6 February 2021
10:04
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Apparently they want to use it to enforce "ethics at the base layer"
10:04
I don't even want to think about what that will eventually end up being a euphemism for
10:05
*sorry zack not jack haha typo
10:05
Or anyone else ofc
10:05
:)
10:05
Interested in people's thoughts
MF
10:06
Mr Flintstone
im sure the multisig bug influenced this philosophy lol
IS
10:07
Ilmu Somebody
They're trying to salvage after spending all this time building something DOA
10:11
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
In reply to this message
Yeah probably but base layer "ethics" enforcement is an idea which outclasses all others in terms of idiocy imo ;)
10:11
In reply to this message
It seems that way, but I am interested in what other factors make you think it is DOA?
Z
10:12
Zack
Hire a philosophy professor who teaches ethics. Done.
I dont see polkadot in the list of projects i reviewed, so i guess i haven't reviewed it.
10:14
But i have written some general arguments for why pos will probably be more expensive to use than pow.
IS
10:27
Ilmu Somebody
Have you tried to develop on it?
Z
11:19
Zack
I spent a couple years trying to implement pos systems.
11:20
I was following along with vitalik and vlads work on casper, and i implemented many different designs.
mx
11:48
mr x
In reply to this message
lol
mx
12:09
mr x
Guaranteed way to know that blockchain is not dying/stagnating is that hashrate go up. Hashes should be treated as reward signal and futarchy used as reward prediction error method to do governance. Blockchain as agent.
12:14
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
In reply to this message
?
mx
12:16
mr x
coin voting
12:16
just can't even
12:17
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Yeah ikr
mx
12:18
mr x
there should be no identity
12:19
only agency measured by hashrate
J
20:15
Josh
Hmm, is it possible to use this for XMR trades?
20:16
I think there's a viewing key that can be used to prove the transfer.
20:16
Anybody want to try? I'll take either side.
20:58
And here's a site where you can look it up: https://www.exploremonero.com/receipt
20:58
So the important piece is the secret transaction key which I guess can be shared with the counter party
20:59
Or maybe that's not necessary, as long as the sender can prove it to the oracle
21:05
Yep, just tested that site and it works
Z
21:11
Zack
In reply to this message
https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo-docs/blob/master/other_blockchains/polkadot.md
I made a review of polkadot.
It is hard to imagine what kind of person would invest in such an awful project.
The paper feels like it fails to meet the standard of science or engineering. Like it fails to meet the standard of science fiction. Like it is in fantasy territory.
Based on magic and superstition.
Z
21:57
Zack
I made an offer to sell 10 veo for 0.025 BTC. you can accept here http://159.89.87.58:8080/contracts.html
22:00
you need at least 1 veo to accept
x
22:10
x
In reply to this message
lmao
22:23
In reply to this message
👍
22:23
last time i read it it was draft only
J
23:17
Josh
In reply to this message
23:20
In reply to this message
Looks like the price on qTrade is 0.0013
Z
23:45
Zack
In reply to this message
but that doesn't come with bragging right of doing the first Amoveo crosschain BTC trade.
D
23:46
Devender
😅😅
Z
23:47
Zack
And the Amoveo DEX doesn't have trading limitations, or KYC requirements. You can maintain your privacy.
23:49
If it wasn't a good price, someone else would be selling cheaper
J
23:49
Josh
If it was a good price, somebody would be taking the other side 😆
Z
23:50
Zack
haha
J
23:50
Josh
I'll post a better offer as soon as I figure out how
Z
23:51
Zack
In reply to this message
http://159.89.87.58:8080/wallet.html
crosschain dex tab on this page
7 February 2021
J
00:00
Josh
hmm, bitcoin fee is too high, i'm going to need more veo
00:01
i'll do it the other way and see what happens
Z
00:05
Zack
In reply to this message
what other way? the interface is only for selling veo
J
00:39
Josh
ok, I posted a better offer:
00:41
How do I know when someone accepts it?
Z
00:48
Zack
In reply to this message
on the same page where you created the offer, near the bottom there is a "refresh" button.
After the bet is matched, pressing that button will reveal the "unlock funds" button, which you are supposed to press once they deliver the BTC.

Also, your offer will disappear from this page http://159.89.87.58:8080/contracts.html
The section "explore order book swap offers"
00:49
I regret not using my qtrade deposit address for my offer.
To avoid paying a tx fee to deposit.
J
00:52
Josh
why deposit at qtrade when we have a dex?
Z
00:52
Zack
to buy more veo to continue the cycle
J
00:55
Josh
Can't we just do a reverse contract on amoveo?
Z
01:17
Zack
In reply to this message
The complicated part is getting the bitcoin address where I should send the bitcoin to.
I could ask someone else to make a contract.
Eventually we will probably have a better tool for this, but right now it is not so easy.
J
01:19
Josh
Can they add the address when they accept the offer?
Z
01:21
Zack
In reply to this message
yeah, that is what I am thinking of building next.
But amoveo contracts are immutable.
To add an address to the contract, what is really happening is that the first contract is resolving, and a second contract is being created.
The second contract has the bitcoin address in it.
the shares from the first contract get converted into shares in the second contract.
01:21
The first contract needs some rules in it for how the second contract should be created.
J
01:22
Josh
Yeah definitely more complicated.
MF
01:26
Mr Flintstone
or you just have a simple way for someone to request a trade to buy veo with btc, then someone else makes the trade and the first person accepts
01:27
and add in a bit of spam prevention and this seems pretty simple idk
Z
01:27
Zack
How about PoW spam prevention, we could make it like bitmessage
MF
01:28
Mr Flintstone
is that like you need to do a VDF or something to submit a request?
Z
01:28
Zack
yes
01:28
well, just normal pow.
vdf is no good, because verification is slow
MF
01:29
Mr Flintstone
oh right. dont want to make you use a gpu
J
01:29
Josh
you can use the gpu in the browser
01:30
otherwise a bot would just use a gpu
MF
01:30
Mr Flintstone
i think its more like, a gpu can verify the VDF in like 3% of the time as it takes to calculate the vdf if the person who first calculated it sends 32 checkpoints to the verifier who parallelizes it with gpu
01:31
so there isnt 1:1 griefing on the vdf pow
01:31
But having a gpu requirement for whoever is running a server seems a bit much
Z
01:31
Zack
vdf normally takes as much effort to verify as it did to solve in the first place.
We were able to design that random number generator VDF to be easier to verify because it was using fraud proofs. but fraud proofs are really slow. you have to wait enough time for people to have a chance to give evidence that fraud had occurred.
01:33
fraud proofs aren't right for this application.
normal PoW works, it can be verified really fast.
Another option is proof of burn.
01:33
or a trusted third party
01:34
In reply to this message
because the interest rate on the veo for the 12 hours is much much smaller than the amount of veo, only a very small amount of value is under control of the trusted third party.
01:35
PoW is a nice option because we don't require them to own any particular currency.
proof of burn is expensive with bitcoin because you need to pay a tx fee.
01:35
trusted third party with bitcoin is expensive too, because of the tx fee
01:35
PoW doesn't work so well with phones though.
J
01:36
Josh
how long would your target time for the PoW be?
Z
01:38
Zack
Enough to be worth the interest rate on the veo for how long until the contract expires, + like 5 tx fees to settle the oracle, + the interest rate during the oracle resolution period
MF
01:40
Mr Flintstone
if they have to own veo anyways to participate in the contracts, it might be a better UX to just lock up a small amount of veo with the server in exchange for request credits
Z
01:40
Zack
Maybe someone with a phone could use their debit card to pay a miner to do the PoW for them. or they could pay the trusted third party in fiat.
MF
01:40
Mr Flintstone
but i think the spam prevention cost should be proportional to the cost for the server to maintain the requests, not necessarily the time value of the trade itself
Z
01:41
Zack
In reply to this message
if they already own veo it is a lot easier yes
MF
01:41
Mr Flintstone
they have to own veo to take the trade anyhow after they have requested it and someone else posts it
Z
01:42
Zack
you can send subcurrency to someone who doesn't have veo.
01:42
you can use veo you gain during a flash mint tx to pay the tx fee of that same tx
mx
02:01
mr x
can people use single burn to make many trades 🤔
02:02
on defection and they have to burn again to rejoin the game
02:04
well guess they got veo after the first trade anyway
02:14
reputation is gained and lost by burning it
06:44
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
In reply to this message
Thanks so much zack, that was very interesting
06:50
Wait is the problem that we are discussing the same as the free option problem in atomic swaps?
07:23
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
If so shouldn't the interest rate compensate for the volatility risk as well?
07:44
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
In reply to this message
Where can I read about this?
MF
07:47
Mr Flintstone
In reply to this message
yeah, i think you can make the free option smaller with a shorter expiration on the trade offer
07:49
blockchain reorganizations to harvest free options are in theory an attack but we have seen nothing of the sort on ethereum which makes massive settlements on a daily basis. maybe it is just more profitable for the miners to front run people than to try to reorg
08:33
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Isn't that the argument that Paul says be has refuted?
Z
09:15
Zack
In reply to this message
Long range attacks are from 2014.
I think the discussion about pos has moved past that point.
But i don't recall Paul's position on the matter.
I know paul thinks pos is bad because giving out block rewards for people to lock up tokens is self destructive in that less liquidity is available for contracts, and limited in its capacity to produce more tokens.
From this https://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/
09:51
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
09:51
"This is the logical fallacy of equivocation, of the concepts of "trust" and "personal verification".

I haven't "personally" written the code of BitcoinQT. I didn't "personally" create-or-verify The Universe, or the Laws of Physics/Chemistry/Computer-Networking, but I'm comfortable relying on those.

There is overwhelming evidence which I can "trust" without "personally verifying" it. I don't "personally" understand the proof of Fermat's last theorem, but from what I *did* "personally learn" about the-way-humans-behave, I know that, if there were an error with the proof, several individuals would have independently publicized the error, and the the error would start appearing in discussions everywhere.

The same is true for *relevant* errors in the compiler or the hardware (errors that would affect my life somehow)...if they existed, with just a little time they would appear publically. In a way, I "trust" these things because I have "personally verified" that there hasn't been an internet/media explosion concerning problems with these things. I also understand evolution and the nature of economic competition, where life forms and competing-agents seek out flaws in their rivals for exploitation.

All it takes to verify that my Bitcoin version works is a little time, and indeed most people wait a very long time to upgrade their Bitcoin software, if they upgrade at all ( https://bitcoinfoundation.o... ). Attacks do not take place on Bitcoin upgrades, precisely because it is so difficult to get away with one. If it were easier to try, people would "trust" less and "personally verify" more. People might never upgrade at all.

