funk bet bitcoin
It may have changed since the last time I used this, exchange here's how exchange works: On the bitcoin tokens side, https: ManfredKarrer days ago You patio11 centralized exchanges as banks patio11 they are bitcoin. We only support payment methods in which chargebacks are not easy i. See the new concept for securing the arbitration system by the DAO tokens: It took a Blue Moon and an exceptional President to give me one such moment yesterday.
my bitcoin wallet is empty nester
Who was he put in contact with? Therefore, revealing the real world user identity of an accused bad actor ie. Having seen small rural communities try and fail to create their own local currency years ago it's only a matter of time before some try again digitally. My original question I think still applies how every so I'll try and rephrase it: Or, with a decentralised exchange, you can split your problem into two problems: Guessing it ends up being reputation enforced.
bitcointoyou confiavelmente В»
bitcoin bits to usd
Animats days ago. Bitcoin, revealing the real world user identity of an accused bad actor ie. This is exchange better model, IMO, but still can potentially be bitcoin. There are so many open questions after watching the video. It helps a lot to understand what it does exactly and how, and patio11 can see the development status usable, but needs lots of cleanup before installing the app. This is a exchange separate from the money they are patio11 trading.
guia como minar bitcoins freedom В»
Patio11 bitcoin exchange
Which doc are you referring? We used a DHT in early days but that was long before the launch. Maybe I oversaw to update at some place There are 4 seed nodes to which you connect randomly at startup. They deliver you all known onion addresses in the network. From that list you select randomly peers until u have 8 connections. You also maintain your local peer list which will be used at follow up startups. I don't see a way how to partition the network.
You get random incoming connections as well e. The floodfill network architecture is very robust against eclipse attacks dht problems and partitioning. Thats why a floodfill architecture is used on Bitcoin as well. Etherdelta has been doing this for ERC20 tokens for some time: Very different from this. Are there currently any ERC tokens with applicable utility other than wild speculation and claims about unproven future features which the ERC20 tokens are created in completely arbitrary artificial scarcity, sidestepping SEC IPO investments limited amounts for?
If some of these projects go on to produce open source software of worth it won't all be for nothing. Associating the ERC protocol with the current mania and nonsense of cryptocurrencies doesn't seem fair. It's simply a method of creating a sub-currency, which yes is often unnecessary but marketing is a powerful force so it happens. Having seen small rural communities try and fail to create their own local currency years ago it's only a matter of time before some try again digitally.
SeoxyS days ago. That doesn't make them good investments. Uptrenda days ago. It may have changed since the last time I used this, but here's how it works: There are two sides to a trade, Alice and Bob. Both sides wish to trade money but they don't trust each other.
To do this, they deposit collateral in the form of Bitcoins into a escrow account multiple mediators need to sign to give back the collateral to their owners. This is a bond separate from the money they are already trading. Alice sends her USD to Bob.
Bob sends his Bitcoins to Alice. If either side cheated the mediators won't sign the "check" to release funds from the Escrow account. Therefore, so long as the value of the collateral is worth more than their potential profit from scamming -- there is no incentive to scam. In BitSquare step 4 I think is done with third-party mediators and the mediators make decisions based on evidence.
So first, how do you prove that a user sent Bitcoin: Second, how do you prove that a user sent USD? Well, I believe BitSquare uses something called "TLS Notaries" -- this allows a person to cryptographically prove that an SSL website was in their browser, potentially enabling a person to prove that they sent funds. As you can see this scheme has a few problems: Users are required to have Bitcoins for collateral.
So if you don't already have Bitcoins you can't buy any strange scenario. It relies on collateral, period, so you can never buy and sell the full amount of funds that you have. BitSquare could be improved if they had more investors and structured the exchange to provide liquidity themselves at a premium.
It's unclear how secure the notaries are and whether or not it can be cheated. Reputation isn't that secure and the model doesn't account for attackers, though I think BitSquare solves this with multiple mediators.
Another option to solve the same problem is to use micro-payment channels. A service would have credit that represented a USD balance and micro-amounts of this balance would be sent to the recipient as the sender receives micro-amounts of Bitcoin.
This is a better model, IMO, but still can potentially be reversed. It's good to see that BitSquare is still around though. Decentralized exchanges haven't had much adoption so far and I haven't seen anyone who nailed every usability problem that these exchanges have. Even assets on Ethereum where you can literally write simple code that says "a transfer occurs if two users agree to it" are traded on "decentralized exchanges" with multiple vulnerabilities and bad UX for traders.
