Mint-Gox

thelonecrouton

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Apr 15, 2014
1,135
813
283
It's going to be hard making p2p trading as fast as centralised trading, dealing with multiple nodes is going to be slower than dealing with a single entity, but you could at least bring consistency by having a set tickrate, a temporal resolution if you like. If that could be brought down to a reliable sub 20 seconds I think that would be adequate.

Traders need to decide which system they prefer - guaranteed bot rape* and possible coin theft via a centralised exchange, or waiting a few extra seconds in a trustless p2p system. I would think everyone but the botmasters would prefer the latter?


*It's a free market etc. but I would be strongly in favour of making any decentralised exchange architecturally as hard as possible to operate bots in. HFT doesn't 'improve liquidity,' that's just the bullshit they feed people as if they are doing the economy a favour, it just makes the players with the most resources richer, faster, at the expense of the rest of us. Just having a tickrate would knock bots down a couple of notches. And no machine-useable trading API. No API at all maybe, just the client.

Enough rambling, I need to update my Masternodes to v15! :)
 

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,863
1,854
1,283
There is this thread which points to several projects that have been started in this vain. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155603.0 If we can start where others have left off, we wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel, however, we would also inherit their baggage. One would have to know what they're looking at and evaluate each project to see which one would scale for our use?!
 

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,863
1,854
1,283
The question is, do we have the development capacity to take this on? I'm not part of the dev team but from where I'm standing Evan seems to be having trouble finding help for the day to day progression of Darkcoin let alone for a major feature like this.

It might be that their code/product/idea is unsuitable. It be that they're owned by Alex Green (joke!). My point being is that we don't know if we need them or not.
No, this would have to be a pet project of an entirely new team. We might get someone on the main team to be a go-between, but unless Darkcoin spurs on new development groups, it's not going to realize it's potential. This would only be one project that could change the crypto world for the better, there are many, many other ideas worthy of their own team! We need to find developers that want to take projects on, many projects. Each developer, with the talent, can start any project that excites them and be the lead on it. You don't have to create (yet) another coin, recreating the wheel over and over again, but join up here and create something NEW and EXCITING!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JGCMiner and tungfa

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,863
1,854
1,283
Basically it's a lot of work and they are looking for 2 more full time Java devs themselves just to advance their project.
Stonehedge it would be very useful you go talk to them. And I think you'd be very welcome. They are thinking about a strategy to approach alts for integration to let the project be better known.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bitsquare/jP58Np_MwMk

Interesting side note: Mike Hearn joins in the discussion there with some tips for them.

They just don't want to be caught up with shitcoins. As the only alt with long term potential plus their interest in anonymity we would be their perfect partner :)

why Java? They use bitcoinj to integrate with the bitcoin protocol. We'd need bitcoinj to be ported to darkcoinj and then it would be pretty easy for them to support us. We had this discussion before. Let me see if I can find it...

EDIT: we already have darkcoinj https://github.com/HashEngineering/darkcoinj
That would be really awesome, as we do have something to offer (masternodes) to help secure the transactions, etc... and of course, we should join forces if possible rather than fork off what they did to something separate. This could be excellent! (oh, you already said that, ROFLMAO)
 

stonehedge

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 31, 2014
696
333
233
I think we should get Minotaur to get in touch with them
as he is our Biz Developer and definitely the man for the job !
And if Minotaur so wishes, I'll take care of some corporate hospitality in Vienna ;)

I'm going to be in Belgium for a while and its a short flight from Brussels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tungfa

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,863
1,854
1,283
The reason there aren't any useable p2p exchanges yet is because they introduce problems that nobody has yet solved.

There are two models that I have come up with:

1. p2p exchange/marketplace using a DHT as the 'market database' - think bittorrent, but instead of peers swapping files, all they swap/propagate to other connected peers is the database of what's for sale. This db would include, for example, seller, product, price, contact info etc.

2. Use Masternodes or some other server network to host the database, distributed and kept current between Masternodes, and have a separate client to access them. Think usenet, but again, it's not a million different files that need hosting, just the one current database.

Either way, it's fairly easy to have the whole thing end to end encrypted, and limit user access via keys that for example a seller might need to grant you to view their wares and buy from them.