It is an intellectual cop-out to say that because someone doesn't personally know everything, they are doomed to a lifetime of "faith" or "subjectivity". This is the pseudoscientific Postmodernism-nonsense which (thankfully) has long been dead!"
09:52
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
The above link is to a discussion that Paul had with v in the comments of that article (which have now been removed for some reason from the website)
09:52
The long msg I posted is one of the first messages that Paul sent in the debate but which was only the first of many dozens of messages in that conversation between him, v and others about pos security
09:53
Your docs repo has some very high quality ideas in it
Z
09:54
Zack
In reply to this message
thanks
09:54
im pretty sure people have been using trust theory a lot before me, I just tried to formalize and document the idea for reference.
09:56
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Regardless, you did an excellent job at explaining it and even if it has been discussed before I am very glad you did that write up on it as I haven't read about it elsewhere in such terms despite it being so valuable to evaluating any security claims
09:57
I have read vitaliks post on different types of trust
09:57
But it is different
09:57
Although still interesting
Z
10:03
Zack
maybe the word "trust" is being used for something else, and I should rename the paper "measuring cryptoeconomic security" or something like that
10:07
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
I think you are looking at trust from the basis of the incentives of each individual actor and vitalik is looking at it by asking how many actors in a set need to be honest in order for something to work
10:08
I think yours is more general than his, since whether or not an actor has a monopoly on the ability to carry out an action is simply yet another factor in determining the potential payoff
10:09
So if you are 1 of 100 people who have the ability to do x where only one of you need to do x in order for the protocol to work
10:09
Then that simply factors into your calculus when determining what the payoffs are for not doing x
10:10
Vitalik leaves the payoffs and impact of an attack as an after thought in his article
Z
10:11
Zack
ive seen vitalik use the kind of analysis from my paper before. comparing the cost of an attack vs how much damage can be done. https://vitalik.ca/general/2020/11/06/pos2020.html
10:11
I think maybe he just doesn't use the word "trust" for this
10:12
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Yeah I am sure he uses both, it is just that he only used one in his above essay
10:14
They are both useful frameworks
10:17
The framework in his trust article is particular consideration that is necessary to make when applying your trust theory ideas
10:17
Like it influences the cost/benefit of an attack
Z
10:19
Zack
yes
10:21
I reference this paper a lot when discussing with authors of PoS protocols about whether their design works. Being very clear about what we mean by security helps the discussion progress.
10:25
=================
10:26
I updated the crosschain DEX tool.
Now it gives a list of available offers that people have made and you can match.
So you don't have to switch back to the contracts.html page.
10:26
you can do it all from inside the crosschain DEX tab in wallet.html now.
x
10:33
x
look good , i see an offer
10:33
they offered to give 10.00000000 veo for 0.015 BTC in address 3NUw8Wd1JxVU98VjnKgFSnxNHEa8zutnVb Expires in 62 blocks.
Z
10:33
Zack
I think that is Josh's offer
10:34
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
In reply to this message
Makes sense, definitions are integral if a discussion is to be fruitful
10:35
Btw zack on an unrelated note what school of economics would you say you most closely agree with the ideas of?
10:39
Or any economists in particular?
Z
10:50
Zack
I was studying physics before working on blockchains.
I think I tend to look at things from a game theory perspective.
10:54
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Interesting, you seem to be a lot more knowledgeable about econ than a lot of people who I have talked to who are game theorists in the past but maybe that is just anecdotal 🤷‍♂️
Z
10:54
Zack
I took a class on economics in high school. I remember some stuff about supply and demand.
Z
11:15
Zack
What do you guys think of this idea:
Lets say 2 people wanted to swap BTC for ETH.
They could have a contract in Amoveo to enforce that both the BTC gets delivered, and the Eth gets delivered.
If both deliver, or neither delivers, they get the same veo back.
if only one of them sends the money, then the other is punished by losing the VEO from the contract. and the veo is worth like 150% more than the BTC or Eth that they refused to send.

So Amoveo can be used to enforce trustless swaps between any pair of blockchains, even if those blockchains don't support atomic swapping, and haven't done any programming to support atomic swapping.

Is this something we would want? Would someone use this?
MF
11:34
Mr Flintstone
when you propose one of these trades or accept it, the UI should create another limit order which sells your side of the contract for 99% of the total reward, so that in the case 2 hours passes (or some amount of time defined in the oracle language) and you had sent bitcoin to them and they didnt send ether to you, an arbitrageur will send you slightly less than 150% of the value of that eth in veo without your involvement
x
12:00
x
In reply to this message
why not
12:00
but it does require that they have of a lot of veo
MF
12:02
Mr Flintstone
i suppose theres no reason why they cant use some stablecoin instead of veo
12:11
the capital requirement might be too unwieldy though
12:11
like overall
mx
12:47
mr x
creating order for 99% max potential should happen always everywhere??
x
15:45
x
In reply to this message
the limitation is that they can not trade an amount higher than their VEO balance..
MF
16:04
Mr Flintstone
yeah per trade
16:05
which would last i guess between 20 min and 2 hr or so depending on which blockchains you were using
EA
16:55
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
Interesting but feels like I’m more excited by swaps between blockchains and assets on VEO and getting this working super well
T
18:07
Topab
In reply to this message
+1
Z
18:49
Zack
That contract about the chess game was resolved.
Here is the oracle ID ue+zjAleNWlqlGABLT5mvQC7Ggk0EiC24AksomSNo0o=
J
18:50
Josh
Did it need an oracle?
Z
18:50
Zack
yeah, rico couldn't or wouldn't send me his losing shares.
J
18:51
Josh
Ah
Z
18:51
Zack
Also, there is still an open constant product market with a few valuable shares in it
18:53
I found a couple ways to improve the contract resolution interface too.
Now a single button is closing the oracle, giving evidence to the contract, and resolving the contract.
mx
19:44
mr x
Hmm pool tab didn't seem to work for selling liquidity shares
19:44
went through contracts.html
Z
19:45
Zack
I used it to sell my shares. maybe it is an issue for whoever is last to sell shares. ill check it out.
mx
19:46
mr x
for XohY+Qg9myFT88VehQHMwXyUFh129gnKz/T+BAgfS/g=
Z
19:47
Zack
oh yeah, it rejected for me too
19:47
server says the signature is wrong.
19:48
oh, it is formatting the tx wrong. the part to pay the lightnode dev fee
19:51
one of the market liquidity tx has a badly formatted amount too.
19:54
I think the problem happens if you own liquidity in less than all three markets, because then it tries making an invalid tx
19:56
ok, I fixed it
19:58
In reply to this message
it looks like you only took out liquidity for one of the 3 markets. I bet you still have liquidity in another of them. I recommend that you try the liquidity tab again in wallet.html
mx
19:58
mr x
yeah
19:58
alright
J
19:58
Josh
Nobody wants my veo offer, maybe it's because it's too big. Does anybody want to do any trades?
Z
19:59
Zack
In reply to this message
a trade for the same amount was matched at nearly the same price on qtrade 8 hours ago
mx
20:06
mr x
In reply to this message
accept the offer button did nothing
20:06
maybe cause i already got tx in mempool?
Z
20:06
Zack
In reply to this message
after you should also use the "scalar contract winnings" tool in contracts.html with
cid
dD76riHgEABZxODlZHgy74/3V8In7gk+xoPjUieUB2M=
and oracle id
ue+zjAleNWlqlGABLT5mvQC7Ggk0EiC24AksomSNo0o=

