Author Topic: CCEDK shutting down end of May for a month  (Read 3982 times)

rjr #15 on: May 26, 2016, 02:37:38 AM

  • Senior Fimker
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
    • View Profile
gaianhuuto -

You have not made your loan payments to me at CCEDK since early April.  Please honor your word to me.  Since CCEDK is closing, you may send your catchup payments and the remaining 21 weekly payments to the Bitcoin address below.  Thank you.

1DHaicfRMLch5CU5LXiZYbdS4YzM4Fm8uP

gaianhuuto #16 on: May 26, 2016, 08:22:44 AM

  • Grand Fimker
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • View Profile
Thanks for the changed account info. You've missed one payment on the 17.5. There is one done today too, otherwise the info is up to date. And don't you worry, our contract will be honored :)
TurnTrips.poker - Ässät pöytään ja kryptovaluutat jakoon.

J #17 on: May 26, 2016, 06:29:36 PM

  • Senior Fimker
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
Another article or two on upcoming CCEDK transition

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rogeraitken/2016/05/15/bitcoin-exchange-ccedk-relaunching-as-decentralized-conglomerate-with-crowdfund-focus/#7a0ed1ee7fd1

https://news.bitcoin.com/ccedk-reopen-finance-incubator/

I think the OpenLedger platform could be considered a major exchange.  It has lots of available CC to deposit and trade.  The difference between it and the traditional exchanges is that it isn't centralized.  This is a true distributed exchange.  I myself run a node.  OpenLedger is just a transaction network.  It works in much the same way as the FIM asset exchange.  Personally, I thought the traditional exchange was the weakest point in the cryptocurrency world.  While OpenLedger doesn't solve all the problems, I think it is a step in the right direction. 

The above articles state that CCEDK is not going to be an exchange anymore.  I would guess most here considered CCEDK a major exchange and they have chosen to stop the business in support of OpenLedger. 

Just my opinion

Problem with your node I think and by my opinnion is that it is only you. You need at least one partner in case of emergency if something happens and you cant be online. That is serious problem also with many other similar projects around. Some automated multisig system like multigateway.org would be superb behind it, but it still would need more people behind it for case of emergency. Just my 2 FIMKs.

warmach #18 on: May 26, 2016, 08:01:26 PM

  • Senior Fimker
  • ***
  • Posts: 227
    • View Profile
Problem with your node I think and by my opinnion is that it is only you. You need at least one partner in case of emergency if something happens and you cant be online. That is serious problem also with many other similar projects around. Some automated multisig system like multigateway.org would be superb behind it, but it still would need more people behind it for case of emergency. Just my 2 FIMKs.

Thanks for pointing this out.  I have been thinking this over myself how to resolve it.  I'm glad someone else saw it too. 

I am open to trying to setup something that would allow someone to step in an emergency.  Here are my thoughts as I've contemplated this...

-- Yes, it is just me, one person.  A single point of failure that could derail the whole thing.  Though, an exchange could really be the same thing, one or two guys.  If that happens, everyone loses everything. IMO, doesn't seem that different to me. 

--  We are a relatively small community, in the beginning, you are going to have small numbers of people doing things.  That is where trust comes in.  I wanted to make that very clear and said so in my OpenLedger thread.  I guess one option would be to provide someone with copy of the FIM and OpenLedger account keys.  This would give them full access to initiate transactions on both systems.  Both the community and I would need to trust that person/party.

-- If my understanding of mutli sig features is correct, it would require that all parties sign off on transactions.  I would think that would potentially slow down transaction processing.  In addition, if one party "disappears" then nothing can happen either.  Maybe I am wrong.  If so, someone please correct me.

-- In regards to MultiGateway, I'm providing the same service to the OpenLedger trading platform.  I don't have setup a multi sig account to hold FIM (can that be even done) or the OpenLedger account that issues FIMKRYPTO.

-- If people really want to use the service, I'd automate the process.  I don't want to have to be constantly watching accounts to look for transactions.  I could give someone access to the service, but again, it would give them access to the keys.


Please feel free to add to my mental ramblings....
Warmach's Forging Pool
http://fim.warmach.info/pool/
May the forge be with you...

J #19 on: May 26, 2016, 08:53:53 PM

  • Senior Fimker
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
Thanks for pointing this out.  I have been thinking this over myself how to resolve it.  I'm glad someone else saw it too. 

I am open to trying to setup something that would allow someone to step in an emergency.  Here are my thoughts as I've contemplated this...

-- Yes, it is just me, one person.  A single point of failure that could derail the whole thing.  Though, an exchange could really be the same thing, one or two guys.  If that happens, everyone loses everything. IMO, doesn't seem that different to me. 

