Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 265 results by masterOfDisaster
Re: Park Nubits and earn 12% Apr. interest. Good rates don't last long
OP edited by
Edit to add:
You can find a parking calculator, a tutorial, and an FAQ at www.parkyournubits.com or http://parkyournubits.com (both also with SSL support if you want).
You can find a parking calculator, a tutorial, and an FAQ at www.parkyournubits.com or http://parkyournubits.com (both also with SSL support if you want).
Re: **MANDATORY UPGRADE REQUIRED** [ANN] B&C Exchange - All users must upgrade
Is it a working exchange now or still under development?
It's still under development.
The next important step is an upgrade of the client version that allows e.g. voting for assets, reputed signers etc.
Enabling the trading can only start after assets and signers are available.
It's only a matter of time.
The exchange will be working soonTM
A call to BKS holders and the aftermath -> A recommendation for BKS holders ;)
Recently I posted "A call to BKS holders" urging BKS holders to upgrade and configure votes.
It seems the client (or the network) doesn't like e.g. asset votes in blocks before the protocol was switched to 4.0
If you encounter problems minting blocks with the client version 4.0.1, please remove all asset votes.
If you have registered a data feed from @Cybnate or @cryptog, you can wait until the data feed providers fixed it (one of two already did, although the finding is only a few hours old), or unsubscribe from the data feeds and reset the votes manually.
Short version:
https://discuss.nubits.com/t/mandatory-upgrade-all-minters-need-to-upgrade-to-b-c-exchange-4-0-1/3723/129
For a long version begin reading here:
https://discuss.nubits.com/t/mandatory-upgrade-all-minters-need-to-upgrade-to-b-c-exchange-4-0-1/3723/90
It seems the client (or the network) doesn't like e.g. asset votes in blocks before the protocol was switched to 4.0
If you encounter problems minting blocks with the client version 4.0.1, please remove all asset votes.
If you have registered a data feed from @Cybnate or @cryptog, you can wait until the data feed providers fixed it (one of two already did, although the finding is only a few hours old), or unsubscribe from the data feeds and reset the votes manually.
Short version:
https://discuss.nubits.com/t/mandatory-upgrade-all-minters-need-to-upgrade-to-b-c-exchange-4-0-1/3723/129
For a long version begin reading here:
https://discuss.nubits.com/t/mandatory-upgrade-all-minters-need-to-upgrade-to-b-c-exchange-4-0-1/3723/90
Re: [ANN] B&C Exchange - A decentralized exchange paying BTC dividends
What options are there to distribute dividends with other currencies (say maybe Nubits or something like Grantcoin) while still retaining the network effects? Or will this require a fork, with all the associated dilution.
The dividend distribution is coded in the client, but a software fork to support additional currencies doesn't lead to dilution; it would merely be a new client release with a new feature.As far as I understand the dividend addresses (public keys) get derived from the BKS private keys.
At a snapshot date, a distribution to the dividend addresses takes place.
Introducing additional/alternative dividend types isn't even a protocol update - you just need a client to distribute dividends and a client to generate the dividend addresses.
There also seems to be a risk of financial engineering a 'short' outside the BKS/BKC/etc system in which it becomes profitable to acquire, and then vote against the self-interest of the acquired crypto asset. It is either this, or a lack of patience that seems to be resulting in the long time it's taking to get enough clients upgraded (and voting for) the 4.0 protocol.
While this risk is theoretically exisiting, I have a hard time seeing a relation between it and the upgrading apathy.
BKC don't exist. Not a single one has been created so far,
There's currently only one place that trades BKS: CCEDK (BTC and US-NBT pair; almost no orders an no volume at the BTC pair, some orders and a little volume at the US-NBT pair).
There's no place with leveraged trading or put options - at least not to my knowledge.
So how can this be a real risk now?
I think it's a lack of responsibility that made people start their client to mint blocks without paying attention to the development.
The slow development over some months might have made them think that it's not important to pay attention.
That's wrong!
Without a protocol update to 4.0 (blocks minted by client versions 4.0.0 and 4.0.1), there's no reputed signer voting, no asset voting, etc.
Trading can't start without switching to 4.0!
People who continue to mint protocol 2.0 blocks (e.g. client release 3.0.2) essentially vote against activating exchange functions at B&C Exchange.
Whuaaaaat?
