Amoveo ♥🧿
11 September 2018
S
22:09
Sy
and you still manage to dodge the question...
Z
22:10
Zack
I am not sure what you are asking
S
22:11
Sy
i am running the pool, how do i decide / set which fork im mining?
22:11
and dont answer "you select it"
EP
22:11
Evans Pan
In reply to this message
just avoid the fork at any cost, block reward is irrelevant to the price, either way veo is going down, but if we fork, veo is dead.
Z
22:12
Zack
You can do a soft fork to force your mining pool to stay on one side, or you could let the fork choice rule decide for you.
22:13
In reply to this message
Why do you invest in amoveo if you think that we should never use the Oracle?
22:13
If the Oracle doesn't work, Amoveo doesn't work either.
EP
22:13
Evans Pan
In reply to this message
We use Oracle to bet not to fork.
Z
22:14
Zack
In reply to this message
I built the Oracle.
It uses forking.
ŽM
22:14
Živojin Mirić
isn't it just saying the result and then you manually fork?
Z
22:15
Zack
It is funny how often people are trying to teach me how the Oracle is intended to be used.
22:15
In reply to this message
I don't understand the question.
ŽM
22:16
Živojin Mirić
#BadQuestion
22:16
I have to reread github about oracle before I ask again, sry
EP
22:19
Evans Pan
In reply to this message
I don't want to argue with you. What I am trying to do is to ask ppl don't bet against you to avoid a fork. Though your plan to reduce the rewards to increase price is utterly wrong, I still support you in order to save Amoveo.
Z
22:20
Zack
I think we need to update the fork choice rule first before we can have an Oracle update the block reward
22:20
Deleted Account
Thanks for explaining zack. I understand what you are talking about
Z
22:21
Zack
I wonder if it will be a political struggle to update the fork choice rule.
22:21
Deleted Account
Someone could bet «true» ;)
22:21
And then no need for a software change now
Z
22:22
Zack
Hopefully the outcome isn't true. The block reward would raise to 1.5 Veo
22:24
Deleted Account
I mean someone could bet 1 mveo true, so that the current code will work? I might be misunderstanding here...
MF
22:24
Mr Flintstone
they need to offset the unmatched bets in order for output type to change
22:24
there is 10 unmatched on “bad question” I think
22:24
so unless someone bets more than 10, the block reward probably won’t change
EP
22:26
Evans Pan
In reply to this message
then Zack will fork to reduce the rewards.
MF
22:26
Mr Flintstone
lol I’m happy to bet against an increase in reward
22:26
Deleted Account
I think we could assume that 51% of the hashpower would follow the oracle without censoring bets. And then you dont need any special code to select fork.
22:27
If more than 51% is syncronized in any way they have control of the blockchain anyway
EP
22:27
Evans Pan
In reply to this message
a veo branch without Dev, how much the veo will worth?
Z
22:29
Zack
In reply to this message
Look into feather forks.
Tv
22:51
Tarrence van As
We're hosting an amoveo whitepaper review in NYC on Sept 26th, sign up here: https://www.meetup.com/Crypto-NYC/events/254286622/
S
22:58
Sy
In reply to this message
sure if i do nothing the pool will follow the highest bet of the oracle but what if i want to support the other side? code changes?
Z
22:59
Zack
In reply to this message
If you do nothing then your pool will follow based on the fork choice rule.
Which fork has higher bets doesn't matter.
23:00
If you specifically want to follow one side or the other, you can update the full node software to censor certain txs.
S
23:00
Sy
why would there be a fork to begin with? the oracle changes the governance variable based on the highest bet amount, aka we lowered spend_tx fees by betting 1 veo on false
23:01
there was no forking, all nodes got the oracle, all nodes know the result, they change the gov variable, all done
Z
23:01
Zack
That oracle had little Veo at stake. So there was little incentive to cause a fork.
S
23:01
Sy
and yet again, the oracle doesnt cause a fork, ppl do by changing code
23:02
unless you built in a command that tells my node to ignore an oracles outcame and set it to a fixed value the oracle doesnt fork
Z
23:02
Zack
People only do soft forks if they expect to profit.
The existence of a contentious oracle market can make it profitable to keep a fork alive.
S
23:02
Sy
it just tells you that it might be worth your while if you fork here
Z
23:03
Zack
Betting in the Oracle is a way to swap tokens on one side of a fork for tokens on the other side.
S
23:04
Sy
man your mind sure is one amazing thing 😂
23:08
you might actually consider doing that btw...add an oracle command to ignore the outcome on close and set it to a fixed value, this way the oracle actually would be able to softfork and consensus will decide...
23:09
since that chain would user different governance variables, other nodes that just follow the oracles outcome would (should?) reject the block, forking rules apply
Z
23:10
Zack
I think it is best to just censor any oracle-close tx that closes in the wrong state.
This way it is a soft fork, not a hard fork.
S
23:10
Sy
yeah but that way you cant fork without hard coding that untrue oracle close into your node
Z
23:11
Zack
No, we don't insert anything new. We just censor some txs. It is a soft fork.
S
23:12
Sy
i find it overly complicated, on one hand you say forking is part of the oracle, on the other hand there is no built in function to actually cause a fork
23:12
how do you censor them?
Z
23:12
Zack
The same as any other invalid block
S
23:12
Sy
lest say our current oracle closes to bad question but you want it to close at true, how do you accomplish that?
23:13
not in explaining words but in actual actions, what do you have to do, what commands to call, what code to change
Z
23:13
Zack
Once the oracle is already closed, it is too late.
I would have to rewrite history at that point, it would almost certainly fail.
S
23:14
Sy
so you have to close it earlier than the actual close, make it lying?
I
23:15
Iridescence
is there a step by step guide showing how to use the oracle to vote for the block reward decision? assume that I am familiar with setting up a node and using the CLI
Z
23:15
Zack
If you want to force a node to stay on one side of a soft fork, then update it to censor some txs.
23:15
In reply to this message
Yes.
S
23:16
Sy
api:oracle_bet(base64:decode(<<"FhbnDw8UWS0ZhtI4/c87YQmwdxXa71NUaadhP9Igzsw=">>), 3, 200000000).
23:16
thats 2 veo on bad question (3)
23:16
1 is true (reward up) and 2 false (down)
I
23:16
Iridescence
ok thabks guys
S
23:17
Sy
right now there are 11 veo left on bad question
23:17
so if you want to change direction, you need more than that :)
Z
23:17
Zack
In reply to this message
1 is true. 2 is false. 3 is bad question.
S
23:17
Sy
close enough :) i will edit it
23:18
okay back to topic ^^
so you need 2 code changes right?
1. oracle close with a lying outcome since the original code isnt supposed to lie
2. ignore all txs that close the oracle correctly
Z
23:21
Zack
A soft fork means censoring txs.
Un-updated nodes can sync with nodes that have had a soft fork.
23:21
The code after a soft fork only produces blocks which were valid before the soft fork.
23:22
Any arbitrary update to the protocol can be made using a soft fork, or a hard fork.
23:22
But if you always use soft forks, the software gets more complicated quickly.
S
23:23
Sy
hmm but if you just censor tx, how do you close it in the state you want?
Z
23:23
Zack
Censoring a single oracle from closing a certain direction is a very simple soft fork which won't cause much unnecessary complexity.
23:24
In reply to this message
If it cannot close any other way, the only thing left to do is close how it can.
S
23:25
Sy
hmm...i still dont see it xD

if i cant close the oracle in another state than it is in how does censoring close txs help me? i cant close early either since block end isnt reached yet
23:26
i could try to censor all bets to that oracle but chance that other nodes will pick them up eventually in their finds are high in 1000 blocks no matter how much i find
Z
23:26
Zack
It is easy to find people to bet their Veo, if they are guaranteed to win twice as much back.
S
23:27
Sy
you dont win any money if you arent matching anything...but if the oracle is in the state you want it, where is the fork?
23:27
a close tx just tells me, close oracle xy in whatever state it is right now, why bother censoring it?
Z
23:27
Zack
If the Oracle isn't in a state that can close, then there must be open orders available to match with
S
23:28
Sy
i do see several ways to cause a fork but they all include changing more than just censoring txs, unless you remove some rules from the code i dont see how you can cause a soft fork
Z
23:29
Zack
Soft forks can change any aspect of the consensus mechanism.
They can steal Veo from users you dislike. They can create new tx types. Anything.
S
23:29
Sy
i know what they can do
23:29
we are talking about how you start an oracle fork
23:30
and it wont happen by censoring an oracle close tx
23:30
i want to understand how you planned this but it is really hard to get a straight answer that actually explains the process which basicly ends in, nobody can fork except you
Z
23:30
Zack
If the txs in the blocks on your node are different from the txs on other nodes, then a fork has happened.
S
23:31
Sy
yep and if i continue to drop that tx and i win enough blocks the other chains will "revert" and move to mine every now and then, aka nobody else will find blocks unless they accept it
23:31
but a dropped tx doesnt change an oracle outcome
Z
23:32
Zack
If there is free money, the Nash equilibrium is to take it.
Many people will quickly strip all the free money from the Oracle.
S
23:32
Sy
i am not talking about attack vectors here, we are talking about your planned oracle forking mechanism
Z
23:32
Zack
Then it will close in the only way left to it.
S
23:33
Sy
and not fork at all
23:33
if you convince enough ppl to take all the betted money from an oracle there is no fork, its just gambling and shit happens
23:33
money taken, direction set, oracle closes, nodes keep syncing
Z
23:34
Zack
If the Oracle can only close in one way, then betting is no longer gambling. Since we know the outcome.
S
23:34
Sy
since changing the direction seems to reset the 1000 block close countdown you can always keep betting...
23:35
hmm i am wondering, if bets are matched and i matched your 1 veo but the direction will be set back to false, will i still have your veo or will false win all veo at the end?
Z
23:35
Zack
Yes, you could keep making big bets in the wrong direction, and keep preventing the Oracle from closing.

But you will definitely lose all the Veo that you use this way.