to convert back to veo.
mx
20:06
mr x
0.015 btc 600$ wow
Z
20:07
Zack
In reply to this message
that shouldn't matter
20:08
In reply to this message
ill do a test to try and see what went wrong.
any chance you can check for errors in the browser console?
mx
20:08
mr x
how much veo I need for it?
J
20:09
Josh
In reply to this message
More people know about qtrade probably.
Z
20:09
Zack
In reply to this message
a little over 1 veo to accept
20:09
1 veo + tx fees
mx
20:09
mr x
got 1.265
Z
20:09
Zack
that should be enough
mx
20:10
mr x
signing.js:56 Uncaught DOMException: Failed to execute 'atob' on 'Window': The string to be decoded is not correctly encoded.
Z
20:11
Zack
so the tx wasn't formated right for signing
20:11
does it print out the invalid tx above that?
mx
20:13
mr x
swaps unhandled case
multi_tx.js:45 e
multi_tx.js:44 swaps unhandled case
multi_tx.js:45 s
multi_tx.js:44 swaps unhandled case
multi_tx.js:45 B
multi_tx.js:44 swaps unhandled case
multi_tx.js:45 undefined
multi_tx.js:44 swaps unhandled case
multi_tx.js:45 undefined
multi_tx.js:44 swaps unhandled case
multi_tx.js:45 B
multi_tx.js:44 swaps unhandled case
multi_tx.js:45 undefined
multi_tx.js:44 swaps unhandled case
multi_tx.js:45 undefined
signing.js:56 Uncaught DOMException: Failed to execute 'atob' on 'Window': The string to be decoded is not correctly encoded.
Z
20:13
Zack
ok, I reproduced the error
20:23
it looks like it isn't making the contract_new_tx
20:25
In reply to this message
you can accept the contract on contracts.html for now. im setting up the fix for doing it in the new page.
20:26
only 3 blocks until Josh's offer expires
mx
20:29
mr x
still getting Uncaught DOMException: Failed to execute 'atob' on 'Window': The string to be decoded is not correctly encoded.
Z
20:30
Zack
oh right, I also fixed an issue with paying the light node dev tax. let me push that fix.
mx
20:30
mr x
u got 2 blocks
Z
20:31
Zack
ok, I pushed that fix
mx
20:33
mr x
nope
Z
20:33
Zack
still the same?
mx
20:33
mr x
yeah but maybe not for same reason
Z
20:34
Zack
I was able to accept in contracts.html with a test just now
20:34
did you refresh the page?
mx
20:34
mr x
yeah
20:35
same error both wallet and contracts
20:35
["spend",0,0,0,"BL0SzhkFGFW1kTTdnO8sGnwPEzUvx2U2nyECwWmUJPRhLxbPPK+ep8eYMxlTxVO/wnQS5WmsGIKcrPP7/Fw1WVc=",5250000,0]]]
signing.js:56 Uncaught DOMException: Failed to execute 'atob' on 'Window': The string to be decoded is not correctly encoded.
20:37
maybe my address is cursed
Z
20:38
Zack
I just pushed a fix to accept the offer in the crosschain DEX tab
20:38
and I used it to accept an offer from my other account, it creates the contract correctly now.
mx
20:42
mr x
so joshs offer doesn't work?
Z
20:43
Zack
im not sure what is preventing you from accepting it
mx
20:44
mr x
woah
20:44
i guess my address was cursed
Z
20:44
Zack
it worked with another address?
mx
20:44
mr x
yea
Z
20:44
Zack
maybe it wasn't enough balance?
20:44
I see the tx in the mempool now
mx
20:45
mr x
1.263
20:45
now i got unconfirmed -1.11358200000000
Z
20:45
Zack
the second address had slightly less, weird
mx
20:46
mr x
second address has more and it worked
Z
20:46
Zack
oh, it had more. so maybe it was a insufficient balance issue somehow, even though you didn't need that much veo.
mx
20:46
mr x
yup
Z
20:46
Zack
maybe an expired balance check somewhere that is no longer valid because of how flash loans work
20:48
I think I found it. in swaps.js
20:50
I removed the expired balance check and updated.
mx
20:53
mr x
ok good
20:53
pool tx went through also now
20:54
weird how i just happened to have just not enough for the tx to work...
20:55
or dunno
Z
20:59
Zack
In reply to this message
did it work? I can't find your tx
mx
20:59
mr x
6Z8iidD06y44CbM9KtaXkigTj3pMhAZ1wAnANAbByik= for the liqudity share sell tx
Z
21:00
Zack
yeah, I see you got your liquidity shares
21:00
I think you didn't match Josh's offer before it expired
mx
21:01
mr x
ueah
21:01
doesn't show in account explorer
21:01
maybe the classic one
21:01
tx only included in the block after the next one
Z
21:01
Zack
because it expired, it is gone
mx
21:01
mr x
when it expired
Z
21:01
Zack
I don't see it in any recent block
mx
21:02
mr x
lol off by one
Z
21:02
Zack
maybe the tx wasn't quite fast enough to get into the mining pool in time
mx
21:02
mr x
day of weird coincidences
21:03
just not enough money and then just not quick enough
21:03
lololll
Z
21:04
Zack
at least we fixed a bunch of bugs
mx
21:04
mr x
yeah
Z
21:09
Zack
@jmharvey do you want to try buying BTC again?
mx
21:13
mr x
is there still problem with inclusion to next block?
Z
21:14
Zack
I think that I solved all the bugs we discovered
21:14
the mempool currently has 4 txs, all 4 are related to a couple tests I did of the crosschain DEX
mx
21:15
mr x
yeah maybe dex tx got in but miners didnt build new proposal in time
Z
21:16
Zack
Sy's pool doesn't immediately rebuild the block he is working on when a new tx is published, because there is a delay between changing the block he is working on and sending out the new work to his miners
mx
21:16
mr x
yup
Z
21:16
Zack
So if a block is found within like 5 minutes after publishing a tx, then that tx wont be included, and it has to wait for the next block
21:17
and in our case, the expiration ran out, so the tx was invalid for the next block and got dropped.
mx
21:17
mr x
haha
21:18
faster block times not so useful if not faster block proposal updates
Z
21:19
Zack
mining pools are forced to build a new block after each block is found
21:19
so at that point your tx would get included
mx
21:21
mr x
yeah 5 min to update proposal pretty long time but whatever
J
21:41
Josh
I'll do it when I get back to the computer in a couple hours.
21:41
Open to other offer ideas too. I have monero, zcash and btc.
J
23:47
Josh
My trade is back up
Z
23:48
Zack
In reply to this message
The trade is back
J
23:58
Josh
I realized I hadn't loaded my veo wallet when I made the offer, so how come it worked?
8 February 2021
Z
00:00
Zack
yeah, I just confirmed. you can post trades without having any veo. ill fix that soon.
00:01
these offers are totally off-chain. im sure if someone tries to match your offer, it wouldn't work, because that account has no money on-chain
J
00:01
Josh
So I should cancel it and make a new one?
Z
00:01
Zack
I can wipe the server to delete the fake offers
J
00:01
Josh
ok
00:01
i'll wait
Z
00:02
Zack
done
J
00:05
Josh
thanks
00:06
ok, reposted
Z
00:28
Zack
someone accepted it! :)
J
00:34
Josh
yep my balance went down
00:35
now we wait
J
00:36
Josh
btw, they should leave a decent fee cause it has to get confirmed
00:37
btc fees are really low now, can leave 17sat/byte: https://mempool.space/
00:38
In reply to this message
It doesn't show any info about the tx?
Z
00:38
Zack
typo, fixed now.
I needed a space after the URL and the word "here"
J
00:55
Josh
yeah!
00:55
and confirmed!
00:57
i released the veo
00:57
where can we see that?
Z
00:58
Zack
when you released the veo, it created a swap to sell your losing side of the contract for a little veo
01:00
so he can either buy that swap you offered, and combine the two types to get his veo. or he can click the button to sell his winning side for nearly its entire value in veo
01:00
if he sells his side, I can buy both sides and combine them and make a bit of arbitrage profit
01:02
In reply to this message
http://159.89.87.58:8080/contracts.html you can see your limit order swap offer on this page
mx
01:17
mr x
and 11 VEO incoming
Z
01:23
Zack
I updated the crosschain DEX tab to give warnings if you don't have a private key loaded, or if you don't have enough money to make the trade.
and I updated the p2p_derivative tool to remove limit order offers if the account doesn't have enough of the right kind of money to make the offer.
mx
01:26
mr x
new block but tx not included yet
J
01:28
Josh
mr x, were you the other side?
mx
01:31
mr x
BOnCHO
01:31
who that is we may never know
Z
01:32
Zack
BoneChalk, that is the person who bet that I would lose in chess
mx
01:34
mr x
and there it is
01:35
dexiest trade ever
Z
01:39
Zack
https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo-docs/blob/master/blog_posts/DEX_7_feb_2021.md
I did a writeup of our successful trial of the crosschain DEX today
J
02:19
Josh
Nice, part of Amoveo history 🙂
MF
03:01
Mr Flintstone
does anyone want to sell some veo for usdc or eth? i think the tool supports it
EA
03:19
Eric Arsenault
Amazing stuff!
J
03:23
Josh
isn't the eth fee really high now?
03:24
also, i think we should try out the oracle. any blockchain can do trades with cooperative parties.
MF
03:24
Mr Flintstone
I think its in the range of bitcoin fees?
J
03:24
Josh
$3.50
03:25
btc is about $1.50
03:25
but yeah
MF
03:25
Mr Flintstone
erc20 transfer is like double gas cost of normal eth transfer? I forget
Z
03:25
Zack
I used the oracle for the chess game yesterday
MF
03:25
Mr Flintstone
oh btc is cheap right now
03:26
so $9. Thats fine, im the one paying it anyways lol
J
03:26
Josh
ok i'll buy eth
03:26
how much do you want to do?
MF
03:27
Mr Flintstone
as much as you want
03:28
ill pay ~ qtrade price net of slippage if you were to dump into bids
J
03:28
Josh
give me a price for 10 veo
03:31
how about 0.36 ETH?
MF
03:31
Mr Flintstone
id do 0.3
J
03:33
Josh
If you want to buy 10 veo on qtrade it's 0.0145 BTC which is about 0.352 eth
MF
03:34
Mr Flintstone
not if i were patient and posted bids
03:34
i can meet you at 0.33
J
03:35
Josh
ok, deal, i'll put it up
03:38
offer is posted
J
03:56
Josh
I released the veo
OK
03:58
O K
In reply to this message
Very cool, congrats guys
03:59
You mentioned this is possible in XMR as well?
J
04:00
Josh
yeah, i'd do xmr trades
Z
04:00
Zack
is XMR difficult to use with other DEX or something?
OK
04:01
O K
In reply to this message
I really don't know how the privacy aspects effect the public proofs
J
04:02
Josh
you would only have to make the tx public if it went to the oracle
04:02
i don't think other dexes use oracles this way
OK
04:05
O K
In reply to this message
I would buy $1000 usd worth for xmr. What would your veo price in USD be?

Did you guys end up doing proof of burn idea on the bitcoin chain?
Z
04:11
Zack
In reply to this message
I don't see your trade releasing the veo.
mr flinstone made his trade to sell for 99.5% of what it is worth.
you can buy that and take a little arbitrage profit. or you can release the veo, and I can buy both to take the arbitrage profit
J
04:13
Josh
I pushed the button and it said "done" but maybe it didn't register.
Z
04:14
Zack
any chance you can take a look at the browser console?
04:17
oh, I see an error in the p2p server, let me check it out
04:17
maybe that code I wrote to verify balances had a bug
04:19
yeah, it looks like my balance check failed.
04:22
so the swap offer Josh tried to publish, it says he would pay 10 veo to get 11 of type 1.
that is correct right?
04:23
and his account has 25 veo, so it should have worked
04:24
oh, im looking at the wrong message. this is when the original swap got removed
04:25
so Josh is trying to sell 11 of type 1 to get 0.032 Veo
04:27
I think ill just turn the balance check off for now, so you guys can finish the trade, and ill add it back later after more testing.
04:31
ok, I turned it off
J
04:33
Josh
In reply to this message
I tried it again, I think it worked
Z
04:33
Zack
yeah, looks like it worked this time
J
04:33
Josh
In reply to this message
I'm open to this but I'd need to get some more veo
JS
04:35
Jon Snow
Seems like some whales are accumulating
04:36
Something might be coming
J
04:36
Josh
maybe they're monitoring our shenanigans
MF
04:39
Mr Flintstone
cool. trade completed
04:42
a request: put the settlement process into the wallet.html and have the subcurrencies automatically combine into veo once settlement is completed
04:42
so we dont ever have to touch contracts.html
Z
04:43
Zack
If you both sell, i can buy both sides and combine for arbitrage profit in contracts.html
So you dont have to touch it.
MF
04:43
Mr Flintstone
do you do that automatically? im pretty sure we both sold
Z
04:44
Zack
I was about to, but you beat me to it.
It isnt currently automatic
04:45
I can probably make it automatic when you open the crosschain tab.
MF
04:46
Mr Flintstone
you dont have to wait until we sell both though right?
Z
04:46
Zack
it would be nice to do a flash mint with also combining the 2 kinds of shares.
So you could do it even if your balance is really low
MF
04:46
Mr Flintstone
since you have arbitrage profits from owning either one
04:47
so someone could be providing liquidity to traders and you dont need both to be online for one person to get their veo
04:47
and finish the trade
Z
04:47
Zack
yeah, we only need one to sell
MF
04:48
Mr Flintstone
so it could be two buttons: "finish trade (everything went well)" "finish trade (there is a dispute)" ?
04:48
and arbitrageurs just handle everything from there?
Z
04:50
Zack
For one of the bottons, the other person can do it automatically.
If you both click a button, it goes to arbitrage people
EA
04:51
Eric Arsenault
anyone want to sell me some VEO for ETH?
04:52
where will people look up the market price of VEO if volume on the DEX gets much larger than qtrade?
04:53
there's going to be tons of arb opportunities
MF
04:53
Mr Flintstone
In reply to this message
cool, as long as it works so that you only need one person online for that person to get the veo they bought immediately, any scheme is fine
Z
05:00
Zack
In reply to this message
I think qtrade will follow along.
Like how all the btc markets connected to coinmarketcap have nearly the same price
OK
05:10
O K
In reply to this message
Sure, if this seems like an interesting way to continue the experiment, give yourself a fair premium and let me know :)
JS
05:12
Jon Snow
Wow this DEX idea is pretty cool. Can basically work for every blockchain
OK
05:24
O K
If we do it for as many coins as possible, it should be pretty good publicity, right?
EA
05:29
Eric Arsenault
Once we get it working, we need to somehow bootstrap liquidity
05:29
That will be super important
05:29
I keep thinking this should tie back to the AMM in some way
05:30
Then we can just incentivize LPs to the AMM, and people can just swap against that
05:43
Is there a way to make a contract for a swap between a person and the AMM pool? Like: if price goes above X, make the trade
J
05:53
Josh
How do we get the miners on here to sell veo?
IS
05:58
Ilmu Somebody
Zack has a lot of veo, this could end up looking like an ICO
MF
06:03
Mr Flintstone
idea for how to use this dex to trade eth for btc:

1. accept someone's offer selling their veo for your eth
2. when you hit accept, immediately create a trade offer selling the veo you are about to buy for btc

you can make #2 dependent on #1 somehow
06:05
maybe you can make them dependent on each other. so both need to get into a block at the same time, so you arent left holding veo if you cant find someone to trade it for btc with
06:07
or you can leave a bit of arbitrage profit for someone to match your trade with
OK
06:09
O K
In reply to this message
I have a feeling that the miners on here only sell veo
MF
06:09
Mr Flintstone
lol
06:16
In reply to this message
maybe if the tx for first trade, the tx for the settlement of the first trade and the tx of the second trade all get put inside a multi-tx somehow, there is a capital requirement of nearly 0 veo to trade btc for eth using amoveo, since the trades are in the same block you can flash loan the veo
EA
06:16
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
Seriously, we will need a lot of liquidity
MF
06:16
Mr Flintstone
In reply to this message
so you only need to hold enough veo to pay the tx fees to trade btc for eth
EA
06:17
Eric Arsenault
And we will likely need to incentivize some behaviours with VEO rewards (feels like this is standard these days)
MF
06:22
Mr Flintstone
im not sure if you could settle it immediately though
OK
06:30
O K
In reply to this message
How much veo is produced per day right now?
I
06:37
Instinct
Around 15 I think
JS
06:54
Jon Snow
So does this DEX mean we basically removed Qtrade dependence?
06:54
people can easily get into veo without using a CEX to get VEO first
Z
06:58
Zack
In reply to this message
You can just post a limit order. If the price moves, someone will match it.
06:59
In reply to this message
You can see in the explorer, the person getting the mining rewards sends them to qtrade continuously.
OK
06:59
O K
In reply to this message
Good point, yes it doesn't seem like that will be the source of our liquidity
Z
07:00
Zack
In reply to this message
Trade offers arent txs though. They are offchain.
And a multitx needs to be made by one person.
MF
07:01
Mr Flintstone
The first tx is signing the trade offer which creates a tx i mean
07:01
and yeah currently multi tx dont support including other peoples tx
07:02
But maybe a market maker could accept all the trades, if there were a way to create an offer to sell eth for veo instead of needing to accept an offer of someone buying eth with veo
Z
07:03
Zack
In reply to this message
You need some veo to use the dex.
Maybe we could make something like shapeshift, but just for buying veo.
J
07:05
Josh
how is that different from the dex?
EA
07:39
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
Maybe I’m not giving a good enough description. Peer to peer trades are cool, but would be better if it could be peer to pool, even for people outside of ecosystem (to gain access to various synthetics). Then people can just pool their liquidity
OK
07:43
O K
In reply to this message
I thought systems like this only worked well when the prices are relatively stable ... Am I missing something?
Z
07:45
Zack
In reply to this message
we can integrate the pool with the limit orders. so when someone uses the swap tx, it will automatically start matching your limit order if the price is good enough
EA
07:46
Eric Arsenault
Say we had synthetic Apple stock, and you had a AAPL <> BTC pool or something with large liquidity. Then someone with BTC wants to hold AAPL. So they just trade with the pool, and they send their BTC to someone in that pool (?) like we are doing now ?
07:46
I guess it gets weird since you need to send to a BTC address
07:46
And the pool can’t hold a BTC address
OK
07:47
O K
Are you envisioning something like uniswap?
EA
07:47
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
Yeah, we already have that functionality
07:47
But integrating this cross chain DEX with it
OK
07:47
O K
Keyword, 'like' -- uniswap only works with stable pairs
07:48
Or rather it works otherwise but liquidity providers get recked
EA
07:48
Eric Arsenault
Uniswap works for any pair
07:48
Yeah
07:48
But people do it because of fees
OK
07:49
O K
In reply to this message
They do it because of a misunderstanding that the fees will outpay their loss in liquidity
EA
07:49
Eric Arsenault
Lol
Z
07:49
Zack
In reply to this message
it is way better than LMSR liquidity providers though
EA
07:49
Eric Arsenault
Well, there’s a ton of people being fooled
OK
07:49
O K
In reply to this message
For sure, I mean I only know this from first hand experience lol
EA
07:50
Eric Arsenault
Lol
07:51
In reply to this message
Yeah maybe this is best we can do
07:51
It’s pretty good though, just need to get the liquidity fly wheel going
J
08:04
Josh
Liquidity sucks on qtrade too, so the bar is pretty low
08:04
And no kyc
08:05
Probably most people here want to buy veo?
I
08:06
Instinct
I do, but cheaper than market price on qtrade rn lol
OK
08:06
O K
In reply to this message
Lol well yeah sign me up too
J
08:07
Josh
Anybody selling?
EA
08:14
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
Same camp
OK
08:14
O K
In all seriousness I'm willing to pay the market price plus a premium for the xmr trade.
Z
08:33
Zack
https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/lezlqc/trustless_decentralized_exchange_with_support_for/
I made a post in the monero reddit about the Amoveo DEX.
hopefully their mods approve it.
I
08:35
Instinct
In reply to this message
Nice
08:36
Oh it’s automatically removed until approval 👎
x
08:45
x
is monero possible
Z
08:47
Zack
In reply to this message
josh says there is a way to make txs public
IS
09:04
Ilmu Somebody
you can send your viewkey to the veo guy and then the guy putting up veo can prove to the oracle that the tx on monero took place.
OK
09:07
O K
I think tx hash plus secret allows verification publicly
TiedToAStar invited TiedToAStar
Z
09:14
Zack
In reply to this message
thank you
09:19
https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo-docs/blob/master/design/oracle.md
I think I made a better explanation of the oracle.
T
09:20
TiedToAStar
Have you guys tested Monero with tesnet btc and testnet monero?
09:22
Here's an example:
09:23
You're going to get a lot of negative feedback on r/monero if you haven't actually tested monero support
Z
09:27
Zack
In reply to this message
the user named "OK" says he wants to test out trading XMR.
Im not really sure what we would be testing?
As long as it is possible to reveal that money was sent to an address, then it works.
IS
09:28
Ilmu Somebody
This way of trading supports anything provable, blockchains are a nice example because they are purpose built to prove txs so it's easy to verify those kinds of trades.
T
09:28
TiedToAStar
You could include a link to the on-chain tx for all involved chains.
Z
09:28
Zack
so far we did a couple dogecoin trades, a ethereum trade, and a bitcoin trade
09:29
https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo-docs/blob/master/blog_posts/DEX_7_feb_2021.md
Here is my report with all the details about the first big trade where I wasn't one of the 2 participants.
09:29
it has links to all the txs on Amoveo and on Bitcoin
T
09:34
TiedToAStar
Yeah I saw, I recommend doing the same for Monero.
Z
09:35
Zack
ok, as soon as someone uses it to buy XMR I will
T
09:35
TiedToAStar
This is huge, don't know if you guys know, but xmr.to shutdown last week so there is huge demand for swaps right now.
09:35
btc/xmr swaps that is
Z
09:35
Zack
In reply to this message
thats great
09:36
In reply to this message
we are working on a plan to combine a veo<>xmr swap and a veo<>btc swap together atomically, so it acts like a btc<>xmr swap. but it would have the limitation that you each need the same value of VEO as you are trading in btc and xmr
09:44
You can do xmr<>veo and then veo<>btc today as two separate steps. it is just less convenient.
EA
10:00
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
Wow, might be a really good opportunity!
10:01
In reply to this message
Alternatively (and eventually), people could just to BTC <> synthetic (XMR) or XMR <> synthetic (BTC)
10:03
In reply to this message
Maybe we can allow people to enter their BTC address if they want to for limit orders, so they could either accept trades within the VEO ecosystem, or trades from offchain assets
Z
10:04
Zack
In reply to this message
I think you need a new bitcoin address for each trade
T
10:08
TiedToAStar
How are you guys bootstrapping liquidity?
EA
10:09
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
That’s going to be a really important topic
10:09
Nothing planned yet
10:09
But this will be key
10:10
In reply to this message
Is there not a way for the sender of BTC to specify which address it’s coming from instead?
10:10
Feels like I should just have a single BTC address I enter, and anyone can send there
10:10
Not sure how they could prove they own an address though
MF
10:12
Mr Flintstone
i think there is a way to make it so the contract's oracle language can transform based on what the person accepting the limit order inputs, like their btc pubkey
Z
10:12
Zack
In reply to this message
Amoveo can make derivatives. So we can have synthetic XMR inside Amoveo.
Amoveo has constant product markets, like Uniswap.

So we can make a big uniswap market between VEO and synthetic XMR, or between synthetic BTC and synthetic XMR.
Then people will be more confident to use the DEX, because they have the liquidity to get back to their currency of choice after.

If demand for VEO was higher, we could increase the block reward to quickly expand the supply of VEO. The block reward is controlled by a futarchy type governance mechanism.
EA
10:13
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
That would be great
Z
10:13
Zack
But we are still really early in DEX development.
For now we are more focused on getting the interface clean, and making sure everything works as it is supposed to.

We only tested the DEX 4 times so far.
EA
10:13
Eric Arsenault
Lol
10:14
Yeah, long way to go
T
10:14
Topab
Veo can be divided into zacktoshis, why increase block rewards if demand increases?
Z
10:15
Zack
In reply to this message
to quickly and efficiently grow the supply, so we can meet the demands of our new users, and hopefully get even more users.
EA
10:17
Eric Arsenault
I think we should increase supply by rewarding LPs
10:17
It’s a great liquidity strategy
10:18
Could we do this for specific oracle questions? And rewards based on amount of liquidity you provide?
Z
10:20
Zack
I think the liquidity provider trading fee is too low, and should be raised. There is serious risk to being a liquidity provider, they should be compensated.
but im against the idea of inflating the supply of veo to reward them.

it is all up to futarchy though. Our new futarchy tool is a lot better, we can get answers to these questions.
EA
10:23
Eric Arsenault
Why are you against it? We’ve seen the effect it has on other projects like sushiswap. If you get liquidity, you win
10:27
Just curious
Z
10:34
Zack
I guess it just doesn't make sense to me.
If futarchy says we should do it, then we will.
EA
10:43
Eric Arsenault
Are you aware of how sushiswap attacked uniswap and stole a ton of liquidity?
10:44
It’s a strategy that all of these projects are using now
10:47
Many other projects are also using a LP reward strategy to draw liquidity (Thorchain, Bancor, almost all of them)
10:47
Not sure if uniswap does? 🤔
x
11:04
x
why not zcash
11:05
if monero privacy breaks, a lot of people will be in trouble
11:06
monero is not as private as zcash based coins
Z
11:07
Zack
Why not both?
x
11:07
x
because, it seems monero will be in trouble eventually ,I don't know,someone told me this,
11:08
at least their reputation will be trashed at somepoint
11:09
but for now, probably ok. it will work for sometime until it doesnt
11:12
zcash also not without problems tho
11:12
still worth trying with both
OK
11:14
O K
In reply to this message
That's a pretty big 'if' that could apply to any coin
x
11:16
x
the risk is different with privacy coins, the privacy coin traders arent aware of the origin of their coins, if privacy of zcash or monery breaks, zcash and monero holders are naked
11:19
But i think most of the privacy coin holders won't have doubt about zcash and monero tho, otherwise the price could've tumbled to zero
11:22
With this kind of trade, even if their privacy breaks in the future, VEO won't be affected. i think
IS
11:25
Ilmu Somebody
the price doesn't tumble to zero, the people holding the coin have an incentive to fund development to fix any issues. People don't invest in monero {the current implementation} they invest in monero {the community and the values that drive it}
11:27
this is key btw, and why I appreciate that zack keeps bringing up the futarchy and that he so clearly communicates which part of the project he is taking responsibility for.
x
11:33
x
In reply to this message
actually true, i think even bitcoin's not as good as it seems if examined further....
IS
11:38
Ilmu Somebody
However, investing in implementation is also important. I don't think any of these projects can ever be complete, it's about how fast and for how long they can self improve.
11:40
Zcash has had developer rewards while monero has been more about trying to keep consumer hardware relevant in mining and trying to build a grassroot. If they fail to keep developers and never fix these de-anon things then they may go to zero it's true.
x
11:42
x
In reply to this message
lol elon musk probably means bitcoin requrie an gigadad to own, average people won't even be able to afford the fee...


