(Pre-Proposal) Buy & Sell from within ALL DASH WALLETS

Which wallets will be first to allow native BUY/SELL for Dash?

  • Total voters
    30
  • Poll closed .
rgenito said:
Personally, I don't do Cash In Mail. If I wanted to be anonymous on a $100 gift, I'd do a cash deposit payment.
Click to expand...

You didnt answer to my question. Suppose we manage to go to a distant ATM, disguised, and we anonymously put some cash into your bank account in order to buy a cryptocurrency.
What guarantees us that you will not deny that we put the money?
 
Agree that Dash core wallet should be kept clean. Otherwise not a bad idea, but would rather see a smaller, more specific proposal. Start with one, get it done, and come back for more.
 
demo said:
And what if the masternodes vote for it?
will you resign from core developer?
Click to expand...
If there would be such proposal I will make it clear that that is the choice in the first place - a vote for having some 3rd party web-api talking to some centralized service integrated into reference client (which I see as an unacceptable option of adding bells and whistles only shitcoins do) is also a vote for firing me as a developer of that reference client. I have no problem with resigning if one day I find that masternodes do not see me as a developer for them, no big deal. To be clear, it's fine to have 3rd-party specific integrations it in some light/spv wallet but implementing that in full node reference client is not an option imo. Fork Dash Core, create Dash WoC wallet and have fun as much as you want if you need that option.
 
X posting from Dash Central.

Hi just a couple of thoughts, the proposal says you will develop Dash wallet wizards for 4 wallet apps. Wouldn't it make sense to have commitments from those wallets you plan to integrate ahead of making the proposal. Because if there are third parties involved is harder to make predictions on the reception of the idea on behalf of those 3rd party wallets.

Is also important to notice that it may not be appropriate to integrate specific broker APIs into the reference core wallets, the reference clients should remain neutral and allow for different brokers to compete for volume. I think this will be great for Evolution where all brokers will have the same opportunity to integrate into the DAPI and be part of the Apps marketplace.

Just clarifying and making sure the reference clients were not counted on the 4 wallet apps you were considering. You can definitely create and maintain your own WoC forks of the reference client but you should consider the technical debt of creating your own forks as you would need to maintain them going forward. Plus I think for the most part people would just continue to download the reference clients from dash.org. Having said this, if you are aware and willing to maintain your own version of the wallets going forward then I can understand the project better.

My recommendation would be to wait and do this as part of Evolution where the marketplace will be available, but totally understand if you will create and maintain your own WoC wallets going forward or if this will be to work with 3rd party wallets like Exodus and Jaxx. Would be good to have those commitments from 3rd parties ahead of making the proposal though.

Just my 2 duffs. Cheers.
 
Last edited:
UdjinM6 said:
If there would be such proposal I will make it clear that that is the choice in the first place - a vote for having some 3rd party web-api talking to some centralized service integrated into reference client (which I see as an unacceptable option of adding bells and whistles only shitcoins do) is also a vote for firing me as a developer of that reference client. I have no problem with resigning if one day I find that masternodes do not see me as a developer for them, no big deal. To be clear, it's fine to have 3rd-party specific integrations it in some light/spv wallet but implementing that in full node reference client is not an option imo. Fork Dash Core, create Dash WoC wallet and have fun as much as you want if you need that option.
Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing your input.
 
Minotaur said:
X posting from Dash Central.

Hi just a couple of thoughts, the proposal says you will develop Dash wallet wizards for 4 wallet apps. Wouldn't it make sense to have commitments from those wallets you plan to integrate ahead of making the proposal. Because if there are third parties involved is harder to make predictions on the reception of the idea on behalf of those 3rd party wallets.

Is also important to notice that it may not be appropriate to integrate specific broker APIs into the reference core wallets, the reference clients should remain neutral and allow for different brokers to compete for volume. I think this will be great for Evolution where all brokers will have the same opportunity to integrate into the DAPI and be part of the Apps marketplace.

Just clarifying and making sure the reference clients were not counted on the 4 wallet apps you were considering. You can definitely create and maintain your own WoC forks of the reference client but you should consider the technical debt of creating your own forks as you would need to maintain them going forward. Plus I think for the most part people would just continue to download the reference clients from dash.org. Having said this, if you are aware and willing to maintain your own version of the wallets going forward then I can understand the project better.

My recommendation would be to wait and do this as part of Evolution where the marketplace will be available, but totally understand if you will create and maintain your own WoC wallets going forward or if this will be to work with 3rd party wallets like Exodus and Jaxx. Would be good to have those commitments from 3rd parties ahead of making the proposal though.

Just my 2 duffs. Cheers.
Click to expand...

Thank you for also posting here ! :) I will copy/paste the response for everyone... as this answers other questions above!


1. Not all wallets want to make a commitment without a commitment. It's a chicken and egg problem. This is simply because everyone is too busy with their current work. The Dash funding will shift everyone's attention because that gives resources for that extra attention.