Thanks for the summary. Just to make it clear, if either party refuses to sign the escrow release, then neither of them gets the escrow-ed funds? If so, then doesn't that mean that I lose out on 2X money when the other party fails to pay me X I send them X and I lose X or more from the escrow? If not, then doesn't that mean that a "troll" can refuse to sign after a trade just to screw me out of X? Or am I missing something?
This is the same problem that BitHalo has in my opinion. But the escrow step for Bitsquare is done with multiple third-party mediators instead of between the users. This has problems of its own because now you have to trust that the mediators are going to act honestly and pseudo-anonymous reputation systems don't reveal what prior relationships might exist between actors. I guess the assumption here is that reputation is good enough. I edited the explanation for clarity.
At the moment I the founder is the only arbitrator as the project has not implemented the fully decentralized arbitration system. We recently changed the concept how to get there with using a high security deposit in BSQ tokens DAO tokens which the arbitrator need to lock up.
In case he would cheat he would risk that his deposit get confiscated by voting of the DAO stakeholders. There will be also introduced mediators who don't have the 3rd key, and who are handling the big majority of cases customer care, there have been basically no real disputes so far.
We did not had time to update all the information on the web page and older documents to reflect the new concept. Like localbitcoin but no need to meet up. Paypal will never cooperate this, because the service is selling money laundering. Without Paypal's cooperation, you can't guarantee that a transaction presently honored by Paypal will not be reversed in the future, for reasons including "the buyer, who legitimately controlled the Paypal account at time of transaction, decided to defraud the seller" and "the buyer, who has credentials for X, Paypal accounts obtained by hacking, does not have the authority to commit either the Paypal account or Paypal to a transaction.
If the traffic to PayPal confirming the transaction wasn't from a centralised server, PayPal would have no way of differentiating between an ETH sale or any other transaction, so their cooperation might not be needed.
Reversal - might be better solutions but couldn't the smart contract escrow simply have a timer built in that would allow the fiat receiver to move the money out of his PayPal account, thus preventing reversal? I'm just running with a half-baked idea, but it feels like it could work.
Doesn't need to be PayPal, could be any fiat transaction provider that has an API that allows confirmation of the fiat transfer that the smart contract can access. You can't prevent reversal by withdrawing from a PayPal account. PayPal cooperation is needed because they shut down accounts that appear to be breaking their rules. Animats days ago. The fundamental problem with this is the same problem Ethereum has - the hooks to the real world aren't very good.
Making them better implies trusting a third party. If you have to trust a third party, why do you need this? Yes, that's been my worry with many blockchain projects - it all sounds great until it needs to interface with the messy real-world. But - regardless of the merits of this particular project - I think there is still some benefit in having a decentralised cryptocurrency exchange even if it doesn't totally eliminate the need for trust. Provided it reduces the scope of what needs to be trusted, or makes it easier to audit, or reduces how often it needs to be trusted, then that's still an improvement.
And cough up the 0. Or, with a decentralised exchange, you can split your problem into two problems: Part 1 is purely Ethereum-based, and this is where competition should drive fees down to near-zero. Because a smart-contract can run this, there's almost no need to trust - this can be done on-chain.
Part 2 is where you have a point - there is still some trust required. But we don't need to trust the tethered-USD processor in Part 2 nearly as much as a full-fledged exchange - and they're easier to audit.
There's also a lot less to go wrong - they're not dealing with lots of different crypto-currencies and networks, all they have to do is burn Ethereum tethered-USD tokens in exchange for real USD in a bank account.
Fees should be lower, you'd hope. Also, eventually we might get to the point where part 2 isn't needed - if you can spend tethered-USD tokens in enough places, why would you need banking-system-USD? Would love to hear some counter opinions though..
How does this differ from BitShares that's been around a long time? Method-X days ago. The assets traded on the bitshares exchange are derivatives backed by the value of the BTS token. This is how counterparty risk is eliminated. Bitsquare is like openbazaar but only for cryptocurrency. Personally, I'm very skeptical the approach will work in practice.
Previously, the only incarnation of this idea was, to my knowledge, NVO: And it went awfully quiet after the ico. I hate myself for using words like ico in every day speech. This the 80s all over again except with shittier music. Not sure how a decentralized exhange could manage this.
Mahn days ago. That's if you want to trade in real-time, but a slow decentralized exchange still has value for casual buyers and sellers. An exchange is typically both a trading platform and a marketplace, but it doesn't have to do both to be useful.
In my opinion the frictionless exchange between cryptos and fiat will become important for real world use cases which don't need to be done in milliseconds but rather seconds. I like it, but I wouldn't use it just yet. I think the fees charged by most exchanges are low enough for me not to worry. Also there is a large amount of legal bureaucracy now happening over real money exchanges, how might that affect it? This is going to get so destroyed but HFT strategies.
