..
Yea I'm a bit of an anarchist. It was after a realization that laws aren't morals. It is not immoral to be outside naked. It is illegal. And yet it is immoral to go after a person who is naked in public, threaten to shoot them if they don't come with you, then throw them in a jail cell. So the irony is cops and military the the immoral ones. Sure there is exceptions like punishing people who murder but even in that case, how can you prove guilt. Why can't people be taught to be peaceful? Why is the world not peaceful. Why is our media pure violence. Most laws are absurd and even more absurd is the method of punishment used. Two wrongs don't make a right, the jury and judge is usually wrong too. Also their judgement is under the authority of man and let all men be liars.
The world could be very beautiful without government. Things were always better in the past. For a man to trade freedom for security he will soon find he has neither.
The peg should be implemented within a year hopefully 6 months... people anticipate Q1 2018 and this will depend on when i get these templates done.
The budget... well since the founders left we have had to fund a lot of things ourselves. Sometimes the community helps and sometimes I fund from my personal Bitcoins. Sometimes I pay BitBay to bounties we have investors who got in early and they chip in. But there is no standard budget. We are volunteer and bounty driven. Sometimes I pay PR and soon we will start a Facebook ad campaign.
People can donate their POS rewards in the market client. That's already a feature. It's voluntary.
Oddly enough new buyers have put down large deposits on large purchase as we have had cash wires where a hefty deposit was done. I have also personally done an arbitrage contract with a big deposit. We have them and so far nobody has complained. Perhaps if this got really big an insurance company would come in for a fee to cover people who can't afford it.
To include a fee on top, why do that? The buyer should get that back. The thing about these contracts is they can be unilateral. So lets say a buyer has no deposit. The seller can guarantee his end of the bargain letting new buyers into the system. This is used for example on a persons "first" coins. But seller may want to do a little KYC first.
To be honest, this takes some getting used to. It's a major paradigm shift.
Haha dont know if anyone agrees if the world would be better without goverment but I understand your ideology.
Why not enforce 10% of the pos reward to a budget address? This way you can do markething or whatever and let comminity vote on it. Projects need funding. This is a already wokring product so its lacking adoption bc there is a lack of markething and people dont know or there is something wrong with the idea that people are just not interested in it
I dont think its strange that large deposits for large purchase have been done cause people who are using the platform now in this stage are familiar with the conditions and are willing to use it in this way. That doesnt mean people dont have problems with it cause most people who do dont complain they just move allong.
With the dubbel deposits we dont understand each other I think at least I dont reading your reaction. Now for my understanding this is how I think bitbay dubbel deposit work for example:
buyer 1 wants to buy a product worth of $1000 he has to send the seller $1000
and make a deposit of 1000 in the smart contract with the seller. The seller also have to put in $1000 in the contract. If the buyer dont gets his product he loses the original $1000 (cause he already send those) and he can choose to blow up the contract which hold the shared $2000 and that will get burned. So the seller would lose $1000 and the buyer $2000. This is how its works right? So even if the seller didnt deliver the buyer could lose another $1000 by blowing up the dubbel deposit contract?
So why cant you have 1 contract where the buyer send $1100 to the contract (1000 for the product and 100 for the insurance) and the seller also has to put in $1000 in the contract. Now if the buyer gets no product he loses $1100 and the seller $1000. Maybe you can even put the extra 100 that if the contract blows up the 100 will get back to the buyer? If the buyer does get his product the contract is released the seller gets his $1000 and the buyer gets his $100 back
What do I have wrong since this seems to be more logical to me there must be something I dont understand
