IIRC Quadriga was reported to have been involved in some market manipulation based on non-existent coins and/or funds.

LOL, that post was pretty amusing to read...

I can't be sure without looking at the code, but yes, I'd guess that this was something included into the condenser code.

And I should clarify that I'm not opposed to someone working on this, if they want. I'm just not convinced it's important enough to devote work to it now.

No one is forcing you to use HBD.

We certainly didn't look into this before, but I'm going to make a reasonable assumption that Steemit only did this after being contacted by law enforcement in the US. If that's the case, I don't see much

OTOH, there's little data to support that that's how most crypto investors make snap decisions. There's a big assumption in that last part "transfer funds to newly provisioned wallet". My guess,

It would enable investors the ability to generate a wallet address completely off-line, then print their credentials, like they can on a normal blockchain. It enables real cold wallets. I've created cold

I don't believe the data is lost. It was discussed in dev meeting today, but the short version is we're reviewing and testing the changes now. If everything goes well, the fix should be deployed sometime

Everything you're describing requires serious changes that may just fail completely. I've already seen mechanisms of this type pretty much destroy a chain because of one missed flaw in the design, so that

The proposal as described can't be implemented easily onchain, because it involves interaction with exchanges. An onchain solution would involve some kind of way to create new HBD (either via conversion

HBD is mostly optional. If you don't want to interact with it, just ask for your posts to be paid in Hive instead. It has use for those who want an onchain stable coin.

The advantage is a local stable coin that doesn't require going offchain and thru exchanges, etc., with all the issues that entails.

What you're arguing for may be better, it is hard to say. But what is for certain is it's much more work.

I think there's plenty of uses of a stable coin (it doesn't seem like you're arguing against that). This is an attempt to make it more stable, and it requires no change to core protocol to do it. Seems

The point of this post is to fix that type of problem.

To your point about tags, that's why I also mentioned this: along with associated probabilities that the predicate actually belongs to each of the specified domains. In other words, the tag originally

There's no way to stop the aggregation of data used to rate people, in my opinion. What we can do is level the playing field somewhat on who owns the data (and hence decentralize the power it yields to

The ratings from a trust network don't really come from a computer, in some sense. It's just doing "provably correct" probability math on your ratings of other people and their ratings of

The dev who is responsible for approving the changes and merging them in is out sick right now, so not yet. I expect the fixes will be merged in and we'll complete testing in a few days, assuming no problems