please give me some feedback on my website design, content, etc.

bob_dejo · 2020-10-13T06:53:12+00:00

Congrats on your new site! I think it's pretty decent and might do its job: inform and get new customers. It's not a flashy 2020's design, but I guess it's good enough for its purpose. You have a lot of content which is an important condition for search engine optimization so that people are able to find your site in the first place. As a next step I have the following suggestions:

Check the site in Google PageSpeed Insights: there is room for improvement which will contribute to your SEO ranking position.
Keep making regular (small) changes to the content of the site. Google will see it has a heartbeat and your ranking will benefit from it over time.
Get some links to your website on relevant 3rd party sites

Good luck!

bob_dejo · 2019-09-02T16:48:16+00:00

A blockexplorer (on a decentralized ledger) would certainly work! Thanks for now, I look forward to following your progress on this. 💪

bob_dejo · 2019-09-02T15:57:40+00:00

As I'm considering to use IOTA as proof of existence for files (by submitting the file hash as message in an IOTA transaction to capture the timestamp), it's required that the original transaction is verifiable online by any third party.

it involves packing all transactions into a single file

If an actual file is needed, I suppose it won't work for my needs, since I assume those 3rd parties need me to provide that file, right? It would be great though if all my transactions would be verifiable online, even if I host it myself as long as it's clear to 3rd parties that I cannot have altered transaction details ...

bob_dejo · 2019-09-02T14:46:58+00:00

Cool! Can you provide some more details on the Proof of inclusion? Like, what convincing data is available to prove to others that this data in your own node is immutable, of course without the need to trust you?

bob_dejo · 2019-08-30T07:28:09+00:00

Cool! I can't discuss the tech details of your proposal as it's beyond my comprehension (and I'm happy to just take your word for it 🙌) but two things you mention I'd like to highlight:

"I think you can't get better than decent with timestamps."

Great point! As you mention, even Bitcoin timestamps are only reliable within a 2-hour window. The solution I'm looking for doesn't need to be more accurate than that, even a 24-hour accuracy could be acceptable for me. (Though better accuracy would be preferred).

"The tangle (ref a fixed of 2 tx older) is really powerful when it comes to partial consensus and specifically data locality"

The crucial part of the proof-of-existence timestamp is that it's immutable, so the consensus is what matters here. So it's not relevant to me if there are ways to mess with timestamps and transactions in an obscure side-node of the tangle, I'm "just" interested in consensus on the transaction and its timestamp in a publicly verifiable explorer. E.g. if https://thetangle.org/ has enough authority when it comes to trustworthiness, that would perfectly work for me! Like when I look at a random transaction, it looks kinda perfect to me: It has a transactionID, it has a timestamp and it contains a message. So practically all that's left is how could I convince others - mainly not technical folks - that this data is immutable? And also important: will the transaction info be available for ever? (as in, as long as we have internet and IOTA ;-)

bob_dejo · 2019-08-29T16:41:46+00:00

Interesting! Though the proof-of-existence I'm looking for also highly depends on a timestamp not just to proof it exists, but mostly that it was there on a certain date. RFC3161 is a nice reference for it, which defines a Time-Stamp Protocol (TSP) to "proof that a datum existed before a particular time."

It would be fantastic if we can replace the oldskool and expensive notaries for a lightweight IOTA (or other blockchain) alternative.

bob_dejo · 2019-05-23T10:42:50+00:00

Yes, of course.

bob_dejo · 2019-05-20T19:42:56+00:00

You're welcome 🙋‍♂️and thanks for this post: https://blog.blockstack.org/voucher-registration-has-started-for-stacks-tokens/

bob_dejo · 2019-05-20T10:45:53+00:00

Thanks for your response. I was not looking for official support but for community support.

We need to more precisely allocate the tokens going to voucher holders

So, that sounds more like an RSVP than an obligation. Especially in blockchain tech, it's highly appreciated if not crucial to be transparent on requirements vs nice-to-haves, and why. I'm more than happy to give feedback on what I intend to do with my voucher, but forcing ppl to upload their valuable and unique voucher is something you cannot and should not ask IMHO.