The Nash equilibrium is to not waste Veo this way.
23:36
In reply to this message
I don't understand the question.
S
23:36
Sy
in a normal betting scenario
23:36
you got 3 pots, true, false, bad question
23:36
the biggest pot in the end wins the others
23:37
but you said the orders are matched
23:37
right now we should have 1 on false, 12 on bad question but if i pull the orders i see 11 on i dont know because the state isnt written into the orders
23:38
and if bad question goes through, do i get your 1 veo or will they be divided proportionally to the winning betters depending on the amount they bet?
Z
23:38
Zack
All oracle bets are matched at 1:1 odds.
You will have twice as much Veo as got matched.
S
23:38
Sy
okay so
Z
23:38
Zack
Unmatched Veo gets returned as is. You don't win anything extra.
23:38
A refund.
S
23:38
Sy
if someone else bets 12 veo on false, it will change direction again, 1 veo on false
23:39
in that case you matched your 1 veo with half o fmine, the other guy takes 12, correct?
23:39
someone else bets 12.1 :D
23:39
ah no 12 was correct, 11 is on bad question, 1 will be unmatched
Z
23:40
Zack
I don't follow.
If you bet 12 in the Oracle and it gets matched, you either get 24 out, or 0.
S
23:40
Sy
no
23:40
if it closes in the current state i betted 2 but only 1 was matched by you so i get 3
Z
23:40
Zack
Right
S
23:41
Sy
and the guy who set 10 will get his 10 back
Z
23:41
Zack
Yes
S
23:41
Sy
okay
23:41
now someone else sets 12 on false again
Z
23:41
Zack
Then the Oracle has 0 open orders left. All matched
S
23:41
Sy
and since it switched to false you double your veo, right?
23:41
since false wins
23:42
if it closes at false
Z
23:42
Zack
If false wins, then everyone who bet on false gets twice as much out.
S
23:42
Sy
if matched...okay
Z
23:42
Zack
Right
S
23:42
Sy
so...back to your "you can convince ppl to bet if its free money" how is the win guaranteed?
23:43
lets say you got 1000 on false and they match that 1000, someone else can still bet another 1000 on false and the true money is gone
23:43
this will repeat until one side runs out of money xD
23:43
how can you guarantee the outcome?
Z
23:43
Zack
If you are participating on a fork where the Oracle can only close on true, then betting on anything other than true is throwing your money away.
So the Nash equilibrium is for the Oracle to end on true.
S
23:44
Sy
and now we did one round, how do you force the oracle to close on true if more ppl have bet on false? xD
23:45
Deleted Account
The way to force the oracle result is to censor bets so that you can make a final bet without risk
S
23:45
Sy
so you dont censor the close tx, you censor bets
23:45
but ultimately, you dont fork the oracle, you fork way before that and reject any block from other nodes than yourself because they will try to include that tx over and over again
23:45
so anytime someone else finds a block you reject it
Z
23:46
Zack
The details of how to program the soft fork really don't matter. Game theory is hard to understand. Just don't worry about it.

If you can understand that any possible update is possible to be done using only a soft fork, that is enough.
23:47
In reply to this message
That is just one way it could turn out.
Look into feather forks.
23:48
No reason to walk everyone through the Nash equilibrium proof.
S
23:48
Sy
hmm so the only one who can fork is you
Z
23:50
Zack
I doubt it
12 September 2018
Z
00:03
Zack
When people trade lentils, you can measure the quality of the lentils by the amount of foreign material mixed in. Like rocks and twigs.

You can know the quality of a large amount of lentils by taking a small sample and counting all the rocks and twigs.

Similarly, it isn't possible for the average person to verify the entirety of Amoveo's code base for security. It is impossible for the average user to verify the security of any hard or soft fork. But it is possible or each of us to choose some piece of an update at random, and verify the security of that part.

Then you can have some statistical confidence in Amoveo's security.
00:54
I think most people will understand this...
mm invited mm
02:07
Deleted Account
Id like to make a stab at describing the game theory for a feather fork push of an oracle: first, i proclaim that my 20% mining pool will only include bets for option A in a block it builds on if the bet volume is less than 100 VEO. The chance of finding two consecutive blocks is 0.2x0.2=0.04. As i am not using all blocks to build on, others will see a 4% decrease in mining revenue, unless they also install my censoring version of the amoveo software. This might lead to 51% censoring bets. At this point i can safely place bets in the oracle knowing they will not be matched.

As miners care only for profit, and not the contents of the oracle, the rational thing is to join in censorship
S
02:16
Sy
Okay oracle question, if i get 10 veo on true, 11 on false the order book shows 1 on false, to turn the oracle to bad question, do i need 1+ or 11+?

my logic tells me 11+ but im really unsure with the way zack matches orders
02:26
Deleted Account
I would expect the ratio of bets in an oracle to be 1:1:1. So a match is not made until all three options have 11 veo. So the answer would be 11+. But this is my opinion, i dont know what the code does
02:30
There is also the other rule that oracle bets must be increasing in size to change outcome
MF
02:31
Mr Flintstone
In reply to this message
1+
02:32
once an order is matched you can think of it as if it never happened from the perspective of switching the oracle output type in the future
Deleted invited Deleted Account
02:33
Deleted Account
But does it have to be matched for all three outcomes?
MF
02:33
Mr Flintstone
Two bets can match as long as they are different types
02:33
you don’t need 3 matches
02:34
so true can match with false and bad question etc
02:34
Deleted Account
So if a true is matched with false, and you get bad value, both get a refund?
MF
02:34
Mr Flintstone
I was actually thinking about that the other day, I’m not exactly sure what happens in that situation Zack
02:34
i think your intuition is correct
02:36
Deleted Account
Hello
02:36
Deleted Account
Hi
02:42
https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo/blob/master/apps/amoveo_core/src/consensus/trees/oracle_bets.erl

It looks like the winners takes all, no refunds, in ‘reward’
S
02:49
Sy
that would make changing the direction of an oracle in some cases way cheaper than it should be
02:50
like you got an epic fight between true and false, thousends are matched on both sides but hey, onle 2 are unmatched, lets put 5 in bad question xD
Z
02:58
Zack
In reply to this message
If false wins, then both bad-question and true are losers.
Some Veo may get deleted.
02:58
In reply to this message
Correct.
MF
03:00
Mr Flintstone
winner takes all they matched, but they can’t get more than 1:1 right?
03:00
I.e bets that were matched between the two non winning outcomes are just deleted?
Z
03:00
Zack
In reply to this message
You, you understand.
It is a little goofy from that perspective.
We can change the Oracle if we come up with a better design.

The current design is nice because it is so simple and easy to reason about.
03:01
In reply to this message
Yes. You got it.
You only win twice as much as you bet.
It is possible for some Veo to get deleted in an Oracle.
MF
03:01
Mr Flintstone
well, the current market price for an asset is the bid. we don’t care about all the trades that got matched in the past
03:01
i would extend that logic to oracle output type
Z
03:02
Zack
All bids in the Oracle are at the same price. 1:1
MF
03:02
Mr Flintstone
yeah, I am just saying why I think the current implementation of unmatched type = output type makes sense
Z
03:02
Zack
Oh right. I get it now.
MF
03:19
Mr Flintstone
about 1% of all veo was traded on exchanges today
Z
03:20
Zack
that is a lot of volume for amoveo
S
03:22
Sy
In reply to this message
deleted from oracle?
Z
03:23
Zack
it is like the example you made earlier sy. if there are 1000 veo bet on true, 1000 veo bet on false, and then 2 veo bet on bad-question, then the result would be bad questions and all the true and false betters lose everything. 1998 veo destroyed.
I
03:40
Iridescence
which exchange has the highest volume?
Z
03:40
Zack
https://veoscan.io/ see for youself
I
03:42
Iridescence
hmm interesting
03:42
people selling veo for eth
S
03:47
Sy
ah okay...interesting :D
03:47
lol i just imagined that happening haha the rageeeee!
Z
03:48
Zack
It seems like a pretty unlikely outcome.
If people were so confident that true or false was correct, why would a bad-question fork end up worth the most?
S
03:48
Sy
but since you got another 1000 blocks to react, highly unlikely
03:48
still a fun thought :)
Z
03:49
Zack
I considered a lot of different designs before going with this one. My major motivation in using our design is that it is very simple to reason about.
We can still do a hard fork to change the oracle if we realize improvements.
03:54
BATman never sold a single satoshi of VEO.
EP
04:40
Evans Pan
ppl are scared by the possibility of a fork
04:41
largest ever trading volume with lowest price after a big debate about possible forks
04:47
In reply to this message
You initiated the vote for a reduced rewards in order to increase the veo price. So I assume you won't do anything to damage the price of veo. But it's quite clear a veo fork will hurt the price badly. Could you think about it again if you want start a fork or not?
04:49
you want to increase the price with a fork, and ppl are scared by the fork, and the price fall. Do you think a fork is good for veo?
Z
04:52
Zack
It would be best for veo if we just lower the block reward.

I think we need to update the fork choice rule first, otherwise the oracle will have a bias towards always increasing the block reward.
m
04:56
mm
How about wider popularization? It’s missing even from coinmarketcap
Z
04:58
Zack
it looks like "accumulative difficulty" is written as part of each header, so this would need to be a hard update
S
05:25
Sy
while you are at it add coinbase value aswell xD
Z
05:26
Zack
the coinbase block reward governance value, you want it written on every block?
Putting it into headers doesn't seem like a good idea
S
05:26
Sy
yeah, not the header
05:26
but into the full block since you cant pull up historical coinbase values and it can change
05:27
i like my numbers to be complete
Z
05:27
Zack
why do you want to look up historical coinbase values?
S
05:27
Sy
why do you want to hide them?
05:27
its blockchain basics, you can lookup everything
Z
05:28
Zack
we could put all 30-odd governance values on every block
S
05:28
Sy
interesting aswell
05:28
that would actually change it sizewise but im open to that too
05:28
i will probably sync a modified node at one point and just output me the missing numbers :D
Z
05:29
Zack
you could save the merkel proofs of the block reward size for every block
05:30
the idea with merkel trees is to reduce the minimum cost of participating in the protocol without getting rid of our ability to have cryptoeconomic guarantees about the data.
05:32
most people don't care about most of the consensus state. with merkel trees, we each only have to download the parts that we care about.
It seems to me that some full nodes don't care about downloading and storing a historical record of the block reward for every block.
So adding this extra requirement for them would be bad.
S
05:42
Sy
it would be one number in existing what? 100+? there is nothing bad about it
05:43
looks like my stats server mysteriously crashed...again
05:44
its not often enough to be an attack i think, maybe once per month, probably bad hardware on the hosters side -.-
Z
05:45
Zack
Different full nodes have their own "one number" that they care about and wish was automatic without merkel proofs.

How about if I add some stuff to the config file so you can instruct it to save merkel proofs of whatever parts of the consensus state you care about.
05:45
In reply to this message
is your ram consumption constant, or is it slowly increasing until a crash?
S
05:46
Sy
na nothing special, its just gone
05:46
cant access it via ssh or ping
05:46
there is no node running on it either, just nginx
05:47
the root server is super overkill haha avg load is like 0.1
Z
05:47
Zack
those types of errors are so hard to debug.
I doubt it is a hardware issue.
Writing code that doesn't crash is difficult, in the general case it is impossible.
S
05:48
Sy
its way too rare to really find tbh
05:48
its just the stats frontend tho, doesnt matter
OK
05:54
O K
The latest full node code is not building for me
S
05:54
Sy
hmm
05:54
it did on my backup node
05:55
i did a rebar upgrade to be sure tho
OK
05:55
O K
it's a fresh clone
Z
05:55
Zack
In reply to this message
It looks like Linux software changed.
So new vps have different install instructions.
05:55
I updated the docs already
OK
05:56
O K
What is "the linux software"
05:56
I haven't changed anything
Z
05:56
Zack
It looks like the rebar release can no longer handle attaching or detaching.
05:56
Software rots over time.
05:57
So now you have to use something like 'screen' to leave a node running
OK
05:57
O K
I already use tmux
Z
05:57
Zack
Great, so this change should be fairly easy for you.
OK
05:59
O K
Why not have make prod-restart do the new procedure
Z
05:59
Zack
Maybe we should make an error report for whoever manages rebar3 releases
05:59
In reply to this message
Yes, we should upgrade the make file for the new behaviour
06:00
I am still hopeful we can get the old behaviour working again
06:00
Maybe I should take this opportunity to get it working on 18.04
S
06:02
Sy
still working fine on my vserver even tho i did the rebar upgrade...
06:03
18.04 but not a fresh one, it was runing a node for some time now
Z
06:06
Zack
It works on 18.04, that is good.

