BitBay |Decentralized Marketplace|Smart Contracts|IoT Tech|Markets Open

[chicken65]

Went through the last threads and i have become more confident now .Thanks dzimbeck for your insight.

The thing is if the project is legit and the bitbay team delivers even half of what it has envisioned then this could easily break into the top 5 coins list.

Lets look at the top coins in market cap after bitcoin.
(These are just my opinions)

Ripple is a scam with artificially bloated market cap.

Litecoin- Just look at the charts it is well past its "silver to the bitcoin hype".Not much developing happening.

BitShares is in a critical phase of transition with major rebranding and lots of changes happening .The Chinese money is fleeing away now with all the uncertainty and confusion about what bitshares is actually supposed to be.They are even trying to redefine and modify the meaning of DAC , a term they themselves coined.Its a good project for the long term but for now it may go further down until things get resolved.  

Dogecoin-Well it had the community effect ,its past its hype and will not be adopted by serious institutions.

NXT- They are having some good developments but they'll be stuck with the tag of having an ipo with very uneven distribution. Whenever it tries to rise in price an early adopter relieves his large bag and spoils the party.

The point being the top altcoin post is there for the taking and Bitbay can be a serious contender for it. It has all things going for it may it be branding or chinese backing,top developer and the great plans to look forward to.

For me personally the secret sauce is nubits like pegging.If they can pull it off and successfully peg close to a dollar or equivalent renminbi well then it makes one hell of an investment for the ico buyers and a stable easily usable currency for the masses.(Easier said than done)

Considering the risk to reward to ratio here I am buying into the ico but just with money I can afford to lose.
Am a BitBayer now and wish Bitbay Team all the best

 



 
  

Interesting post and your observations of other coins.

The thing is if the project is legit and the bitbay team delivers even half of what it has envisioned then this could easily break into the top 5 coins list.

I agree with this and I will be surprised if this coin doesn't break in to top ten at least. Top five is doable for sure as well but that will mean a determined and focussed community> of course the Dev needs to come up with the goods but Im pretty confident were good there.

[chipmadness]

Guys this is legit, David is a great guy! If you ever see a coin that has a Black coin developer in it...... Just buy.... BUY IT.... David is a good guy and he is very smart.

[CryptoBull]

Good evening,
so just finished reading the thread, got back from work.Well i can see some strong hand in the Dev team for sure.
i like the simple way of explaining things,open dev is always a good sign.I would love to hear some future plans for this project it sounds promising for me personally.Can somebody provide a link to the reddit Q&A i re-installed my PC and i lost my history.(thank you in advance for that)

I want to hear about the technology, if somebody is good lad and explain to me how exactly is BitBay working will be helpful for me,this smart contracts sounds interesting for example.
With that nobody can scam me with a trade right?
maybe i didnt understand it quite right i guess, thats why i could use some help understanding the Tech better.


Ok thank u in advance with the help


P.S
Btw merry btc rise 

[Piston Honda]

Good evening,
so just finished reading the thread, got back from work.Well i can see some strong hand in the Dev team for sure.
i like the simple way of explaining things,open dev is always a good sign.I would love to hear some future plans for this project it sounds promising for me personally.Can somebody provide a link to the reddit Q&A i re-installed my PC and i lost my history.(thank you in advance for that)

I want to hear about the technology, if somebody is good lad and explain to me how exactly is BitBay working will be helpful for me,this smart contracts sounds interesting for example.
With that nobody can scam me with a trade right?
maybe i didnt understand it quite right i guess, thats why i could use some help understanding the Tech better.


Ok thank u in advance with the help


P.S
Btw merry btc rise 

https://www.reddit.com/r/BitBay/comments/2lwx22/ama_with_bitbay_and_dzimbeck/

I actually just went over it yesterday, very good stuff (it's pretty much one of the main reasons for buying-in myself, as I'm gunshy when it comes to most alts in general).

[dzimbeck]

I think, I also decided not to invest - except if the DEV answer my questions about real time hardware control and outlines how that will be possible at all with the Blackhalo solution?

I am mainly interested in the IoT offering, but it seems to me the IoT concept does not even exists on conceptual level. If there is not even conceptual solution, I can't see how this project will release a working, blockchain enabled, peer to peer Internet of Things software that controls hardware in real time.