Re: [ANN] B&C Exchange - A decentralized exchange paying BTC dividends
Minting with release 3 of the client harms your investment as it delays the asset voting, which is a prerequisite for trading on B&C Exchange.
Either upgrade to release 4 or stop minting, if you can't upgrade for whatever reason!
Either upgrade to release 4 or stop minting, if you can't upgrade for whatever reason!
Re: [ANN] B&C Exchange - A decentralized exchange paying BTC dividends
Thanks, it would be good to compile a list of data feed providers to make it easier for people to decide
Having a list is not enough. You need to assess the data feed provider; this is crucial. You need to make sure he/she configures the votes after your fancy.
If you register a feed from a provider who doesn't vote like you'd vote (or at least very often close to it) if you'd configure the votes manually, you might be better off, stopping the minting.
That theoretically harms the security of the network, because it reduces the part of the shares that are minting.
The alternative - having votes that lead (from your perspective) in the wrong direction - can be dangerous (for your interest) as well.
That's what I mean when saying there comes a responsibility with owning shares of a corporation, especially if you are able to vote directly and make decisions; like the protocol update:
We have reached 42.85% of protocol votes for version 4.0. All shareholders must upgrade to version 4.0 immediately. The protocol switch date will be two weeks after 90% of blocks are minted with 4.0.0 or 4.0.1.
The protocol switch can only happen, if the vast majority of (active!) minters have switched to 4.0.0 or 4.0.1!
Selecting a data feed provider requires finding out, what side takes in discussions and what are the arguments of the provider.
It's pretty much like trying to find out about whether you want to elect a specific politician:
try to find out what he/she says (here: forum discussions) and what he/she does (here: data feeds; are the aligned with the discussions?)!
You can look for data feed providers here:
https://discuss.nubits.com/c/b-c-exchange
Regarding asset voting (that will be able once the protocol switch is complete), from:
https://discuss.nubits.com/t/configure-your-votes-when-minting/3729/16
Quote from: JordanLee, post:16, topic:3729, full:true
There a number of facts shareholders should know (unless they are using data feeds) regarding configuring asset voting.
For the maxtrade value, bear in mind that it won't really matter until the 5.0 version is released. Let me explain a little about the development process as I see it from now until just past release of 5.0, which will explain my suggested maxtrade value. Right now most messages can be sent, but their processing isn't implemented. We will work on that and as we do, we will begin see the exchange function in the context of a few narrow and limited use cases. Because the exchange will be incomplete, it stands to reason there will be plenty of ways to exploit the solution in its incomplete form. That is fine, because we are on test net and it is just part of the process. Eventually, we will get to where we have provided for all the use cases and no known major or high risk exploits are possible. This will be the time to move the solution to production, but we wouldn't want to do so with high max trade values. We want to start it with very low max trade sizes, so it can be tested without risk of loss of substantial funds. A good place to start would be around 1 USD. Once the exchange performs well with that limit, it can be raised incrementally at whatever pace seems appropriate at the time.
In regard to required signers and total signers, please remember that the protocol requires two backup signers to validate orders. This means 2 of 3 multisig cannot meet B&C protocol. The protocol can be changed (this hasn't even been coded yet), but doing so increases risk. I recommend we not do that. 2 of 4 is the minimum number of signers to be protocol compliant. If 2 of 4 is used, and a single signer is unavailable, no orders with the involved funds can placed. The funds wouldn't be lost because they can still be withdrawn without backup signers, however. I suggest 3 of 6 as a minimum number of required and total signers. More total signers and more required signers, such as 8 of 15, provide much better decentralisation but somewhat higher costs for transaction fees and signer compensation. My recommendation for a starting point is 3 of 6: 3 required signers and 6 total signers. I hope we move to 8 of 15 soon.
Also bear in mind that once an asset has been successfully voted in, you don't need to keep voting for it with its maxtrade value and so forth, unless you want to change one of the values from its current setting. If you don't vote, then your vote is counted as a vote for the status quo. So, if the current number of required Bitcoin signers is 3, if I vote for 3, it just wastes blockchain space. An abstention will be interpreted as a 3 by protocol. If you wanted to change it to 5, then you should include it in your vote. This notion of an abstention being counted as a vote for the current network setting applies to most things that can be voted for within B&C Exchange.