Old vps are running older software. I haven't had problems with mine either.

I wonder if sudo apt-get upgrade might break it.
06:06
Hard to guess what dependency changed caused the problem.
06:17
Thanks to @Crypto_Lira for realizing this issue with Linux dependencies
S
06:23
S
Got it up and running now! Thanks!
m
06:28
mm
Did anyone already tried running node in a container? If not, I can try tomorrow. It should lower the entry barrier.
07:03
Deleted Account
with regards to the amoveo.exchange worry before, the team says there was an orphan on the block so transaction didn't go through. they have credited my account so all is good now
S
07:32
S
Amoveo is fun. At least, whatever the outcome, it's because of an epic experiment. Other shitcoins lose value cuz scamz
10:22
Deleted Account
I believe theres hould be more marketing on amoveo
10:23
writing code is not enough, ethereum was all marketing from the beginning
Deleted invited Deleted Account
S
12:31
Sy
What do you want to market? hard to use interface? veo isnt there at all yet
T
13:39
Topab
Can someone list the things that can be done in Amoveo at the moment?
M
13:42
Mike
I don’t think marketing is necessary. Amoveo is already easy to find for suitable investors.
AK
14:42
A K
Guys, when will the oracle resolve and has anyone declared he/she will fork?
DY
15:12
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
In startups either you need an internal growth engine or do marketing from day -10 (before you even start the project)

Even if you have a growth engine like uber/airbnb without marketing it will never grow as big. And all the unicorn startup histories I’ve read have done back hat marketing at some point in their lives.
15:13
In reply to this message
Could you talk a little about how eth was marketing in the early days, anything interesting they did?
AK
15:23
A K
invited investment bankers - that’s when the marketing that brought ETH to live really started
15:23
Lubin did well
S
15:32
Sy
In reply to this message
nobody except zack has the knowledge how to fork right now so i doubt a fork will happen, its not the first time a gov variable has been changed and it will close around 33500
AK
15:48
A K
As of know , will close without any changes? "Bad question"
S
16:33
Sy
with no new bets, yes
Scirockoe joined group by link from Group
Z
20:09
Zack
I've been thinking maybe we should lock the block reward and target block period now, to prevent then from being changed by the governance mechanism.

Since our fork choice rule is to follow the chain with more hash power, and increasing the block reward will almost always increase the hash power, it seems like amoveo governance will fail in these cases.
S A invited S A
AK
20:37
A K
Block period directly affects network security
20:38
Like, you won't have simple rules like "wait 6 confs" anymore
Z
21:15
Zack
another option is to change the fork choice rule, to try and select for the fork with higher priced veo instead of selecting for the fork with more hashpower
22:20
Deleted Account
Its easy to place high bids if you know the outcome of an oracle...
Z
22:21
Zack
yes, question oracles are a lot simpler to reason about since they have a correct outcome.
22:22
Deleted Account
I still think you need 51% or some unsignificant % and coerce miners to get 51% in order to do a soft fork. So this is still the protection for Amoveos security. And that should be no different from any other block imho
Z
22:23
Zack
maybe a block_reward governance change needs to happen in 2 steps.
First we can do a combinatory question oracle to find out if changing the block_reward will be good for the price, then we make a governance oracle after the community has already agreed to the update.
22:25
Deleted Account
Just to repeat myself: treat the miners well with stability. Miners are mostly not «whores» but rather people who have some interest in the project
22:25
This is why i did not like this oracle in the first place
22:26
We should rather try to figure out the hashrate we want, then change the block reward in small steps and in a planned fashion
22:27
Actually you could easily argue that low price for veo should mean higher block rewards to secure the network ;)
22:30
I think a feather fork is not feasible at this time because you could not make miners agree to censoring txs, even at a loss
Z
22:33
Zack
Giving away free VEO is bad, no matter how "interested" the miners are in Amoveo.
There is a lot of propaganda lately because of how miners want more free money.

The amount of hashrate we would need to make Amoveo secure while it is GPU mineable is unobtainable. We would need more hashrate than Ether.
When people say to increase the hashrate for security reasons, this is a trick so they can get more free money.

The only thing we are optimizing for when setting the block reward is to balance the supply of new Veo with the demand for new Veo.
22:35
With Amoveo we do not want to use debates or propaganda to make our decisions.
We need to find ways to use futarchy to make our decisions.

That is why I propose using a oracle question to find out if a lower difficulty would be good for the price of VEO.
Then once we have the result from the oracle question, we can use a governance oracle to do the update.
22:36
People will put their money where their mouth is, and we will find out what is actually good for the price of VEO.
22:36
Deleted Account
Hmmm. So you are arguing that the required hashrate at this point is very low, much lower than the current level. I can accept that argument, but it might be better to make sure that stealing from Amoveo is more costly than at least some portion of similarily sized projects
22:38
I still think an open argument about this issue is important to give people some chance to think about these things before voting
22:38
Or betting...
Z
22:38
Zack
if someone re-mines some blocks to do a double-spend, I think it would be easy to get community consensus to fix the history and prevent theft.
22:39
Exchanges can see if history is being re-written on-chain, they can shut off the exchange temporarily until the situation is taken care of.
22:40
Deleted Account
Depends on how long the attack lasts. If you can transfer funds outside the blockchain, it doesnt matter if we roll back
Z
22:40
Zack
We could safely lower the hashrate to the point where an attack likes this occurs every 2 weeks, and I doubt it would be a problem.
22:40
Deleted Account
Then perhaps we should
22:40
And find a better way to distribute veo
Z
22:40
Zack
if the exchange has poor security and allows withdrawals during an attack, then it seems like they deserve to take the loss
22:41
Deleted Account
Id say that is not a way to treat a company supporting amoveo
22:41
I think noone deserves to be stolen from
22:42
So rather not put them in that position
Z
22:42
Zack
No amount of programming can save people from themselves.
22:42
if an exchange uses poor security, I cannot save them.
22:43
Deleted Account
I would expect there is a lot of poor security to go around. If Amoveo is the root cause, thats massive bad PR, because a blockchain is expected to have this stuff sorted out
Z
22:43
Zack
It is no secret that Amoveo is GPU mineable.
22:43
Everyone knew that when they signed up.
22:44
Deleted Account
Other coins would call that a positive thing
22:45
My thinking is that even if GPU is a fragile defence, it is a barrier if some cost. And we should choose that cost to minimize the chance of Amoveo being shut down for this reason
22:46
I dont know what that hashrate is unfortunately. The naish equilibrium would involve the cost of renting hashpower, and what happens to veo price, along with the rate you can leak values before the attack is stopped
Z
22:51
Zack
mining is for distributing new tokens. Every aspect of mining needs to be optimized for distributing tokens efficiently.

Security is a side effect.
If we had to change any aspect of mining to optimize for security, that would mean that we are better off using POS for consensus.
22:56
Imagine if your company had a rule. All passwords had to be N characters long, and every worker was paid N thousand dollars a month.
The company could update N at any time.

This would be a terrible strategy for a company.
A company using this strategy would always be worse than an equivalent company that did not limit itself this way.

The only reason we can use POW for consensus is if it is a completely free side effect, and we don't have to optimize any aspect of POW to maintain consensus.
Z
23:16
Zack
Ive been thinking of adding a new merkel tree, this one will hold the txid for every tx that has been included in a block.
That way, you can make a merkel proof to prove to the light nodes that their tx was included in a block.
23:18
this would increase the size of every block by (number of txs) * (32 bytes) * 16 * 8
each tx would be like 4 kilobytes bigger.
(compare to the average bitcoin tx of 225 bytes)
13 September 2018
00:04
Deleted Account
Why is controlling distribution more important than controlling security? Because those are the two things you can control with mining?
Z
00:05
Zack
security is the most important thing.
00:06
Deleted Account
You could always distribute more veo than what you mine... i guess that would be an airdrop.
Z
00:06
Zack
If we can't get security for free from POW, then it is better to use POS.
But, the demand of new tokens is so much higher than the security needs, this is never a problem. We can always get security for free from POW.
00:06
Deleted Account
I see
MF
00:08
Mr Flintstone
In reply to this message
what is your view on what should happen when bitcoin block reward goes to zero?
00:08
Deleted Account
But you cant get POS right now because you would need to implement that. So amoveo is in a position where you should pay for security, even if its not free. Because the alternative is quite likely the end of Amoveo.
Z
00:09
Zack
In reply to this message
the demand for new bitcoin will never go to zero, letting the reward go too low below demand like that is bad for bitcoin.
00:09
Deleted Account
Does demand really depend on whether the bitcoin is new or old?
00:10
Traditionally emission would be controlled to scale with the market. But bitcoin changed that
Z
00:12
Zack
The economy is always growing.
Currency is used to solve the coincidence of wants problem so that the economy can run more smoothly.
The total amount of currency needed grows with the economy.
00:13
I guess if the great depression happened, or bubonic plague, then the total needed currency could decrease
00:13
maybe in a situation like that POS currencies would be more important, since you can't get security for free from POW
00:15
a big asteroid impact, or a nuclear war or something.
00:17
Deleted Account
Actually, if mining is profitable, renting gpu hashrate is probably free or net positive value for as long as mining is valuable. Because 51% hashrate would get you 100% of mining rewards. With this argumentation, mining is not secure as long as an attacker may procure hashpower at less than 2x cost price.
00:17
So mining is pointless for security...
00:17
I admit
00:17
Changing the mining reward changes nothing
00:20
Does anyone know how much hashrate one could easily rent for a short timespan?
Z
00:20
Zack
That would be serious arbitrage if you could rent something for 1/2 the profitability of using it.
There is no such thing as a free lunch, economically speaking.

Mining gives us security as a free side effect of distributing tokens.
00:21
Deleted Account
No. Its the other way around
00:24
Wait. You need to match the current hashpower, but you get all mining rewards. So if you rent the hashrate at cost price, you end up with whatever the other miners were getting, plus control of the blockchain
00:25
If others are making money, as a minimum you will make the same
00:27
The price of renting such hashpower right now is $30k per day (2 veo per 10 min at $100), so you would have to risk that in order to perform the attack
Z
00:28
Zack
If there was a situation where people could double their money by renting hash-power, they would keep doing that.
Either the price of renting computers goes up, or else the profit of mining goes down, until it is no longer possible to rent computers and make so much profit.