I believe I already answered this, im not able to monitor this thread constantly because I'm usually working. But yeah you can do zero confirmations with multisig because your device or you hold the raw transaction. It depends on the application/hardware. Best that you give me some example or use case and I can explain to you how I would approach it.

This isnt dissimilar from NightTrader multisig engine which I have made. I just dont have any front end for it. Controlling hardware in real time is fairly easy when you know multiple signatures are involved. Add this to checklocktimeverify and you can have outputs convert to different things based on blocks. Handling raw transactions where you hold the other signature can leave you secure with the fact that you can do zero confirmations.

Thanks for your reply.

I am familiar with the green address concept of Bitcoin that requires a third party and allows instant transactions and I believe you are not referring to that. So if your solution conceptually is not that, let see a concrete use case: open a gate in a sport venue where users use their wallet to enter the venue and the gate controller device charges 10 BitBay coin for opening the gate. My understanding is, prior to opening the door the device must know if the 10 BitBay Coin is available for the buyer. The device must ensure the balance is available, it's not a double spending and it's a legitimate transaction, otherwise the door cannot be opened. Once the gate controller device is satisfied the balance is available, and only in that case it opens the gate. How long it takes for the device to verify if there is a sufficient balance on the address, because prior verifying the balance the gate cannot be opened?  In other words, how long the user must stand for waiting the device to perform the service?

If you say so you have worked this out and willing to explain this, I am sure that's the case, and you will have a working solution :-))

One working solution is to have your funds locked before you get to the gate ...  Thus your primary account would have locked funds set aside for public events and interaction with IOT ... So they cant hold your money hostage because the funds are set to convert back to a regular account on the expiration of the lock ... The gate only signs with parties that were confirmed in advance to be honest. Those parties would hold a double deposit contract with the manufacturer too.

All due respect David, this solution isn't practical and such implementation would make the use case completely uncompetitive to existing FIAT or even digital currency payment solutions. Currently payment systems, even the Bitcoin network with green addresses works in ad-hoc manner: you pay at the time of the purchase. In order to buy a pizza, hotel room, concert ticket  there is no requirement to lock the fund to the seller prior to the transaction, not even with Bitcoin. I think such system that you have suggested wont be adopted at all.

I understand your solution would be still anonymous and decentralized, but having so much complication to make a payment to IoT devices would make the solution impractical in my opinion.

This starts boiling down more to logistics.

I disagree. This is not a logistical but a conceptual issue. What you have described is a workaround by asking users to comply with your work around in order to have the luxury of involving with a very-very complicated process.

Anyway, thanks for answering, apart from the IoT part, your solution will be great and I have no doubt you will roll out an excellent smart contract system. I suggest don't involve the IoT it at all. Firstly people have no idea what is it so it doesn't mean anything :-)) and no one is investing in this because the IoT feature, but once someone take a closer look at it, the reaction will be that it is not acceptable for businesses and that reaction could cause more harm than good for the project. Your decentralized market solution is flawless, it is obviously a viable use case, but the hardware industry and hardware integrators will be taking apart the IoT concept and such publicity will hurt your and the project's reputation.

Well this was just an example. Also I should mention that your client would be locking the funds. And its not dissimilar from "Parking" funds in Nubits, we can offer incentive for parking with manufacturers. One method is to use only one manufacturer at first to simplify the distribution. I'm mostly interested in mesh networks to be honest. That is exactly what I discussed with the other players. My solution works, its not "green addresses" per se but I agree even though it works it may not get adopted. That solution works around bitcoins weakness of trustless doublespend problems. What you are describing is a problem inherent in Bitcoin itself so the only other way is to make the device are party to the transaction in some way so it can trust the RAW transaction is valid. This way it doesnt have to wait for confirmations since it knows its holding a signature, hash or something that would prevent you from spending otherwise. Time locks are not permanent, they are only needed to create a connection with the hardware manufacturers server to prove you arent double spending on one of their devices.

So, no offense taken. I have yet to see a better solution. Perhaps I can come up with an additional one later and PM you when I do. After all knowledge should be free. So we are taking baby steps. Just start with what works and let the industry evolve. That solution works for your particular use case. Users can also do a double deposit contract with device manufacturers in advance. Then they would not need to use my above proposed method.

Bitcoin itself is highly flawed anyways, it doesnt have a very advanced scripting system, there is malleability which always needs to be worked around by protocols, there is major problems with botnets and sybil attacks, there is a scalabiity issue that is very complex to confront (im speaking of bandwidth issues in securing the blockchain) and so on.