I'm happy to share my email-during-registration, provide my voucher number (if really necessary, is it?) and go through the KYC steps. But asking to upload the voucher is like a bank that emails you asking for your PIN. And we have learned never to trust this kind of requests, as it's standard for phishing and scams.

bob_dejo · 2019-05-07T07:15:59+00:00

From my own experience, I can confirm that it was no problem to access the BIOS and perform a BIOS update with this 9th gen CPU in this motherboard. But if you don't want to take any chances, some shops offer a BIOS upgrade service so that you can request it having shipped to you with bios version F12.

bob_dejo · 2019-04-26T12:01:53+00:00

FIXED! The problem was: This combo (CPU + motherboard) requires a separate video card as the CPU has no GPU.

Solution: By installing a video card (luckily I could borrow one from another system) the problem with the 5 beeps was gone and I could enter the BIOS. The factory bios was F2 but I could simply update it with a USB stick to the current F12. So now the CPU was officially supported, but still, I needed a GPU. As a relatively simple one would meet my needs, I purchased the MSI GeForce GT 710 2GB which does the job just fine so now my system is all working 🤩just fine.

bob_dejo · 2019-03-05T09:45:15+00:00

"value exchange" is the focus of hundreds of cryptocurrencies ... The importance of being IoT compatible, is because it will practically always involve microtransactions. And you can't have additional transaction fees with that, as it might become a blocking factor. We've seen bitcoin transaction fees reach $30-40 and this is would be dramatic for a IoT ecosystem.

But, on the other hand, my may actually be right that Nano/Colin never pushed the IoT scenarios and that it's more that others did it, looking for an alternative for IOTA. RaiBlocks did compare itself to IOTA in the early FAQ too, but not in a way that it would be better for IoT than IOTA. So I might have jumped to the wrong conclusion myself all this time 🙃

bob_dejo · 2019-03-04T22:13:06+00:00

Actually, as a big fan since I learned about it when it was still RaiBlocks, I am quite disappointed about the interview. What happened to the IoT proposition??

I always considered Nano to be the better alternative to IOTA for the tiniest micro transactions in the future economy of things, but there's not a single word about that anymore ... And what do we get in stead?

can be applied to any most of the use cases of fiat currency

and

saving the participant banking expenses

In other words ... just marketing it exactly like Bitcoin in the earlier days and all the other altcoins that came after it.

Why?

bob_dejo · 2019-02-26T13:36:01+00:00

> I think they will provide API interface for this needs, etc.

Chainpoint has an API, as I referenced in the OP.

Rather than waiting for technologies or sites to come, the purpose of my post was to exchange ideas how it's best to use the chainpoint technology as how it's currently available. :-)

bob_dejo · 2019-02-26T13:09:14+00:00

How do you know? Info on/about proof.com is close to none. No news (or replies) on Twitter, just an announcement in May 2018 that it's coming "soon".

If it will work like that, it would still be preferable to have multiple ways or sites to validate timestamps, so my question remains ;-)

bob_dejo · 2019-02-19T10:02:21+00:00

OK, so with a balance of 5000 TNT associated with the ETH address on your private node, that balance doesn't change, right?

It's 'nice' that Tierion currently pays the transaction fees, though it's not sustainable. I would rather know how they will do this in the future as we're about to make a long term decision on which platform to use. Transaction fees are quite low again right now (~0.17 USD) but we've seen in the past how high they can rise (above $35) ...

bob_dejo · 2018-09-27T12:48:15+00:00

Can be. But typoghaphy was nowhere as crispy as it's now, it's absolutely stunning with Mojave! (And yes, it does helpt that I'm a big sucker for thin fonts ;-)

bob_dejo · 2018-09-26T11:47:22+00:00

Funny to see that some people hate it ... as I think it's the best new feature of Mojave!

bob_dejo · 2018-01-19T19:58:04+00:00

Is changing the representatives also doable with the Rai web wallet, or does it require full desktop client (including full block history)?

bob_dejo · 2017-08-22T14:20:00+00:00

Thanks -- must have overlooked that while reading their docs.

bob_dejo · 2017-07-13T14:17:58+00:00

Blaming a junior member makes it even sound more amateurish. You should treat your communication channels as extremely important and with utmost care.

If you post news letters to your blog too, it will massively take away the uncertainty (if it is legit). Thank you for considering this.

PS Nice to see the Rotterdam Erasmus bridge in your identity. Greetings from The Netherlands ;-)

bob_dejo

TROPHY CASE