There are other problems though with both approaches.

In both cases, I have yet to come up with a bulletproof way of preventing spam and deliberate market corruption, this is particularly true of #1. You need a mechanism to prevent peers from flooding the marketplace/exchange (I use the terms interchangeably, because they are at root the same thing - a means of connecting buyers and sellers) with garbage.

One approach would be to charge for access - difficult to do with #1, another would be a reputation system that limited injections according to a scale based on past behaviour and feedback from other peers - still not exactly rock solid.

Approach #2, even with IP obfuscation of the hosts, leaves server ops potentially liable for content they host, and is less truly 'p2peery' - but then usenet existed before the www, and usenet will exist after the www... ;) However #2 also makes spam control far simpler, as there would exist a distributed 'authority' to cull garbage.

Another thing that users are going to have to get used to is that p2p trading is going to require a bit more effort on their part. Buyers and sellers are going to have to liase with each other, and arbiters if required, there is no automated way of doing this that maintains perfect market freedom and does not lead to restriction of trade through centralised services. Such is the price you pay for not having a 3rd party do everything for you, including run off with your money.

p2p markets would also hopefully deal with the problem that plagues current centralised exchanges - idiots leaving their money on the exchange which makes it trivial for exchange owners to game the market with that money via bots, or simply steal it. The current concept most people have of an exchange order book may need to be revised, but IMO this is a good thing.

The arbitration thing is easy, just have an arbiter market offering multisig escrow in whatever currency the arbiter is competent to do it in. Bitcoin and Darkcoin work exactly the same way here, if you have a tool to do one, a simple find/replace bitcoind/darkcoind in the code will get you the other. I could put a radio button and corresponding variable in one of my simple tools to select which in a few minutes. I imagine bitcoinj/darkcoinj are the same story, if you're using that as a back end.

Heh, I could go on for hours, but I need my morning coffee. Just thought I'd throw some thoughts out there.
Unfortunately, I don't understand how exchanges are programmed, BUT, what if we basically have a normal exchange, hosted by each masternode, BUT synced up to eachother, and a type of blockchain to keep track of what has been exchanged. The difference would simply be that the funds that are put up for the exchange are literally held in the user's wallet (but locked until taken down or exchanged). It should look and feel just like an exchange, only access is through your wallet.

In this case, I don't see how one can spam. To initiate a transaction, you have to put up and lock funds. Unless you're doing that, how else can you engage the system in order to spam?

I can see needing a minute or so to make sure that over 50% of the nodes have a consensus regarding each transaction, but that's a small price to pay!

Also, this particular blockchain can be foreshortened anytime, as it's only recording transactions, which, over time, can expire (people can keep their transactions forever in their wallet, but these exchanges have nothing to do with verifying coins are ligit, only that the trade was made.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Cofresí

thelonecrouton

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Apr 15, 2014
1,135
813
283
And if Minotaur so wishes, I'll take care of some corporate hospitality in Vienna ;)

I'm going to be in Belgium for a while and its a short flight from Brussels.
A distributed exchange as you describe still needs some way of preventing bad actors from spewing nonsense into the mix and fargling things up for everyone else.
 

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,863
1,854
1,283
Would a page out of Evan's book of tricks function for us? Make it so you're charged fees for "acting bad"? I would have to think people should be allowed to pull their order as fast as they can, because sometimes we make a mistake and need to stop it before it's too late. Can you give an example of how the system could be messed with? I'm just not versed well enough with this. Why can exchanges do this, but not masternodes? Because the masternodes would have to talk to eachother? Is that the weak point?
 

thelonecrouton

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Apr 15, 2014
1,135
813
283
Would a page out of Evan's book of tricks function for us? Make it so you're charged fees for "acting bad"? I would have to think people should be allowed to pull their order as fast as they can, because sometimes we make a mistake and need to stop it before it's too late. Can you give an example of how the system could be messed with? I'm just not versed well enough with this. Why can exchanges do this, but not masternodes? Because the masternodes would have to talk to eachother? Is that the weak point?
It would be difficult to maintain the same financial barrier to setting up a rogue node without integrating the exchange into the core daemon, which I don't think is a good idea, for financial/legal liability as well as security reasons. But you could in theory implement a similar but separate requirement for exchange nodes.