2. Neutrality: this does not harm a wallet's neutrality. Wall of Coins is the *only* service that offers this. Does Jaxx or Ethereum's wallet appear not neutral because they integrated Shape Shift? Of course not: shape shift was the only service that offers what they offer. What is better: the image of supreme neutrality by now allowing the ONLY API buy/sell Dash service for wallet users that want to buy/sell Dash, or to get Dash into the hands of the masses as quickly as possible while also being an example for other individuals to make a better API service? I say it's more important to get Dash into the hands of as many people as possible and to inspire other companies to create alternative solutions for the wallets. There's much more for everyone to gain.

3. This is for new work, not old work. The reference clients are not counted, as the proposal explicitly states that people will choose the 4 wallets to focus on.

4. Waiting: this proposal will not hinder future releases of projects such as Evolution. There are no negative drawbacks by starting today, especially when the Dash treasury has an available budget.

Will you invite and urge the wallets to comment? I understand you believe it would be good to have those commitments comments already, but the community must realize that these wallet leaders are *MUCH* too busy for this to get their attention. I know how to make this happen, and when MNOs vote yes on this and trust in me once again, they will see the developments happen :) Thank you again for asking!

I am here to serve Dash, my friend.
 
This is an interesting idea. With the Dash Wallet for android, my expertise is with the Dash Network Protocol, not user interfaces. In fact for my app, the user interface design is maintained by a core developer. The integration of such a system as proposed here is beyond me, but the proposal states that other developers would be doing the work.

I haven't used Wall of Coins and will need to consider this further.

A PR is a Pull Request, which is a request to add code to an existing project maintained by someone else. That is how the code would be added to any wallet, including mine, assuming their code is available on one of the sites such as github.com, gitlab.com, etc.
 
demo said:
You didnt answer to my question. Suppose we manage to go to a distant ATM, disguised, and we anonymously put some cash into your bank account in order to buy a cryptocurrency.
What guarantees us that you will not deny that we put the money?
Click to expand...

Could you please answer to my question?
 
demo said:
Could you please answer to my question?
Click to expand...

You'll have to ask the bank or ATM. They're the ones that have the right to refuse to accept a deposit/payment.

demo said:
Come on now! Is it so difficult for you to implement a commitment scheme? You dont seem to have deep knowledge of what cryptography is. Are you an advertiser-marketeer or something? I believe that Dash doesnt need more of them, we have a lot (@amanda_b_johnson being their president)
Click to expand...
Here's where you can find more information about me and the team: https://wallofcoins.com/en/about/
 
HashEngineering said:
This is an interesting idea. With the Dash Wallet for android, my expertise is with the Dash Network Protocol, not user interfaces. In fact for my app, the user interface design is maintained by a core developer. The integration of such a system as proposed here is beyond me, but the proposal states that other developers would be doing the work.

I haven't used Wall of Coins and will need to consider this further.

A PR is a Pull Request, which is a request to add code to an existing project maintained by someone else. That is how the code would be added to any wallet, including mine, assuming their code is available on one of the sites such as github.com, gitlab.com, etc.
Click to expand...

Thank you for posting your thoughts in here :) I will find out from Jaxx pretty quickly how much of a separate implementation is necessary between Jaxx for desktop and mobile--if any separate implementation. With that said, it looks like Hash Engineering will be 1 of the 4 we focus on, and I greatly look forward to talking with you :)

For everyone else's knowledge: I'm traveling back from Arizona (open house meetup!) and we will begin promoting others to vote on the wallets this week. We will still reach out to all wallets immediately after the team and I discuss these operations tomorrow when I'm back in Florida. Thank you to the Dash community for allowing us to serve you all...Looking forward to this!!
 
Also, I'd like you all to know that I will bring up to the wallets the biggest concerns the community has had so far:
  1. This implementation will be done in a modular way so that other APIs will have an easier time adding their services.
  2. We will work with the wallets to help warn their users if they are not getting a reasonably fair offer. This will prevent any newcomers from experiencing a bad first experience.
If you think of any other concerns, speak now! :)
 
I recommend to develop a plug-in system, similar to what we have in web browsers.

Why ?

Because integrating "Wall of Coins" or any other exchange is limited to a specific country or set of countries, not truly world-wide, and it is gonna confuse customers.

Additionally we want a free-market competition, so that any exchange could develop wallet-plug-ins and integrate itself into a wallet.
 
Hello Everyone!

I apologies on the late update, I posted a new thread in the General Section and did not realize it was deleted till this morning. (I guess I need to be on the forums more often with you all :D )

The Update that I posted last week:

We have been coordinating meeting with wallets to discuss what is need to get the integration rolling :)

We have a few meetings this week with some wallets that the community voted on and we look forward to chatting with them about this!

Stay tuned for the next update!

Albert
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top