Topic: Open Transactions Server: Asset/Bond/Commodity/Cryptocoin/Deed/Share/Stock Exch. - page 2. (Read 42621 times)

Try


(I just tried that, it works for me.)

Things like that. opentxs, the subcommand within it you want, and the switches/args.

Just don't even bother staying inside opentx or ot "shell mode", FT isn't even trying to make them work anymore I think, like they are deprecated modes or something.

So just do oneliners that tell opentxs one command you want it to run for you, with whatever args that subcommand needs.

-MarkM-

Some commands work. For example stats, addserver, newnym and so on. But as soon as i have to enter a nym-id or a server-id i dont know what to enter.
For example:

stat shows my nym as "New Nym". And this time i had to enter my password on starting ot too. So the nym is ok i think.

So it seems i have to use it something like showmarkets --server
Only thing is, i dont find out how to enter.

I tried:

Code:

showmarkets --server wmY1B8o94PFENzqPVK6wLOLvkog9TvA3GDxZuAMGCpW
showmarkets --server
showmarkets --server 0
showmarkets --server <0>
showmarkets --server
showmarkets --server Digitalis

It always only shows such errormessages:

Code:

Undefined command: "showmarkets --server Digitalis" -- Try 'list'.

But i dont have a clue what other ID could be meant. Or how i should enter that ID then.

The commandline "shell" mode doesn't work I think. Do individual commands from the unix shell, like

opentxs status

or whatever instead of invoking opentx or ot and doing commands from its own prompt.

In ~/.ot is a commandline mode defaults file where you can set your default server and nym, and other things that you probably don't want to default.

Otherwise you need --server and --mynym and so on on the commandline.

-MarkM-

ok i will check this out this week, thanks

Since i didnt get the Testserver to run i tried it again with your server. I found that the problem before was the unix linebreak and that OT cant interprete the format when it has no linebreaks. I thought normally that the way xml is built should allow this anyway.
But i now was able to add the digitalis server. Then i added all coins and trade objects available. I added Digitalis as a trade object too again but dont know how to delete again.

But now im stuck. I created a nym by providing a password. Can i change the username afterwards? I dont really understand the command style. For example checknym. When i use that command it tells me to use --mynym and the id. But what id and in what format? I tried 0, the long code and the name of the nym. Its not working. The same goes for showmarkets. Brackets dont help either.

Are there no ripples traded? I have xrp in my ripple account i dont need and want to sell but the owner doesnt tell me why it doesnt work for me. So i thought maybe i can sell it with OT.

I think there is even a QT GUI nowadays, it has taken over the name "Moneychanger" that used to be the name of the test/demo java client, which is now known as OtapiJ. (OT API J).

https://github.com/Open-Transactions/Moneychanger

You need the basic OT itself of course, certainly for the java GUI which is just a front end that uses it, but most likely also for the -QT GUI, which probably is just another front end that uses it.

Basically the java GUI links to the otapi-java library and the QT one probably links to the otapi C++ library.

There are also supposedly iPhone and Android clients that have been coming along nicely lately though not sure either is ready for use yet.

Apparently the -QT GUI is not ready for end-user use yet, more for developers to help test and debug and such.

-MarkM-

is there some kind of GUI i can download for this? i thought i saw some screen shots but i'm not going to spend 1 hour trying to find it... 

thanks in advance

@markm... Whats the status of your server now? Is there trading going on or is it still too silent? And what about the network? Are there a couple of servers yet?
When i read that this topic started 2011 it probably really needs easy to install clients before OT is becoming a much used exchange.

I cannot register my nym on either your demo server or digitalis servers.  Is this a problem with me... or your servers?

That would be very useful for hot-wallet operators.

Right now in addition to the problem of not many people having installed Open Transactions clients there is also the problem of not having any hot-wallet operators. All the tokens I have issued are all based on very-cold-wallet coins, typically coins that are secured on their blockchains by multiple hard-coded checkpoints. Since some of the chains have low difficulty, those checkpoints are an important part of the security of those cold-wallet coins. But market-makers (people who buy and sell the tokens for actual on-chain coins) will want some kind of automation to lower their account-clerk workload in accepting coins into their hot wallets and disbursing coins from their hot wallets.

-MarkM-

Yes.

Would it be possible to have a Bitcoin (or some similar alternative) wallet that automatically issued a token to depositors and was fully auditable by the public?

So far people do not seem to have found it viable to run their own Open Transactions client.

As it is a server <-> client system people's decision not to run a client kind of limits the user-base.

The server works, but until there are a number of people acting as market-makers by buying and selling the tokens there is no easy way in and out of the markets; basically each user currently would have to go through whatever it is that such market-makers would have to go through in terms of arranging to have more tokens issued if the number of tokens currently existing is not sufficient to support the volume of trade they wish to conduct.

For example, there are currently only 200 digiBiTCoins issued on the system, because the vaults aka coldwallet in which actual bitcoins have been secured only contain 200 actual bitcoins frozen "forever" so that tokens can be issued representing those "forever frozen" coins. That means only a maximum of 200 bitcoins worth of bitcoin tokens can be traded at any given moment on the server.

In a sense the system suffers so far from its own security: you can have security or you can have convenience, to some extent you have to trade one off against the other. The current server intends to provide basically the definite 100% reserve tokens; it thus obviously cannot, conceptually, itself provide warm or hot wallet, its function is to be the coldest wallet of all, so that its tokens represent coins that have never moved since the tokens were issued and will never move as long as there remains any need or use for tokens that represent cryptocoins.