I read somewhere that 99% of zcash transactions are traceable
IS
11:42
Ilmu Somebody
yeah they have optional privacy which you must pay for. This basically doesn't work.
11:42
Either privacy by default or no privacy
14:13
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
In reply to this message
Really?
Z
16:01
Zack
In reply to this message
I think he is just joking because he had a bad experience with them
16:07
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Ok, because if not I'd be interested in how so as it would be a pretty significant weakness in the design
16:08
But I haven't heard it claimed before, at least seriously (although I am very much aware of the risks relating to "impermanent losses" present on such platforms lol)
MF
16:10
Mr Flintstone
i think the level of risk in an AMM is proportional to the return to LPs on average. some pools blow up LPs and some make them money though
J
16:59
Josh
In reply to this message
They can submit a bip32 public key and the software can auto generate a new address for each trade.
Z
17:01
Zack
In reply to this message
then you are trusting that software not to re-use an address and drain your account, right?
17:03
In reply to this message
The post got unblocked.
mx
17:05
mr x
I created oracle for galactic federation making itself known
17:05
false imo
J
17:06
Josh
In reply to this message
Hmm, I guess so. But you can run it yourself.
Z
17:06
Zack
In reply to this message
oh, right.
17:08
In reply to this message
I think we need some page to look up recent oracles, that this is important for security
mx
17:08
mr x
+1 lol
17:09
and ongoing governance variable changes
J
17:12
Josh
Since we want to attract the miners to the dex I think it's important to implement veo buy offers so we can put up a bunch of veo buy offers on the board.
Z
17:14
Zack
miners can't make their own offers?
17:14
I guess seeing a bunch of open offers will give them confidence
mx
17:16
mr x
9K42QGvIK4t5zyp62Zy76gWXVuQpF/VpU2R5azRUri8= oracle id shows current type as true? hmm
17:16
I put 0 for false when i created at contracts
Z
17:18
Zack
the oracle data looks like it is in state true. which interface did you use for making the oracle?
contracts.html ?
mx
17:18
mr x
yea
17:19
scalar oracle creation
Z
17:19
Zack
could be a bug. I think all the tests of this interface have been "true" so far.
17:20
ill look into it, and ill make an oracle report if no one else does
17:21
but maybe you want to do the report so you don't lose the money you made for the initial report
mx
17:21
mr x
oracle_bet.html?
Z
17:21
Zack
yeah
17:21
I think it is only like 0.02 veo though
mx
17:21
mr x
i put 0.02 on the amount field?
17:22
oh right
17:22
double?
Z
17:22
Zack
yes, that should work. it just needs to be a little bigger than the first report
17:22
you are reporting in a different direction this time, so it doesn't need to be double
mx
17:23
mr x
hmm?
Z
17:23
Zack
oh it is only 0.009 veo
17:23
I checked in lookup.html
mx
17:24
mr x
only double if you want bet on currently winning side??
Z
17:24
Zack
oh right, it is double, my mistake
17:24
you need to match the existing, and also meet the minimum
17:24
so 0.019 should do it
mx
17:25
mr x
alright made the tx
Z
17:26
Zack
don't forget to do the tx to get your money out of the oracle once it has resolved
mx
17:26
mr x
yup
Z
17:26
Zack
oracle_winnings.html
Z
17:45
Zack
im thinking the oracle explorer api should have 4 kinds of requests.
* get all the governance oracles.
* the most recent oracles based on when they were made, or when a report was made for them.
* the oracles with the highest amount of stake in them currently.
* look up all the oracles involved with a particular contract ID.
17:46
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
In reply to this message
Well proportional to the return minus the interest rate at least
Z
17:47
Zack
In reply to this message
the liquidity shares are a spendable currency too. you can use them as collateral for contracts.
im not sure how that impacts the interest rate cost
17:47
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Ah yes I was thinking about this
17:47
And the answer is that it doesn't
Z
17:47
Zack
ok
17:47
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Since by staking them somewhere else you are giving up the interest on them basically
17:47
Or you are staking them at a discount
17:47
Either way you only get one interest payment
17:48
Not like two simultaneous sources of interest
17:48
But yeah it is an interesting question
17:48
And I have heard people claim that it allows for greater capital efficiency
17:48
But it doesn't
17:48
Since you have to chose one source of interest at the end of the day
17:49
It allows interest rate arbitrage to occur more efficiently though afaict
17:50
But yeah I was thinking about this question and discussing it with my dad on a road trip a few weeks ago haha
Z
17:54
Zack
cool, thanks for explaining
Z
18:31
Zack
mr x and I looked more into his oracle.
It was supposed to be in state "true" all along. so the interface is right, we just interpreted it wrong.
This is because of how our scalar contracts work.
You decide the final price of the contract at the last minute, so the result can be embedded into the oracle text.
This optimization is so that we can have a big number provided by a binary oracle.

the scalar contract, it only accepts oracles of state "true". they should always be true.
You can know that this oracle is saying that aliens did not make contact with humanity because the oracle text ends with a 0.
Z
18:53
Zack
In reply to this message
looking up all the oracles related to a particular contract is a challenge.
We can't calculate this from on-chain state, because the smart contract on-chain, it is just a hash of the contract. So we can't know what oracles could possibly be related, or if it is even a contract that uses oracles.

Contracts that were created with contracts.html, they automatically give the contract bytecode and oracle text to the p2p derivatives server.

So if you have a Contract ID, you could get the oracle text from the p2p derivatives server.

So I think the way this will work is that the contract_explorer page will check if the oracle text is available from the p2p_derivatives server. and if it is, it will use that oracle text in an api request to the explorer server to find if any oracles are related.
So we can have a list of oracles related to that contract on the contract_explorer page.
fx-c.com/en/ invited fx-c.com/en/
Deleted invited Deleted Account
OK
21:18
O K
In reply to this message
Yes, "impermanent loss" is what I was describing. I forgot the term they were using for it. Maybe I did a poor job of explaining it, but I think the conclusion is correct: AMMs aren't good for pairs with divergent (?) prices. If I'm misunderstanding something, you can be sure I'm not being sarcastic and any help understanding would be most welcome.
21:21
In reply to this message
Please don't put words in my mouth, I never said I had a bad experience with them, only that I learned a lesson.
BS
23:31
Bo Smubo
How much is one veo now?
23:42
50usd now
Z
23:47
Zack
In reply to this message
yeah, about.
there is a price discussion channel in discord.
23:47
http://159.89.87.58:8080/recent_oracles.html
I made an explorer for oracles.
9 February 2021
mx
00:09
mr x
Could it show stuff like when closeable if not change and how much to bet to change direction?
Z
00:17
Zack
In reply to this message
Good ideas
A
05:03
Adrien
Looks like the SSL cert of amoveo.io expired 5 days ago
Z
05:10
Zack
In reply to this message
that website is part of exantech.
@denis_voskvitsov is our contact for exantech.
DV
05:11
Denis Voskvitsov
thanks, will ask to update
Z
05:40
Zack
https://www.reddit.com/r/zec/comments/lfmm8k/trustless_decentralized_exchange_dex_with_support/
I made a post on the Zcash reddit talking about the Amoveo DEX and how it can be used for Zcash.
Bob Ross invited Bob Ross
BR
05:48
Bob Ross
Lookin for some help...

