Topic: [ANN] [SFR] SaffronCoin | Latest Version - 1.4.2/2.6.2 | Mandatory Wallet Update - page 157. (Read 437833 times)

Wow Charles you know a lot of stuff! Let's have both the versions for the IOS wallet. POOF would be even more awesome in mobile!

Sounds awesome!

Great idea !

I'll try to do that

I want iOS wallet also

There is no one makes iOS wallet ?

SFR can be the first ?

Nice roadmap! How about Android wallet?

Let me make it easier for you .
If you think new wallet feature is not secure use the classic wallet.

People want to use its feature, then use the new wallet.

Then move on.

There is nothing wrong with it wallet or blockchain.

Just some fancy UI dev want to included. Not hurt anyone.

Just move on to the final wallet.

I love its feature anyway.

This is a basic Roadmap outlining SaffronCoin's tasks in the nearest future:

- Expand the POOF! system to include self destroying voice messages. This provides even more anonymity and privacy since your message can't be copied but just heard!

- Implement SFRMS SMS alerts for transactions in most countries. (Current SFRMS has only Email alerts).

- Setup a community fund. A donation address moderated by the community to progress developments of the coin.

- Implement optional "Stealth Addresses" to send anonymous transactions. At the same time, the community will discuss on the coin supply.

- The same Devs that brought you SaffronCoin will develop an exchange named cryptoxindia.com to trade SFR and other coins in fiat such as INR, USD, EUR. India does not have a multi-crypto exchange so this will be the first.

- Could be teaming up with Unocoin, India's biggest BTC only exchange to co-develop cryptoxindia.com and help promote cryptos in countries that are not exposed much to crypto-currencies.


***If you would like to add anything, please let me know so we all can discuss it and i can update the list. Remember these are short term goals about 4-10 weeks.***

P.S. Some of you might know about a long term goal we have planned. But i would like to mention this for those that do not know. This could take more than a year depending on the success of SFR. We want to include BTC as well as SFR ATMs in India. There is no such thing in India. After some months, we would make a proposal to the Govt. to look into cryptos and its benefits. This would greatly benefit the crypto community!

Yea that would help us and SFR users. We could have a look at some mock designs, let the community decide what to use and then we will code it.

I personally do not have good design sense. Lol. I am honest about it.

Personally I don't know too many devs willing to take the time and answer questions and explains things as much as the saffron guys do. I do think Vald you are posing important questions, because others may feel like you do and do hope the answers being provided are offering some clarity. About the UI of the wallet, you seem like a design oriented person, you should design some layouts and send them to the devs, help them improve their product The goal is to make crypto ever better and we can only to this if we all come together to build something greater.

I know who they are, I'll hunt them down if ever lol (kidding). From my observations, this hands off approach dev typically take I feel is what has precisely been preventing cryptos from acheiving more than what they have done so far. I know it seems counter to the crypto culture but at some point the prevailing dev strategy needs to evolve and i have been a proponent of pushing further into the realm of allowing/advising the devs to create an intergrated platform.. because lets face it other than bitcoin, there are no companies that will step in and do it so how can a coin possibly build from nothing? relying solely on the blockchain etc is a mistake, if you want adoption by mainstreet, the gen public you have to build the infrastructure, build services that are easy to use, are compelling etc to reduce friction for adoption etc. As these are peripheral services that sit on top of the blockchain and are not intergral to the blockchain itself they are therefor optional. The devs are steadfast in this that they are added layers but are OPTIONAL. should someone be uncomfortable with them, no problem, the classic wallet will always have the core wallet/network without the added feature. At that point, it become a user CHOICE and are not forced into anything.

If you have knowledge on networks, there are two types of requests, GET and POST. The exchange data is a publicly available API which uses GET request.
In a GET request, no info is given but only retrieved. Users are not "connecting" to the price check or the "explorer". All these are GET requests and loaded directly from the appropriate websites.
Every feature that downloads content from the Web, has an independant container. Example, the price check and explorer.
The beauty of implementing such a technology is in case for example the Bittrex exchange is hacked, and some malicious code enters into the exchange API. Even though your wallet is accessing that API, that malicious code cannot affect the entire wallet or the system unlike a web browser that can install extensions infecting your entire computer.

All containers are independant. We are not saying this is 100% secure. Nothing in the world is 100% secure. If your system has access to the outside network, there are many ways it can get affected. We are just trying to increase the security as much as we can.

Independent containers increase security. The same can happen to a block explorer. But these are all one-way displays. So it wouldn't matter.
Also phishing attack is negligible. Because we embed the website in the code.
For example to display the block explorer, we embedded the explorer's website url into the code so a fake url can't be shown to you. But then someone can hack the block explorer website and display some other content. But the users security is in place since no info of their's is given out since all this is a GET request.
If you are worried about coins being lost, nothing of this can happen because all are independent containers. The malicious code CANNOT have access to your wallet.

