ROUND 2: B&C Advertising on Reddit - Threads Now LIVE!

[Sentinelrv]

2.5 hours.

I’d feel better if some people posted letting me know that they’ll join in.

[masterOfDisaster]

Thank you for your initiative!
I will likely not be available at the beginning of the advertisement, but I think I can join later.

Here my quick feedback for the prepared post

Jordan Lee announced that development will begin shortly after Nu v2.0 is finished and released, which should be shortly.

I feel “shortly” is overused.

BlockShares holders can set the transaction fee cost (in BlockCredits) of using B&C Exchange, the number of multi-sig signers required to successfully conduct a trade (such as 7 out of 11 or 8 out of 15), and much more.

Motions can do a lot, but my understanding regarding the numbers “n” and “m” of the used n-of-m-multisignature transactions is that the customer can select the level of security based on the need for security (=amount of traded coins).
The rest looks very well written!

[Sentinelrv]

Thanks for catching that. I’ll fix it in a sec. As for the second part, I’ve copied that from the first post of the main thread, so I assume it’s correct.

Edit: 2 hours now.

[Sentinelrv]

Less than 45 minutes.

[BCExchange]

Total funds committed have reached $147,643 including seed funds. We are now 73% of the way to our goal of $200,000.

Thank you for creating the thread!

[tomjoad]

I’ll make a post as soon as the thread is live too.

[Sentinelrv]

Thanks, I’ve updated the totals.

[masterOfDisaster]

Is the type of actually used multisig (e.g. 2-of-3, 4-of-9,6-of-11,8-of-15) really determined by motions?
You are right. The second part is in the initial post of the B&C Exchange thread.
I’m just curious about the meaning.
I can imagine that motions define what portfolio of different choices is offered by the exchange.
But I understand it like the cost increases by using more signatures; the choice is up to the user.

• more signatures increase the size of a tx (providing more security)
• tx generate costs (to be paid in BlockCredits)
• the more signatures you want, the more you have to pay

Just in case there’s discussion about that topic it would be good to know the meaning.
Maybe I understand it wrongly.q

[Sentinelrv]

Threads now LIVE!

• r/cryptocurrency

• r/bitcoin

• r/peercoin

[Sentinelrv]

Thanks everyone for all the comments so far. let’s keep it up! For once I’d love to see the Bitcoin community embrace this. I imagine the association with NuBits and proof-of-stake prevents them from doing so though.

[Nagalim]

don’t worry about r/bitcoin. They’re not going to upvote a post they know came from someone in the community because they think it means shill. The funniest part about that is that Nu is decentralized, so by their definition it’s basically impossible to talk genuinely about Nubits without being a shill. Anyway, we got a good thing going in r/cryptocurrency, thank you for waiting to post there until we actually had some news.

[JordanLee]

Is the type of actually used multisig (e.g. 2-of-3, 4-of-9,6-of-11,8-of-15) really determined by motions?

It won’t be determined by motion, but by voting similar to how NuShare holders vote for park rates. No vote at all will be interpreted as a vote for the current setting.

[masterOfDisaster]

Ah, so there will at each time only one type of multisignature transactions be available (except for the tx that have already been placed before an adjustment of the type)?
It is not up to the user to define how much security he feels necessary for a particular transaction?
If the current voting is for 6-of-11 a user can chose 6-of-11 or nothing?

[thExit]

Great news, will try to support you on Reddit. Good luck!

[JordanLee]

It is not up to the user to define how much security he feels necessary for a particular transaction?

Letting the user choose is a security vulnerability. Playing the role of a hacker, I want the other party’s funds transferred but not my own. One way to do that is to try things like using 15 of 15 signers in hopes that enough signatures can’t be had (there are other protocol rules that prevent this) or using 1 of 15 and try and corrupt your signer into not signing.

[masterOfDisaster]

I understand.
But that’s not what I was trying to say.
Maybe I chose the wrong words. Let me try again.
I didn’t think of a user’s choice of multisig type (e.g. 1-of-15) of all the types that can be thought of and that are technically possible.
I rather thought that a user may choose from types that are offered, because they have been elected (through voting by BKS holders) to be available (e.g. 2-of-3, 4-of-9,6-of-11,8-of-15).
And from those available types a user may choose the one which suits the needs: 2-of-3 for small amounts to be transacted, 8-of-15 for big amounts.

[cryptog]

bitcointalk down again.

[Cybnate]

bitcointalk down again.

Back up again for me

[cryptog]

yep here too.

[cryptog]

down again.