Can’t get my transaction to hit the blockchain from amoveo desktop wallet. Trying to get it to Qtrade. Anything special I need to do?
Z
05:50
Zack
In reply to this message
If you use the light node, I can help https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/light-node-amoveo
05:50
The desktop wallet was not written by me, and it hasn't been supported in a long time
05:51
you can also access the light node from my server: http://159.89.87.58:8080/txs.html
but it is more secure to download it and open it in your browser locally
BR
05:52
Bob Ross
Okay cool I’ll give it a go! Thanks for the quick reply
06:04
anddd im stuck. ive got the light wallet main menu page pulled up but not sure where to go from here
Z
06:04
Zack
did you get to the txs.html page?
06:05
if you are on home.html, there is a link near the top that says "send VEO, receive VEO, sign txs, publish txs"
06:05
that takes you to the txs.html page
BR
06:07
Bob Ross
yeah so none of the links are working for me
06:07
it says your file couldnt be accessed, it may have been moved edited or deleted
Z
06:07
Zack
what does it say in your URL? which browser are you using?
BR
06:07
Bob Ross
chrome
Z
06:08
Zack
http://159.89.87.58:8080/txs.html this is the page you are trying to get to
BR
06:08
Bob Ross
that works, thanks man
Z
06:09
Zack
that is the version I am serving, it does work, but it is less secure than downloading and running your own light node code
BR
06:18
Bob Ross
after hitting send do i have to sign and publish. it gave me a tx id
06:18
nvm i see it pending in my wallet
Z
06:19
Zack
I see your tx in the mempool
06:19
sending 6.2
BR
06:19
Bob Ross
gracias senor
Z
06:19
Zack
de nada
EA
06:27
Eric Arsenault
@zack_amoveo curious to know what your priorities are with all these possible dex directions we've been talking about
06:27
also, I think we need a second Zack 😂
06:28
I wonder if we could find someone. Would you be open to splitting up the dev reward?
Z
06:28
Zack
im thinking of backtracking the the AMM tool and integrating it with limit orders, like we were talking about before
EA
06:28
Eric Arsenault
yeah, I think that's a good direction
Z
06:28
Zack
It can help provide liquidity to make the DEX more useful
EA
06:28
Eric Arsenault
seems like there are a couple foundational things needed before the dex can really take off
06:29
totally
06:30
In reply to this message
do you think this would accelerate things?
06:30
like if someone else worked on synthetics or something in parallel
MF
06:31
Mr Flintstone
i think there are lots of ways to improve the UX of the dex still
06:31
a lot of low hanging fruit
I
06:32
Instinct
In reply to this message
Yep might need @ZackatronTheArchangel comeback
MF
06:37
Mr Flintstone
In reply to this message
like doing everything inside wallet.html & making requests to buy veo
06:38
or maybe even buying veo and selling btc is a limit order with a contract whose oracle language transforms based on what the person accepting it puts in as their btc address
Z
06:39
Zack
In reply to this message
If someone has the capability to do stuff like this, and makes a DAC to get paid, I think they would profit.
BR
06:43
Bob Ross
i closed out the light node. does that impact the confirmations? still sitting at 0
Z
06:44
Zack
your tx was included in block 151285
BR
06:45
Bob Ross
okay thx
06:47
you were holding since May 2019
BR
06:48
Bob Ross
yeah its been a minute. everything else poppin has me thinking its time to rotate
James (Jet Protocol) Moreau invited James (Jet Protocol) Moreau
Z
06:50
Zack
https://www.reddit.com/r/zec/comments/lfmm8k/trustless_decentralized_exchange_dex_with_support/
looks like the DEX will not work for Zcash yet. They don't have viewing keys yet, but are planning to add that feature.
J
06:52
Josh
Of course it will still work with transparent addresses.
Z
06:53
Zack
In reply to this message
oh, good point. thank you.
MF
06:54
Mr Flintstone
what is "zcash sapling"
06:54
is that their test net or something?
Z
06:54
Zack
yeah, I think so
MF
06:54
Mr Flintstone
i think it actually might be mainnet?
Z
06:58
Zack
huh, it says it was already activated. im confused.
06:59
oh, I think this guy is trying to manipulate me into supporting his pet feature
MF
06:59
Mr Flintstone
lol
06:59
no i think he just misunderstood what is requried for this to work
06:59
since the address starts with 0 zcash anyways, a key to view the whole account works
Z
07:02
Zack
oh, maybe viewing keys only works for the receiver to prove their balance, not the spender to prove that they have spent?
07:02
for the Amoveo DEX it is the spender who needs to prove that they sent the ZEC
MF
07:03
Mr Flintstone
they wouldnt send it unless the recipient shared the view key
J
07:03
Josh
Sapling was a previous release, they're up to Canopy now.
07:05
In reply to this message
Yeah this could work
07:05
but would need to change the UI I think
Z
07:05
Zack
I think the view key can be put into the same field with the receiving address
07:06
it is just copying that text into the oracle question
MF
07:07
Mr Flintstone
probably xmr would work the same way?
07:07
but im not familiar with either
Z
07:09
Zack
looks like with XMR the sender has a way to prove that they sent
https://www.getmonero.org/resources/user-guides/prove-payment.html
EA
07:09
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
yeah, maybe worth just making this a bit more usable first, so we can use it more. we can probably learn a lot once miners start selling via the DEX
07:12
07:16
In reply to this message
I think we could probably get a lot of use with a few tweaks. As it currently stands, probably will be pretty low
Dai Taka invited Dai Taka
JS
09:28
Jon Snow
When will Elon tweet about veo?
Z
09:40
Zack
we can bet on that
willy Greenberg invited willy Greenberg
EA
10:27
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
Maybe it’s too early, but I’m starting to feel like if we get some traction with the DEX concept, we should just focus on this. Amoveo is pretty cool since you can do any kind of bet, and DACs, and other cool things, but it also makes things confusing if we talk about all these other cool things we can do.
10:28
I think the project would benefit from having super clear messaging and clear documentation around the dex use case (if we think that’s what we double down on)
H
10:29
H3R3TiK
In reply to this message
+1
EA
10:29
Eric Arsenault
Just from a marketing perspective, a focused goal will do wonders
mx
12:46
mr x
Automatically make offer to sell your side for 99% or something close to it at the moment of entering contract and share it so that anyone can buy it anytime so that on completion (or on winning if we talk about bets in general) you will receive your money without having to do anything. Super good for user experience imo. This was the original plan right? :P
12:48
Did this with flintstone before subcurrency update
12:48
Now anyone can buy the winning side
12:49
Also give the loser the option to sell losing side for very little right?
A
12:50
Amoveo ♥🧿
In reply to this message
yeah, this is already in the dex
mx
12:51
mr x
yeah
A
12:51
Amoveo ♥🧿
In reply to this message
but agreed on this
12:53
automatically signing a 99% swap means the person buying veo just needs to accept the trade, then wait for it to get into a block, then send the bitcoin, then they can go offline and when they get back, the veo they bought is in their wallet
OK
12:53
O K
Who controls the @amoveo handle?
A
12:54
Amoveo ♥🧿
In reply to this message
then for the person selling their veo, signing a 99% swap means they automatically get their veo back if the trade gets accepted and the bitcoin doesnt get sent
12:54
without needing to come online ever
mx
12:54
mr x
Yeah specialist watching the pool of 99% offers and snatching one when conditions are right
12:54
so cool
A
12:55
Amoveo ♥🧿
so this seems like a very important aspect of UX and easy to do, and basically everything is built except the automatic signing and broadcasting of the 99% swap when either making an offer or accepting an offer @zack_amoveo
12:56
In reply to this message
Because the browser for these 99% swaps is already built for the specialist to do this
EA
12:58
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
I assume Zack lol
mx
13:00
mr x
flintstone?
A
13:00
Amoveo ♥🧿
nah
13:00
also do you mean on tg or twitter?
OK
13:11
O K
I mean on tg lol
13:12
In reply to this message
doesn't talk like zack
13:12
lol
EA
13:40
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
@zack what do you think of these
x
13:43
x
I hope there's a DAC tab ,
EA
13:43
Eric Arsenault
for marketing materials, would be great to have some high level milestones... some ideas: 1) improve current UX (if we think its worth it), 2) combine order book and AMM.... what comes next? Synthetics?
EA
13:44
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
where
x
13:44
x
i mean add a tab in the wallet for assurance contract
13:44
that is easy to use
13:45
DAC
EA
13:45
Eric Arsenault
In reply to this message
maybe, but this is my opinion on the topic...just focus entirely on dex, and not make an interfact that tries to do everything
13:46
dex > dac
13:46
>>>
x
13:52
x
the two is not in conflict. I think DAC tab should be easy to add, because that's something that's already working.
13:52
with DAC, people can ask for money to do marketing etc, e.g. translation of amoveo to non-english markets etc.
Abdulraouf Defnany invited Abdulraouf Defnany
x
13:54
x
because when new users try the wallet , they have no idea how to use that tool yet,,
EA
14:04
Eric Arsenault
they will if the dex is easy
14:04
it's just my opinion. I think having a clear focus and messaging will pay dividends
14:05
you don't really see DACs or things like that when you go to Uniswap... you just see a trading platform
B
14:16
Ben
100 % agree with eric DEX >everything else
14:16
if we get an interface along those lines of uniswap, this will be an Killer
x
14:20
x
it's already a killer,but without correct marketing done yet
B
14:21
Ben
currently it is only an idea, an UI can form it to a Weapon
x
14:21
x
I mean the blockchain itself
B
14:21
Ben
same goes for the Blockchain, great concept but unuseable
x
14:23
x
Not really, it lacks instructions to show people how to use.... I said that before
B
14:23
Ben
thats not enough, if you want to have a brought audience that include average joe
Z
15:54
Zack
In reply to this message
The p2p derivatives tool already accepts this kind of derivative that gets activated if the trade gets matched. It should be pretty easy.
15:55
In reply to this message
Looks good.
Another option is to dm me, and i can copy suggestions to my todo list.
A
16:07
Amoveo ♥🧿
In reply to this message
yeah it doesnt currently sign and broadcast a 99% swap offer though
16:08
like if you were to create a limit order, or accept one, in both those cases the software should sign and broadcast a 99% swap offer for your shares
16:08
for the dex i mean
Z
16:09
Zack
Yeah, it makes sense.
We can probably get rid of 2 of the 4 buttons that way too.

Im thinking when you click the other 2 buttons, it should check the order book at match that way, if possible. So you dont lose that bit of arbitrage profit, and you dont need someone else to clean it up at the end for you.
A
16:09
Amoveo ♥🧿
nice
Deleted invited Deleted Account
J
17:21
Josh
Why are we taking about 99%? Are we assuming the parties don't mind paying 1% arbitration?
Z
17:23
Zack
In reply to this message
the loser should at least be able to sell for the cost of tx fees to make the oracle, plus interest rate on the money in the contract until the oracle would resolve.
Only Holds invited Only Holds
A
22:22
Amoveo ♥🧿
99% is just an estimate. probably it ends up higher
22:22
but it allows for the dex to be non interactive i think
mx
22:50
mr x
Maybe more flat feeish for paying tx fees
22:50
dunno
J
22:56
Josh
In reply to this message
That's what I thought.
10 February 2021
S
00:44
Sy
Who named himself amoveo?
EA
00:45
Eric Arsenault
mystery man
x
00:50
x
group owner
MF
00:56
Mr Flintstone
lol i thought zack un-did it
00:56
i had no idea what you guys were talking about yesterday
Z
00:56
Zack
In reply to this message
I forgot to click the save changes button the first time
J
05:41
Josh
Is there an easy way to make a DAC yet?
EA
05:41
Eric Arsenault
yeah, it's just a bet between two people
J
05:42
Josh
People here seem to be pretty interested in UI design so I think a DAC for that could work.
05:42
Why just two people?
EA
05:42
Eric Arsenault
well, if I wanted to do UI, I could place bets with many people individually
05:42
it's not pooled together afaik
J
05:43
Josh
isn't that the whole point of a dac?
EA
05:43
Eric Arsenault
it would definitely help attract talent
J
05:45
Josh
and capital
EA
05:52
Eric Arsenault
agreed
EA
06:13
Eric Arsenault
Who would be interested in doing the following with me: 1) funding our moneys together into a multisig (or something), 2) funding front-end development, 3) because there is a dev reward (or fees?) that can be earned from this, we could treat this as an investment, and we all share proportional to the capital we put in?
06:14
maybe DM me, and I can try to coordinate if there is enough interest
06:14
or just signal here!
J
06:35
Josh
Wouldn't it be cooler to do this with a DAC?
EA
06:35
Eric Arsenault
well, yeah... but then we don't get the rewards
J
06:36
Josh
As the entrepreneur you get rewarded if it succeeds
06:36
also, load up on veo and watch the price moon
EA
06:36
Eric Arsenault
I can get rewarded more if it succeeds and I own a piece of the product though
J
06:36
Josh
the product is amoveo
EA
06:37
Eric Arsenault
the product can also be the dex on top on amoveo :)
06:37
I mean, there can be a product on top
J
06:37
Josh
if you own the product, is it decentralized?
EA
06:37
Eric Arsenault
like uniswap on ethereum
06:38
In reply to this message
probably not fully
J
06:39
Josh
I think it's a design flaw if people get profits from the dex
06:39
the goverment will try to go after those people
EA
06:39
Eric Arsenault
yeah totally lol
06:39
Could we host something on IPFS or something?
J
06:40
Josh
the main problem in doing a UI project is having a management team that does a good job
06:40
it's a lot of hard work
EA
06:40
Eric Arsenault
totally
J
06:40
Josh
maybe, there are a lot of p2p systems but i think the hard part is the ui
06:41
money + good management team
06:41
if we get some money we can find a good UI studio
06:41
but we still have to manage it -- spec things out really well, make sure they're doing a good job
EA
06:41
Eric Arsenault
I would be happy to PM something like that
J
06:42
Josh
awesome, then i'm interested
06:42
do you have experience with this kind of stuff?
EA
06:43
Eric Arsenault
yeah, i've played all hats in a startup, including PMing products
J
06:43
Josh
ok let's talk
EA
06:43
Eric Arsenault
👍
Z
06:48
Zack
In reply to this message
You can make a big dac limit order and allow it to be partially matched.