With that said, they liked my ideas with mesh networks and added it as IoT which is a misnomer. The mesh netowork idea I had was working with hardware but not necessarily in real time. A good example is Blackcoins COLD Staking. This is something rat4 added some RPC calls for. Now I can do multisignature staking in Halo. We could then, use a device with the staker to sign the second sig. So this is a case where you dont need instant confirmations.

 To me, mesh networks are a dream goal if we even get close to that point this project will be a smash hit. So really my impression in starting this project was to start in mesh. If they really want to do this with me, we can change the world so its of great interest to me to see this follow through.

Lets be clear about this roadmap again:

*DEMO Smart contracting client(from BlackHalo)  --- Within a week. Trying to get it before ICO ends but not 100% sure.
*Markets(beta without advanced whitelists but with a kill switch/mod key) --- Within a month or two max. I've been working on this for Blackcoin, they coincide

The last two get worked on simultaneously with Hedging taking precedence:
*Hedging transition with the checklocktimeverify --- this is about a month... we can pull from NuBits, but we are dealing with a larger supply so that math has     to work out to manage all of everyones funds properly. If they pay my dev team I can have them work on this fork BEFORE I finish my markets which would greatly increase the speed in the fork.

*Markets with whitelists/double back on server --- one month after the main markets release. Its not a difficult implementation, its very elegant but there would also be some user interface feedback and bugs we want to respond to. This could delay one additional month so we will have to ask users to behave in our decentralized markets so we don't have to shut it down.

So give the above a total of 3 months. Realize I'm trying to underpromise and overdeliver. And you know I deliver if you read blackcoins subreddit

ONCE we are hedged, we can go for the mesh networks. We will now be capped at a billion dollars(thats my target price anyways) and be able to afford and utilize our connections to the hardware markets and we will indeed create an incentive system for setting up these networks.

[dzimbeck]

Good evening,
so just finished reading the thread, got back from work.Well i can see some strong hand in the Dev team for sure.
i like the simple way of explaining things,open dev is always a good sign.I would love to hear some future plans for this project it sounds promising for me personally.Can somebody provide a link to the reddit Q&A i re-installed my PC and i lost my history.(thank you in advance for that)

I want to hear about the technology, if somebody is good lad and explain to me how exactly is BitBay working will be helpful for me,this smart contracts sounds interesting for example.
With that nobody can scam me with a trade right?
maybe i didnt understand it quite right i guess, thats why i could use some help understanding the Tech better.


Ok thank u in advance with the help


P.S
Btw merry btc rise 

You should check out BitHalo and BlackHalo. This is my program that has been out and tested for almost a year. And yes, nobody can ever scam these contracts. They are by far the most secure way to do business. Check out blackhalo.info. You can read my whitepaper there its very exciting tech.

[dzimbeck]

haven't had time to read the whole thread, but the initial post does look ...interesting. an actual decentralized market could be huge. complex though, to say the least. i'm gonna read up on this.

Did you see the flow chart i posted a few pages back? Please read up on bitmessage channels and whitelists. Then realize im adding a burn layer to bitmessage(but the first version of markets will not have the burn layer because I want the nodes)

i looked for, but did not find the flowchart.

been glancing through this thread. i'd read previously about bitmessage. i kinda feel like i did when i first heard about bitcoin. which is best summed up by the following:

That made me lol... ok well im going to repost the link. Its more of a "diagram" than a flow chart. So they way it works is, the nodes in the network do something similar to a multicast to all the other nodes that they find through each others known nodes. And they all try to decrypt everyones messages to see if it is indeed their. In order to prevent spam Bitmessage forces proof of work. But of course, an ASIC can smash their network. SO, use two methods. First burn coins on any network of your choose OR use timelock and lock a certain amount of coins to come back to you. (you pay yourself). Then, you can only post as much messages per minute as you have funds.

So, markets are channels in bitmessage or shared mailing lists. In SOME ways these can be decentralized servers. But, spam and of course inability to moderate is a problem. But its only a problem if everyone else can see you. SO, make a trust building system using Bitmessages white lists. This forces nodes to behave well in the lower level mailing list or perhaps a centralized server to earn the right into the moderators market. The mod likes you? He will burn your address into the blockchain thus making you a member of the white list. He could even store the list on a webpage no problem. You check that list, get into the network, they see you and the network is small only filled with people who behave well. Then to mitigate spam further you connect networks together like legos. Each network has moderators and can communicate with other moderators about the contents of their networks.