For the maxtrade value, bear in mind that it won't really matter until the 5.0 version is released. Let me explain a little about the development process as I see it from now until just past release of 5.0, which will explain my suggested maxtrade value. Right now most messages can be sent, but their processing isn't implemented. We will work on that and as we do, we will begin see the exchange function in the context of a few narrow and limited use cases. Because the exchange will be incomplete, it stands to reason there will be plenty of ways to exploit the solution in its incomplete form. That is fine, because we are on test net and it is just part of the process. Eventually, we will get to where we have provided for all the use cases and no known major or high risk exploits are possible. This will be the time to move the solution to production, but we wouldn't want to do so with high max trade values. We want to start it with very low max trade sizes, so it can be tested without risk of loss of substantial funds. A good place to start would be around 1 USD. Once the exchange performs well with that limit, it can be raised incrementally at whatever pace seems appropriate at the time.
In regard to required signers and total signers, please remember that the protocol requires two backup signers to validate orders. This means 2 of 3 multisig cannot meet B&C protocol. The protocol can be changed (this hasn't even been coded yet), but doing so increases risk. I recommend we not do that. 2 of 4 is the minimum number of signers to be protocol compliant. If 2 of 4 is used, and a single signer is unavailable, no orders with the involved funds can placed. The funds wouldn't be lost because they can still be withdrawn without backup signers, however. I suggest 3 of 6 as a minimum number of required and total signers. More total signers and more required signers, such as 8 of 15, provide much better decentralisation but somewhat higher costs for transaction fees and signer compensation. My recommendation for a starting point is 3 of 6: 3 required signers and 6 total signers. I hope we move to 8 of 15 soon.
Also bear in mind that once an asset has been successfully voted in, you don't need to keep voting for it with its maxtrade value and so forth, unless you want to change one of the values from its current setting. If you don't vote, then your vote is counted as a vote for the status quo. So, if the current number of required Bitcoin signers is 3, if I vote for 3, it just wastes blockchain space. An abstention will be interpreted as a 3 by protocol. If you wanted to change it to 5, then you should include it in your vote. This notion of an abstention being counted as a vote for the current network setting applies to most things that can be voted for within B&C Exchange.
Re: [ANN] B&C Exchange - A decentralized exchange paying BTC dividends
And I've just been reminded that there's another data feed for BKS voting:
https://discuss.nubits.com/t/cryptogs-bcexchange-data-feeds-beta/2503
https://discuss.nubits.com/t/cryptogs-bcexchange-data-feeds-beta/2503
Ouch, I didn't realise the consequences here, sorry ... updating asap!
any tips on pain-free vote configuration?
Nice to see that my alarming post delivered the message
The good news is that there are currently no motions, etc. going on.
And for asset voting the protocol switch needs to happen and a lot more minters need to upgrade to version 4.
So there's still some time to get familiar with it.
There's no pain-free vote configuration
You can do it manually and need to follow the development closely - which continually takes time.
Or you can register a data feed, but must do some assessment to find out which data feed provider votes after your fancy - which takes time for an initial assessment and some checks from time to time.
I think the most easy solution is to get votes configured is by registering a data feed.
I'm only aware of one data feed, provided by Cybnate, a very reputed member of the Nu community who hosts a Nu Network data feed as well.
The B&C Exchange data fee is here: https://github.com/Cybnate/BKS-datafeed
...and you'll find it empty, because there's nothing to vote for at the moment.
If you want to know how it works, have a look here (this is for the Nu Network, but it works the same): https://discuss.nubits.com/t/cybnates-datafeed-beta/1310
More information about (Nu Network) data feeds: https://docs.nubits.com/using-a-data-feed/
Before you delegate your voting behaviour to somebody, you should make sure that person has a mindset that is compatible with yours!
For B&C Exchange there was only one motion so far: https://discuss.nubits.com/t/bks-passed-motion-to-stop-sale-of-bks/2485/
Cybnate supported that in her data feed: https://github.com/Cybnate/BKS-datafeed/commit/1791d4125820d47720ad745d716d37d423a45584#diff-83fc3e19234622842fbf4ce8d074644b
If you want to know more about Cybnate, you should visit the Nu Network forum and look for her posts, work, reasoning, and votes she configures for the Nu Network.
I'm aware that this sounds like a lot of work and in fact it is.
