Quote from: MalReynolds on March 02, 2016, 07:34:00 PM

I've been thinking about this some more. The post above discusses my desire to say something specific in the whitepaper on the maximum ISP latency acceptable for running a Lisk mainchain node. (I am worried we are going to have a lot of disappointed Active Delegates when they realize they can't run a Lisk mainchain node from home on their spare PC and they actually have to rent a server at Vultr for $5 per month). I also ask for confirmation that sidechains can run at slower block times that the mainchain, and if that alone would allow the use of slower, high-latency ISPs.

These are important and hard questions that nobody really knows the answers for yet. One of my first goals when Lisk goes live with 0.5.5 is to set up some cheap sidechain nodes and run some timing experiments to get some answers. I want to give my future sports dapp customers great service!

We will have to do this as a community. I will try it from the office and from home. Then take the latencies to different IPs and post them. If we all do this, we should find a minimum.

Quote from: MalReynolds on March 02, 2016, 07:34:00 PM

First off, are we going to start Lisk on version 0.5.5 software and not 0.5.4?

Version 0.5.5.

Quote from: MalReynolds on March 02, 2016, 07:34:00 PM

And once we start saying a Lisk blocktime of greater than 10 seconds is OK - why not set the official Lisk blocktime as necessary to maximize high-latency home ISP participation by Active Delegates? Maybe that's a blocktime of 15 seconds, maybe that's 30 seconds, maybe that's a full minute of 60 seconds. Logically, a 60 second blocktime should be able to handle 6 times higher latency delays than a 10 second blocktime, right?

No, if we are talking about latencies we are talking about milli seconds here. It doesn't make a difference if we have 10 second blocks or 60 second blocks.

Currently our blockchain database is 807MB big, after 2,234,777 blocks. That means every block is on average (approximately!) 0.000361MB or 361bytes big. About 3,000,000 blocks are 1 year. That means our blockchain will probably grow to about 1,5GB-2GB in the first year, due to more volume at Lisk. This is absolutely OK. Even 3GB would be OK.

We just bring the blockchain bloat problem at Ethereum, because imagine there are 10,000 dapps. That wouldn't be possible in my opinion right now. However, at Lisk this wouldn't change a thing, because of the sidechains. Wink

Additionally, changing the 10 second block time is not 1 change of code. It would require heavy testing. So in conclusion, we won't change the 10 second block time which is only beneficial for users and devs.

Quote from: Dogstar12 on March 02, 2016, 07:36:45 PM

Hey@all,

i want to change some btc to Lisk.

Where can i get a client for windows? That link https://downloads.lisk.io/lisk/main/lisk-0.1.1-Darwin-x86_64.zip on the page don't works.

Can someone help?

We haven't released the client yet. We will release the full client right at launch or very soon after that.

Quote from: GoldenEye on March 02, 2016, 07:39:11 PM

@Max
You can please ask the exchange again?

Otherwise I will wait a week...

Perhaps we should make a little "publicity" for bter.

I will write another support ticket in a few minutes!

Quote from: GoldenEye on March 02, 2016, 08:18:56 PM

Quote from: MalReynolds on March 02, 2016, 08:10:22 PM

Quote from: poornamelessme on March 02, 2016, 08:03:22 PM

...I haven't gotten all of my keys/passphrases yet.

I was a little surprised to see a public key along with a passcode and Lisk account number from my XCR deposit. Is this public key the same as the one in discussions going like "please send me 1 XCR so I can get a public key" ? Will we need to do a "first transaction" in our new Lisk accounts in a few weeks to generate a new public key, or is the one assigned at the ICO site a good public key forever?

In asymmetric cryptography (public-key cryptography) a pair of keys is used (public and private). Both keys are generated simultaneously.
With the "first transaction" you mentioned, the public key is not generated, but firstly stored in the blockchain.

Exactly!

Quote from: bitcoinuserz on March 02, 2016, 09:36:02 PM

Quote from: Dwr on March 02, 2016, 09:21:05 PM

Quote from: LiskHQ on March 02, 2016, 04:27:19 PM

Quote from: bitseedmike on March 02, 2016, 04:03:41 PM

(Note: looks like whitepaper needs to be updated, "0.1 LISK of amount sent for a spend transaction" should be "0.1% LISK of amount sent for a spend transaction".

We changed it to a constant 0.1 LISK. There was always the problem to calculate the fee, now it's very easy.

Great job! So if lisk will cost 10 usd in the future, transaction fee will be 1 usd. You guys rock! "Now it's very easy", lawl

I do agree with this. it should be percentage not constant. Constant will disrupt free economy as lisk goes up.

Hah! Absolutely not. If the price of 1 LISK grows that high, we would obviously release an update which reduces the fees back to older levels.

Imagine a percentage fee of 0.1% as it was before. The more money you want to transfer, the more you have to pay for the transaction. Let's say you want to transact 10,000 LISK at the price of 10 USD as "Dwr" forcast. Then you would have to pay 100 USD transaction fee. However, with our (current!) constant fee you would have to pay 10 USD, most probably at this level we would have reduced it to 0.001 LISK, i.e. 1ct.

Quote from: Celendion on March 02, 2016, 10:42:10 PM

the signature of members is not available?

What do you mean?