Thus Bitmessage is able to scale and avoid spam. It also can filter content based on rules (perhaps they want a clean market).

One more layer here... Halo itself can filter incoming and outgoing requests to bitmessage. So even if there was crap on the channel your actual client would not be able to see it. SO, here is a diagram that shows that. Granted, it sounds complex but its not so bad. I will have the markets with mods in our beta as well as a key i can publish to force it back to a server if it gets too much madness. Then after, i code the whitelists system. Basically, I force people through a server first and have them do some honest deals. Once they check out after a certain number of months and volume they get into the whitelist. Our server/bitmessage address signs for the whitelist for our market. Now if somebody wants to start their own channel, they use the same model.

A channel does not need a mod necessarily but ours certainly will and so will NightTraders.

Here is the page with my diagram...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=850267.340

[arklan]

thats really interesting. all sounds like a well thought out plan. execution sounds like a bitch though. really complex. i am not saying i doubt you can do it or anything, just noting that to do it will be hard.

so, to be clear, is the goal decentralized digital markets/exchanges for coins, or are we talking physical goods? if the latter, which i think is what ya mean, then it seems the only remaining problem for users would be keeping shipping and delivery addresses anonymous from one another. not that the market should solve that, of course. what i'm trying to say is it sounds like you've covered everything a market could cover.

impressive.

[godzirra]

I'm reading a lot about NuBits here. How about BitUSD?
I'm a Bitshares guy so I'm biased but I think it's a much better product.

[Adderral]

I'll say I''m impressed with it all. Coin will be a top 5 imo without any doubt.  

[dzimbeck]

Thanks yeah its also decentralized trading of coins. But for coin trading I dont have it listed YET because I'm coding two engines in Blackcoin called "NightTrader" its basically a micropayment engine and a multisignature exchange engine. They are meant to fully decentralize trade without relying on atomic trading. There is other things we can do too like we can microtrade time locked coins as long as the coins touch the multisignature account. This again, doesnt require checklocktimeverify on both networks its an elegant solution to decentralized trade without middle coins. But I had to be practical and make sure the markets are running and solve other problems.

So, hopefully we can get more devs to worry about adding my engine because im trying to focus on the complex stuff so they dont have to. Currently I just hired 4 devs here in Cambodia and im paying out of pocket. They are totally new to Bitcoin but im training them. Cambodia does not have a lot of python devs so its been very slow getting them started. Has I not wasted time with devs, I could have coded the markets myself already.

Regardless I knew I needed help and refuse to work alone for the rest of next year. So this deal with Bitbay will help set up my dev team. That was part of the deal.

[altcoinUK]

I think, I also decided not to invest - except if the DEV answer my questions about real time hardware control and outlines how that will be possible at all with the Blackhalo solution?

I am mainly interested in the IoT offering, but it seems to me the IoT concept does not even exists on conceptual level. If there is not even conceptual solution, I can't see how this project will release a working, blockchain enabled, peer to peer Internet of Things software that controls hardware in real time.

I believe I already answered this, im not able to monitor this thread constantly because I'm usually working. But yeah you can do zero confirmations with multisig because your device or you hold the raw transaction. It depends on the application/hardware. Best that you give me some example or use case and I can explain to you how I would approach it.

This isnt dissimilar from NightTrader multisig engine which I have made. I just dont have any front end for it. Controlling hardware in real time is fairly easy when you know multiple signatures are involved. Add this to checklocktimeverify and you can have outputs convert to different things based on blocks. Handling raw transactions where you hold the other signature can leave you secure with the fact that you can do zero confirmations.

Thanks for your reply.

I am familiar with the green address concept of Bitcoin that requires a third party and allows instant transactions and I believe you are not referring to that. So if your solution conceptually is not that, let see a concrete use case: open a gate in a sport venue where users use their wallet to enter the venue and the gate controller device charges 10 BitBay coin for opening the gate. My understanding is, prior to opening the door the device must know if the 10 BitBay Coin is available for the buyer. The device must ensure the balance is available, it's not a double spending and it's a legitimate transaction, otherwise the door cannot be opened. Once the gate controller device is satisfied the balance is available, and only in that case it opens the gate. How long it takes for the device to verify if there is a sufficient balance on the address, because prior verifying the balance the gate cannot be opened?  In other words, how long the user must stand for waiting the device to perform the service?