Investments have an interest rate price determined by a global market. If one kind of investment becomes more profitable, investors from all over the world keep investing in it until it's profitability lowers to the global interest rate.
00:28
Deleted Account
If you were able to short veo making a profit would be a lot easier. Veo may be used like this in the future to break other blockchains...
Z
00:28
Zack
No matter how big the block reward is, it will still be about the same profitability for mining.
00:29
Deleted Account
Yes, but you get mining for free, but the gain is control of the blockchain
00:33
You can get $6k or so from the order book on qtrade and amoveo.exchange. So right now theres no danger id say
00:42
I was wrong first. Renting hashrate is more like break even if mining is break even to begin with, and you are renting hashpower at exact cost price. The conclusion is that mining is not really a security measure if such hashrate is obtainable. POS might be somewhat better, as the veo you would stake would be lost in an attack (as price would most likely collapse)
Z
00:43
Zack
yes, I think your understanding is right.
00:45
Deleted Account
A way to mitigate this would be for pow miners to post shares on the blockchain, so that only miners who had been mining for a while had an easy way of getting the reward. That way it would be difficult to implement a quick change in hashrate
00:45
Quite difficult to implement i expect
00:47
Because a 51% attack would see a much higher actual difficulty than oldtime miners, so youd need, say, 90% for a day, or 51% over a week...
Z
00:49
Zack
I think we should focus on getting big enough so someone makes an asic. Then we will be fine.

I have attempted a couple pos blockchains before. I think we won't need it for Amoveo.
00:49
Deleted Account
Agreed.
00:50
But this algorithm could be interesting for someone else starting a new blockchain in the future. Perhaps ill make it a blog post, not amoveo related :)
00:59
You can motivate an ASIC development by making mining rewards bigger when the volume is there. But anyone attempting this will also look for stability. This will be shown by the history of Amoveo...
01:00
Just saying. You can improve the general opinion on Amoveo mining stability by making some public announcements, and then sticking to that plan
Z
01:00
Zack
ASIC is a long term investment, they wont care if we are over-rewarding in the short term.
01:01
I can only announce my personal strategy. Amoveo's decisions are mostly made by futarchy now.
01:01
Deleted Account
In crypto nothing is long term
AK
03:03
A K
In reply to this message
Have you considered how much ASIC hashrate would be needed to secure VEO? And how much network would be willing to pay? If yes please share
S
03:07
Sy
almost any asic would do if you produce enough...i dont see how miners get "free veo" tho, yes you get more, thats why the price is low, compared to a few month back i basicly get way less $ than before
S
03:31
Sy
current antminer run 13 TH at double round so even a half as fast miner could pull 13 TH, we are at 25 TH netspeed, highest was 200, id say around 2000 is sort off save for easy takeovers but still way off for a coordinated attack
03:33
the more interesting questoin is, what market cap does a coin need so someone invests at least a million into asics

and who invests a million without "testing" them first for a while after which you sell them at even more profit...
AK
03:53
A K
Market cap per se less relevant than the ROI
03:54
If you recover investments in 2 months who cares what mcap it was
AK
04:13
A K
To do so, you'll need at least $1M monthly mining rewards + at least $1m buying demand
S
04:16
Sy
since value is tied to market cap and risk aswell...yes you need mcap
04:17
we got 4320 blocks per month on avg, lets say you are nice and only mine 50% thats 500$ per block
04:18
doable but really hard to calculate since production does take around a year afaik 😝
04:18
so you could have started back at 700$ per veo and look at shit right now 😂
AK
04:18
A K
Yeah well but here it's discussed changing block time and reward
S
04:18
Sy
oracle is still on bad question and zack is thinking about freezing reward + blocktime
AK
04:18
A K
So mcap might remain the same and mining change drastically
S
04:18
Sy
doesnt really matter imho
04:19
its like reducing block reward, right now im pretty sure the price will just go down aswell so 33% less reward, 33% price drop -> nothing changed $ wise
AK
04:20
A K
33 less reward 33 price drop = "66%" drop and miners are fucked ))
04:21
$ wise it's still strange it's more profitable than ETH on Nvidia
S
04:21
Sy
ah true
AK
04:21
A K
Not many coins could maintain that for months
S
04:21
Sy
yes they are double fucked, if you reduce the reward more will leave, trust will decrease, more will drop
04:22
thats why i vote for changing nothing, diff and price will work it out
04:22
thats how its supposed to be
MF
04:27
Mr Flintstone
it definitely looks like block reward isn’t changing from this oracle now
04:28
so congrats to whoever won 1 veo
AK
04:33
A K
Who won it?
MF
04:39
Mr Flintstone
not sure. Sy is my guess
A
04:40
AAA
Bad question? First 1 veo there that matched Zack?
MF
04:41
Mr Flintstone
In reply to this message
yep
Krakenified invited Krakenified
S
04:52
Sy
In reply to this message
yep
05:15
Deleted Account
Nice article...
Z
12:53
Zack
In reply to this message
now I am thinking we just need to do it in 2 steps.
First use a combinatory question oracle to find out if changing the block reward is good.
Then we do the governance oracle to actually do the change.
12:54
In reply to this message
not yet.
remember bad-question oracles take longer to settle, we might still have time to run a combinatory oracle, and then close the governance oracle on false.
Z
21:50
Zack
Who made amoveo.co ?
D
21:52
Darius
In reply to this message
@anthonygeryan
21:53
Deleted Account
In reply to this message
@Dcrblock did
22:10
Deleted Account
@Dcrblock
D
22:55
Darius
Yes?
Deleted joined group by link from Group
14 September 2018
00:42
Deleted Account
In reply to this message
@Dcrblock - give them the domain back. Stop being a domain hodler.
Z
01:35
Zack
I think I am coming to some conclusions about the governance Oracle.

The Oracle only works to report things that are already common knowledge. It is not generally an effective tool for making decisions.
There are 2 major limitations:
1) When you use the on-chain oracle, you can make different bets on each side of a fork.
2) Nakamoto consensus is optimizing for maximum hash rate, which is often contradictory with the goal of a large market cap.

Luckily, Amoveo has scalable markets for derivatives, which are an ideal tool for communities to come to agreements.
We should use amoveo futarchy markets to make the decision, and then use the governance mechanism to report the communities choice to the blockchain.
AK
01:40
A K
In reply to this message
and do you know, who owns amoveo.io ?
Z
01:41
Zack
Mr flintstone maybe?
MF
02:11
Mr Flintstone
no
G
02:31
Gonzalo
In reply to this message
☝️
AK
02:39
A K
In reply to this message
You do?
Z
02:40
Zack
oh right, I think it is Gonzalo
AK
02:40
A K
I'm just trying to locate the best domain, we do need smth more than GitHub )
02:41
Deleted Account
as for the lean startup approach here https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo/blob/master/docs/community_roadmap.md , there is still an uncertain answer if you need critical mass to test this concept in the first place
02:43
how many veo does batman have?
02:44
also why not move to a proof of stake system? this would build investor confidence
AK
02:46
A K
Who is batman? Do we know anything besides BAT.. addr?
I
02:47
Iridescence
🦇
02:48
are you scared that batman will dump?
[
02:56
[Riki]
In reply to this message
How would it do that?
02:56
Would it also raise confidence for btc if pos? ^^
02:57
Deleted Account
what is bat's adress?
02:58
oh it starts with bat i guess
02:58
that's not that many amoveo though
02:58
i think 1 or 2 people mine 50% of amoveo
02:59
Deleted Account
thats who we should be scared of
03:00
who is number 2 address?
03:00
many whale miners, be careful out there
B
03:38
Ben
look when he mined that
03:38
and to what should he dump?
03:39
there is no market at all currently
03:39
and he is by far not the biggest holder
Eloi invited Eloi
D
03:50
Darius
Lolzzzzzzz
E
03:50
Eloi
Hello everyone
MF
04:31
Mr Flintstone
hello
04:42
Deleted Account
theres manya ddresses bigger than batman
MF
04:42
Mr Flintstone
didn’t realize BIOB had been accumulating so much
04:42
Deleted Account
someone mined 5% of all veo
04:42
and they may have separated into different address to avoid suspicion
MF
04:44
Mr Flintstone
In reply to this message
and still mining it looks like
S
05:32
Sy
i used to know almost everyone in the top10 but things sure have switched...
BB
06:22
Brian Brian
I have 10 veo am I on top 10?
Deleted invited Deleted Account
Deleted invited Deleted Account
B
15:20
Ben
you missed top 10 with 10 veo, but close mate
S
18:46
Sy
i was wondering, when someone closes an oracle, why doesnt it "clean up" after himself automaticly? like pay out all bets, unmatched etc
18:50
does the node keep any record about which bets were made at the oracle or do they really vanish once they are matched?
19:06
Deleted Account
I dont know about Amoveo design decisions, but in general requiring an outside event to trigger some action is safer, as there is no way to create an infinite loop potentially printing or stealing money
19:07
I would argue that we need a system to monitor unsettled oracles and perhaps make these triggers automatically.
19:09
Im not sure it it’s possible to help people close a channel after an oracle for a market resolves. Depends on whether sufficient information is available to the outside world
19:09
And channels could possibly contain any code...
S
19:14
Sy
someone has to run oracle_close anyway
19:14
so no infinite loop, it should just iterate itself and clean up
19:24
Deleted Account
Im just saying if the system itself depends on external triggers, its much more difficult to find a loophole
19:24
An attack tends to take longer at you need to make many txs
19:25
But I dont know if this is why Amoveo is designed like this. Just speculating here
Deleted invited Deleted Account
Z
20:41
Zack
In reply to this message
Closed bets are stored by account, open orders are stored in the Oracle.
20:42
In reply to this message
It is easier to reason about tx types that always take the same number of cycles to execute.
20:43
In reply to this message
We have something automatic like this to prevent channels from being closed at the wrong state.
Z
23:34
Zack
If we can't fix attaching/detaching problem in linux, this is going to be annoying for integration testing of amoveo full nodes.
Starting 3 separate nodes, one in each terminal, and then having to tab back and forth to each terminal.
23:35
oh, I should just start all 3 in screen, and use screen to tab between them
AK
23:40
A K
nohup might help?
23:40
also screen/tmux works for sure
Z
23:41
Zack
I wish I could write a single script that would start all 3 instances of tmux or nohup or whatever, and then launch the 3 nodes in them. all in one command.
S
23:43
Sy
Ben just setup a node on a vps without a problem..
23:43
you can start screen with a name detached np
Z
23:43
Zack
nice, which service did he use?
23:44
cool, thanks for the info about screen sy
15 September 2018
Z
00:45
Zack
Pretty soon we will have CFDS, so you can go long Veo.

