Hmm... Will discuss this with my team.
Open Bazaar integration - pre-proposal
- Thread starter akhavr
- Start date
Hmm... Will discuss this with my team.
But that doesn't answer my question though. How is your solution different from me doing, for example,
- Setup an item for sale (and for example offer a 25% discount if payed in X amount of Dash instead of BTC as incentive)
- Get payed in Dash
- Safety for both buyer and seller.
As opposed to
- Setup an item
- Invite people to use their Dash though Shapeshift to pay in BTC to the OB address... ?
.
Ok, now I'm lost.
The case above isn't yet possible within an OB, because it can't observe Dash network. This will be implemented as a next stage.
Stages 1-3 are exactly about this, being integrated into the OB client.
If that doesn't answer your question, may you rephrase it in more details, giving an example? It's pretty late here and my brains are somewhat fried
Ok, now I'm lost.
The case above isn't yet possible within an OB, because it can't observe Dash network. This will be implemented as a next stage.
Stages 1-3 are exactly about this, being integrated into the OB client.
If that doesn't answer your question, may you rephrase it in more details, giving an example? It's pretty late here and my brains are somewhat fried
Yes! That's what I mean, I'm seriously not getting this proposal ... again, sorry if I'm being a ding-dong, but I don't see what development funds are needed for 1-3.
4 is an entirely different matter and a HUGE project.
.
As I've mentioned here, before forking OB network to Dash, it's important to give an option to buyers to pay in Dash and sellers to receive in Dash (will add a stage for this too).
My tinkering with early OB code drove me to a conclusion that simply switching BTC to Dash would be comparably easy task. But what's the point, if most trades would be done in BTC? Buyers want a wide choice, sellers want lots of buyers. Balkanization of the OB network won't help either.
Thus, the goal of first steps is make sure that dash holders can do one click purchases for all stuff, sold on the OpenBazaar. Only when this is done, we propose to change the back end and do dash-dash payments w/o touching bitcoin.
Yes, this might be considered a fancy way to add a shifty button to the OpenBazaar client. If someone sees a simpler way to do such integration in a clean way - I'll be glad to learn.
..when it will be developed.
OB integration was discussed for year+, that's why I'm came up with this pre-proposal.
If anyone is aware of the plans of other coins or of shapeshift to make such integration - I'd like to know more about this.
Integrating Dash as a native currency would make a (commercial) sense only when there would be active dash buyers and sellers.
I disagree. There will be active buyers and seller when there is enough incentive for people to go out of their ways to use a novel form of payment. Otherwise, why bother?
That was clearly evident with the history of Bitcoin and Silk Road. It was only because of Bitcoin's pseudo-anonymous features that urged people to use it, thus gaining (+)demand - (-)supply pressure, thus increasing market cap.
It's a chicken and egg thing, but unless the tools are available will people won't use Dash. Not the opposite. Necessity is the mother of invention, but not everyone is an inventor and has the exact same needs at the exact same time. Therefore, I again disagree with your logic. Provide a incentive for use, and people will follow. It just has to be strong enough, and in the case of Dash, it is instant transactions and privacy features.
So I fail to see how using our funds to develop an interim crypto-wide workaround solution is a good thing.
Circling back to post #1.
The cheapest and most risk-free option to bring buyers and sellers an option to pay in Dash and receive Dash is first do it via shapeshift and then fork the core network to handle dash buyer - dash seller payments without conversion.
Being a developer I understand the desire to rush and play with a cool new toy, but that desire cost me tens of thousands of dollars, white hair and years lost in implementing stuff that nobody cares about.
I can bundle all implementation phases together, but this raises both implementation risks for my team and commercial risks for the dash network beyond levels I'd like.
Once again, I'm not for the money in this proposal. I'm just presenting what it would cost to implement commercially.
If anyone sees the better way or is aware of other projects doing the same ("shifty button for openbazaar") - I'd gladly hear more.
The cheapest and most risk-free option to bring buyers and sellers an option to pay in Dash and receive Dash is first do it via shapeshift and then fork the core network to handle dash buyer - dash seller payments without conversion.
Being a developer I understand the desire to rush and play with a cool new toy, but that desire cost me tens of thousands of dollars, white hair and years lost in implementing stuff that nobody cares about.
I can bundle all implementation phases together, but this raises both implementation risks for my team and commercial risks for the dash network beyond levels I'd like.
Once again, I'm not for the money in this proposal. I'm just presenting what it would cost to implement commercially.
If anyone sees the better way or is aware of other projects doing the same ("shifty button for openbazaar") - I'd gladly hear more.
Complete integration of Dash into OB requires (1) modification of user interface and (2) modification of payment network protocol (btc -> dash).
As far as I understand you're advocating for (1)+(2). Am I right?
We can cut a corner and allow users to buy and sell for Dash by just implementing (1) and using shapeshift for every dash payment.
Also, by implementing (1) we prove our hypothesis that OB+Dash is necessary for actual customers, which removes most of the risk of the "Dash+OB integration project".
Thus, from an investment viewpoint, implementing (1) would be (a) cheaper and (b) clear most of the risk. If it will be successfully used, we can proceed with (2) which most users will feel as just an optimization for a lower transaction fee and time.
If I'm bad at the explanation (again), please, quote the paragraph, where you've lost me and ask questions.
Thanks.
As far as I understand you're advocating for (1)+(2). Am I right?
We can cut a corner and allow users to buy and sell for Dash by just implementing (1) and using shapeshift for every dash payment.
Also, by implementing (1) we prove our hypothesis that OB+Dash is necessary for actual customers, which removes most of the risk of the "Dash+OB integration project".