If you say so you have worked this out and willing to explain this, I am sure that's the case, and you will have a working solution :-))

One working solution is to have your funds locked before you get to the gate ...  Thus your primary account would have locked funds set aside for public events and interaction with IOT ... So they cant hold your money hostage because the funds are set to convert back to a regular account on the expiration of the lock ... The gate only signs with parties that were confirmed in advance to be honest. Those parties would hold a double deposit contract with the manufacturer too.

All due respect David, this solution isn't practical and such implementation would make the use case completely uncompetitive to existing FIAT or even digital currency payment solutions. Currently payment systems, even the Bitcoin network with green addresses works in ad-hoc manner: you pay at the time of the purchase. In order to buy a pizza, hotel room, concert ticket  there is no requirement to lock the fund to the seller prior to the transaction, not even with Bitcoin. I think such system that you have suggested wont be adopted at all.

I understand your solution would be still anonymous and decentralized, but having so much complication to make a payment to IoT devices would make the solution impractical in my opinion.

This starts boiling down more to logistics.

I disagree. This is not a logistical but a conceptual issue. What you have described is a workaround by asking users to comply with your work around in order to have the luxury of involving with a very-very complicated process.

Anyway, thanks for answering, apart from the IoT part, your solution will be great and I have no doubt you will roll out an excellent smart contract system. I suggest don't involve the IoT it at all. Firstly people have no idea what is it so it doesn't mean anything :-)) and no one is investing in this because the IoT feature, but once someone take a closer look at it, the reaction will be that it is not acceptable for businesses and that reaction could cause more harm than good for the project. Your decentralized market solution is flawless, it is obviously a viable use case, but the hardware industry and hardware integrators will be taking apart the IoT concept and such publicity will hurt your and the project's reputation.

Well this was just an example. Also I should mention that your client would be locking the funds. And its not dissimilar from "Parking" funds in Nubits, we can offer incentive for parking with manufacturers. One method is to use only one manufacturer at first to simplify the distribution. I'm mostly interested in mesh networks to be honest. That is exactly what I discussed with the other players. My solution works, its not "green addresses" per se but I agree even though it works it may not get adopted. That solution works around bitcoins weakness of trustless doublespend problems. What you are describing is a problem inherent in Bitcoin itself so the only other way is to make the device are party to the transaction in some way so it can trust the RAW transaction is valid. This way it doesnt have to wait for confirmations since it knows its holding a signature, hash or something that would prevent you from spending otherwise. Time locks are not permanent, they are only needed to create a connection with the hardware manufacturers server to prove you arent double spending on one of their devices.

So, no offense taken. I have yet to see a better solution. Perhaps I can come up with an additional one later and PM you when I do. After all knowledge should be free. So we are taking baby steps. Just start with what works and let the industry evolve. That solution works for your particular use case. Users can also do a double deposit contract with device manufacturers in advance. Then they would not need to use my above proposed method.

Bitcoin itself is highly flawed anyways, it doesnt have a very advanced scripting system, there is malleability which always needs to be worked around by protocols, there is major problems with botnets and sybil attacks, there is a scalabiity issue that is very complex to confront (im speaking of bandwidth issues in securing the blockchain) and so on.

With that said, they liked my ideas with mesh networks and added it as IoT which is a misnomer. The mesh netowork idea I had was working with hardware but not necessarily in real time. A good example is Blackcoins COLD Staking. This is something rat4 added some RPC calls for. Now I can do multisignature staking in Halo. We could then, use a device with the staker to sign the second sig. So this is a case where you dont need instant confirmations.

 To me, mesh networks are a dream goal if we even get close to that point this project will be a smash hit. So really my impression in starting this project was to start in mesh. If they really want to do this with me, we can change the world so its of great interest to me to see this follow through.

Lets be clear about this roadmap again:

*DEMO Smart contracting client(from BlackHalo)  --- Within a week. Trying to get it before ICO ends but not 100% sure.
*Markets(beta without advanced whitelists but with a kill switch/mod key) --- Within a month or two max. I've been working on this for Blackcoin, they coincide

The last two get worked on simultaneously with Hedging taking precedence:
*Hedging transition with the checklocktimeverify --- this is about a month... we can pull from NuBits, but we are dealing with a larger supply so that math has     to work out to manage all of everyones funds properly. If they pay my dev team I can have them work on this fork BEFORE I finish my markets which would greatly increase the speed in the fork.