I wonder what happens if I go long Veo, and then buy a bunch of Veo.
In a thin market like this, it seems like this would let me buy a bunch of extra Veo at a lower price?
MF
00:45
Mr Flintstone
the other side of the cfd needs to use discretion as always
00:45
based on market depth of reference price
00:46
so if they are willing to go short with a bunch of notional, you can easily market buy on the spot markets and screw them
00:46
this is why we need good liquidity for the cfd to be useful
AK
00:47
A K
that would depend on how CFD is settled
00:47
what is the settlement price
Z
00:47
Zack
Sounds like CFDS will be a great second killer app.
AK
00:47
A K
we had a bit of this discussion couple months ago )
Z
00:50
Zack
I've got to shut down the old markets because we are updating the smart contract.
If you have not settled your channels or contacted me, then there is nothing more you have to do.
It will take about a week, the contract will be processed on-chain, and then you will get your Veo credited to your account.
K
01:19
Kan
Zack https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo/blob/master/docs/progress_reports/August_2018.md I couldnt see Wagerr. I think they have updated their wallet and started test markets. Are they qualified to be in your competitor comparision list? What are your opinions?
A
02:02
Aries
If you have 20 minutes, this video is a good watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zL7uTBZWnoA
02:23
Deleted Account
What is the attaching/detachibg problem in linux?
Z
02:28
Zack
Old instructions for turning on the node no longer work.
Documentation was changed for a temporary solution.
02:30
Deleted Account
Ill have a look :)
ミ●﹏•ミ invited ミ●﹏•ミ
sd
03:22
steel dan
Zack I am trying to terminate all remaining amoveo processes but I can't
03:23
root@devious /home/steliox/amoveo/scripts # sh ./kill_all_erlang.sh
root@devious /home/steliox/amoveo/scripts # sh ./kill_all_erlang.sh
do not finish the job
03:24
03:25
what else must I do ?
03:26
I failed at launching the amoveo node but now cleanup fails. I dont want to reboot the server
03:26
It's sticky like a rootkit lol
03:28
03:28
In reply to this message
link please?
Z
03:29
Zack
In reply to this message
Look in scripts folder. There are a couple tools for that.
03:29
Oh, you did
sd
03:29
steel dan
yes I ran them all, but the cleanup fails
03:29
check the first two screenshots, something always remains
03:30
again when i run the scripts, it always finds processes to kill
03:30
they seem to respawn
Z
03:30
Zack
I think Ubuntu uses some erlang processes.
If they crash, Ubuntu reboots them
03:31
But the one on 8080 is probably a amoveo node
03:31
Rebooting the node would let you start fresh
sd
03:32
steel dan
In reply to this message
this cannot be possible, I think
03:32
ubuntu does not have erlang preinstalled
Z
03:32
Zack
Yes , you are right
sd
03:33
steel dan
look, it respawns:
03:33
S
03:34
Sy
ah make prod-restart kills everything anyway
Z
03:34
Zack
https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo/tree/master/docs/getting-started
This is the part that changed.
It is only a problem for people who started a new machine for a new node.
S
03:34
Sy
so sending api off and then prod-restart is enough
sd
03:35
steel dan
In reply to this message
this is a folder, which file do you mean?
03:35
I am trying to launch a new node, at the moment
03:35
but first I must do cleanup, which fails
sd
03:40
steel dan
ok I used htop, filtered beam processes, sent kill signal 9, via htop
03:40
but when I run sh ./kill_all_erlang.sh
it still finds a process to kill, very strange
DV
04:05
Denis Voskvitsov
you may be need to kill epmd too not only amoveo_core
Z
04:06
Zack
erlang development tools are different from the erlang vm.
Rythm box, a music player for ubuntu, I think it uses the erlang vm.
04:06
and pidgin
K
04:47
Kan
In reply to this message
this was the reason why I asked Zack's opinion 👍
M⛏
04:50
Moe ⛏
im betting on the GGG fight tonight to try it out.
MF
04:58
Mr Flintstone
they use some kind of masternode system to determine event outcomes it looks like
Z
05:10
Zack
depending on N of M trusted masternodes has similar economic problems as using a subcurrency, like Augur's rep for voting.
You have to pay enough in fees, so that the long term expected gains from fees exceeds the short term expected gains from cheating and robbing the market.
Making the fees this high makes it too expensive to be a useful oracle.
05:23
Deleted Account
If one is shorting amoveo while holding amoveo that's synthetic USD right/
MF
05:24
Mr Flintstone
yeah, if you’re shorting the veousd rate
05:24
assuming short via some linear instrument like cfd
05:32
Deleted Account
@kacperwikiel yes because you short position is like selling veo for usd, while holding the same amount. The pair must be VEO/USD. If the pair is USD/VEO (more likely?), i expect you can go long for the same result. Like @Jbreezy0 says...
07:37
Deleted Account
So how to send USD value that way?
Liquidate some of the position, send veo and ask person on other end to use same instrument?
Z
07:52
Zack
you both would use the same market.
If you buy 2 of the same instrument, in opposite directions, then it cancels out and you get veo out.
07:52
it is important to use a market so that you trade at the market price
MF
08:40
Mr Flintstone
what if you want to abstract it to a usd lightning payment
08:41
where the other person doesn’t necessarily need to themselves have locked up at least the amount they are going to receive
08:41
or lock up much at all
Z
08:42
Zack
It will eventually be possible to move your bet to a more direct path.

Another strategy is to have a protocol with a hundred step handshake to make a direct channel with this contract between two people.
ミ
09:04
ミ●﹏•ミ
Can I run mn?
09:05
How many VEO I need to create Masternode?
14:06
Deleted Account
@kr2two 0. There is no masternode, only nodes
Š
17:49
Šea
In reply to this message
1000 times less than mVeo
17:49
Hope this helps
S
18:38
Sy
There are still no masternodes...
IP
18:51
I P
would be cool to have hybrid pow/masternode consensus
AK
19:59
A K
VeoNG
sd
20:30
steel dan
In reply to this message
yes true, thank you
A invited A
Z
21:05
Zack
Futarchy is a tool for efficiently getting information from groups of people.
21:17
Futarchy is slow, and it is difficult to get more than a few bits of information at a time.
It is not suitable for answering questions about a user interface.
21:18
Futarchy is best used in situations were there is a lot of money at stake, so people are spreading propaganda, or lying to each other, making it hard to find out accurate information.
21:29
futarchy means making a betting market, and we learn information by looking at the prices at which people are betting.
If people are betting at 3:1 odds that team B will win in football, that means there is about a 75% chance that team B will win.

You use futarchy to find out probabilistic information about the future. But you can only ask about information that will eventually become common knowledge.
Z
21:55
Zack
If Alice is a manager of a publicly owned company, and she makes decisions that are bad for the stock price, then she could easily lose her job.
21:56
If Alice is running her own business, then there is no reason she would consult futarchy about her prostitution consumption habits.
21:57
If that is the case, then the market's price will reflect that reality. The futarchy market would tell Alice to hire her sugar baby.
21:59
If Alice is an executive for a studio making movies, and she has influence over which actors are chosen, then the futarchy market will probably be measuring the correlation of the number of movie tickets sold vs which actor is selected for the leading role.
DY
22:00
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
The market can not determine everything. The market can determine public things, for example if iphone will sell more this year or not. There are thousands of little parts playing role in such questions. But when it comes to Alice's lust levels, only Alice knows about it hence a market in unnecessary.
Z
22:05
Zack
I hope that we can make all management jobs obsolete. That in the future all hierarchies will be flat, and we will make any group decisions using prediction markets.
Like how the Amoveo community works.
22:10
Radical Futarchy
DY
22:14
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
For Amoveo to work efficiently a certain number of people need to be joining the market. I believe that number is around 100 (the same number in data science)

Thus currently, we can not say Amoveo Futarchy is working efficiently. This is a chicken and egg problem. We can not use Futarchy for deciding the future of Amoveo before we have enough people participating. And for enough people to participate we need some decisions.
Z
22:16
Zack
prediction markets can give accurate results even if only a single person bets.
More important is how many people have the opportunity to bet.
22:16
For a certain amount of effort, there are a lot of people who could bet.
DY
22:17
Demi Yilmaz
Can someone help me open up a market for

"If Zack & the other OGs move discussions to bitcointalk for 1 month, the monthly growth of the community will increase by 5x that month."
Z
22:19
Zack
that is a little tough to measure, I think we should word the question differently
22:19
what is "5x growth" even mean?
22:19
who are OGs?
DY
22:19
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
True
22:20
In reply to this message
If telegram channel has grown on average 10% the last 2 months, 5x means 50%
Z
22:20
Zack
oh, so like 1550 members or something?
DY
22:20
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
Mining pool owner, veoscan, veobook owner flintstone, tallakt etc.
22:50
Deleted Account
are there any other coins actively using futarchy?
Z
22:52
Zack
I think not. We are the only project using futarchy that I am aware of.
Gnosis uses some cool financial tools as well, but I think they haven't used futarchy yet.
23:09
Deleted Account
I guess an interesting question is if amoeo is using a true futarchy
23:10
since futarchy as initially envisioned is based on the current distribution of wealth in the global ecosystem
23:10
so the initial paramters as envisioned by robin hanson probably matter a lot
23:10
since if you have a futarchy, but the guy owns 99% of a closed system cryptocurrency, then is it actually the original vision of futarchy?
16 September 2018
02:27
Deleted Account
First the community needs to learn how to participate in futarchy, before the results will be acurate. Even though this will take time to mature, I think it’s unfair to say that Amoveo is not using futarchy
02:28
Amoveo is trailblazing futarchy...
Z
04:27
Zack
Robin Hanson is a genius for discovering so many important properties of prediction markets.

