.?

Remember that we kind of need to bootstrap the whole process to some extent, and hobble along hobbled by various problems such as needing the free open source tools with which to develop the free open source tools, and needing artists and musicians and so on to use the free open source tools in order to create demand/market for improvement of the free open source tools and so on.

For example some people say free open source tools are not good enough so real artists and musicians do not use them.

I do not think rewarding artists and musicians for not using the free open source tools seems a likely way of encouraging the improvement of such tools.

Partly because free open source does not tend to proceed along a trajectory of "if you build it, then they will come".

Rather the opposite seems more normally / usually the case: unless they come, there is no point building it.

That is why some people claim that much of free open source software seems to be written for the software's developer rather than for masses of people who never even bothered to get involved in the development of the stuff.

Basically the programmers had already come, so what they - the people who did already come - wanted got built.

So if we reward artists and musicians for using free open source tools, and those tools could be improved / could be better, maybe the fact that they need to use those tools in order to get those rewards might cause those artists and musicians to apply more effort and finances and lobbying and so on toward getting those tools improved instead of just running off with some non free open source tool to go do some non free open source project or something.

Presumably the tools work just fine for the programmers who wrote them; maybe it takes a certain amount of knowledge or skill to even perceive whatever problems artists and musicians have with such tools.

-MarkM-

EDIT: Notice that for authors, we reward authors for using a free open source wiki program/site, not, for example, for uploading microsoft word document files...

Isn't this like "putting the cart before the horse"?

I agree that we should create incentives for artists to use (and create) free open source tools. I wholeheartedly support that.

But they don't exist yet. (lightyears away from the extent we would wish to see)

So if we were to wait until those tools are created, meanwhile we will not have any artist develop for devcoin.

Shouldn't we start with more relaxed requirements, and give bonuses for musicians based on how much % open source they used in their creation process?

I would suggest that we need some sort of openness from the artist.
He should absolutely lay open what tools he used.

That would than give us a way to judge and derive a percentage point of how open source his process is.

There should be different criteria that add shares to the bounty an artist recieves.

1) final product is free and in open source format (33%)
2) tools he used are open source (33%)
3) he explains the steps he made, enlightening us about the creation process (33%)

Something like that would be needed as to also attract "secretive" artists who use open source tools.
Or "secretive" artists who don't use open source tools, but like to share their music for free.
or an other combination: an artist who likes to share his music for free, yet create it with proprietary tools, but be absolutely open about his creation process, in effect be like a teacher about it.
etc... there are 8 possibilities for point 1, 2 and 3 to be combined:

0.0.0 (go away, we don't like your corporate ass around here.)
1.0.0 (free stuff to download)
0.2.0 (presenting open source tools)
0.0.3 (teaching about how to use proprietary artist tools)
1.2.0 (artist creates art with open source tools and final product is in downloadable open source format, but artist doesn't explain what's behind his music process)
1.0.3 (artist creates free music with proprietary tools and explains like a teacher his creation process)
0.2.3 (artist explains how to create music with open source tools, but doesn't provide any art example, only theory) You like that mark, hm??  
1.2.3 (a dream come true, an artist creates free stuff with open source tools and is open about his whole creation process) .... jesus returned anyone?

[markm]

Programming is about developing, creating algorithms is about developing.

But not art. (certainly not the whole process of it)

We are devcoin - development coin.

So I do think it should be mostly about the development.

Maybe lets go back to the basic five categories of art, my father is an artist and was part of organising an art expo in Harlow, Essex when I was a kid. The artists designed the logo to have five squares, representing "the" five arts. Presumably at least five types of artist, representing those five arts, were all in agreement that five is how many arts there were. Or hey maybe they really just meant that was how many of "the" arts the expo would be about and would present and represent.

Five different ways of arranging five squares were chosen also so each art could have a distinct logo of its own but all of them being compositions of those five simple grey squares on a white background.

The five types were, I think, something like flat static art (painting/drawing), static three-dimensional art (sculpture), mobile art (dance/drama), sonic art (music/sound), and linguistic art (literature, poetry, presumably the scripts of plays/dramas...)

There is some overlap/crossover already so far, because choreographers might have some notation system (language, linguistic system) they can use to script dances, playwrights definitely have a notation system they use to script plays/dramas, heck even musicians have notation systems they can use to script music.

But we can also see some things that do need development in order to enable these arts. For example for flat art some kind of flat media would likely often be useful, so free open source flat media such as sketch programs and paint programs and designs for paintbrushes and formulae for paints and processes for creating paints and processes for production of flat medias such as canvas and paper and lithography-stones and so on and so on are needed.

Regardless of what emotional experiences your example dude went through before making his song, chances are that someone had developed a musical scale that appealed to him and that he chose to use rather than some other musical scale, and various instruments had been developed out of which he chose an instrument with which to express or perform or play his song and so on.

In case you missed my earlier edit on the end of my earlier post, please notice that devtome rewards people for using a free open source wiki, not, for example, for uploading a microsoft word document...

-MarkM-

[georgem]

please reread my last post, I added what kind of combinations could exist, to create more incentives for different kind of artists.

