BitBay OFFICIAL BITBAY Thread Smart Contracts Decentralized Markets Rolling Peg

[Preventative.Measures]

Any solution to the identically named BitBay exchange, other than hope for its immanent demise?

[1714633790]

1714633790

[1714633790]

1714633790

[1714633790]

1714633790

[Munti]

You do have a point Cryptohunter. We are rather busy atm, but I will do a little research on the subject when I get the time. Would have to be some sort of sidechain solution though. We don't want to get in Ethereums situation with a blockchain that grows 1 GB each day. Pm me any relevant links, and I'll look at it when I can.

[Munti]

Any solution to the identically named BitBay exchange, other than hope for its immanent demise?

Going for the immanent demise 

Seriously, there isn't much we can do about it except working on SEO. And SEO work has started as you can see from our community updates.

[dzimbeck]

You do have a point Cryptohunter. We are rather busy atm, but I will do a little research on the subject when I get the time. Would have to be some sort of sidechain solution though. We don't want to get in Ethereums situation with a blockchain that grows 1 GB each day. Pm me any relevant links, and I'll look at it when I can.

Exactly thanks Munti, yeah we just need to research other sidechain solutions to see what has been done so far. It is only good if there is a very easy way to deploy the sidechains. I'm not sure any coin has done that yet but we will keep an eye out for a scalable solution.

[lijoe408]

Any solution to the identically named BitBay exchange, other than hope for its immanent demise?

Going for the immanent demise 

Seriously, there isn't much we can do about it except working on SEO. And SEO work has started as you can see from our community updates.

Even with SEO work, I think they'll be in the top 3-5 search results regardless.  It can get very confusing to the new user when hearing about bitbay for the first time and finding the exchange instead.  Everything from the logo to the colorscheme is very similar.

[Preventative.Measures]

Any solution to the identically named BitBay exchange, other than hope for its immanent demise?

Going for the immanent demise 

Seriously, there isn't much we can do about it except working on SEO. And SEO work has started as you can see from our community updates.

Even with SEO work, I think they'll be in the top 3-5 search results regardless.  It can get very confusing to the new user when hearing about bitbay for the first time and finding the exchange instead.  Everything from the logo to the colorscheme is very similar.

It's a legitimate problem, there's no doubt of that.  Has anyone on the team probed the legalities of the trademark?  We're talking international law (in eastern europe no less) so it's a shot in the dark, but due dilligence in matters such as these separates the chaff from the wheat.  It's one of those forest for the trees issues, deceptively critical for the project's success.

Knowing Poles they'll ask for money if you try and play nice, so maybe a cease and desist right out the gate is the way to play it.  Doing nothing or going with a passive option like SEO work is not your path to success.

[cryptohunter]

You do have a point Cryptohunter. We are rather busy atm, but I will do a little research on the subject when I get the time. Would have to be some sort of sidechain solution though. We don't want to get in Ethereums situation with a blockchain that grows 1 GB each day. Pm me any relevant links, and I'll look at it when I can.

Totally agree we don't want to start bloating our blockchain. Sidechains would be the ideal way to go.

Anyone know of any projects implementing this type of system yet?

[Ganeshik]

I think it's EOS

[Special K]

You do have a point Cryptohunter. We are rather busy atm, but I will do a little research on the subject when I get the time. Would have to be some sort of sidechain solution though. We don't want to get in Ethereums situation with a blockchain that grows 1 GB each day. Pm me any relevant links, and I'll look at it when I can.

Totally agree we don't want to start bloating our blockchain. Sidechains would be the ideal way to go.

Anyone know of any projects implementing this type of system yet?

Maybe something like komodo?
Their chain is locked to the bitcoin blockchain.
You could lock a sidechain to bitbays-chain.

[dzimbeck]

You do have a point Cryptohunter. We are rather busy atm, but I will do a little research on the subject when I get the time. Would have to be some sort of sidechain solution though. We don't want to get in Ethereums situation with a blockchain that grows 1 GB each day. Pm me any relevant links, and I'll look at it when I can.

Totally agree we don't want to start bloating our blockchain. Sidechains would be the ideal way to go.

Anyone know of any projects implementing this type of system yet?