BKS are not just tokens of a "cryptocurrency".
They are shares of a corporation (B&C Exchange).
With owning shares comes power.
And with power comes responsibility!
All BlockShareholders must upgrade their B&C Exchange client to version 4.0.1 immediately, to ensure we continue to build momentum towards a functional exchange. This is a mandatory upgrade for all users.
A call to all BKS holders:
from release 4.0.0 on asset voting is possible.
Upgrade to 4.0.1 if you are still on 3.x to make the protocol switch possible!
This protocol switch is required to start asset voting and other stuff.
At the NuBits forum (https://discuss.nubits.com/t/configure-your-votes-when-minting/3729/) has a discussion started regarding asset voting.
You might already be aware of that, but if not, start getting familiar with it:
you need to configure votes when minting with BKS.
As a responsible shareholder you need to decide the fate of the coporation of which you own shares!
Not minting (and trying to evade that problem this way) is not yet an option: the higher the participation of shares in the minting process, the higher the security of the network.
Keep your property safe and vote wisely!
I wrote "note yet", because there will be data feed providers, from whom you can register feeds that configure votes. Once you've found a data feed provider, that decides after your fancy, you can register that feed and mint with settings continuously updated by the data feed provider.
Alas, there are no data feed providers yet.
So: configure your votes!
If you don't configure votes and mint, you essentially vote against everything, ultimately stalling the decision process of the coorporation, harming your property!
You don't want that, do you?
Re: [ANN] B&C Exchange - A decentralized exchange paying BTC dividends
When are you going live?
It depends what you consider "live". The blockchain is live from the beginning and allowed trading BKS ever since.Asset voting (to determine which tokens can be traded on the B&C Exchange) has just begun.
Trading the assets is still not possible, but that might change rapidly, now that Eleven has been hired as (additionaö) full time developer to increase the development speed.
Look at the progress here: https://bitbucket.org/JordanLeePeershares/bcexchange/commits/
Are you still seeking funds from funders?
Funding is complete for now. If additional funding is required to develop e.g. a website to access the B&C Exchange blockchain, additional BKS might be created by the current BKS holders and sold/auctioned. This is not on the agenda I'm aware of.How to fund?
Not possible at the moment. If you want to purchase BKS, you need to buy them on the open market, e.g. here: https://www.ccedk.com/bks-us-nbt or via escrow. I can point you to someone if you are interested in the latter one (useful for bigger amounts than offered at CCEDK).Re: [ANN] B&C Exchange - A decentralized exchange paying BTC dividends
All I hear is BS... I have no longer interest in this project. You won't get half a dime from me
You don't come across as having had genuine interest. You asked questions and got answers.
They might not be after your fancy, but calling eveything you hear BS is less helpful than arguing and explaining why you see it differently.
Maybe helping wasn't your intention.
That is interesting, because you wanted to accuse BKS holders of being selfish. Not so different after all...
Anyway - have fun... btw. dimes aren't supported by B&C ;-)
Re: [ANN] B&C Exchange - A decentralized exchange paying BTC dividends
- What makes B&C better than OpenLedger?
I don't know whether it's better. It's just different, e.g. in the way it offers trading pairs. B&C will offer trading of native assets instead of using proxy assets. This can remove friction.
And you can bet that B&C will have sufficient (US-)NBT liquidity. So you can effectively trade assets at pairs with "USD rates".
Does Openledger have pairs with synthetic fiat at a tight peg and decent volume?
Does Openledger have a client with that you can do your trades or are you limited to a website for your trading?
While it's expected to find websites that allow convenient access to the "B&C user accounts", the user account is on the B&C blockchain and the user can't be locked out. What happens to user funds on exchange, if https://bitshares.openledger.info is down due to technical or legal issues, DDoS'ed or unusable in any other way?
You might be able to DDoS B&C as well, but that will make BKS holders awfully rich and can't be sustained forever.
Users can't be locked out from their funds easily. They are handled by multisg through the signers.
- What are the differences between BKS shareholders and signers in terms of voting power?
- How are you planning to take into consideration and defend the B&C user interests Vs BKS shareholders & signers?
Signers are a kind of contract workers, hired by BKS holders.
If they don't behave, they'll get removed and replaced.
I see your voting system a bit too static and away from what decentralization means...