Are Masternodes themselves ever charged collateral fees? I don't see how they can be, the MN balance remains locked up.

I think a far simpler approach to a decentralised exchange would be to just keep trades between individual buyers and sellers. Any 'depositing' anywhere and you're back to Bot Town.
 

tungfa

Administrator
Dash Core Team
Moderator
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 9, 2014
8,902
6,735
1,283
It would be difficult to maintain the same financial barrier to setting up a rogue node without integrating the exchange into the core daemon, which I don't think is a good idea, for financial/legal liability as well as security reasons. But you could in theory implement a similar but separate requirement for exchange nodes.

Are Masternodes themselves ever charged collateral fees? I don't see how they can be, the MN balance remains locked up.

I think a far simpler approach to a decentralised exchange would be to just keep trades between individual buyers and sellers. Any 'depositing' anywhere and you're back to Bot Town.

I agree
Buy to seller .... seller to buyer .... keeping it simple but save !!!
(DRK - BTC ... BTC to DRK ONLY)

So what about Smart Contracts ?!
I sell 10 DRK for BTC (smart contract) with Escrow !
You buy 10 DRK for BTC, smart contract sais YES (as payment is correct) does his signature, I do mine .... 2 out of 3 (Multi Sig)
Escrow release and done !
Everybody Happy ?!
 

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,863
1,854
1,283
It would be difficult to maintain the same financial barrier to setting up a rogue node without integrating the exchange into the core daemon, which I don't think is a good idea, for financial/legal liability as well as security reasons. But you could in theory implement a similar but separate requirement for exchange nodes.

Are Masternodes themselves ever charged collateral fees? I don't see how they can be, the MN balance remains locked up.

I think a far simpler approach to a decentralised exchange would be to just keep trades between individual buyers and sellers. Any 'depositing' anywhere and you're back to Bot Town.
No, masternodes are not charged collateral fees.

The problem with that, tungfa, is that you'll still have to find someone to trade with, then agree on a price, etc... it's not as liquid, it's clunky and slow. We seriously need an exchange that functions as fast and smooth as the stock market, but is decentralized. We need it if cryptos are ever going to act like cash. We can't run away from the need just because it seems difficult. I am certain this can be done, if we think outside the box. We just have to pretend we're Evan, and we'll find the way! (I'm actually serious! LOL)
 
  • Like
Reactions: tungfa and Cofresí

Cofresí

Member
Core Developer
Aug 22, 2014
86
82
58
121
Carribean
Unfortunately, I don't understand how exchanges are programmed, BUT
Thank god you don't know :). You know what would happen if we'd ask people who actually program stock exchanges if we could run them in masternodes? Some would shake their heads in dismay, while most of them would probably explode with laughter. That's because no single one of them would have a freaking idea about masternodes. Problably already the concept would blow their minds. It's way better fresh people like you that don't see too many limitations everywhere push for this. Only fresh people can really think outside the box. The good thing is we don't need to think outside the box too much for this one. Evan already did that for us. I say forget the traditional decentralised exchange (like what their doing at OpenBazaar and Bitsquare and Lighthouse. We still should talk to bitsquare though). These will be great projects but not really suitable for our purpose of a currency exchange.

Look: we already did the currency exchange in Darkcoin. Even something more complex than that. What is darksend? In my naive mind, it is a more complicated thing than a currency exchange. It premixes denominated amounts of multiple people together. Pretty fucking complex. A currency exchange would be less complicated and not so far from what already has been done.

I like thelonecrouton's skepticism as to not overloading the core function of the deamon and the legal implications a currency exchange brings with it in some countries. But we have a testnet for developing it outside the core darkcoin development. It could be programmed as an optional module like was proposed for other possible masternode services like the tor function. No one should be forced to run the exchange module on his masternodes. But those who run it could earn a little commission per trade as an incentive. Just like a broker does. The client gui could have a simple interface, optionally made available in a tab, for the trading. Done.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: TanteStefana

tungfa

Administrator
Dash Core Team
Moderator
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 9, 2014
8,902
6,735
1,283
Hey TanteStefana i hear you
but then you still need that 3rd party to put a ton of coins on that market to be traded !
decentralized or not ! you gotta rely on a 3rd party ! or is there a way that we as a community put our coins out there, agree on a price and see how buys it with the fluctuations we have ?!
I do not think so ?!
I know what you mean about my 'simple' idea, and you are probably right that we are not looking outside the box of a regular exchange, there must be a way to do that in a pooling kind of way .... i am gonna talk to some people who maybe can point me in the right direction.

good ideas already here ! well done guys, we gotta crack that nut eventually, keep it coming

we still should talk to the bit square guys !
 