*Markets with whitelists/double back on server --- one month after the main markets release. Its not a difficult implementation, its very elegant but there would also be some user interface feedback and bugs we want to respond to. This could delay one additional month so we will have to ask users to behave in our decentralized markets so we don't have to shut it down.

So give the above a total of 3 months. Realize I'm trying to underpromise and overdeliver. And you know I deliver if you read blackcoins subreddit

ONCE we are hedged, we can go for the mesh networks. We will now be capped at a billion dollars(thats my target price anyways) and be able to afford and utilize our connections to the hardware markets and we will indeed create an incentive system for setting up these networks.

Right now I can see what you are trying to achieve and thanks for the clarification.

So far a few of us, potential users and investors posted that the IoT concept seems a bit vogue and it's very questionable how that such hardware integration would work with the Balckhalo system, and generally with decentralized blockchain solutions. You have described a workaround, but also said yourself that your original suggestion to the BitBay team was a mesh network idea, and then it was called IoT. So why don't call it "mesh network" if the focus will be in fact ... on mesh network :-)) I had involved with several crypto projects at investment level that went very wrong for the same reason, the objectives were identified incorrectly, the team delivered different solution what was promised. It's your project and you do as you wish, but why to disappoint (perhaps mislead people) by promising IoT when your goal - very understandably - related to a bigger picture and you will work on mesh network?

I have been involved with IoT related design and implementation projects for years, this area is close to me, but for the given technology, the peer to peer network and the decentralized blockchain the mesh network sounds a more sensible goal. I fully agree with you that it could be game changer. (the very-very smart people of Skycoin work on the same thing) I would change the IoT in the project description to Mesh Network. Right now no one really cares, people who knows you will still believe in the project, but you could avoid lot of problems by defining the goals and deliverables accurately. Later, when the price inevitable drop (see Viacoin) investors start to complain, FUD, etc., and then it will be a huge issue why you work on mesh network if you promised IoT.

Anyway, good luck, I will throw in a few BTCs and look forward to see the mesh network implementation some times next year.

[chicken65]

thats really interesting. all sounds like a well thought out plan. execution sounds like a bitch though. really complex. i am not saying i doubt you can do it or anything, just noting that to do it will be hard.

so, to be clear, is the goal decentralized digital markets/exchanges for coins, or are we talking physical goods? if the latter, which i think is what ya mean, then it seems the only remaining problem for users would be keeping shipping and delivery addresses anonymous from one another. not that the market should solve that, of course. what i'm trying to say is it sounds like you've covered everything a market could cover.

impressive.

I cant speak to much for the technical stuff but I think your on the right track there. Dont know if you saw this before? Maybe it helps.




[/quote]

[Piston Honda]

I think, I also decided not to invest - except if the DEV answer my questions about real time hardware control and outlines how that will be possible at all with the Blackhalo solution?

I am mainly interested in the IoT offering, but it seems to me the IoT concept does not even exists on conceptual level. If there is not even conceptual solution, I can't see how this project will release a working, blockchain enabled, peer to peer Internet of Things software that controls hardware in real time.

I believe I already answered this, im not able to monitor this thread constantly because I'm usually working. But yeah you can do zero confirmations with multisig because your device or you hold the raw transaction. It depends on the application/hardware. Best that you give me some example or use case and I can explain to you how I would approach it.

This isnt dissimilar from NightTrader multisig engine which I have made. I just dont have any front end for it. Controlling hardware in real time is fairly easy when you know multiple signatures are involved. Add this to checklocktimeverify and you can have outputs convert to different things based on blocks. Handling raw transactions where you hold the other signature can leave you secure with the fact that you can do zero confirmations.

Thanks for your reply.

I am familiar with the green address concept of Bitcoin that requires a third party and allows instant transactions and I believe you are not referring to that. So if your solution conceptually is not that, let see a concrete use case: open a gate in a sport venue where users use their wallet to enter the venue and the gate controller device charges 10 BitBay coin for opening the gate. My understanding is, prior to opening the door the device must know if the 10 BitBay Coin is available for the buyer. The device must ensure the balance is available, it's not a double spending and it's a legitimate transaction, otherwise the door cannot be opened. Once the gate controller device is satisfied the balance is available, and only in that case it opens the gate. How long it takes for the device to verify if there is a sufficient balance on the address, because prior verifying the balance the gate cannot be opened?  In other words, how long the user must stand for waiting the device to perform the service?