Thus, from an investment viewpoint, implementing (1) would be (a) cheaper and (b) clear most of the risk. If it will be successfully used, we can proceed with (2) which most users will feel as just an optimization for a lower transaction fee and time.
If I'm bad at the explanation (again), please, quote the paragraph, where you've lost me and ask questions.
Thanks.
Ok, I'll also do my best. Thank you for being so patient with me !!
Yes, I am an advocate of integrating Dash into current OB code, even if it is much more difficult. This would not be cutting corners and a much more elegant solution. We want to make the end user's life easier, not more complicated.
Here is what is bugging me;
- Requesting funds for development of Dash, that end up also benefiting other currencies. Given the market cap, Eth and LTC alone will benefit much more than us, creating down pressure for us. People can always "tumble" coins for anonymity. What is the real benefit of using Dash? Where is the incentive?
- It is obvious by OB's announcement that the Shapeshift plugin will eventually happen. Yes, you can speed things up if you do it yourself, but IMHO this is not going to directly benefit Dash's development (because you cannot lock to Dash transactions only!) - So what the rush? We should develop something else before Shapeshift do it themselves as this will be great for their business.
- Will make all Dash products 0.5 - 1% more expensive
- We don't need to prove the hypothesis that Dash + OB is necessary. It's is an obvious thing. Dash is Bitcoin on steroids. What we need is adoption, and making something as new and cutting edge like OB even harder to operate is not useful. We need to think the other way - how do we make life simpler to the end user?
.
Yes, I am an advocate of integrating Dash into current OB code, even if it is much more difficult. This would not be cutting corners and a much more elegant solution. We want to make the end user's life easier, not more complicated.
Here is what is bugging me;
- Requesting funds for development of Dash, that end up also benefiting other currencies. Given the market cap, Eth and LTC alone will benefit much more than us, creating down pressure for us. People can always "tumble" coins for anonymity. What is the real benefit of using Dash? Where is the incentive?
- It is obvious by OB's announcement that the Shapeshift plugin will eventually happen. Yes, you can speed things up if you do it yourself, but IMHO this is not going to directly benefit Dash's development (because you cannot lock to Dash transactions only!) - So what the rush? We should develop something else before Shapeshift do it themselves as this will be great for their business.
- Will make all Dash products 0.5 - 1% more expensive
- We don't need to prove the hypothesis that Dash + OB is necessary. It's is an obvious thing. Dash is Bitcoin on steroids. What we need is adoption, and making something as new and cutting edge like OB even harder to operate is not useful. We need to think the other way - how do we make life simpler to the end user?
.
I guess you're missing an important thing: to make Dash a viable payment solution on the OB network, OB client has to support Dash<->BTC conversion. Otherwise Dash buyers will be able to use just Dash sellers.
And the simplest way to implement this now is to use shapeshift API.
Of course, better strategy would be wait and see who first will implement it and then have a free ride
Certainly a better funding source would be a shapeshift or OB, but I don't have connections there.
And the simplest way to implement this now is to use shapeshift API.
Of course, better strategy would be wait and see who first will implement it and then have a free ride
Certainly a better funding source would be a shapeshift or OB, but I don't have connections there.
I guess you're missing an important thing: to make Dash a viable payment solution on the OB network, OB client has to support Dash<->BTC conversion. Otherwise Dash buyers will be able to use just Dash sellers.
And the simplest way to implement this now is to use shapeshift API.
Of course, better strategy would be wait and see who first will implement it and then have a free ride
Certainly a better funding source would be a shapeshift or OB, but I don't have connections there.
That is exactly what I mean.
There is a huge difference there, look... The main thing about OB is it's decentralised trade platform, so the dispute mechanism is the golden egg, not the platform itself. It's the trustless decentralised nature of it. For that we really need the 2-of-3 multisig-capable system.
My math was wrong. It's a little worse now I realise. If you buy/sell with Shapeshift it will make products up to 2% more expensive, maybe even more in our case because shapeshift fees are calculated depending on market depth and liquidity. So, using an automated plugin;
OB Seller sell X product for 1 Dash ( in reality 0.0145 BTC)
Buyer buys X product - sends 1Dash to shapeshift -> 1% upmark to convert to 0.0145 BTC -> OB Seller multisig wallet (0.0145 BTC)
Tx is successful, funds are released to shapeshift -> 1% upmark to convert o 1 Dash -> Seller wallet (1 Dash)
If I don't use a plugin, as a Seller I may choose to keep my holdings in BTC and liquidate to Dash when I see fit. Maybe the market even moves in my favor, maybe I can send to an exchange of choice and not spend 1% on an automated system.
Well, a seller not knowing very much about BTC yet being able to setup a OB shop would be very weird. I'm not proposing 2 versions of OB, quite the contrary. I've been pushing for a long time for the integration of Dash into the OB protocol, which I got an "ok by us, if you guys do it! " from the OB devs. One OB, two currencies. It is perfectly possible, though indeed and workload.
But answering your question: If I want to pay with Dash to a seller, all I have to do it put the seller's address right onto Shapeshift and deposit my Dash there. I have the transaction ID's so I have proof of ownership. Done. No need for a plugin.
What you propose is transacting in virtual-Dash both ways, where an automated plugin does the dirty work for both parties, so they can use the 2-of-3 BTC multisig features of OB for mutual buyer/seller protection, at the same time opening the door for all other altcoins to do the same, which is a huge disadvantage for us, and we would be paying from our development fund for it - a feature Shapeshift themselves would be first in line to develop
Either that, or I'm seriously not getting this. I'm sorry!! I feel like I'm pissing on your parade and I don't mean to!!
.