--  We are a relatively small community, in the beginning, you are going to have small numbers of people doing things.  That is where trust comes in.  I wanted to make that very clear and said so in my OpenLedger thread.  I guess one option would be to provide someone with copy of the FIM and OpenLedger account keys.  This would give them full access to initiate transactions on both systems.  Both the community and I would need to trust that person/party.

-- If my understanding of mutli sig features is correct, it would require that all parties sign off on transactions.  I would think that would potentially slow down transaction processing.  In addition, if one party "disappears" then nothing can happen either.  Maybe I am wrong.  If so, someone please correct me.

-- In regards to MultiGateway, I'm providing the same service to the OpenLedger trading platform.  I don't have setup a multi sig account to hold FIM (can that be even done) or the OpenLedger account that issues FIMKRYPTO.

-- If people really want to use the service, I'd automate the process.  I don't want to have to be constantly watching accounts to look for transactions.  I could give someone access to the service, but again, it would give them access to the keys.


Please feel free to add to my mental ramblings....

Thanks for answer.

I want to say, I have been following cryptocurrencies since 2012, so my opinninions are not only about FIMK.

Yes, there is maybe no difference between trust of small exchange or small decentralized exchange in some platform.

I have not tried your service, but multigateway.org I have and it is fully automated, transactions are almost instant if service is up and running.

Still, my main point is that you need partners to be trusted. I can be one of them for saving passwords and data if needed, but I think best option for that would be FIMK association.

warmach #20 on: May 26, 2016, 09:17:50 PM

  • Senior Fimker
  • ***
  • Posts: 227
    • View Profile
I have not tried your service, but multigateway.org I have and it is fully automated, transactions are almost instant if service is up and running.
While I haven't done it yet, this was my plan as well.  Before I put all the work in to automate it, I wanted to make sure it was something that people wanted.  If no one wants it, I don't mind shutting service down.  I just saw a need and am trying fill it.

I think best option for that would be FIMK association.

I agree
Warmach's Forging Pool
http://fim.warmach.info/pool/
May the forge be with you...

warmach #21 on: May 26, 2016, 09:39:09 PM

  • Senior Fimker
  • ***
  • Posts: 227
    • View Profile

-- If my understanding of mutli sig features is correct, it would require that all parties sign off on transactions.  I would think that would potentially slow down transaction processing.  In addition, if one party "disappears" then nothing can happen either.  Maybe I am wrong.  If so, someone please correct me.


I have delved more into the multi sig features of the OpenLedger/Bitshares platform.  It is actually more robust than I imagined.  It allows me to give permissions to other accounts to move funds.  With these permissions, I can give each account a weight.  So if the weight of the account(s) adds up to be greater than or equal to the permission threshold, then the transaction is processed. 

For example...  The threshold to process a transaction is 1.  I give my own account a weight of 1.  I can then therefore make any transactions I want myself.  I could then give J a weight of 0.5 and Dirk Diggler a weight of 0.5  Neither could do anything on their own but if they both sign the transaction, the weight adds up to 1 and goes through. 

http://docs.bitshares.eu/bitshares/user/account-permissions.html

So it looks like I could give access to several accounts that could work together to move funds in the case that I disappear. 

Is there a similar feature in FIMK?
Warmach's Forging Pool
http://fim.warmach.info/pool/
May the forge be with you...

J #22 on: May 27, 2016, 06:19:35 PM

  • Senior Fimker
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
While I haven't done it yet, this was my plan as well.  Before I put all the work in to automate it, I wanted to make sure it was something that people wanted.  If no one wants it, I don't mind shutting service down.  I just saw a need and am trying fill it.

If you really can code system like that, I can't see no reason why anyone would like to have FIMK in traditional exchanges besides, except of Coinmarketcap ranking. And some people maybe prefer other assets more than OpenLedger, but...

Dirk Diggler #23 on: May 30, 2016, 11:08:49 AM

  • FIMK Staff
  • *****
  • Posts: 486
    • View Profile
    • Krypto Fin ry
Is there a similar feature in FIMK?

There is phasing and account control which basically do the same thing, that code is in FIMK but its not enabled.

The things with these kinds of features is that when you enable it once you have to keep it enabled for eternity or a full blockchain scan would no longer work (unless you of course later disable the feature and manually code around those transactions remaining on the chain - but this could potentially be a lot of transactions).

I would think that would potentially slow down transaction processing.

That totally depends on the transaction processor architecture and transaction storage and balance data management.
As it stands now all major crypto currencies suffer from this since they all share roughly the same application architecture.

We are however working on a method that totally re-thinks the whole way you build up a crypto currency network, cant say anymore at this time  ;)
FIMK Developer | GPG fingerprint: CEF2 7C39 43BE 6800 504E  71BC 7E87 A7B0 AC34 E2D5 | mofowallet.com | blog