  • Like
Reactions: TanteStefana

stonehedge

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 31, 2014
696
333
233
In the meantime I have just reached out to an Exchange based in the city of London, not far from my house suggesting that now might be a good time for them to up their game and make some introductory deals for people affected by Mintpal collapse and Cryptsy instability.

They might not figure high on the volume charts but they are a real company, with real people working in a real office. They also have very robust verification and offer FIAT markets.

Lets see if they throw us a temporary line.
 

stonehedge

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 31, 2014
696
333
233
I'm deliberately not saying who they are because I think they didn't pay masternodes for a while (they have a mining arm) but lets see if they can redeem themselves.

Once again, I volunteer myself to extend some corporate hospitality. Two miles is a lot closer than Vienna :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: TanteStefana

pbleak

Active Member
May 15, 2014
399
172
113
I can get volume due to a very strong reputation on the Bitcoin lending forums. I'd have to seriously plan it, but I could certainly get enough these days to get the ball rolling on other altcoins.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TanteStefana

stonehedge

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 31, 2014
696
333
233
I can get volume due to a very strong reputation on the Bitcoin lending forums. I'd have to seriously plan it, but I could certainly get enough these days to get the ball rolling on other altcoins.
Well, if I was one of the exchanges that was functioning at the moment I'd be raising hell to catch as much volume as I can while the Mintpal fallout continues and Cryptsy has an outage. I like Cryptsy but you can't help but give them a low trust rating based on the number of tech faults that they have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TanteStefana

pbleak

Active Member
May 15, 2014
399
172
113
I left cryptsy many moons ago for that reason. Too many little errors here and there. I think Bittrex will be the winner here even though I don't trust them 100% but if they do well now they will have taken their chance.
 

tungfa

Administrator
Dash Core Team
Moderator
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 9, 2014
8,902
6,735
1,283
how about the new Danish exchange who just signed us up !? super secure and whatnot !?
is there any volume by now ??
ccedk something
 
  • Like
Reactions: TanteStefana

pbleak

Active Member
May 15, 2014
399
172
113
ccedk is nice looking but no volume whatsoever. I had a look, there are a few people looking for the odd trade, but damn is it quiet. The admin should have added some volume to help kick it off. I was going to write to him but I felt it would be a bit out of the blue for him.
 

stonehedge

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 31, 2014
696
333
233
How can you not trust this lot? :D

https://cex.io/about/

Seriously, from a user experience, they are what cryptsy try to be...secure and useable. Good customer services too (had some trouble with FIAT payments that were resolved quickly).

I have no affiliation with them at all and actually don't really care who we end up adopting but my best experience so far has been with these ladies and gents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TanteStefana

pbleak

Active Member
May 15, 2014
399
172
113
Also a few other problems on ccedk: the trading pairs are awesome, but the withdrawal limits for FIAT at minimum 100 usually. Nobody wants to be the first to test that out. There's also some quirky Russian language stuff mixed in there, but why? Is it not a Danish site?
 

stonehedge

Well-known Member
Foundation Member
Jul 31, 2014
696
333
233
Thats the kind of spot that we need to be making.

The warning signs for Mintpal were there for months. I know that it seems that way with the benefit of hindsight but also, some individuals involved with other coins seem to have sat on information. One Doge kingpin resigned when his warnings were ignored.

Its a free market but we want to be encouraging as many exchanges as possible to step up.

In the meantime, I'd like to look into what our colleagues in Austria have to say and whether I/We'd be able to fund a collaboration. I'd much rather go into such discussions with Evan's blessing though. Open source or not.
 

tungfa

Administrator
Dash Core Team
Moderator
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 9, 2014
8,902
6,735
1,283
I tagged Minotaur already and here again,
i will send him an email later, as he is the one who should talk to Evan / fernando about this !