In regards to the "beta" tag.. Google mail was in "beta" for a couple years. Just saying. This whole discussion is somewhat odd to me, since we are talking about peripheral services and not the blockchain or PoW network itself. The Saffron guys are trying to do it "in-house" and create an intergrated ecosystem around their coin. Bitcoin have thousands of companies creating centralized products that use bitcoin as their backbone. Totally agree with you that crypto shoul dbe decentralized and distributed but thats is for the blockchain and network itself, the services and tools using the blockchain is a completelly different story. Maybe etherium? is attempting to created everyhting via the blockchain but idk. Crypto is the currency but the products/apps/services using it like I said is a different animal entirely as far as I see it. This is my take.  

Huh? Dude the wallet is in beta. Not the coin. If the core of the coin was in beta then ofcourse it would run on a testnet.

Just because the wallet feature is in Beta, why should the coin be run on Testnet? This is not a hardfork. Doesn't make any sense.  I guess you do not understand even how the Bitcoin Protocol works. The stable wallet is also available. This beta is only for those that want a first hand on this wallet. The beta wallet DOES NOT AFFECT the coin.

Only SFRMS is in Beta. Not the entire wallet.!


Edit: Do you know Gmail was in Beta for 2 years and so was Orkut. But people still used it on a large scale and well put their "money" in it.

Oh mate. Many of us hardly slept developing the various features SFR underwent these past 2 months. And you question our hardwork? Well then why hasn't any other wallet implemented features what we have? The Bitcoin code for QT wallet does not allow SFR features to be implemented out of the box. That is the reason you don't see the features SFR has on other wallets. We coded a lot of stuff from scratch to enable the QT wallet to display these kind of features.
If you do not like external nodes, why do you use any platform that uses it. If you have a better idea to implement POOF! then please do share it rather than trolling. I have already explained in detail the blockchain is public. POOF! features will not work on it.

Since you are/was a CS student, i am all ears if you can implement a more anonymous and secure system than POOF! Also you are bothered about a background-image ? Lol.
It never crossed my mind to change it. Also this is "Beta". Since you mentioned it, we will change it to something more appealing. But then you should also ask the same question to the original developers of the Bitcoin Wallet.

Been away from the boards here for a little bit, so just trying to catch up, I like seeing the activity and members of the community providing truly positive things, whether ideas, comments, helping out other out on hardware etc.. and of course the fantastic dev updates. Soi if I've missed any older posts directed at me, let me know on what page and I'll go check them out.

I have seen Vips comment on possibly altering/looking at the amount of daily coin minting. In the past to create a more realistic amount of coin created on a daily basis, the avg amount of time to find a block reward was increased to 90secs. One thing that is important to note is that due to the nature of the multi-algo approach for pow on any given day and as assured by the independent difficulties they each possess, the five algo will create a five-way split of the total minted coins. So if 65k coins are created a day, then only 1/5 can possibly go to an individual algo, which naturally is then split up and distributed to the miners of that algo based on hashing capabilities. It does mean that no single miner can really obtain much on a daily basis even if he/she had the dominant hashrate for any particular algo. This is wonderful for the purposes of maximising distribution of coins across the various miners. Though I dont doubt some may have sha and gpu miners but I doubt someone out there is dumping large amount of coins on the daily is hard to envision. More than likely dumps occur from trader (not investors.. there is a difference) that either take profit from lower buys or even cut their looses just to bounce to the latest coin on the upswing in hopes of "riding the waves". At this time I don't think we have the "big" miners nor are we on any of the large multipools (that im aware of). To counter that, one has to convert traders into investors, increase volume/demand overtime.. which is something that will take time.

That being said, early discussions when the 90secs what chosen, some alternate options had naturally surfaced each with their positives and negatives. Were we as a community ever to decide and ask the dev to move to a longer avg blocktime Id want to be sure we are doing it to find the best possible balance between mining and investing AND not simply a way to force the value up. Extend the blocktime to long and you cripple any profitability to mine which is not very beneficial for a robust and vibrant network and more or less has the same effect of a halving (price may not rise but you still loose half the miners). Naturally a correction to optimize or find saffrons true "sweet spot" could result in the value of saffrons to organically rise and markets react and confirm/support the action taken.

I concede that i am not an expect in macroeconomics and have always had this idea that coin should grow in an organic way via increased mining difficulty from an influx of miners resulting in harder ROIs necessitating their purchase. But certainly if many seems concern with the daily minting them perhaps we have yet to find the right balance.

So I suggest the following (comments appreciated):  In a future wallet update, the avg blocktime would be increased from 90seconds to 180 seconds effectively reducing the daily minting by half. As a concession, when the halving does occur in a year from now, dropping the rewards per block by half, the speed for block discovery would be sped up back to 90secs effectively cancelling out the impact of the scheduled halving. This would result in still providing the newly lowered daily minting but at the benefit of an increased block speed which will be better as over the next year we are surely going to see merchant being interested in saffroncoin. Basically we ensure a scare currency, without compromising the network with a large shift and when the scheduled halving takes place, the sped up the transactions speeds will better support the merchant and users.

What do you guys think?

Guys, 1 glance at Valds post history, and you will see that all he does is bash, disrespect, belittle and FUD other coins, devs and members. The dude obviously lives a miserable insecure existence, ignoring might be an option.