But if only a little money is sold, that bet is active, even if not enough people bought for it to be worth your time to build.
Z
09:51
Zack
https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo-docs/tree/master/crosschain_dex
I made some documentation comparing the Amoveo DEX to alternatives
MF
10:01
Mr Flintstone
cool, maybe include some examples of how it works
10:01
like a link to the doc with the btc for veo trade
Z
10:02
Zack
good idea
10:09
done
x
10:14
x
In reply to this message
👍
Z
10:18
Zack
should I change much more before putting it on twitter? Is there some other DEX I should review?
Maybe Bisq?
x
10:20
x
yes bisq
10:22
I'm not sure if bisq is in the same catergory, because probably bisq has fiat trading?
Z
10:23
Zack
Amoveo can support fiat, as long as there is a place to look up if the fiat payment has occured.
10:29
ok, I wrote about Bisq
x
11:45
x
ren protocol claimed to be 100x faster than atomic swaps
MF
12:01
Mr Flintstone
so i think they take deposits in bitcoin then issue paper bitcoin on different blockchains
12:02
more so than they are actually doing spot cross chain transactions
12:06
designing a project so it holds as much hard currency crypto as possible and hand waving the security with some fancy cryptographic jargon like "shamir's secret sharing" makes me cringe
jb
12:15
john blair
Can I mine amoveo with convential low/entry level pc hardware? Are you looking for future listings?
OK
12:17
O K
In reply to this message
FPGAs are currently mining on the network, entry level PC hardware is not going to be profitable.
jb
12:17
john blair
Good to know. I've wanted to get into this project for months as I like zacks ambition but I have a lack of knowledge of where the project is going. Wanted to get my feet wet for free to help experiment
13:32
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Also wrt "If one of either Alice or Bob has more need to access their bitcoin sooner, they can end up needing to pay a premium to the other to withdraw their Bitcoin sooner." from https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo-docs/blob/master/crosschain_dex/bisq.md, is that necessarily an issue, isn't that the same as any other instance in which more than one people have agreed to a contract that involves locking up of capital?

Ofc I agree with the rest of it, and definitely think 2 of 2 is insecure without a sound WoT based reputation system
13:33
Just a minor thing but in this post https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/amoveo-docs/blob/master/crosschain_dex/atomic_swap.md another specific disadvantage of atomic swaps is that they are a special type of interactive from what I understand insofar as that it is possible that you can lose money if you are offline for a particular step in the protocol

So the consequences of being offline are more significant than simply causing the trade to fail
Deleted invited Deleted Account
Z
17:58
Zack
In reply to this message
Good point
18:08
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
In reply to this message
:)
Z
18:52
Zack
In reply to this message
the difference is that in Bisq the premium can easily be over 50% of your money, but in Amoveo DEX is it like 0.3%
Z
19:10
Zack
It is very difficult to get any information on the binance DEX.
19:14
It seems like what is happening is that you send your BTC/ETH or whatever to binance, and they give you a trusted wrapped version managed by the centralized binance team instead.
Then you trade that wrapped version on their on-chain order book.
Then you swap your wrapped tokens back for the BTC/Eth whatever with the centralized binance team.

So it is like Tether, Binance is holding all the cryptocurrency backing each of their wrapped tokens.

It seems like there is no point to creating a blockchain for this, because the security is the same as just depositing your money into the centralized Binance exchange.

Calling this a "DEX" is very misleading. I think you should not do business with a company that lies to it's customers. Imagine what else they could be lying about.
x
19:19
x
binance chains are based on cosmos i think
19:19
same for thorchain(rune)
Z
19:20
Zack
if you are trusting binance to hold your BTC during the entire exchange process, it doesn't really matter what tech is being used to secure the wrapped token.
Binance could refuse to give back the BTC that they were holding for you.
Not your keys, not your coins.
x
19:26
x
that's still how majority of world 's trading is done.. all offered by cenralized platfroms, some are regulated, so It has been working, I think I cannot say the centralized models always dont work..

There's no decentralized althernatives.

BUt i imagine will people in the future all trade with tools offered by amoveo? maybe..
Z
19:32
Zack
yeah, the centralized version is popular.
But what they are doing here is selling the same centralized tool, and calling it a DEX. They are lying to their customers, which is unethical.
x
19:36
x
That's actually not uncommon tho, etherdelta , idex etc all called themselves DEX, that's their marketing stategy.. Overall binance is trustworthy enough for traders to use, but they did try to maximize profit whenever they can.

All marketing has lie..
19:36
almost
Z
19:39
Zack
etheredelta isn't a cross chain dex. it is for swapping tokens inside of ethereum.
I don't see them lying about their capabilities or how they work anywhere.
x
19:40
x
I'm not sure how binance DEX works , i guess they should be at least non custotial that's the standard for 'DEX's these days.
Z
19:41
Zack
idex also is not a cross chain dex. it is for swapping tokens inside of eth. I also don't see them lying about their capabilities or how they work.
I
19:43
Instinct
Idex makes you kyc to use it
19:43
Since they did that, they lost all their volume
19:52
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
In reply to this message
Lmao
11 February 2021
Ri invited Ri
Z
07:19
Zack
I did a crosschain dex update. now when you accept an offer, it immediately posts a limit order to sell your shares for 99.5% of their maximum value. When you click 'you have already been paid' it checks for the existence of this limit order, and matches with it if possible. it uses flash minting to simultaniously sell the shares back to veo
07:19
This should make it easier to use.
MF
07:19
Mr Flintstone
thats great
EA
07:20
Eric Arsenault
beauty
MF
07:20
Mr Flintstone
id like to test it in a few hours if anyone wants to buy or sell some veo
Deleted invited Deleted Account
J
08:00
Josh
Bedtime for me but I'm happy to try tomorrow.
N
08:02
NM$L
In reply to this message
hi zack.
08:03
long time no see.
08:03
why price 3x recent?
08:04
In reply to this message
hi
IS
08:15
Ilmu Somebody
In reply to this message
I'll buy some
N
08:40
NM$L
how about veo migrant to bsc?
MF
08:41
Mr Flintstone
In reply to this message
for btc?
IS
08:42
Ilmu Somebody
I responded via pm
N
09:44
NM$L
In reply to this message
good job, thank you zack.
09:45
I have hold for 3 years
09:47
AmoveoPrivateKey.txt created in 2018/3/11
09:47
just checked my balance.
09:48
30 veo
A
10:04
AI 🏅
In reply to this message
+
10:04
In reply to this message
I've been keeping it since September 2020. I bought it not so long ago at the bottom yet. total 55
N
10:05
NM$L
I mined a lot
10:06
using aws 😁
A
10:08
AI 🏅
😁
Z
18:33
Zack
It seems like we really want to be able to make offers to buy veo in the crosschain DEX.
In order to do this, we need it to be possible for the person who is selling veo to provide their address on the other blockchain where they want to get paid.
We want it to be impossible for an attacker to insert their own address when someone else is trying to trade.

How can we do this? Is it possible?

Currently the smart contract system only has access to information that is in consensus state. So we can see how many shares of each contract are owned by each account.
We can see how many total shares are outstanding for each contract.
We can see if a particular swap-offer's trade ID has been incremented.

Currently we cannot see the history of txs, or headers.

A couple ways I can imagine making this work:
* hard update so that when you match a particular limit order, it stores your pubkey with that limit order's id in consensus state space. So we have a receipt of of who is on the other side of the limit order, and only they can have permission to give certain data to the contract. This update would require a new merkle tree, so it would be a bigger update, but it would allow for smaller contract_evidence txs.

* hard update so that the smart contract has access to historical block hashes. We can verify a merkle proof of a historical tx, and use that as evidence for who matched the limit order with that trade ID. This update would require less on-chain changes, and it would be more flexible in that we could prove anything about any historical tx. But the contract_evidence txs would be longer, it would be more expensive to match an offer to sell your VEO in the crosschain DEX.
J
18:41
Josh
What does the address-insertion attack look like?
Z
18:45
Zack
In reply to this message
an insecure way to do this would be to have the smart contract allow anyone to insert their address, as long as they own a non-zero amount of type 2 in the smart contract.
Lets say Bob put up the original offer to sell VEO, and Alice is trying to match that offer and sell her BTC.
In that case an attacker could see that Alice is trying to match the limit order, and they could insert their own tx ahead of that tx in the blockchain.
They could do a contract_use_tx to buy a small amount of both type 1 and type 2 in the smart contract, then do a contract_evidence_tx to insert their own address into the smart contract.
Now Bob has an obligation to send his bitcoin to the attacker in order to receive Alice's veo.
18:46
If we require the address-writer to own a sufficiently large amount of type 2, that doesn't work either. The attacker can buy both sides of the contract, and it is the same as holding Veo. They can have as much type 2 as they need.
Z
19:06
Zack
I think we should go with the limit order receipt plan, because it offers smaller tx sizes.

I can also imagine it being useful for other situations.
Imagine I set up a limit order offering to play tic-tac-toe on-chain. The smart contract would need to know the account that matched my offer to know who has permission to update the tic tac toe contract with where they want to play next.

or imagine there are several things I am willing to bet on, like a bunch of football games happening today. but I only want to bet on one of them.
The person who matches my bet, they need to decide which of the football games we will be betting on, and they need to decide before the football games start playing.
19:07
I think we don't need to make a new tx type for this.
We can use the first bit of the Salt to decide if we want to record a receipt or not.
19:08
but maybe I should make a new tx type anyway, to make it more clear what is going on and avoid clever hacks.
Z
20:13
Zack
Another example is if I want to make an offer to form a certain kind of channel.
I would want that whoever accepts the other side of my channel to have different permissions from everyone else in the system.
mx
20:27
mr x
No generic p2p derivative tool currently exist?
Z
20:28
Zack
in contracts.html you can teach the server a contract, and it gives you the contract id.
You can use that contract id to make a swap offer.
You can send the swap offer to someone else, and they can accept in contracts.html
or you can post the swap offer to the server and anyone can accept.
20:29
it is very generic, but that amount of power means the interface can be a little intimidating
mx
20:42
mr x
This works even if contract not on chain?
Z
20:43
Zack
Yes.
A hash of the contract goes on-chain only once they accept your offer.
20:44
The contract text itself only goes on chain when you run the code to enforce the result.
This keeps it compatible with the merklized abstract syntax tree strategy.
We only post on-chain parts of the contract that actually get executed.
20:45
In practice one of you are incentivized to sell your shares to the other, so you can withdraw your winnings without ever putting the contract bytecode on-chain.
mx
20:51
mr x
Or winner or both sell their shares to specialist
Z
21:38
Zack
In reply to this message
Yes, and in that case the specialist doesnt need to know what you are betting on. Because both sides cancel out.
J
22:54
Josh
In reply to this message
If we assume one side is always online, the online party (Bob) can offer Alice a price, and if she agrees, Bob can send her an offer to sell veo with Bob's btc address already in the contract.
Akki invited Akki
Z
23:41
Zack
In reply to this message
And if alice doesnt sign?
What if 5 alices dont sign?
And then they all sign at once?
23:41
As long as your balance isnt too big, you are limited in how many of them are able to accept
12 February 2021
MF
00:07
Mr Flintstone
anyone want to try to buy some veo for btc? ill sell 5