Whether or not we use the precise same definition of Futarchy as Robin Hanson doesn't matter.
This is a blockchain, not a Robin Hanson fan club.
ES
07:07
Ed Sonic
🤣
Deleted invited Deleted Account
Cryptokido invited Cryptokido
Tibike joined group by link from Group
17 September 2018
Deleted invited Deleted Account
Deleted invited Deleted Account
22:13
Deleted Account
nick szabo makes some great points about futarchy, that seem to apply in practice http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2009/05/futarchy-experiment-wed-learn-great.html
22:13
comments are very enlightening
22:16
It seems like nick szabo was claiming that robin hanson isn't an intellectually honest academic, that was purposefully obfuscating the actual assumptions underlying futarchy under a rug
EP
22:42
Evans Pan
In reply to this message
You are right. Futarchy is only working when there is enough people to join and enough stake in bet. Zack is wrong, how can 1 single bet in futarchy tell the future accurately? it's just one person's prediction for the future.
MF
22:52
Mr Flintstone
it’s the fact that nobody is willing to match the bet that gives us information
22:52
much more information than we get from that fact that zack placed the bet
22:53
anybody in the world can take the other side
EP
22:53
Evans Pan
In reply to this message
You are right here, the more important is how many ppl see the Oracle and how many thought about if they should bet or not. But currently, it's not the case.
22:53
In reply to this message
only in theory
22:54
theoretically it's correct. But in reality it's not.
MF
22:54
Mr Flintstone
it’s either right or it isn’t
22:55
we generally take acting on greed to enrich oneself to be axiomatic
22:55
when thinking about security of blockchain mechanisms
22:55
this falls in that category
EP
22:57
Evans Pan
It's very similar to political vote. Many country require a minimum vote rate. If only 10% of the people voted, the vote is not valid.
22:58
the assumption here to make 1 vote valid is 99% of the other people who can voted decided not to vote.
Z
22:58
Zack
In reply to this message
Nick was confused when he wrote this.
Look at Robin Hanson comments at the bottom.
EP
22:59
Evans Pan
But in amoveo, 99% of the holder either don't know how to vote or didn't know there is a vote at all.
23:03
It would be nice to design sth like if you hold any veo, then you have to vote, otherwise, you lose 10% of your veo automatically.
Z
23:04
Zack
In reply to this message
That would be a terrible mechanism.

Voting is not cryptoeconomically secure. It is vulnerable to bribery.
In particular, it is vulnerable to p + epsilon bribes.
EP
23:07
Evans Pan
It's might be a terrible idea but it would encourage people to participate in the futarchy.
Z
23:08
Zack
Voting is democracy, not futarchy.
Futarchy is not about participation, it is about putting your money where your mouth is.
EP
23:10
Evans Pan
take the recent futarchy for example, the reducing block rewards one, there was no announcement, no notice, if someone didn't follow all the messages in telegram, he wouldn't know there is an important futatchy about Amoveo.
Z
23:11
Zack
In reply to this message
You mean the governance oracle?
That was not futarchy.
EP
23:13
Evans Pan
It's the same logic for Oracle or futarchy. to get accurate prediction, we need a minimum bets level to make it effective.
Z
23:14
Zack
It don't see why it would matter to warn every Veo holder before we run some futarchy markets.
Since the outcome of the market will be the same either way.

If there is strong opinions about the market, then the participants in the market will tell everyone else.
If there are no strong opinions, then the outcome doesn't matter.
EP
23:15
Evans Pan
How to tell everyone else?
Z
23:17
Zack
With words.

Futarchy is not voting.
If you analyze it as if it was voting, you will come to false conclusions.
EP
23:17
Evans Pan
if I want to tell 100 holders of veo who don't check telegram and discord and github, how to do that?
Z
23:17
Zack
There are plenty of voting based blockchain projects.
Since you like voting better than futarchy, you should join one of them instead of amoveo.
23:22
In reply to this message
The security of amoveo does not depend on our ability to spam our users.

I am very glad that futarchy doesn't involve people spamming propaganda at huge mailing lists.
23:24
I am so glad that futarchy doesn't depend on the constant vigilance of our users.
I am happy to support lazy users who don't understand or care about any governance mechanisms.
23:55
Deleted Account
also I believe since there's the tax given to you, the actual effect of this is that it's an inherently broken system that won't resemble anything near an actual futarchy
23:55
it's more a centralized oracle of zack
23:56
for it to work, I believe the founder reward coins need to be unable to vote in the futarchy market
18 September 2018
JT
00:40
John Tromp
what percentage is that?
AK
00:41
A K
20% of all generated
JT
00:41
John Tromp
wow, such generous:-)
AK
00:41
A K
although right now veoscan shows 16.924%
00:42
well, no ICO )
MF
01:12
Mr Flintstone
20% of the block reward is created for the dev reward account, so it’s closer to 1/6
01:13
at least I think it’s 20% and not a flat 0.2
AK
01:13
A K
20/120 but ofc
01:13
tnx
MF
01:13
Mr Flintstone
not sure why the math doesnt work out perfectly to 16.6%
01:14
repeating of course
Z
01:22
Zack
1/6 is 16.6%.
01:23
Veoscan.io probably has rounding issues
01:24
The starting distribution of Veo holders doesn't impact the accuracy of the Oracle.
Even if someone had 51% of the Veo, they still can't force the outcome of an Oracle.
01:25
It is not voting.
We are not doing democracy.
The average persons opinion doesn't matter.
It is futarchy.
01:32
Deleted Account
my point is that it's not futarchy, since there's a tax rate
01:32
if the distribution was 51% and non inflationy, then it wouldn't be an issue
01:34
and I also don't quite understand how that would work. if you have 51% and the other guy has 49% then you would always beat the other guy and get the funds
Z
01:57
Zack
In reply to this message
Sounds like you don't know what futarchy is.
I wonder what your motive for posting here is.
You aren't interested in learning.
01:59
VN is a troll right?
Š
02:00
Šea
In reply to this message
Likely
04:44
Deleted Account
when sex?
Deleted invited Deleted Account
08:32
Deleted Account
There was tx fee burn bug so dev reward / total balances does not add up to 16.6%.
Z
10:50
Zack
I think the extra 100 Veo the dev reward started with on day 0 is part of the difference too
14:08
Deleted Account
Yes that is the reason too.
T
18:13
Topab
Can Credit Default Swaps be donein amoveo? This project is working on it but seems that outcome is solved by voting "A decentralized committee made up of CDx token holders vote to resolve the outcome of credit events" https://cdxproject.com/
18:52
Deleted Account
Looks like a complicated way of describing a way to use an Amoveo market...
MF
20:13
Mr Flintstone
currently credit default swap in old world finance work like insurance does, with premium payments made by the buyer of insurance to the seller. the payout triggers if the underlying issuer defaults. this is often structured like a debt security which means blockchains cant enforce it, but this doesn’t mean we can’t use the chain to trade other credit derivatives that give us essentially the same economic exposure. can use a binary option to trade credit risk by asking the oracle if the issuer has defaulted on any payments on a specified series of debt. present value of owning the true option should be equal to the pv of a credit default swap with equiv parameters
Z
23:24
Zack
In reply to this message
Nice. Thanks for explaining
19 September 2018
MF
00:57
Mr Flintstone
who switched the block reward oracle output type to false?
00:57
that was like 500 blocks ago
Z
00:57
Zack
not me, this is the first I heard of this
00:58
what is the oracle id?
MF
00:58
Mr Flintstone
FhbnDw8UWS0ZhtI4/c87YQmwdxXa71NUaadhP9Igzsw=
Z
00:59
Zack
thanks.
Still about 500 blocks till it can be closed
MF
00:59
Mr Flintstone
how much was bet?
Z
00:59
Zack
im looking that up now
MF
01:00
Mr Flintstone
this should be good lol
01:03
are you sure this isnt a read issue
Z
01:03
Zack
oh, my mistake. I am mis-reading this data
OK
01:03
O K
lol
01:03
whew
MF
01:04
Mr Flintstone
that woke me up
01:04
lmao
Z
01:04
Zack
it was such a big mistake to store some oracle data into a weirdly formatted order.
It has confused us more than once now
01:04
There are currently 79 veo being bet on false
01:05
I think that this oracle is not functioning as a proper futarchy.
We would need to use a combinatory market first to find out if the block reward should be changed, then after we have the result of the combinatory market we can make a governance oracle.
01:06
The current game is something between chicken and majority rules.
MF
01:08
Mr Flintstone
we can run a combinatory market concurrently though right
01:09
we still have a few days before this is finalized
Z
01:17
Zack
yes, we can do the combinatory market concurrently, but I still haven't pushed the update to fix the market smart contract, and I am reluctant to start a new market with the old code, because I don't want to maintain different code on different servers
Deleted invited Deleted Account
S
15:49
Sy
just let it go through, you wanted to lower the block reward anyway, now its happening
15:50
none of the pools are running modified nodes so it will just change and everything continues, no fork, no fuzz
AK
15:52
A K
wait how will it resolve if left unattended?
S
15:53
Sy
the oracle got its direction, once block end is reached you close it
15:53
if nobody closes it i think nothing ever happens...can you still bet after block end?
AK
15:55
A K
to what outcome will it resolve? used to be bad question?
S
15:58
Sy
false as stated above
AK
15:58
A K
how much is bet there?
S
15:58
Sy
79 veo
AK
15:59
A K
false = block reward goes to ... ?
15:59
sry for questions )
S
15:59
Sy
down
AK
16:00
A K
33% ?
Deleted invited Deleted Account
S
16:01
Sy
afaik yes
DY
16:11
Demi Yilmaz
I missed some chat can someone summarize the block reward situation & how it is changing?
AK
16:12
A K
if no more wages are placed, block reward goes down 33%
JT
16:16
John Tromp
how much needed to move to bad qst?
S
16:33
Sy
80
S
17:23
Sy
Zack did you implement a way to check a nodes version? im still dropping txs, way less than before but it sometimes happens and im not sure which node exactly drops them, me and ap should have upgraded, not sure about xd tho
K
18:03
Kan
Zack have you analysed chain.link as a competitor?
Z
18:43
Zack
In reply to this message
I didn't add a version check to the api yet
20 September 2018
DY
01:50
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
I guess the answer is no?
MF
01:51
Mr Flintstone
I think he tweeted about it once
01:52
I don’t think it was positive lol
huglester invited huglester
Deleted invited Deleted Account
06:55
Deleted Account
dear comrades
06:55
i've just registered at qtrade
06:55
but used fake name
06:56
if i'll deposit some money, what is the probability that they will not give them back?
06:57
or this exchange does not regard KYC seriously?
06:57
I thought that it is something like livecoin or other semi-anon exchange
OK
07:03
O K
Lol
07:03
You can withdraw 2k per day
07:03
Hopefully you didn't use the name Victor vl
07:06
Deleted Account
i used completely fake name from my e-mail login
07:07
i prefer not to use real name if it is not necessary
07:08
but i don't not how about this exchange
bvana invited bvana
DY
14:16
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
You can use amoveo.exchange and you dont have to use any real name.
14:17
Deleted Account
@demiculus could you get in trouble for this?
DY
14:22
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
Maybe when veo grows to become a top 50 coin
making the exchange handle lots of transactions.
But when that comes we can solve it.
14:26
Deleted Account
Ok :)
Deleted invited Deleted Account
22:04
Deleted Account
What about creating an oracle about total amount of veo locked in oracles?
Gregory invited Gregory
DV
22:23
Denis Voskvitsov
trying to understand meaning of records in our current governance oracle.
I'm getting just two elements in api:orders result.
In first I can see orders record with total amount 79 VEO, and another one is of 54882 VEO.