Maybe something like komodo?
Their chain is locked to the bitcoin blockchain.
You could lock a sidechain to bitbays-chain.

Yeah lets keep researching those other projects. Lisk has sidechains, I think... Ardor has them. But which project has them so we can let people build on us in a really easy way? Is there a codebase we can easily import? This is more of a long term thing to research. Are these sidechains secure and distributed?

[hexdump]

Code:

: wallet.dat corrupt, salvage failed


wallet.dat: BDB0090 DB_VERIFY_BAD: Database verification failed

BDB1009 /home/xxxx/.bitbay/wallet.dat: unsupported btree version: 10

any ideas ?

thanks

[Preventative.Measures]

In reading articles and the like the issue of trust between buyer and seller is glossed over.  BitBay purports a certain sum held in contract by both parties is an unequivocal gurantee scamming won't occur.  To me, it seems unless that amount is 100% of the agreed purchase price it will stack the deck against sellers and invite buyers [scammers] to purchase goods at a discount.

For example, lets say someone has a comic book for 10,000 BAY with collateral of 1000 BAY.  What's to stop the buyer from saying he never got it, sacrificing the 1000 BAY, and essentially get the comic at a 90% discount?

Or is the problem the opposite?  I.e., once funds have transferred to the seller, is the onus then on the seller to issue a refund if the buyer has a problem?  Flipping the script, what's to stop a seller in the above senario from selling a buyer an empty box for what amounts to 9,000 BAY?

This collateral system is offered as a panacea to limit or eliminate fraud, but I can't quite see how it will work in practice...

[ptcgroup10009]

In reading articles and the like the issue of trust between buyer and seller is glossed over.  BitBay purports a certain sum held in contract by both parties is an unequivocal gurantee scamming won't occur.  To me, it seems unless that amount is 100% of the agreed purchase price it will stack the deck against sellers and invite buyers [scammers] to purchase goods at a discount.

For example, lets say someone has a comic book for 10,000 BAY with collateral of 1000 BAY.  What's to stop the buyer from saying he never got it, sacrificing the 1000 BAY, and essentially get the comic at a 90% discount?

Or is the problem the opposite?  I.e., once funds have transferred to the seller, is the onus then on the seller to issue a refund if the buyer has a problem?  Flipping the script, what's to stop a seller in the above senario from selling a buyer an empty box for what amounts to 9,000 BAY?

This collateral system is offered as a panacea to limit or eliminate fraud, but I can't quite see how it will work in practice...

no usually the deposit are double , for the comic book the buyer will put 10,000 plus anther 10,000 the seller will put 10,000 and send you the comic book which is worth 10,000. In your example the buyer is putting 11,000 in the deposit he is not losing 1000 but 11,000.

You wont sign the double deposit if you received  a empty box.

[Preventative.Measures]

Understood, thought that might be a possibility, but won't the high outlay be a barrier to entry?  For the uninitiated, I could see how putting 100% on the line would make them uneasy or irate for a variety of reasons.  In many, many cases it would be entirely impractical.  The folks using these marketplaces by and large won't be rich.  Their net worth could (and in practice, will be) tied to the very items they're selling.  For the guy listing the 10,000 BAY comic book, that could be an entire month's salary locked up in crypto limbo until the sale is completed...an amount our fictional seller cannot afford to put aside.

Is there any way to incentivize the deposit and reward completed transactions?  For example a lottery wherein one could yield anywhere from 0.0000001% to 10% of the deposit for a sucessful transaction?  There are a variety of interesting ways to implement the odds of high payout, to further incentivize good and civil conduct.

The BAY to fund such a system would have to come from somewhere...where I don't know...but I believe it will take more than 0% fees to overcome aversion to 100% collateral.

Just kinda spitballing as I really like this project and want to see it succeed.