I think this would give more possibilites for an artist to participate, and don't measure an artists worth as if he were a code developper

[emfox]

BTER unfortunately is broken as far as supporting eight digits of decimals goes.

It has weird things happen like not being able to use all the decimals when placing an order on the website, and displaying with different numbers of decimals on different parts/tables of a page, yet you see offers appear on the orderbooks that have more decimals than you can type in on the page.

It looks like maybe their API si allowing bots to make use of all the decimals while the webpages are inconsistent about how many decimals there are.

The only reason I ever used BTER was BBQcoins, which I have not been able to work with properly over there because of this weird glitch that forces ten satoshi jumps between prices for humans using the website, leaving huge gaps therefore between prices, while bots or the system's own internal manipulations or something gets to jump in-between all your prices by making use of those decimals that you the human are not permitted/enabled to use.

In fact when I started using BTER the extra digits of decimals that the bots or the internal manipulators or who-ever or what-ever were using were not even visible in the order-book, so you'd find you could not buy an offer at its displayed price because it was not displaying the full price, the last one or more decimals were concealed.

Basically the script they are using, which I believe is a commercial script that they sell to other sites or that they along with other sites buy from someone, is broken as far as dealing with bitcoin-based cryptocurrencies go; it was maybe hacked up from some code originally intended for fiat forex (in which one usually uses five decimals and trades blocks of ten thousand units of a currency so that the 10000 units in play at a time makes up for the five decimals, balancing them out by multiplying by 10,000).

Still, it was better to deal with BBQ over at BTER despite the broken scripts than to contemplate the ghastly idea of having Vircurex, which seemed to have been designed for eight decimals all along, get flooded with garbage crapcoins. I certainly do not recommend anyone use any of the scam-central exchanges that specialise in enabling all the new scamcoins that keep coming out, I merely happened to use it because I dabbled in BBQcoin, which was kind of an early proof of how scammy all those new scrypt coins are.

(Think of BBQ as an experiment to see whether having more scrypt coins would be viable; what it seemed to demonstrate was that in fact having another scrypt coin was not viable, yet nonetheless despite the demonstrated lack of viability of an increased number of such coins, more and more such coins keep coming out...)

-MarkM-

so they just open the dvc/cny trading pair other than dvc/btc pair....

[georgem]

please notice that devtome rewards people for using a free open source wiki, not, for example, for uploading a microsoft word document...

-MarkM-

Yes, I understand that and absolutely approve of it.

[markm]

so they just open the dvc/cny trading pair other than dvc/btc pair....

I don't quite follow your reasoning.

Are you saying that you do have a full eight decimals if you use the dvc/cny pair instead of the dvc/btc pair?

In the sense that they are fixing a page at a time and that particular page has so far already been fixed?

Or do you mean that the problem of decimals can be avoided by using currencies that do not have eight decimals anyway so that the lack of support for eight decimals does not matter?

(Implying presumably that the problem only occurs on the "what you buy it with" side not on the "what is being sold" side of pairs?)

-MarkM-

[georgem]

There should be different criteria that add shares to the bounty an artist recieves.

1) final product is free and in open source format (33%)
2) tools he used are open source (33%)
3) he explains the steps he made, enlightening us about the creation process (33%)

Something like that would be needed as to also attract "secretive" artists who use open source tools.
Or "secretive" artists who don't use open source tools, but like to share their music for free.
or an other combination: an artist who likes to share his music for free, yet create it with proprietary tools, but be absolutely open about his creation process, in effect be like a teacher about it.
etc... there are 8 possibilities for point 1, 2 and 3 to be combined:

0.0.0 (go away, we don't like your corporate ass around here.)
1.0.0 (free stuff to download)
0.2.0 (presenting open source tools)
0.0.3 (teaching about how to use proprietary artist tools)
1.2.0 (artist creates art with open source tools and final product is in downloadable open source format, but artist doesn't explain what's behind his music process)
1.0.3 (artist creates free music with proprietary tools and explains like a teacher his creation process)
0.2.3 (artist explains how to create music with open source tools, but doesn't provide any art example, only theory) You like that mark, hm??  
1.2.3 (a dream come true, an artist creates free stuff with open source tools and is open about his whole creation process) .... jesus returned anyone?

I will use those 8 ways of participating for http://devmusic.org and http://devsound.org  and create examples for all 8 styles (expect the first one of course, which is just an example of how NOT to participate at all)

The 8 ways of participating, I like the sound of that... shaolin grandmaster approves of that.

[markm]

please reread my last post, I added what kind of combinations could exist, to create more incentives for different kind of artists.

I think this would give more possibilites for an artist to participate, and don't measure an artists worth as if he were a code developper

Okay I will go back and read again.

But meanwhile, I so far still do tend to think that we should be about art development, specifically about free open source art development, rather than about art per se. Art per se includes non free non open source art, and its development is often non free non open source development.

We should in my current opinion as developed (hee hee) so far be about the free open source development of free open source art.

There are plenty of places where people can submit and maybe even be rewarded for non free non open source art development and even the actual pieces of art developed by such processes/means.

-MarkM-