If you say so you have worked this out and willing to explain this, I am sure that's the case, and you will have a working solution :-))

One working solution is to have your funds locked before you get to the gate ...  Thus your primary account would have locked funds set aside for public events and interaction with IOT ... So they cant hold your money hostage because the funds are set to convert back to a regular account on the expiration of the lock ... The gate only signs with parties that were confirmed in advance to be honest. Those parties would hold a double deposit contract with the manufacturer too.

All due respect David, this solution isn't practical and such implementation would make the use case completely uncompetitive to existing FIAT or even digital currency payment solutions. Currently payment systems, even the Bitcoin network with green addresses works in ad-hoc manner: you pay at the time of the purchase. In order to buy a pizza, hotel room, concert ticket  there is no requirement to lock the fund to the seller prior to the transaction, not even with Bitcoin. I think such system that you have suggested wont be adopted at all.

I understand your solution would be still anonymous and decentralized, but having so much complication to make a payment to IoT devices would make the solution impractical in my opinion.

This starts boiling down more to logistics.

I disagree. This is not a logistical but a conceptual issue. What you have described is a workaround by asking users to comply with your work around in order to have the luxury of involving with a very-very complicated process.

Anyway, thanks for answering, apart from the IoT part, your solution will be great and I have no doubt you will roll out an excellent smart contract system. I suggest don't involve the IoT it at all. Firstly people have no idea what is it so it doesn't mean anything :-)) and no one is investing in this because the IoT feature, but once someone take a closer look at it, the reaction will be that it is not acceptable for businesses and that reaction could cause more harm than good for the project. Your decentralized market solution is flawless, it is obviously a viable use case, but the hardware industry and hardware integrators will be taking apart the IoT concept and such publicity will hurt your and the project's reputation.

Well this was just an example. Also I should mention that your client would be locking the funds. And its not dissimilar from "Parking" funds in Nubits, we can offer incentive for parking with manufacturers. One method is to use only one manufacturer at first to simplify the distribution. I'm mostly interested in mesh networks to be honest. That is exactly what I discussed with the other players. My solution works, its not "green addresses" per se but I agree even though it works it may not get adopted. That solution works around bitcoins weakness of trustless doublespend problems. What you are describing is a problem inherent in Bitcoin itself so the only other way is to make the device are party to the transaction in some way so it can trust the RAW transaction is valid. This way it doesnt have to wait for confirmations since it knows its holding a signature, hash or something that would prevent you from spending otherwise. Time locks are not permanent, they are only needed to create a connection with the hardware manufacturers server to prove you arent double spending on one of their devices.

So, no offense taken. I have yet to see a better solution. Perhaps I can come up with an additional one later and PM you when I do. After all knowledge should be free. So we are taking baby steps. Just start with what works and let the industry evolve. That solution works for your particular use case. Users can also do a double deposit contract with device manufacturers in advance. Then they would not need to use my above proposed method.

Bitcoin itself is highly flawed anyways, it doesnt have a very advanced scripting system, there is malleability which always needs to be worked around by protocols, there is major problems with botnets and sybil attacks, there is a scalabiity issue that is very complex to confront (im speaking of bandwidth issues in securing the blockchain) and so on.

With that said, they liked my ideas with mesh networks and added it as IoT which is a misnomer. The mesh netowork idea I had was working with hardware but not necessarily in real time. A good example is Blackcoins COLD Staking. This is something rat4 added some RPC calls for. Now I can do multisignature staking in Halo. We could then, use a device with the staker to sign the second sig. So this is a case where you dont need instant confirmations.

 To me, mesh networks are a dream goal if we even get close to that point this project will be a smash hit. So really my impression in starting this project was to start in mesh. If they really want to do this with me, we can change the world so its of great interest to me to see this follow through.

Lets be clear about this roadmap again:

*DEMO Smart contracting client(from BlackHalo)  --- Within a week. Trying to get it before ICO ends but not 100% sure.
*Markets(beta without advanced whitelists but with a kill switch/mod key) --- Within a month or two max. I've been working on this for Blackcoin, they coincide

The last two get worked on simultaneously with Hedging taking precedence:
*Hedging transition with the checklocktimeverify --- this is about a month... we can pull from NuBits, but we are dealing with a larger supply so that math has     to work out to manage all of everyones funds properly. If they pay my dev team I can have them work on this fork BEFORE I finish my markets which would greatly increase the speed in the fork.