want to test out the new settlement features of the dex
00:12
i put out an offer if someone wants to accept it, 5 veo for 0.01 btc
00:12
one point zack is that there is a space after the address so if you double click and copy itll be like "1FfGKsKSvbkFEMdeqgFED2NrtgLp2M4crw " instead of "1FfGKsKSvbkFEMdeqgFED2NrtgLp2M4crw"
00:13
which could have bad outcomes
B
00:22
Ben
where do i see your offer?
MF
00:23
Mr Flintstone
hit the crosschain DEX button -> hit "refresh available action"
00:24
i think zack was working on a way to get the offers to automatically show up once you navigate to the crosschain DEX tab
B
00:27
Ben
ah ok, i thought you want to sell BTC
00:27
nevermind
MF
00:27
Mr Flintstone
ok
B
00:27
Ben
but looks a lot better already
J
01:39
Josh
I accepted it
MF
01:42
Mr Flintstone
ok
Deleted invited Deleted Account
EA
08:46
Eric Arsenault
someone should try a fiat <> VEO swap :P
08:46
I don't have access to venmo in my country
Z
08:50
Zack
how about bankers checks?
08:50
do they work?
08:50
cashiers check*
08:52
oh, i guess they take a week to certify. no good.
Z
10:20
Zack
I rewrote the thorchain review.
My first review was inaccurate.
Tae Page invited Tae Page
B
14:18
Ben
how would that work with fiat? looks like venmo is available in my country
Z
14:52
Zack
In reply to this message
Venmo has a history page for each person, and you can read each others history
B
15:25
Ben
is there a way to reverse Payments wit venmo like with paypal?
B
17:30
Ben
venmo is part of paypal and only for US citizen
I
19:31
Instinct
In reply to this message
Kadenaswap is another one I think - https://github.com/kadena-io/kadenaswap
Z
19:36
Zack
In reply to this message
looks like they didn't build it yet, and they don't have a plan on how they will build it.
There is nothing here for me to review.
I
19:37
Instinct
In reply to this message
Z
19:38
Zack
In reply to this message
this looks like an AMM tool, like uniswap. Not a crosschain DEX.
IS
20:37
Ilmu Somebody
In reply to this message
Haha I love it. Learned so much economics here! You set it up like a friction problem in physics, actually, it'd be cool to have a method to make pictures like that for this.
B
22:08
Ben
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJmanKFp_Uo <- nice video about cross chain exchange with kadena
13 February 2021
07:47
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Hey @zack_amoveo would the problems be with a design whereby any token can be used (within reason, i.e it must be liquid etc) for the reporting process by oracles as the stake/collateral, meaning that it would become exceedingly difficult to acquire a majority of all potential tokens that could be used resulting in there not being a need for a forking mechanism since the problem it is supposed to solve is no longer practically relevant?
07:52
Wouldn't such a design successfully remove the opportunity cost of theft for reporters by making it prohibitively difficult for them to achieve a position where they have a monopoly on reporting by owning a majority of tokens?
Z
07:52
Zack
In reply to this message
That doesnt solve it.
You dont need a majority, you just need more than everyone elsr would stake against you.
07:53
People would be afraid to stake honestly, thinking the honest side could lose
07:57
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Interesting so the opportunity cost of theft results from the possibility of attackers credibly threatening the nash equilibrium (I may be using this term incorrectly here :) of honest reporting?
08:00
And it is possible to credibly threaten a shift from the honest reporting equilibrium without actually owning the majority of tokens?
08:00
Even if you only own an extremely small % of all possible reporting capital?
Z
08:08
Zack
In reply to this message
yes
08:08
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Hmm interesting
08:09
I suppose it is just a matter of precedent
08:09
If the attacker comes late once a strong precedent has been established of honest reporting
Z
08:10
Zack
a powerful attacker can make a credible commitment to buying as much as it takes
08:10
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Hmm
08:10
Interesting
08:16
Thanks for this explanation 👍
🅐🅝🅣 invited 🅐🅝🅣
?
11:13
🅐🅝🅣
In reply to this message
I respect your opinion. However, it is necessary to get more liquidity by getting attention from many traders by listing on the exchange.
Just...my opinion.
11:15
In reply to this message
Hi sir, I am from BankCEX. We can discuss listing.
x
11:46
x
that would be great!
11:48
In reply to this message
indeed there was lack of marketing for this project, that's definitelry true,
JS
12:00
Jon Snow
In reply to this message
You must be new here
?
12:01
🅐🅝🅣
In reply to this message
Correctly..👌
12:01
In reply to this message
Yes, I am new...😊
16:38
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
@zack_amoveo do you think it is justified that augur considers parasitic oracles a threat, considering that they have a forking mechanism and so therefore augur reporters do not have their no-attack opp cost increased by parasitic oracles?
16:40
In their white paper they seem to put a lot of focus on the problem of parasitic oracles which is surprising to me
R
17:08
Ri
@zack_amoveo If I understand the most recent developments correctly sounds like they not only make crosschain swaps possible, but also could potentially enable privacy improvements to public blockchains. could you use
this technology to build something like a transaction mixer, but better? like a Tornado Cash on Ethereum, but functional for any public chain? If so I honestly think that could be a killer feature that you should consider working on.
Z
17:19
Zack
In reply to this message
Yes i consider it a problem for them.
If the amount of money bet in augur is bigger than the value of all the rep, it can be profitably attacked.
17:32
In reply to this message
The current version is not providing privacy.

The swap doesnt necessarily create any connection between the tx on amoveo and the tx on the other chain, because usually the oracle text never gets posted on-chain.
The only person who needs to know you swapped is the person you swapped with.

But, how do you find that person to swap with without advertising your offer?

For now it is not optimized for privacy. The offers are published publicly.
18:48
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
In reply to this message
Interesting, would this also apply to amoveo? Insofar as that if there was a parasitic oracle relying on the outcome of amoveo markets, it could incentivise amoveo reporters to attack if the parasitic oracle isn't forkable and uses external tokens (such as eth)?
20:03
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
I suppose the issue here is that the forking mechanism of amoveo or augur may not successfully prevent the attacking reporters from defrauding the parasitic markets
20:04
So even though amoveo/augur may fork and the fork in which the attackers won becomes worthless, the parasitic oracle platform may still report the false outcome...?
20:11
Does this mean that parasitic oracles would actually be more expensive to use than their native counter part if they are parasitic off a platform such as amoveo/augur due to them using a token that doesn't fork when amoveo/augur forks and so therefore requiring manual intervention from a separate oracle to resolve the truth in the event of an amoveo/augur fork?
20:15
I suppose whether parasitic oracles using amoveo reporters incentivises amoveo/augur reporters to carry out an attack depends on how the parasitic oracle decides to handle the outcome of a fork on amoveo/augur
20:16
If it, in such cases, decided to entrust the truth to a completely different oracle then it would not be incentivising amoveo/augur oracles to report incorrectly
20:16
But it would be pushing back the problem ofc to the question of the trustworthyness of whatever oracle it is using in the event of an amoveo/augur fork
20:24
It doesn't seem however that there would be any realistic scenario where a parasitic oracle would be designed to passively accept the winning fork to be the one that is of the outcome that initially won even if it was due to reporter malice
20:25
Although if such a situation did occur, then it may act as an incentive for reporters to report incorrectly right?
20:25
Sorry about the volume of messages 😅
Z
22:07
Zack
In reply to this message
Copying amoveo isnt a parasite, because we dont charge fees. Copying amoveo doesnt harm amoveo at all.

When amoveo forks, the more valuable side has more proof of work. So if you had a amoveo light node embedded in ethereum for example, that light node would follow the higher hashpower fork of amoveo, which is the honest side.
14 February 2021
IS
00:10
Ilmu Somebody
might is right
Frank FT invited Frank FT
mx
01:03
mr x
only care about truth to the extent it increases hash rate
J
06:11
Josh
@zack_amoveo Does the offline signing in the light wallet work?
Z
06:16
Zack
In reply to this message
yes
MC
06:43
Mr Crypto
In reply to this message
🤣🤣🤣
G
17:37
Gregory
Mb one should create bsc version of veo? Raise some money and hire frontend dev
15 February 2021
J
00:36
Josh
If anybody is interested in selling VEO on the DEX for 0.0023 BTC, pm me
JS
01:55
Jon Snow
Is REP pumping because of VEO pumping? 😂
Z
02:00
Zack
I think it is a bull market all around
TG
02:46
Toby Ganger
“veo pumping”…🤣
I
02:57
Instinct
In reply to this message
Almost 5x in 2 weeks yeah
TG
02:58
Toby Ganger
at almost zero volume…it’s meaningless until we see some actual volume…and yay! we’re up 5x…now i’m only down 80%!
JS
03:19
Jon Snow
In reply to this message
You should buy more now to dilute your cost and make the price higher!
TG
03:21
Toby Ganger
In reply to this message
can’t buy more crypto when all your money is in crypto!
JS
03:21
Jon Snow
In reply to this message
You can buy more VEO by selling other crypto
TG
03:22
Toby Ganger
i’m aware of how a market works
03:23
i’m quite comfortable with my VEO position…definitely not going to add more to it now
Z
03:25
Zack
In reply to this message
You loaded up on veo at $900?

That only happened for a few hours on one day like 2 years ago, right?
I think i never saw the price above $250 or so personally.
TG
03:27
Toby Ganger
In reply to this message
I’m calculating in Bitcoin price…
03:28
i’m down 77% in satoshi price
03:28
I don’t really remember USD price at the time
03:29
was like 3 years ago…mostly OTC before it hit qtrade
Z
03:29
Zack
In reply to this message
oh right. bitcoin is way up
TG
03:31
Toby Ganger
In reply to this message
definitely…but VEO’s primary markets are trading against BTC…so given that’s what most folks are using to buy VEO…the relevant metric is whether they gained or lost BTC…
03:32
Although I’m still down in USD also
03:33
maybe soon that will change? now that VEO is an unstoppable whirlwind force 😉
JS
05:00
Jon Snow
In reply to this message
Another 2x of VEO price will do the trick to bring you back to breakeven. Should be quick
TG
06:12
Toby Ganger
In reply to this message
I’m not sure what form of math that is…if VEO doubled in price with BTC staying constant…I would still be down 55% in satoshi price
06:12
it would take another 5x increase against BTC to break even
JS
07:12
Jon Snow
In reply to this message
Haha, typo, I meant anothe two of 2x. Double twice
TG
07:49
Toby Ganger
In reply to this message
That would get me close to break even
TG
08:43
Toby Ganger
the good news is that if we ever get a usable (for laymans) interface and a reasonable level of marketing….it could still do 100x from here…but who knows
JS
08:52
Jon Snow
In reply to this message
The goal is to get to 1VEO=1BTC
TG
08:53
Toby Ganger
In reply to this message
Only have about 500x to go.
EA
09:03
Eric Arsenault
Doable
JS
09:09
Jon Snow
In reply to this message
It will bring the market cap of Amoveo to roughly half of Uniswap
09:09
Dream big
TG
09:10
Toby Ganger
If I didn’t think it was possible I would have sold long ago. But there are a lot of hurdles to hurdle
BS
21:17
Bo Smubo
I only have 20veo
x
21:19
x
there was long enough time for people to get cheap veo, but why people didn't do it ? . btc was once also below 1 USD for a long time , once below 10000USD for a long time
cryptohito.eth invited cryptohito.eth