I am late but I wanted to make sure that even with the passage of this motion, we would still have some time margin to increase the number of lpcs.
The end of operations of KTm and Jamie will be a gradual process.
So their buy liquidity support will fade away gradually.
In the worst case in which Nu has not increased the buy liquidity via private custodians, we would still have some liquidity present in some of the reserves held by JL at Tier4.
Voted.
This has passed. I will have more to say about steps that need to be taken for a smooth transition in liquidity operations over the next several months. In three months time we will be certain there will be no more exchange defaults on shareholder deposits, because there won’t be any.
For now I would encourage shareholders to quickly transition away from using Jamie and KTm’s services. We can do that even faster than the motion stipulates if there are enough LPC proposals and shareholders pass them. It could take as little as two weeks if people stepped up quickly to provide alternatives. Such an outcome is worth a lot. I would be especially pleased to see liquidity pools form and LPC proposals that make use of off exchange funds in tier 3, even though that means movements between tier 3 and tier 2 would be handled manually for now. It is worth the trouble to protect from exchange defaults, as we have learned. As I have said elsewhere, it may make sense to have 5% in tier 1, 5% in tier 2 and 90% in tier 3 to provide excellent protection from exchange default.
I think this is must.
Otherwise it is gonna be difficult to find new LPCs I believe.
The new LPCs new to protect themselves. Hedging by purchasing derivatives is probably too complicated for the average LPC.
Spreading the liquidity over Tiers1-2-3 is much simpler
It has been 7 days since the passage of this motion. It would be appropriate for @KTm and @jmiller to give a report on their implementation of the above terms.
To accomplish burning at the present time raw transactions must be used. Information in how to contruct them is available. Nu specific documentation also outlines how to use raw transactions for multi sig addresses, which may be helpful. If you have questions about how to proceed, please as @sigmike, @erasmospunk or myself for assistance. I would advise burning a NuBit or two as a test before attempting to burn the entire amount. Please let everyone know what address(es) you will burn from in advance.
Sorry about the delay. I’m working on this today. @JordanLee I sent you a BM with a couple of questions about this process.
Jamie
A test burn of 5 NBT was sent to address BGzfoZHwjKXgbX7R5oPdG12QgFZV6tjpcB. By examining the txid, you can see that 4.99 NBT was burned as fee.
Funds that are still locked up on Bter will not be factored into this first 25% burn, as they are currently out of my control. Below is a breakdown of the funds that are currently under control:
Allcoin
BTC: 20.0033 (5822.1605 NBT)
NBT: 6896.3579
Bitspark
BTC: 10.8693 (3163.6184 NBT)
NBT: 2175.8859
Poloniex
BTC: 87.5209 (25473.8331 NBT)
NBT: 25447.9761
Off Exchange
BTC: 32.0023 (9314.5894 NBT)
NBT: 150503.9
The exchange rate used is $291.06, which came from Bitcoinaverage.com on March 9, 2015 21:04 UTC.
Total funds in NBT:
228798.3213
25% = 57199.5803
If someone could please look at this breakdown and verify that there are no obvious errors in calculation, I will proceed with the burn of 57199.5803 NBT to this address: BMdEGVo9oSmsFHDKiL39CYhaSD3AmCv4s4
Jamie
Edit 3/9/15 21:22 UTC: I found an error in the amounts reported for Bitspark, so I recalculated everything using the current BTC exchange rate.
Bump.
Note that an error was found in the numbers posted above which has been corrected and updated to reflect the current BTC exchange rate.
This is quite a lot of NBT to burn. I would appreciate a nod of approval from at least one shareholder before I proceed.
I’ve just run the numbers and they come out agreeing with your calculations. I’ve also verified that the transaction you mentioned has a 4.99NBT tx fee.
As far as I’m concerned, the burn can go ahead
Double checked your math and all my figures match.
Sorry for the delay, I can confirm these numbers. If you don’t truncate the exchanged BTC values after the 4th position you get 0.0001 NBT more in the final balance
Mind to share how exactly you are burning? Are you using ‘nud’ and if so, what exactly do you use as command?
