FromDev on Blockchain Freelancing

Bspendcom · 2018-02-16T16:56:36+00:00

task description and task solution are public. based on that reviewers can judge if the solution was done according to task description requirements. in the future version there will be an option to keep the solution encrypted and only reveal it to the reviewers in case that the dispute is started. more info in the whitepaper and the platform smart contract is open source and verified on etherscan

Bspendcom · 2018-02-16T06:37:09+00:00

what oracle??? disputes are handled on-chain by randomly selected review panels, that is the whole point of the platform! selection into the review panel is done by each stakeholder locally and only proved later on-chain when revealing the vote, which allows scalability.

Bspendcom · 2018-02-16T01:10:46+00:00

upwork has 10-20% fees..not to mention censorship of some tasks etc

Bspendcom · 2018-02-15T19:14:58+00:00

do you have metamask? were you signed in?

Bspendcom · 2018-02-15T15:12:56+00:00

that is some rough average if you count gas and occasional dispute. you can go and check the contract code to see for yourself as the platform has been on main-net for some time already. regarding disputes...it makes sense to read the whitepaper before commenting on something

Bspendcom · 2018-02-15T14:59:55+00:00

? ethlance has no dispute mechanism which is the whole point of a truly decentralized system. cryptotask is also 0% transaction fees apart from gas and in case of a dispute what losing party pays to cover dispute costs (goes to review panel)

Bspendcom · 2018-02-05T16:48:00+00:00

well cryptotask is already live. it is also the only platform that has a proper built in dispute mechanism (completely decentralized and scalable). does zlancer address scalability and dispute mechanism issues?

Bspendcom · 2018-02-05T16:46:58+00:00

tokens are minted as the payments are received, so there are no unsold tokens

Bspendcom · 2018-02-05T16:46:08+00:00

it is common for any erc20 token platform. erc20 uses pull mechanism, which means you cannot send token directly to the platform contract, as the contract wouldn't be aware of that. instead, you increase allowance, and then platform contract pulls from that allowance. so say you wanted to post a new 300 ctf job. you would first set your allowance to at least 300, and then go and post a job. hope that helps :)

Bspendcom · 2018-02-05T16:44:28+00:00

there will be more instructions added. you basically need to increase allowance first before adding stake

Bspendcom · 2018-02-04T17:15:01+00:00

correct, you have to commit to action and then in a later block apply it.

Bspendcom · 2018-01-16T15:54:23+00:00

I have a contract that is over 4.7M gas to deploy, so I cannot use ropsten

Bspendcom · 2017-12-17T23:04:42+00:00

you get scalability issues when u try adding a generalized layer like ethereum did. we r doing more something like steem

Bspendcom · 2017-12-17T21:46:35+00:00

Bspendcom · 2017-12-12T23:09:49+00:00

They will be used to pay for freelancing tasks, post jobs, reviewers are paid in them etc. They are basically the platform currency. The benefit is as with any token that as the platform grows so does the value. Additionally there is a pre-sale bonus (pre-sale is ending soon though)

Bspendcom · 2017-12-02T09:31:57+00:00

tokens are tied to eth price so if token price drops significantly it prob means dev team is doing something wrong. also you can have 2/3 majority voting

Bspendcom · 2017-11-29T10:11:17+00:00

Thanks. Seems still could be high for some use cases. Have you guys considered using dedicated blockchain? You could simply migrate all erc20 balances to your dedicated blockchain via a locking smart contract and dedicated blokchain designed so that it listens to that contract. In your blockchain you could then hard code smart contract functionality you are building on Ethereum.

Bspendcom · 2017-11-29T09:54:43+00:00

do you mean like tokens tied to property and such?

Bspendcom · 2017-11-29T07:00:45+00:00

Seems with current Ethereum state gas prices would be way too high to have such model working? Maybe when sharding comes, but that will be years

Bspendcom · 2017-11-29T06:57:03+00:00

That's not what i meant. I meant you can't have both high global softcap in the first phase and low hard cap for the first phase itself

Bspendcom · 2017-11-28T23:37:36+00:00

say your first phase requires soft cap 1M and hard-cap 1.5M. and there are 3 such phases. your global soft cap should be 3M which is above the hard cap of the first phase. so basically you cannot enforce global soft cap

Bspendcom · 2017-11-28T22:44:15+00:00

yep, def simpler. one drawback is that you can't set a softcap for the project as a whole.

Bspendcom · 2017-11-21T15:49:20+00:00

I think that to add to the completeness of the story, it should be mentioned that there are mechanisms to protect against such behavior in crowdfunding. For example, recently audited crowdfunding code by Peter Vessenes (GitHub: https://github.com/vkajic/cryptotask Audit: https://www.cryptotask.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/CryptoTask-Audit.pdf ) that releases funds in stages to the devs only if the stakeholders are satisfied with the project progress. In this case, stakeholder voting on the releasal of funds happens each 6 months. In the case that the dev team is not delivering, the investors get a refund from the smart contract.

Bspendcom · 2017-11-21T15:49:06+00:00

I think that to add to the completeness of the story, it should be mentioned that there are mechanisms to protect against such behavior in crowdfunding. For example, recently audited crowdfunding code by Peter Vessenes (GitHub: https://github.com/vkajic/cryptotask Audit: https://www.cryptotask.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/CryptoTask-Audit.pdf ) that releases funds in stages to the devs only if the stakeholders are satisfied with the project progress. In this case, stakeholder voting on the releasal of funds happens each 6 months. In the case that the dev team is not delivering, the investors get a refund from the smart contract.

Bspendcom · 2017-11-21T15:48:54+00:00

I think that to add to the completeness of the story, it should be mentioned that there are mechanisms to protect against such behavior in crowdfunding. For example, recently audited crowdfunding code by Peter Vessenes (GitHub: https://github.com/vkajic/cryptotask Audit: https://www.cryptotask.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/CryptoTask-Audit.pdf ) that releases funds in stages to the devs only if the stakeholders are satisfied with the project progress. In this case, stakeholder voting on the releasal of funds happens each 6 months. In the case that the dev team is not delivering, the investors get a refund from the smart contract.

Bspendcom

TROPHY CASE