[dzimbeck]

Code:

: wallet.dat corrupt, salvage failed


wallet.dat: BDB0090 DB_VERIFY_BAD: Database verification failed

BDB1009 /home/xxxx/.bitbay/wallet.dat: unsupported btree version: 10

any ideas ?

thanks

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22389442/bitcoin-wallet-dat-corrupt-salvage-failed?rq=1

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=158951.0

[dzimbeck]

Understood, thought that might be a possibility, but won't the high outlay be a barrier to entry?  For the uninitiated, I could see how putting 100% on the line would make them uneasy or irate for a variety of reasons.  In many, many cases it would be entirely impractical.  The folks using these marketplaces by and large won't be rich.  Their net worth could (and in practice, will be) tied to the very items they're selling.  For the guy listing the 10,000 BAY comic book, that could be an entire month's salary locked up in crypto limbo until the sale is completed...an amount our fictional seller cannot afford to put aside.

Is there any way to incentivize the deposit and reward completed transactions?  For example a lottery wherein one could yield anywhere from 0.0000001% to 10% of the deposit for a sucessful transaction?  There are a variety of interesting ways to implement the odds of high payout, to further incentivize good and civil conduct.

The BAY to fund such a system would have to come from somewhere...where I don't know...but I believe it will take more than 0% fees to overcome aversion to 100% collateral.

Just kinda spitballing as I really like this project and want to see it succeed.

This is why deposit can be customized in the first place. Users who are new can take guarantor contracts do they aren't forced to put up funds. Those can be unilateral for example. The whole thing is an exercise in building trust. That's why we have a rep system built in. For an untrusted party like you said, collateral should be equal to the item value.

[hexdump]

Code:

: wallet.dat corrupt, salvage failed


wallet.dat: BDB0090 DB_VERIFY_BAD: Database verification failed

BDB1009 /home/xxxx/.bitbay/wallet.dat: unsupported btree version: 10

any ideas ?

thanks

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22389442/bitcoin-wallet-dat-corrupt-salvage-failed?rq=1

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=158951.0

tried that
looks like wallet.dat was created with berkley bd 6.x but wallet require berkley bd 5.x not sure how this happened ?
has this coin been forked recently ?

[Preventative.Measures]

Understood, thought that might be a possibility, but won't the high outlay be a barrier to entry?  For the uninitiated, I could see how putting 100% on the line would make them uneasy or irate for a variety of reasons.  In many, many cases it would be entirely impractical.  The folks using these marketplaces by and large won't be rich.  Their net worth could (and in practice, will be) tied to the very items they're selling.  For the guy listing the 10,000 BAY comic book, that could be an entire month's salary locked up in crypto limbo until the sale is completed...an amount our fictional seller cannot afford to put aside.

Is there any way to incentivize the deposit and reward completed transactions?  For example a lottery wherein one could yield anywhere from 0.0000001% to 10% of the deposit for a sucessful transaction?  There are a variety of interesting ways to implement the odds of high payout, to further incentivize good and civil conduct.

The BAY to fund such a system would have to come from somewhere...where I don't know...but I believe it will take more than 0% fees to overcome aversion to 100% collateral.

Just kinda spitballing as I really like this project and want to see it succeed.

This is why deposit can be customized in the first place. Users who are new can take guarantor contracts do they aren't forced to put up funds. Those can be unilateral for example. The whole thing is an exercise in building trust. That's why we have a rep system built in. For an untrusted party like you said, collateral should be equal to the item value.

I guess we'll have to see how it unfolds in practice.  It sounds good, but it seems to presuppose the existence of a market that isnt yet there.  Chicken and the egg.  If everyone has to start as untrusted entities within the network, without rep, then you will still face the barrier to entry problem.  It seems to invite over-dependence on a centralized guarantor (who?), which could just as easily gain strength as lose it when the network matures, and corrupt the original intent into something like an eBay/PayPal.

I guess you're saying in practice you, as a seller, can buy a gurantee from someone who will financially back the integrity of the transaction and foot the bill if things go afoul?  And same as with the buyer?  If the buyer doesn't have collateral he can purchase -- what would you call it? a voucher? -- from someone who will back the transaction on that side?

Sounds like a transaction fee to me, albeit a decentralized one.  IMO unless there's some sort of financial incentive baked in people will find a way to game this system and burn it down before it has a chance to flourish.

Devil's advocate here.  Like I said, behind the project, but something as elemental as this really needs to be fleshed out in great detail.  If there's any extant literature to this end, please point me in that direction.