is it real bet or some flaw in representation?
22:28
Zack could you please take a look?
MF
22:46
Mr Flintstone
55k veo isn’t a real bet
22:46
there are only 40k veo
22:46
79 is tho
AK
22:47
A K
In reply to this message
why is it displayed then ? :(
MF
22:48
Mr Flintstone
yeah it definitely should be better
22:48
not sure why it is displayed or what it means. I’m pretty sure this even mislead zack earlier this week
DV
22:58
Denis Voskvitsov
so how one can tell what amount of bets received on every outcome of oracle?
besides false, I believe it has 79 veo
Deleted invited Deleted Account
23:11
Deleted Account
Hmm - look at veoscan?
DV
23:18
Denis Voskvitsov
it is governance oracle so it's not listed in markets on veoscan

anyway I'd like to know the way itself, veoscan isn't a magic tool :)
21 September 2018
MF
01:26
Mr Flintstone
about 24 hrs (140 blocks or so) until reward change locks in
f
01:31
finex
So block reward is decreasing....
MF
01:40
Mr Flintstone
we’ll see what happens
01:58
Deleted Account
What do you mean by that @Tandrax2188 ?
MF
02:14
Mr Flintstone
p sure he’s trolling
02:15
can’t remember last time dude said something serious tbh lol
OK
02:17
O K
What ? 9000
03:08
Deleted Account
9000?
OK
03:09
O K
the power level
Z
03:11
Zack
https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo/blob/master/apps/amoveo_core/src/consensus/forks.erl#L12
9000 was when we did a hard fork to change the pow function to make ASICS easier.
M
04:49
Mike
I can’t tell is the 9000 is in reference to the meme or an actual significant figure
05:30
Deleted Account
Vegeta? Dragonballz...
Oscar Gold invited Oscar Gold
T
09:16
Tromp
Anyone from amoveo.exhange here?
MF
09:19
Mr Flintstone
@demiculus
T
09:20
Tromp
Thx
T
13:55
Topab
I believe this will be used more and more in the futureto give confidence to investors https://medium.com/medcredits/skin-in-the-game-how-medcredits-is-using-augur-to-assure-accountability-950166f1f0ab
AK
14:16
A K
Zack so what's with the bogus bet?
Z
14:46
Zack
In reply to this message
part of the oracle's information is stored in the orders merkel tree, and it is formatted to take up the same space as an order, even though it is not an order.
AK
14:47
A K
soo we just need to update API docs or smth?
Z
14:47
Zack
now I am not sure what you were asking about.
AK
14:47
A K
chain won't use this 54882 bet?
Z
14:47
Zack
that is not a bet, it is some oracle data.
AK
14:47
A K
In reply to this message
.
14:48
ah ok
14:48
i'm watching this oracle closely )
MF
22:14
Mr Flintstone
wow
22:14
switched to bad question
DV
22:42
Denis Voskvitsov
when it closes? block 35115?
B
22:47
Ben
interesting, who did the bet? ;)
22 September 2018
MF
00:27
Mr Flintstone
discord down for anyone else?
Z
00:28
Zack
Discord works for me.
00:28
I just posted in general to test
MF
00:45
Mr Flintstone
yep, working for me now
Z
01:38
Zack
there are currently 21 veo betting on bad-question.
So I guess someone made a 100 veo bet to cancel out the 79 veo bet that had previously been there
AK
01:42
A K
We really need a way to see all historical bets
03:39
Deleted Account
The bets are on chain?
MF
03:52
Mr Flintstone
yeah
04:03
oh, this was the same account that changed the bet to bad question before I think
AK
04:14
A K
but how can one see what exactly was bet in that transaction?
Z
04:15
Zack
In reply to this message
So their bets mostly cancel out.
Hopefully they didn't lose too much Veo
S
04:34
Sy
In reply to this message
its not like we dont know the amount....80 were on false
Z
04:36
Zack
overall, they have 100 bets matched on false, and only 80 on bad-question.
if nothing changes, then they end up losing 20 veo
S
04:36
Sy
umm no, how would that be possible?
04:37
there were 79 veo on false, he bet 100 on bad question again, matching the 79 and 21 are left unmatched
Z
04:37
Zack
he bet 100 in each direction. according to flintstone, both bets were the same person
S
04:37
Sy
right now 91 veo on false are matched
04:37
no
04:38
flintstone said the same guy who bet 10 veo on bad question earlier to reinforce it bet 100 again
Z
04:38
Zack
oh, I misunderstood
S
04:38
Sy
so one guy put 110 on bad question
04:38
21 unmatched right now
Z
04:39
Zack
it is a little like an everybody pays auction
S
04:47
Sy
some are paying more right now 😝
MF
04:50
Mr Flintstone
In reply to this message
this is just from recollection. didn’t actually look at the chain aside from veoscan
S
04:52
Sy
In reply to this message
its not phrased 100% clearly because when that address put addition 10 veo on bad question it was already there from my 2
04:52
i looked on chain :)
MF
04:55
Mr Flintstone
maybe a way to visualize this is to have a table with the following columns: block height, unmatched amount, unmatched type, cumulative matched true amt cumulative matched false amt, cumulative matched bad question amt
04:55
any thoughts?
04:56
And we only add a row if there is oracle activity
04:56
this wouldn’t tell you who matched who, but it is at least a step in the right direction
S
05:01
Sy
i have plans to update my explorer a bit
05:01
so we can atleast lookup all bets for a given oracle
05:01
will be done...in a week or two xD
05:02
but we should be able to track oracles overall once im done
Z
05:02
Zack
it is nice if we use the light wallet, so that you can have merkel proofs to know that the data is correct
05:02
blockchain.info isn't a light wallet.
I wonder if I am being excessive with cryptoeconomic security.
MF
05:27
Mr Flintstone
as long as it’s in the background and doesn’t interfere with anything I don’t think so
05:27
unless it is prohibitively difficulty to program
S
05:41
Sy
well, no offense but if we wait for you to build it into the light wallet we still wouldnt have some infos we got from the explorer, nobody cares if its merkle proofed, we need it visualized and available
05:41
there is a huge difference between an explorer and a wallet / node
MF
05:42
Mr Flintstone
that’s true
G
13:57
Gregory
How many veo in circulation currently?
B
15:04
Branc
price veo?
DY
15:05
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
http://veoscan.io/
B
15:43
Ben
Zack did you aleady released a Full Node version which supress the niose? (helper Task)
16:31
Deleted Account
So 110 on bad question vs false in the oracle. Would be fun to switch the oracle to «true» at this point ;)
IP
16:51
I P
In reply to this message
we need a volunteer!
16:51
it would not cost that much given the current price of veo
S
21:43
Sy
21+ to switch
Thelonious_Cr invited Thelonious_Cr
Z
22:54
Zack
In reply to this message
I suppressed some noise on the current full node.
There are still lots of print messages I need to remove.
B
23:52
Ben
ok, thanks quite important since almost every command get jammed by spam.
23 September 2018
Z
01:00
Zack
Fake error reports is sabatoge. Are you even running a full node Ben?
01:03 
(amoveo_core_prod@ubuntu-s-1vcpu-1gb-fra1-01)27> block:height().
34302
(amoveo_core_prod@ubuntu-s-1vcpu-1gb-fra1-01)28> channel_manager:keys().
[<<4,99,154,123,165,99,36,234,51,217,124,28,32,49,21,106,
   25,203,152,147,165,240,105,216,221,161,151,244,...>>,
 <<4,167,100,29,117,30,4,136,51,171,36,52,154,138,223,53,
   204,54,0,162,28,254,125,77,2,221,41,...>>,
 <<4,245,152,154,117,25,21,174,130,150,230,41,140,252,144,
   218,24,83,142,241,141,38,200,197,11,146,...>>,
 <<4,40,221,150,68,202,200,88,123,4,28,120,130,178,212,24,
   82,66,121,217,179,163,135,180,93,...>>,
 <<4,91,224,43,201,48,11,204,161,250,88,208,87,243,111,167,
   31,189,230,29,146,78,53,202,...>>,
 <<4,145,112,50,219,188,143,149,95,71,170,176,185,123,217,
   160,182,162,15,239,20,210,53,...>>]
(amoveo_core_prod@ubuntu-s-1vcpu-1gb-fra1-01)29> keys:pubkey().
<<4,93,235,195,249,2,221,206,84,39,162,223,175,251,138,
  196,104,3,79,137,155,32,118,102,127,236,95,124,153,...>>
Here I feed 3 different commands to my full node, I receive the correct responses. No surprise print-messages.
DV
01:19
Denis Voskvitsov
when new block received current build of full node can print bunch of messages
Z
01:20
Zack
yes, it does alert you when a new block is shared to you. Thank you for the honest and accurate report Denis.
DV
01:25
Denis Voskvitsov
moreover there is a lot of messages on failed connect to peers. so I guess Ben wasn't so wrong
MF
01:25
Mr Flintstone
lol
Z
01:27
Zack
@denis_voskvitsov in your experience, almost every command you try to issue is being messed up with print messages?
So like, over 90% of commands?