Edit: emailed !
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: TanteStefana

tungfa

Administrator
Dash Core Team
Moderator
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 9, 2014
8,902
6,735
1,283
ok, i talked to somebody (a very clever guy) about this to get an idea where something like this would go
Tungfa translation is : (please bear with me)

- The exchange would work on the QT Wallets (some other coin is doing that already i believe)
- and everything would work secure on the MN Network
- Different Exchanges can compete for customers (voting system, who is best and trusted...
let the exchanges compete on quality of service and user experience)
- Exchanges, rates, volumes feed off one blockchain
- this way if MintGox goes down, everyone is still protected... another Exchange picks up the refugees
no one loses their money
- the money is ether on that exchange or on my wallet, i buy and they send it over
- when you make a trade it is locked in, just like the MN's hold 1000 locked otherwise they get rejected / are invalid !
- the Qt client has be built with these features so trading happens on the Qt client
- you choose the exchange that has the best deal/volumes
but the exchange doesn't really hold the coins
the network locks the trade
like DRK masternodes lock in 1000 DRK
- the trades are held in the blockchain
- it's just a few tweaks to the blockchain and Qt client
and change with the price
- the exchanges then get fees for helping to process the orders
those with the best hardware do that
- if you make a trade it is locked by the network, if no one fulfills the order, you can cancel
it's just an on/off flag
- if the trade happens then it is logged and secured by the entire MasterNode mesh
- so multi sig with a smart contract ?
everyone should compete on customer service, analytics, charts, insights, etc
it's all of that and more
Bitcoin 3.0 technology

You guys still with me ?
Would love to hear Evan's opinion on this !!
To do it over the QT Wallets (based on the MN network is definitely the way!!)
Tx TT for the input
 

TanteStefana

Grizzled Member
Foundation Member
Mar 9, 2014
2,863
1,854
1,283
ok, i talked to somebody (a very clever guy) about this to get an idea where something like this would go
Tungfa translation is : (please bear with me)

- The exchange would work on the QT Wallets (some other coin is doing that already i believe)
- and everything would work secure on the MN Network
- Different Exchanges can compete for customers (voting system, who is best and trusted...
let the exchanges compete on quality of service and user experience)
- Exchanges, rates, volumes feed off one blockchain
- this way if MintGox goes down, everyone is still protected... another Exchange picks up the refugees
no one loses their money
- the money is ether on that exchange or on my wallet, i buy and they send it over
- when you make a trade it is locked in, just like the MN's hold 1000 locked otherwise they get rejected / are invalid !
- the Qt client has be built with these features so trading happens on the Qt client
- you choose the exchange that has the best deal/volumes
but the exchange doesn't really hold the coins
the network locks the trade
like DRK masternodes lock in 1000 DRK
- the trades are held in the blockchain
- it's just a few tweaks to the blockchain and Qt client
and change with the price
- the exchanges then get fees for helping to process the orders
those with the best hardware do that
- if you make a trade it is locked by the network, if no one fulfills the order, you can cancel
it's just an on/off flag
- if the trade happens then it is logged and secured by the entire MasterNode mesh
- so multi sig with a smart contract ?
everyone should compete on customer service, analytics, charts, insights, etc
it's all of that and more
Bitcoin 3.0 technology

You guys still with me ?
Would love to hear Evan's opinion on this !!
To do it over the QT Wallets (based on the MN network is definitely the way!!)
Tx TT for the input
I'm totally with you! I can see it, and even better, exchanges (private enterprise) can still be a part of the system! Wow! I love you guys! You're all stepping up to the plate wonderfully!
 
  • Like
Reactions: tungfa

tungfa

Administrator
Dash Core Team
Moderator
Foundation Member
Masternode Owner/Operator
Apr 9, 2014
8,902
6,735
1,283
and
if we DRK really had something like that working ! OMG think about it , no more MintGox, paranoia about scammers and fuxxed exchanges , no more people loosing coins or getting "hacked" ... save and happy customers !
Happy Days !...>