Thank all of you for your help. The burn is complete. You may examine the transaction here: 6390f9015efc66adf423a80eb81ea43d13a1d4d0e52e11f020985f998bbb5353
@creon I will answer your question in a moment. I just wanted to get this posted first.
It would appear it’s in the transaction fee?..
You can do this with nud, but I simply used a debug console from the gui.
The standard command for constructing a raw transaction is:
createrawtransaction ‘[{“txid”: “ID_OF_THE_TRANSACTION”, “vout”: OUTPUT_N}]’ ‘{“RECIPIENT_ADDRESS”: AMOUNT_TO_SEND, “CHANGE_ADDRESS”: CHANGE_AMOUNT}’
By dropping the last part (, “CHANGE_ADDRESS”: CHANGE_AMOUNT) any change will be put towards fee, or “burned” as we are calling it here. So, here are the steps I used:
-
Send a normal transaction of 57199.58 NBT to a temporary holding address and take note of the txid. In this case, it was: 44da74b59b4e522784380bb022304cf44972f721146234e96d75240d9edb3455
-
Construct the raw transaction using the txid from your temporary holding transaction to the desired burn address and do not provide a change address:
createrawtransaction ‘[{“txid”: “44da74b59b4e522784380bb022304cf44972f721146234e96d75240d9edb3455”, “vout”: 1}]’ ‘{“BMdEGVo9oSmsFHDKiL39CYhaSD3AmCv4s4”: 0.01}’
- Use the transaction hex that the above command returned to check and make sure you’ve entered everything correctly:
decoderawtransaction 01000000ac22fe54015534db9e0d24756de934621421f77249f44c3022b00b388427524e9bb574da440100000000ffffffff0164000000000000001976a914bc65851004a5b595762bd16ce51194ad7c663a3388ac0000000042
output:
{
“txid” : “106a1da853f6e578e2b2fec76d5cc8b707d8f4aee1d580419eb6a7aa66023eb5”,
“version” : 1,
“time” : 1425941164,
“locktime” : 0,
“unit” : “B”,
“vin” : [
{
“txid” : “44da74b59b4e522784380bb022304cf44972f721146234e96d75240d9edb3455”,
“vout” : 1,
“scriptSig” : {
“asm” : “”,
“hex” : “”
},
“sequence” : 4294967295
}
],
“vout” : [
{
“value” : 0.01,
“n” : 0,
“scriptPubKey” : {
“asm” : “OP_DUP OP_HASH160 bc65851004a5b595762bd16ce51194ad7c663a33 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG”,
“hex” : “76a914bc65851004a5b595762bd16ce51194ad7c663a3388ac”,
“type” : “pubkeyhash”,
“reqSigs” : 1,
“addresses” : [
“BMdEGVo9oSmsFHDKiL39CYhaSD3AmCv4s4”
]
}
}
]
}
- Sign the transaction using the same transaction hex. This will output a new transaction hex:
signrawtransaction 01000000ac22fe54015534db9e0d24756de934621421f77249f44c3022b00b388427524e9bb574da440100000000ffffffff0164000000000000001976a914bc65851004a5b595762bd16ce51194ad7c663a3388ac0000000042
output:
{
“hex” : “01000000ac22fe54015534db9e0d24756de934621421f77249f44c3022b00b388427524e9bb574da44010000006b483045022030378722de92cd279cdb3fe7eb62e867b48a40e30b3034db0beeea9215a6142b022100861dee5807ac0d0557f74770c8afe3c34dac882567ebd65205d1c876b9a8423501210362721967f873d43bc320d4fc5b90cf8156bdf18a4e48d7ded8fcdaa4b7c19d97ffffffff0164000000000000001976a914bc65851004a5b595762bd16ce51194ad7c663a3388ac0000000042”,
“complete” : true
}
- Now send the transaction using the signed transaction hex. This will send the transaction and output your final txid:
sendrawtransaction 01000000ac22fe54015534db9e0d24756de934621421f77249f44c3022b00b388427524e9bb574da44010000006b483045022030378722de92cd279cdb3fe7eb62e867b48a40e30b3034db0beeea9215a6142b022100861dee5807ac0d0557f74770c8afe3c34dac882567ebd65205d1c876b9a8423501210362721967f873d43bc320d4fc5b90cf8156bdf18a4e48d7ded8fcdaa4b7c19d97ffffffff0164000000000000001976a914bc65851004a5b595762bd16ce51194ad7c663a3388ac0000000042
output:
6390f9015efc66adf423a80eb81ea43d13a1d4d0e52e11f020985f998bbb5353