You seem to confuse decentralization with communism. Ownership of B&C and the signers are decentralized and distributed.You are giving zero power to your users which are the most important part of your project.
Users have all the power they need to have. They vote with their purses You might have achieved a decentralized platform but its governance model defeats the whole idea that your are trying to sell. Why don't you make it a decentralized autonomous exchange (DAE) far from human conflict of interest. The running costs including developers would come out of the fees and donations and if there was a surplus the whole community could vote what to do with it via a smart voting system that takes into account the users voice, the developers voice and the infrastructure people voice.
This governance model (shareholders deciding by direct voting which way to go) proved to be very successful during all the development decisions and business process decisions Nu had to make since its beginning.It's way more advances than what's used in traditional stock corporations. You don't need middlemen here!
As I said before, users already have a vote. They vote with they behaviour. If they don't come or leave the exchange, the BKS holders will hear that!
Users have an interest in using a convenient and cheap exchange.
BKS holders want to offer that, but still make money from it.
As the BKS holders funded this whole exchange, I think it's ok, if they have a say.
If users want to influence something at B&C directly, they might want to buy BKS?
And BKS holders will listen to the users who may ask for services on forum, of course, shareholders are not deaf.
They will listen the same way corporations listen to their users but hey! it's okay, making profit out of them it's all that matters.I'm still waiting for the answers of my questions
Corporations who listen to their users are more successful than others - at least if there are alternatives; a monopoly is different.
B&C is not the only decentralized exchange approach.
B&C will need to listen to its users.
Re: [ANN] B&C Exchange - A decentralized exchange paying BTC dividends
So B&C 4.0 will allow reputed signer voting and which currencies will be traded on the exchange.
I believe this was touched on deep within this thread, but can someone describe the process of being a signer? Briefly walk us through the set up and day in life of a signer.
I ask because I'd really like to become one.
I believe this was touched on deep within this thread, but can someone describe the process of being a signer? Briefly walk us through the set up and day in life of a signer.
I ask because I'd really like to become one.
I'd like to ask additional questions:
is it possible to state hardware requirements for a computer that is suitable for running a signing node?
How much RAM and CPU speed is necessary, how much I/O, bandwidth, etc.?
Is it possible to host a redundant solution (I suppose it's not easily possible, at least not as an integrated solution)?
Is a device like RaspberryPi3 suitable, or do you need more power?
As far as I understand, the reputed signers need to run nodes or have RPC access to daemons of the assets they offer signing for.
Can you please remind me: are only standard wallets supported or lightweight versions as well?
...signers for BTC will have a hard time, if they need to sync over 70 GB blockchain...
Re: [ANN] B&C Exchange - A decentralized exchange paying BTC dividends
[...] centralized exchanges still are faster at executing transactions, by orders of magnitude in general, than decentralized ones. So there are places for both kind of exchanges.
I fully agree.
High frequency trading will by design be impossible with B&C Exchange - at least in the implementation that is currently being created.
I have no idea how to bring the speed of a decentralized exchange even close to a centralized exchange, but doubt that it's possible with the currently available tools.
This decentralized exchange is going to have other benefits than speed (just to name a few):
- ability to trade native assets instead of proxy assets (in difference to other decentralized exchanges, same as centralized exchanges)
- high level of security due to multisig with different possible levels (rarely (if ever!) found at centralized exchanges)
- high level of availablity - all trades happen on blockchain and cost BKC; DDoS'ing the blockchain is possible, but very costly as BKC are required for it
- highly flexible ways to access the "account": by wallet application on own computer or through websites, which offer access to the blockchain
- leveraged/margin trading is basically possible
- decentralized escrow services are within reach
Re: DECENTRALIZED crypto currency (including Bitcoin) is a delusion (any solutions?)
I beg your pardon for being off-topic.
But as you have an immense understanding of crypto currencies, I thought I might ask a question regarding a part of the recent conversation.
I'd have asked via PM, but I bet a lot of people are interested in your assessment.
Why do you scream when you've been incessantly warned that storing your crypto currency with any third party is inherently unsafe and can never be safe.
That is why we need decentralized exchanges, but these have technical challenges that have yet to be overcome.
Don't you think that decentralized exchanges like
MercuryEx or
Blocks & Chains Exchange
are on a good way, because in difference to other decentralized exchanges they use no proxy tokens, but do transactions on the native blockchains.