*Markets with whitelists/double back on server --- one month after the main markets release. Its not a difficult implementation, its very elegant but there would also be some user interface feedback and bugs we want to respond to. This could delay one additional month so we will have to ask users to behave in our decentralized markets so we don't have to shut it down.

So give the above a total of 3 months. Realize I'm trying to underpromise and overdeliver. And you know I deliver if you read blackcoins subreddit

ONCE we are hedged, we can go for the mesh networks. We will now be capped at a billion dollars(thats my target price anyways) and be able to afford and utilize our connections to the hardware markets and we will indeed create an incentive system for setting up these networks.

Thanks, a couple of points here answered some questions I had as well.

[chicken65]

Currently I just hired 4 devs here in Cambodia and im paying out of pocket. They are totally new to Bitcoin but im training them. Cambodia does not have a lot of python devs so its been very slow getting them started. Has I not wasted time with devs, I could have coded the markets myself already.

Regardless I knew I needed help and refuse to work alone for the rest of next year. So this deal with Bitbay will help set up my dev team. That was part of the deal.

Can i ask why you hired a team from Cambodia
Im thinking cost was the prime reason which is fine. Just curious

[digicidal]

Currently I just hired 4 devs here in Cambodia and im paying out of pocket. They are totally new to Bitcoin but im training them. Cambodia does not have a lot of python devs so its been very slow getting them started. Has I not wasted time with devs, I could have coded the markets myself already.

Regardless I knew I needed help and refuse to work alone for the rest of next year. So this deal with Bitbay will help set up my dev team. That was part of the deal.

Can i ask why you hired a team from Cambodia
Im thinking cost was the prime reason which is fine. Just curious

I'm not 100% sure but I actually believe that is because David is currently physically located there so he has the ability to meet with / manage them directly as opposed to hiring from outside and having to manage over group messaging/skype/irc/etc.

[jokumat]

.. After the debut of the markets, we will fork the coin into a hedging coin. This will greatly reward investors who get in on the ground floor, and it will eliminate volatility using a similar system to NuBits...

Why is currency pegging good for investors? One would expect just the opposite. If the currency is pegged to something (like fiat), then its value can't rise.  

Merchants may not want the volatility associated with cryptocurrency. It's a way of attracting a wider audience. It also serves as a hedge against risk. ie. Bitshares BitUSD. It's a necessity if you're going after mass adoption imo.

Once again. I'll put this simply. I am not a user. I am a speculator. Why should I speculate on a crypto pegged to US dollars? Where is my profit? Why should I take the risk and buy Bitbay coins now, why not to keep my dollars, if not bitcoins?

And this thread is useless to help me to make a decision. It' s just full of technology promises and vague business plans. Let' s copy blackcoin, get some chinese businessmen on board etc.

[dzimbeck]

Currently I just hired 4 devs here in Cambodia and im paying out of pocket. They are totally new to Bitcoin but im training them. Cambodia does not have a lot of python devs so its been very slow getting them started. Has I not wasted time with devs, I could have coded the markets myself already.

Regardless I knew I needed help and refuse to work alone for the rest of next year. So this deal with Bitbay will help set up my dev team. That was part of the deal.

Can i ask why you hired a team from Cambodia
Im thinking cost was the prime reason which is fine. Just curious

Unfortunately, because im broke. Its too bad because i could have had so much money had i sold all my coins before the horrible summer. But once the summer ended i had nothing. The only way to expand Halo was to pay for it myself. For some ridiculous reason, we could not get funding. We just fell through the cracks. I did not want to have my "hat in my hand" looking for investors so I was just like "Screw it, I'm going to Cambodia and hiring myself a bunch of  devs". It was between Cambodia and India. But i thought Cambodia may be a hidden treasure because its so underdeveloped. And its cheaper. Although now, I wonder also about Bangladesh.

What i learned was, India may have been a better deal because finding devs here without jobs is a really slow process. So better to pay about 20-40% more and get a HQ Indian dev.

Although some of the sources here I talked to said it was the same.

About 150-300 per month for a beginning level dev (although here is most C# and little python)
         300-500 for middle level dev
         800 for senior dev

[chicken65]

Thanks for the response. Interesting stuff.
At that price you would be lucky to get a programmer in the west for half a day.
Lets hope your works is well rewarded on this project 

[needmoney]

I'm in with 4800 BAY