Nice bonfire. We should have had a ceremony and a count down for this. Be it known that Nu not only prints nubits. It systematically burns nubits as needed, too. Gone are the days when Nubits creation was a oneway street. My confidence in Nu just goes up by a notch. We should announce it in the news far and wide and record it in the journal @tomjoad
Posted to Twitter & Facebook: https://twitter.com/OfficialNuBits/status/575105027171315712
Posted to Reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/NuBits/comments/2yie7a/a_nubits_custodian_has_completed_a_historic/
Reddit text:
Link: [Passed] Motion to end LPC operations of KTm, Jamie and NSR sales of Jordan
Proof of burned NBT: http://blockexplorer.nu/transactions/6390f9015efc66adf423a80eb81ea43d13a1d4d0e52e11f020985f998bbb5353
What does this mean, and why is it a big deal?
…
It’s important because this is the first time that a Nu custodian has used the burn mechanism for NuBits. It definitively proves that the network is capable of removing NBT from circulation when demand
necessitates it. Any “ponzi” label attributed to us by our competitors should now be retired forever.
Soon, the Nu network will have the ability to grant NuShares to custodians who promise to burn a certain number of NuBits. In this way, modest NBT demand declines can be directly protected by the market valuation of NuShares. This NSR-for-NBT burn mechanism will be a complement to the existing parking rates mechanism.
…
An additional supply-reduction mechanism - variable transaction fees - is scheduled for a future release too.
There should be no question at this point that NuBits is the world’s first truly flexible decentralized digital currency. In contrast to Bitcoin, which relies on preset protocol values to determine supply, NuBits combines the power of blockchain technology with the wisdom of human judgment.
The future of Nu is bright!
Text was slightly modified for /r/cryptocurrency
Excellent.
Excellent indeed -
How does exactly Burning work?
Shareholders:
My regular work is very busy this time of year and has me on the road frequently. I have just returned and wanted to provide my status on the steps required by this motion.
I have successfully “burned” as fees 25% of the NBT remaining from my grant, totaling 255,759.654 NBT (of 1,023,038.654 NBT).
Proof of this burn exists in the Nu blockchain and can be verified by reviewing the transaction ID: e4e4e0127f58df1c7f0e5a2e7e6ebac71453d4beb64e906a25d4ab2c7c5e6329
For more information please review the post that details the breakdown of the status of my grant funds.
The only change in my holdings between the day that post was written and today affects the “exchangeHeld” funds. The first settlement with CCEDK for a portion of the 87,200 NBT that was owed to me on behalf of the Shareholders occurred after that post had been written.
Accordingly, it is my plan to burn as fees 25% of the NSR that had been received in the settlement–totaling 2,746,787 NSR of the 10,987150 NSR–later tonight after I have confirmed that the burn process works the same for NSR as it does for NBT. I expect it does but will test with a small amount first to be sure.
I did not recognize this request the first time I read your post and apologize to the Shareholders for not submitting these addresses in advance.
Addresses that the burned funds were sent from:
- BSyDq6yQ3vt2URGcBhJRmAdsNuQ5pXkAsx
- BFYzuakJCgyU7vsQY485ipC4aFtKVamF2m
- BQ5MRjZ2q6pGFD4pmiUkWzKvrGEHQ5Recw
Thank you.
//KTm
Does the burning shown in money supply report in the wallet? I don’t see 0.25 million down step in coinmarket 7-day chart
It needs to be reported to Coinmarketcap.