Warm or hot wallet services are conceptually totally separate services, even if such services were to be operated by the same operator that runs the server. That ensures that even if all hot wallets and all warm wallets were stripped of coins by some theft or hack or act of god or whatever all the tokens nonetheless continue to be full 100% reserve backed by their issuer, which is the frozen-forever-wallet operator.

This structure means that the combined system of token issuer, server, and market-makers (warm and hot wallet operators) operates at more than 100% reserve.

Thus it is maybe not really all that surprising that it is taking time for such a setup to materialise and scale up.

(For example, if people wanted there to be more than 200 tokens that represent bitcoins, how would the token issuer justify tying up more actual bitcoins "forever" in order to issue more such tokens? How is the issuer being compensated so far for having already "tied up", "permanently", 200 coins in order to have already issued 200 bitcoin-tokens? If another 200 tokens were desired, how would the token issuer finance the obtaining of another 200 actual bitcoins and the "permanent freezing" of those bitcoins in "frozen forever" wallets so that 200 more tokens can be issued?

Give it time, I guess...

-MarkM-

I haven't even begun to read every reply in this thread... Sorry.

I just have one question:

Do we have a viable exchange yet?  If so, what's preventing others from moving off the central exchanges?

They function similarly to XRP in the sense that they ration the use of server resources.

But they are not a currency nor an asset, they are outside the system, outside the markets; they are arbitrary credits the server operator assigns to nyms (identities) and which the server consumes at the rate of one credit per API call.

Currently all API calls cost the same, one credit aka token per API call.

Since quite likely some API calls consume far more system-resources than others possibly this initial simple system will need to be adjusted to charge more for actions that consume a lot of resources.

The system operator can make up these tokens aka credits out of thin air, they are not transferable from one identity to another nor can you trade them on the markets. There is not yet even any built in mechanism for requesting them from the system operator nor for offering bribes or inducements to the system operator to encourage said operator to assign you some of these tokens aka credits.

They are not transferable from server to server either: if I assign one of your identities some on the Digitalis server that is local to the Digitalis server, they cannot migrate to the OTdemo server.

What they do do is give the server a way of paying its bills other than by taking a percentage of trades or transfers.

There is no mechanism for taking any percentage of trades or transfers.

I had imagined volume traders would flock to Open Transactions precisely because the higher the volume you trade the more damage you would take from percentage-based fees; I figured paying a tiny fee per API call would be far cheaper for professional traders than being charged a fraction of every trade, a larger fee the larger the trade.

Of course this usage tokens approach also means window-shopping is not free; an API call to obtain prices as just as much an API call as is an API call to make or take an offer...

-MarkM-

Are usage tokens pre-mined? Are usage tokens similar to XRM on Ripple?

The "usage tokens" system is now active on the Digitalis server.

That means each API call now costs one "usage token".

Which in turn means you need "usage tokens" to do anything on that server.

How much "usage tokens" will be worth is something the market is going to have to figure out I guess, presumably by the famous process known as "price discovery".

-MarkM-

New Windows Builds are OUT:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/moneychanger-windows-builds-out-of-date-77301

 

If you are openly running a server in a given jurisdiction, and if that server is being used to process real money (vs, say, game tokens) then I could see how you could come under the jurisdiction of local authorities, and need to comply with AML and KYC requirements. (Also, keep in mind, in OT there is a difference between a "server operator" and a "currency issuer.")

However I don't see any technical barriers to running an OT server anonymously on an anonymous network, and being paid to do so in Bitcoin. I'm not recommending that anyone actually do this, but I'm curious how you believe an OT server, in that scenario, is "actually quite vulnerable to government attacks" ? Doesn't the use of Bitcoin for moving funds on/off of an OT server mean that the server can operate in a censorship-resistant fashion? What good is Bitcoin otherwise?

I'm also curious how Silk Road could still be operating, if that were true, since it seems like a similar example.



Please be specific about what you are trying to accomplish. For example, why would you integrate the OT server with anything at all? Normally, commands are sent to the OT server from the various clients, using the OT client API. (https://github.com/FellowTraveler/Open-Transactions/wiki/Use-Cases)

So NORMALLY, if you wanted to integrate OT into some other software, you would be integrating the OT client API, not the server.

My (limited) understanding is that the "Electrum server" is actually a Bitcoin client. In which case, I could understand the value of integrating the OT client API into it, the same as I could understand the value of integrating the OT API into any other Bitcoin client (or Bittorrent client... or web client... or sip client...) but I'm still not sure exactly what you are trying to accomplish through the integration. Technically you can already link OT to anything else, since OT has a powerful command-line utility that is fully-scriptable. So any UNIX-style scripting to connect OT with other transaction systems is completely possible.

If your point is that OT needs a graphical user interface, I agree with you--but Knotwork is a server operator, not a coder, so he is unlikely to be the person who writes the UI integration you desire. I am also unlikely to take on some new project (such as a commercial-grade client), since my free time is already all booked up on OT itself, which represents (so far) 3 years of my life spent working to create software for you, for free. Thus it will have to be left to you (the open-source community) to "stand on the shoulders of giants" and create whatever OT clients or integrations you need. Luckily, it has specifically been designed for this purpose, and so those of you who choose to do so, will find the path has already been cleared.

Yes, it has been thought of. There is also already a python OT API library.

Further, da2ce7 has some interesting ideas that will integrate server contract ID with bitcoin addresses themselves and via P2SH amybe able to piggy-back on to the bitcoin network's hash power to secure OT servers against attacks and malfeasance ... stay tuned.