Bypassing FLOT for NuOwned operations

[masterOfDisaster]

Continuing the discussion from FLOT BTC Operations (buy side):

Because a discussion about that topic is hardly possible in one that deals with much more activity, I decided to spawn a new topic.
It would be great to continue the discussion here.

This sums up my position:

FLOT BTC Operations (buy side)

Both @Cybnate and you are only allowed to trade with FLOT as far as I’m aware of your contracts (unless you consider the balancing with @Cybnate a T3 activity, which would give you green light for that ).As both operations are NuOwned, I wouldn’t care if you did that to speed up the balancing.

Making FLOT the middleman of that activity neither increases the security of the tx nor anything else.I say go for it.

@cryptog, @Dhume, @dysconnect, @jooize, @mhps, @ttutdxh, @woodstockmerkle, what do you say?

[Nagalim]

My concept of this would be to have NuOwned operations be required to produce a report. The report should separate internal Nu txns from third party trades, where third party trades will always have a price and internal Nu txns should not. Once we’re good with that, allowing NuOwned operations to make internal Nu txns at will really isn’t very contentious at all to me.

[masterOfDisaster]

A report is good and the way to go.
For now I think that because both you and @Cybnate are involved in such a deal, misbehaviour can be detected unless both of you go rogue.

[Nagalim]

Right, but if we both go rogue then the funds are sacrificed anyway. NuOwned operations already have the concept of trust. The issue here is the question of what the limit of trust is and what the collateral and so on is. Examples are hard to come by, but pretend I send a bunch of BTC to NuSafe, making it worth more than the collateral, and the operator takes it and runs? Essentially, the limitation is that before the txn both players combined had no more trust than what they were given externally. They then transfer this trust. An attacker would move trust form a trusted operation to a less trusted operation then ask for a reup on their operation. So ideally there would be some concept of how to prevent that abuse. But in the end, the trusted player is being trusted not to trust an untrusted player. Anyway, I’ll think about it some. There should probably some limitations rather than just “you can withdraw and deposit amongst NuOwned operations freely”. There should be guidelines, like “attempt to remove middlemen and keep the fees paid on foreign blockchains to a minimum”.

[jooize]

Making FLOT the middleman of that activity neither increases the security of the tx nor anything else.

Is that accurate?

Person A carries funds X.
Person B carries funds Y.
These people want to switch funds X and Y.
One person will be in control of more than they should because one of them has to send first.

I think it can be fine to let such direct exchanges take place with approval from FLOT, but limited to some amount for risk management.

@Nagalim: Is such a report sort of an annotated transaction log? Or is that report due before transactions are made?

[masterOfDisaster]

One person will be in control of more than they should because one of them has to send first.

You are right, but do we have a “trust limit” for the operations of @Cybnate and @Nagalim?
I don’t know one…

[Nagalim]

Yes, annotated after the fact. Just a transparency thing.

T3 definitely has a trust limit, but it also has a window of time in addition to a magnitude, so i can hold large amounts of funds for a short period of time just fine.

[masterOfDisaster]

has a window of time in addition to a magnitude

Right! You are not prohibited from holding funds in excess of x, just not for an extended period of time above y (too lazy to check up the numbers).

[jooize]

How much funds is it about this time? We have no set limits for amounts trusted to these individuals and let FLOT decide, right? Can a percentage of the sum they usually handle be used?

I trust Cybnate and Nagalim, but this is of course about the long-term as well.

[Nagalim]

Basically, I am advocating some guidelines about when to and when not to, but in the end I’ll be saying something like this:

“Any NuOwned operation may freely withdraw funds to another NuOwned operation, provided that operation is active. ‘Active’ operations are those that are in control of greater than 1000 NBT of funds and have an operator who has been in communication with shareholders in the last week. Received funds from any NuOwned operation are to be treated just like funds received from FLOT and T4. Efforts should be taken to avoid extraneous transactions and to keep fees on foreign blockchains to a minimum.”

I still want to talk about accountability though. I’m worried about something like black-listed BTC being hot-potato’d around to different operations, but maybe I’m just overthinking it. The thing is, it’s hard to come up with ways in which someone could act maliciously by giving someone else funds. The worst I can come up with is if Nu has a faulty operation and I start taking advantage of it, I can dump all my NuOwned funds into that operation to take more advantage. But that’s such a farfetched situation for a whole lot of reasons.