My understanding is, that MercuryEx has been stopped, because transaction malleability makes using it unsafe until OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY is widely available.
And Blocks & Chains Exchange is not as decentralized as some might wish, but for a corporation that might still be ok and much better than the current centralized exchanges.
But as you have an immense understanding of crypto currencies, I thought I might ask a question regarding a part of the recent conversation.
I'd have asked via PM, but I bet a lot of people are interested in your assessment.
, but the Cryptsy thing pisses me off. The high level of scuntitude they've displayed and complete disregard for their customers just makes me want to scream. I did in my car on the way home, but it didn't help.
Why do you scream when you've been incessantly warned that storing your crypto currency with any third party is inherently unsafe and can never be safe.
That is why we need decentralized exchanges, but these have technical challenges that have yet to be overcome.
Don't you think that decentralized exchanges like
MercuryEx or
Blocks & Chains Exchange
are on a good way, because in difference to other decentralized exchanges they use no proxy tokens, but do transactions on the native blockchains.
My understanding is, that MercuryEx has been stopped, because transaction malleability makes using it unsafe until OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY is widely available.
And Blocks & Chains Exchange is not as decentralized as some might wish, but for a corporation that might still be ok and much better than the current centralized exchanges.
Re: DECENTRALIZED crypto currency (including Bitcoin) is a delusion (any solutions?)
It's a pity that this discussion, which was one of the better ones on bct for some time, has come to this end.
I still haven't read it all, but it seemed to be very auspicious.
I still haven't read it all, but it seemed to be very auspicious.
Re: DECENTRALIZED crypto currency (including Bitcoin) is a delusion (any solutions?)
I admit I haven't read the whole thread (which I will likely do).
Searching within all posts didn't show an occurance of Proof-of-Burn.
This was invented by Slimcoin (burning coins to generate virtual miners that process transactions and write the blockchain).
I'd like to know what's your view of Slimcoin or rather Proof-of-Burn (because Slimcoin is more dead than alive, but Proof-of-Burn as consensus mechanism not necesarily).
If you don't find information about it, I might dig in my bookmarks for bitcointalk threads, source code and more when I'm at my computer.
Searching within all posts didn't show an occurance of Proof-of-Burn.
This was invented by Slimcoin (burning coins to generate virtual miners that process transactions and write the blockchain).
I'd like to know what's your view of Slimcoin or rather Proof-of-Burn (because Slimcoin is more dead than alive, but Proof-of-Burn as consensus mechanism not necesarily).
If you don't find information about it, I might dig in my bookmarks for bitcointalk threads, source code and more when I'm at my computer.
Re: [Bounty] Get $10 NBT Bonus By Hedging BTC Volatility At NuLagoon.com
[...]
User Guide
----------
- **Step 1:Register an addr pair to the Tube**
Send xxx NBT and xxx BTC (please check the magic number from our website) to the Tube FROM a NBT address and a BTC address of yours, then the two send-from addresses will be registered.
- **Step 2:Check live addr pairs**
Check Live Addr Pairs to see if your addr pair is successfully registered.
- **Step 3:Exchange coins by using the Tube**
Send NBT/BTC to the Tube (the minimun is 100 NBT or 0.2 BTC) FROM NBT/BTC side of your addr pair, then you will receive BTC/NBT by another side of the addr pair shortly.
User Guide
----------
- **Step 1:Register an addr pair to the Tube**
Send xxx NBT and xxx BTC (please check the magic number from our website) to the Tube FROM a NBT address and a BTC address of yours, then the two send-from addresses will be registered.
- **Step 2:Check live addr pairs**
Check Live Addr Pairs to see if your addr pair is successfully registered.
- **Step 3:Exchange coins by using the Tube**
Send NBT/BTC to the Tube (the minimun is 100 NBT or 0.2 BTC) FROM NBT/BTC side of your addr pair, then you will receive BTC/NBT by another side of the addr pair shortly.
After having sent the displayed amount of NBT and BTC to the NuLagoonTube addresses, what else is required to tie those two addresses to each other and allow conversion from NBT to BTC or vice versa through them?
How do you make them appear at the "Live Addr Pairs"?
There are some "register requests" listed in the "Blockchain TXs" overview, which can't be found in the "Tube Transactions" overview or the "Live Addr Pairs" overview.