[dzimbeck]

Code:

: wallet.dat corrupt, salvage failed


wallet.dat: BDB0090 DB_VERIFY_BAD: Database verification failed

BDB1009 /home/xxxx/.bitbay/wallet.dat: unsupported btree version: 10

any ideas ?

thanks

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22389442/bitcoin-wallet-dat-corrupt-salvage-failed?rq=1

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=158951.0

tried that
looks like wallet.dat was created with berkley bd 6.x but wallet require berkley bd 5.x not sure how this happened ?
has this coin been forked recently ?

The build works on tons of computers. The issue is not with berkley db. It was forked 8 months ago so that isn't your issue. Try PyWallet or some of the other recovery methods. Also you should always backup wallet.dat I don't maintain the QT and it's similar to the Blackcoin QT which has been forked a lot. Maybe if we upgraded to newest Bitcoin core we would find Bitcoin patch but I'm not sure they patched that.

If you built it yourself then maybe but I think your issue is a common issue with Bitcoin.

I code the markets wallet which runs no risk of database corruption because it doesn't mix database with private keys unlike wallet.dat

I wish I could be more of a help but all I can say is always backup your wallets

If you follow some of those instructions you have a chance try pywallet to see if you can get private keys outta that

[dzimbeck]

Understood, thought that might be a possibility, but won't the high outlay be a barrier to entry?  For the uninitiated, I could see how putting 100% on the line would make them uneasy or irate for a variety of reasons.  In many, many cases it would be entirely impractical.  The folks using these marketplaces by and large won't be rich.  Their net worth could (and in practice, will be) tied to the very items they're selling.  For the guy listing the 10,000 BAY comic book, that could be an entire month's salary locked up in crypto limbo until the sale is completed...an amount our fictional seller cannot afford to put aside.

Is there any way to incentivize the deposit and reward completed transactions?  For example a lottery wherein one could yield anywhere from 0.0000001% to 10% of the deposit for a sucessful transaction?  There are a variety of interesting ways to implement the odds of high payout, to further incentivize good and civil conduct.

The BAY to fund such a system would have to come from somewhere...where I don't know...but I believe it will take more than 0% fees to overcome aversion to 100% collateral.

Just kinda spitballing as I really like this project and want to see it succeed.

This is why deposit can be customized in the first place. Users who are new can take guarantor contracts do they aren't forced to put up funds. Those can be unilateral for example. The whole thing is an exercise in building trust. That's why we have a rep system built in. For an untrusted party like you said, collateral should be equal to the item value.

I guess we'll have to see how it unfolds in practice.  It sounds good, but it seems to presuppose the existence of a market that isnt yet there.  Chicken and the egg.  If everyone has to start as untrusted entities within the network, without rep, then you will still face the barrier to entry problem.  It seems to invite over-dependence on a centralized guarantor (who?), which could just as easily gain strength as lose it when the network matures, and corrupt the original intent into something like an eBay/PayPal.

I guess you're saying in practice you, as a seller, can buy a gurantee from someone who will financially back the integrity of the transaction and foot the bill if things go afoul?  And same as with the buyer?  If the buyer doesn't have collateral he can purchase -- what would you call it? a voucher? -- from someone who will back the transaction on that side?

Sounds like a transaction fee to me, albeit a decentralized one.  IMO unless there's some sort of financial incentive baked in people will find a way to game this system and burn it down before it has a chance to flourish.

Devil's advocate here.  Like I said, behind the project, but something as elemental as this really needs to be fleshed out in great detail.  If there's any extant literature to this end, please point me in that direction.

Guarantor contracts mean it's unilateral. One side puts up deposit. Example, you sell 200 dollars of coins, deposit 200 advanced payment 200 collateral. Buyer deposited nothing. Now he knows he can trust seller. Sellers only risk is buyer blows up contact before sending cash.

Similar solution with sales, buyer puts up double seller puts up nothing. Seller trusts buyer because he knows his item can be shipped.

The level of guarantor can be adjusted

I don't think it's a barrier to entry because they save so much money by using it and one party is always going to hold coins.

These questions are good and just realize this is a small concession considering we crush theft and deception.