A million already come to mind. HFT generally provides liquidity and is arguably a good thing, for people wanting to execute infrequent trades, on otherwise thin volume markets. Not saying all firms do this, but I immediately thought of malicious tactics like spoofing. Market manipulation is already happening on crypto exchanges. It's much easier to manipulate a currency when the volume is thin. I feel there is already a decentralized exchange: That has the advantage of a decentralized reputation system and a head start in network effects.
A better version already exists https: It's a shame that Ethereum tokens are getting a bit of a bad reputation, because an exchange like EtherDelta coupled with asset-backed tokens could really open up all kinds of possibilities. I'm involved with https: Bisq team member here, thanks everyone for the feedback so far. Happy to field further questions.
Looks like third party arbitration. Guessing it ends up being reputation enforced. As there is no concept of arbitrator reputation, it makes no sense to deselect arbitrators, as this will only reduce his trading possibilities. Traders will only be able to take offers of users with whom they have at least one overlapping selected arbitrator - http: Being able to trade between altcoins trustlessly is pretty neat.
Just finished watching their video and got nothing other than "Read our white paper if you're interested", plus bunch of buzzwords. Why make the video at all? People visiting that site already know what a "decentralized bitcoin exchange" is. Offers to buy and sell bitcoin are broadcast to that network, and through the process of offering and accepting these trades via the Bisq UI, a market is established. There are no central points of control or failure in the Bisq network. There are no trusted third parties.
When two parties agree to trade national currency for bitcoin, the bitcoin to be bought or sold is held in escrow using multisignature transaction capabilities native to the bitcoin protocol.
Because the national currency portion of any trade must be transferred via traditional means such as a wire transfer, Bisq incorporates first-class support for human arbitration to resolve any errors or disputes. That's the "definition" of a decentralized bitcoin exchange, not an explanation, which means I already knew all that even before I clicked through the link. None of that is in the video as well as on the website itself, almost feels like they're hiding behind their "white paper" just like a lot of academics write their dissertation in intentionally hard-to-understand manner so they won't get criticized easily.
It also doesn't help they have that immature quote "To change something, build a model that makes the existing model obsolete" as their tagline, which has nothing to do with the hypothetical value they claim to provide. Just some formatting help so that people can read this: This sounds like a decentralized LocalBitcoins specifically, not an online exchange.
Asterisks around the block, no spaces indent. The latter is for mono space which is illegible on mobile. I felt the same way. There are so many open questions after watching the video. How do I get my Euros to someone selling me bitcoin? Is there a central bank account everyone deposits the money? Some cryptocurrencies like Stellar have a built-in decentralised exchange[1].
They solve the problem of getting fiat into the system through anchors[2]. I wonder if there is a better way. You send fiat money to the trading peer using e. There is no central bank account and Bisq does not control any money and can thus not steal any money. It helps a lot to understand what it does exactly and how, and we can see the development status usable, but needs lots of cleanup before installing the app.
Wasn't Bitcoin supposed to be decentralized in the first place? What's a "decentralized" decentralized currency, anyway? OJFord days ago. You've deliberately omitted the crucial word: Bitcoin is decentralised, but one can choose to trade it for dollars, et al.
While I know nothing about this project or the creators, I find your comment very ignorant. If you don't like it, go do something else of your own. At least the creators spent time and effort doing something they find valuable. What will happen is, to avoid their assets being tied up indefinitely ala Gox , account holders will try to move their BTC off-exchange. This means that an exodus from one exchange, in addition to spooking account holders at every other exchange, will make it pretty difficult to move BTC in or out of another exchange.
Your rational action, as an account-holder of a non-imperiled exchange, is to a immediately request a wire yes, a wire of your USD and b bid as high as possible for a transaction to exfiltrate your BTC. This turns non-imperiled exchanges into imperiled exchanges, quickly. This content can be removed from Twitter at anytime, get a PDF archive by mail!
Did Thread Reader help you to today? If nothing shows, it may have been deleted by jasonlk view original on Twitter. Normalized by account it's often the little users, by lots. Normalized by dollar value it isn't even funny. We drilled on its use. Since it's instructive this thread may be longish:. Here is the book. Two rounds of web forms, two phone calls, a paper letter, and another phone call later, a Japanese financial institution has come to see things my way regarding the appropriateness of spelling my name the way my other bank does.
Getting them to this point was classic:. McKenzie, we have to have your legal name in our system for compliance reasons. The name the Ministry of Justice picked for my paperwork is not accurate. Wait a minute, wait a minute.
I think I've finally worked out what the game plan is here. If nothing shows, it may have been deleted by RepMarkMeadows view original on Twitter. But what would be their worst nightmare?