It seems to me that less than 2% of the commands I type get messed up with print-messages.
01:29
Amoveo is designed so that >99% of users never run a full node.
User-experinece of the <1% of users who do run a full node is not a priority. So Ben was lying a second time when he called it "quite important".
OK
01:29
O K
Lying requires intent
S
01:33
Sy
In reply to this message
lol sorry but this is the biggest bullshit you have writte so far, why cant he find it important?
DV
01:33
Denis Voskvitsov
I'd say about third of commands get jammed time to time. it might be quite important since there are actions like betting that can't be done with light node
S
01:33
Sy
not everything is evil...and yes alot of commands get interupted by spam, we are just more used to it and gave up month ago
Z
01:38
Zack
So you guys are upset that messages get printed out when a new block is found? You never find these useful?
01:39
once every 10 minutes
OK
01:40
O K
I 100% copy and paste full commands
01:40
I suggest everyone do it
DV
01:53
Denis Voskvitsov
it doesn't seems just a message about new block:
119> syncing with this peer now [-7,[-7,150,109,104,200],8080]
trade peers
get their top header
get blocks from them.
another get_blocks thread
syncing with this peer now [-7,[-7,78,46,149,239],8080]
trade peers
get their top header
already synced with this peer 
block organizer add
talk_helper failed_connect 1 
removing peer [-7,[-7,47,105,43,173],8080]
server crashed.
headers 
removing peer [-7,[-7,173,230,157,155],8080]
talk_helper failed_connect 1 
removing peer [-7,[-7,51,15,87,84],8080]
talk_helper failed_connect 1 
removing peer [-7,[-7,114,215,136,52],8080]
talk_helper failed_connect 1 
removing peer [-7,[-7,159,65,173,9],8080]
talk_helper failed_connect 1 
talk_helper failed_connect 1 
removing peer [-7,[-7,47,105,59,4],8080]
01:53
(logged right now on full node)
01:54
it would be more useful to have them in separate logfile with timestamps
Z
01:54
Zack
That is old software. Do a git pull and try again
DV
01:55
Denis Voskvitsov
ok, thanks. that build is like 7 days old. nowadays software is aging so quickly…
B
04:19
Ben
i run a full node yes
S
14:36
Sebsebzen
Number of people in channel is kinda stagnant
14:36
Not good
DY
14:45
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
True, Zack whats the plan? What are you working on?
Z
14:46
Zack
scalar markets
S
14:50
Sebsebzen
What’s that?
Z
14:51
Zack
for stable coins, and going long/short veo or eth or whatever
S
14:52
Sebsebzen
Btw, are you considering at some point to higher another dev for code refactoring. Two pair of eyes are better and also help to keep it well maintained and accessible to new people
14:52
Ok, interesting
DY
15:54
Demi Yilmaz
In reply to this message
I agree with this. Writing better code will increase your speed. Hiring a part time senior dev who will check your code will make your life easier, prevent all the simple mistakes that you’re making.
15:54
Though it is hard to find someone to hire(even part time). So if you cant think of people whom you can ask for help, then it might be better to just post a job opening and wait for that person to find you because finding the right person may take 1-3 months.
IP
16:10
I P
In reply to this message
he doesn't like the word 'hire', the idea was to fund with contract on amoveo
16:11
In reply to this message
Zack don't be paranoid, he could forget to git pull latest updates or smth
16:15
i've updated my full node so far so good
16:16
don't see any spam, only couple of 'talk_helper failed_connect 1. will ignore this peer.' when i restarted but this is expected
IP
17:06
I P
no erro spam messages present after i git pulled the last version
B
18:24
Ben
i have also git pulled
IP
18:25
I P
so, do you have constant spam? i don';t have it
18:25
only 1 time when i restart, fter that it is perfectly fine
B
18:27
Ben
lets see
18:30
hmmh looks like it is not syncing anymore
18:30
interesting
IP
18:30
I P
did you stop it correctly?
18:31
did you use make prod-restart?
B
18:31
Ben
halt/api off
IP
18:31
I P
really, i don't know why but i have 0 problems with my node, runs very stable with no issue
B
18:31
Ben
congrats
24 September 2018
S
00:12
Sy
its sort of random
00:13
my backup node that was in sync for weeks stopped at some point, had to clean resync 3 times until it finally got back on track
00:13
and it was not an update issue ^^
00:13
it is easier if you have added yourself to the peers tho and it just keeps syncing
Z
00:13
Zack
That is unusual
00:14
The hardest part of solving this will be to make a reproducible error
S
00:14
Sy
yeah, highly unlikely - everything in sync for a while now
Z
00:15
Zack
I wonder if the node ended up on everyone's blacklist, or if the database got stuck in some un-updateable state.
00:16
If it happens again, tell me so we can do some testing to try and diagnose what broke
Deleted invited Deleted Account
IP
05:32
I P
guys, sorry to ask, but are there any updates planned for UI/UX? i mean amoveo is like rocket science to regular person😃
S
05:40
Sy
not from zack
IP
05:42
I P
In reply to this message
yeah, i know that Zack is focused on core functionality
DV
06:05
Denis Voskvitsov
In reply to this message
we're going to present light wallet UI update this week. stay tuned :)
IP
06:05
I P
In reply to this message
nice, spasibo drug
Z
08:12
Zack
Great
JW
13:00
JZ W
is amoveo trading now？
M
13:05
Mike
In reply to this message
Qtrade and Amoveo.exchange
JW
13:10
JZ W
In reply to this message
thanks
S
16:30
Sy
qtrade.io
B
16:54
Ben
btw. just as an feedback i still have the Task helper Messages in my Fullnode
16:54
B
17:21
Ben
looks like zacks node is dropping TX
17:22
send from two diffrent Pub Key and both transaction got a TX ID from the Light node but never went thru
19:02
Deleted Account
Ban pls
B
19:15
Ben
now it worked
B
23:41
Ben
did anyone ever tried to place a bet after an oracle changed the direction
23:41
?
Deleted invited Deleted Account
Z
23:41
Zack
It changed direction more than once
B
23:41
Ben
also for a GOV oracle?
Z
23:42
Zack
Gov oracles have changed direction more than once.
I think question oracles have only changed directions once each, at most.
They both use the same code, they work the same way.
B
23:43
Ben
okay, good to know. somehow my bet is not going thru
23:43
Fullnode is in sync and i used that command before
Z
23:43
Zack
There are some rules preventing certain kinds of bets.
Share more details and maybe I can help.
B
23:43
Ben
did you changed the code in the last update in regards to that oracle syntax?
Z
23:44
Zack
Participating in the Oracle has not changed. It is all documented.
23:44
How much are you betting? Which direction? Which oracle?
B
23:44
Ben
see pm
23:46
a human readable output after placing a bet would be awesome, and if it fails a reason in best case
25 September 2018
IP
00:00
I P
In reply to this message
+1
Z
00:13
Zack
I was able to help Ben, and we made a plan on how to avoid this problem in the future.
B
00:14
Ben
thanks Zack!
M
00:15
Mike
💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻
IP
00:15
I P
Sticker
Not included, change data exporting settings to download.
👍, 39.1 KB
MF
01:28
Mr Flintstone
29 veo oracle bet in veoscan
DV
01:36
Denis Voskvitsov
switched back to false
MF
01:44
Mr Flintstone
do you see how much is unmatched on false now?
Z
01:45
Zack
Ill check
01:45
looks like 8.9 VEO.
MF
01:46
Mr Flintstone
I wonder how many different people have participated in this
IP
01:47
I P
In reply to this message
Means decrease block reward?
01:47
Nice
Z
01:47
Zack
I feel guilty for letting something like an everybody pays auction exist.
There are good arguments that stuff like this is immoral.
I will fix the market soon so we can fix the oracle so it wont be like this.
01:48
these tools certainly are unhealthy for the distribution.
It is like an exploit in human psychology that can trick some people into losing so much money.
B
01:55
Ben
interesting concept
01:55
all pay auction would be a game changer
AK
02:34
A K
In reply to this message
It is working like this now
02:35
I'm just not sure what happens to matched veo - they're erased or go to the winner?
MF
02:35
Mr Flintstone
to the winner
Z
02:35
Zack
They go to the winner
AK
02:35
A K
Cool tnx
Z
02:36
Zack
You have to make a tx to collect your winnings or unmatched Veo. It is not automatic.
S
02:57
Sy
02:57
i dont see the amount of the bet?
MF
03:16
Mr Flintstone
152118
03:16
sats
03:17
O nvm
03:17
that is the fee
Z
03:18
Zack
I recently made an oracle bet with 1 satoshi, is that mine?
DV
03:18
Denis Voskvitsov
it should be last field according to record definition in oracle_bet_tx
Z
03:18
Zack
yes, I made that tx
MF
03:18
Mr Flintstone
aha!
03:21
we must be getting close to 1% of amoveo’s circulating supply locked up in this oracle?
Z
03:22
Zack
yes, I think we are getting near.
MF
03:22
Mr Flintstone
would be around 350 veo
03:22
or so
IP
03:41
I P
In reply to this message
wow that is niiice
S
03:46
Sy
1 veo is always 100000000 tho, not 1
03:47
5 is type, thats where the amount usually is
03:48
03:48
i've included a spend for comparison
03:50
looking at the other bets 6 is definately not the amount
Z
03:51
Zack
1 satoshi, 29 veo, 0.9 veo
03:51
those are the amounts being bet
03:51
it is 6
S
03:51
Sy
hmm k...why did you switch them?
03:51
that stuff is so random...
S
03:52
Sy
yeah i know
03:53
but in every other tx 5 is the amount, only in ctc and oracle_bet you switch them
03:53
and probably some more special ones i havent found yet
03:54
looks like type and amount should have been switched for consistency sake
S
03:56
Sy
yep
03:56
okay i fxed the parser, i can see the amount now
03:56
gotta add type aswell
Z
03:57
Zack
switching them now would be a little messy, trying to change the format of a record at a certain block height
S
03:58
Sy
so we got 8.9 left unmatched on false?
Z
03:58
Zack
that is what I am seeing
S
03:58
Sy
k
03:58
will probably be matched again
03:58
what a journey!
Z
03:58
Zack
yes, it is like a dollar auction
DV
04:55
Denis Voskvitsov
DV
Denis Voskvitsov 21.09.2018 22:42:32
when it closes? block 35115?
DV
04:58
Denis Voskvitsov
hmm now it shows done_timer at 35555
MF
07:04
Mr Flintstone
yep it gets reset every time the output type changes
13:16
Deleted Account
current gov oracle mechanism: https://fomo3d.games

:-/
13:21
as long as there is no element of prediction to what the result will be, I dont understand what the incentive is to attend to such an oracle
13:22
predicting the metagame is close to impossible
13:29
If i could influence the metagame in some way, it would be by saying: remember the miners could decide to fork on this, forcing the value to «bad question» and collecting free money. in my honest opinion the fork with less mining rewards will be worth less due to the fact that it excludes new Amoveo users to a higher degree.
13:31
i myself seem to control 0.5<x<1% of the mining power at the moment. im sure other miners agree with me
T
17:34
Topab
Interesting article highlighting the importance of usability as key to take off https://messari.substack.com/p/crypto-design-201-messaris-unqualified-opinions
Titan95 invited Titan95
DY
20:09
Demi Yilmaz
We've switched back to veo on amoveo.exchange

https://amoveo.exchange/trade/index
S
21:06
Sy
Zack i just realised, you stated earlier that you think only 1% will run a full node...so only 1% will "control" the oracles?
Z
22:09
Zack
In reply to this message
Reporting the outcome to the Oracle is just one step. 1% of people is more than enough to handle it.
We will add oracle reporting to the light node eventually
IP
22:19
I P
actually, amoveo full node can run on any old and crap hardware
22:20
it is easy to run amoveo full node- 1$ per month vps or some old pc will do fine
22:20
tried to sync eth full node without an ssd and it did not happen😂😂
Z
22:20
Zack
It is cheap to run a full node. Not easy for most people.

Eth is expensive and difficult to sync.
AK
22:21
A K
well give Amoveo 3 years and we'll see )
DV
22:21
Denis Voskvitsov
I've read this point as advantage and honestly don't get it.
why do you want to run full node (where you probably store your money) on the old crap hardware?
22:26
sure it is a mark that software isn't bloated, and it's good, but it doesn't add too much in comparison to «big blockchains» nodes, which operate way more amounts of data.
Z
22:28
Zack
Amoveo is great for sharding.
Even if it got huge, you should still be able to run a shard on old hardware.
IP
22:28
I P
In reply to this message
the lower are the requirements to hardware to run a full node the better
22:30
i mean i have an old pc, i run a bitcoin full node there with no issues, can't run eth full node
22:31
i can run eth full node on my workstation but i don't want to
DV
22:31
Denis Voskvitsov
In reply to this message
indeed it's better, but learning curve to run a full node effectively limits number of people who can run a node on their raspberry/orange pi/etc
22:32
In reply to this message
well yes, eth IOPS requirements is a shame… anyway, have you tried to sync in fast mode? it still will take hours, but eventually finishes