Author Topic: Privatizing BitAssets  (Read 31191 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wuyanren

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 589
    • View Profile
That's very good, but I see it is to wallet synchronization and distress

Offline jcrubino

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile

So I contend that a market full of private market pegged assets with profit motive for a near "winner takes all" on the team that can provide the highest liquidity and best marketed variant will produce better results than relying on socialized funding of the BitAssets produced by delegates. 

Thoughts?

1. "socialized funding" I thought Bitshares was a startup, implying a business
2.  why not elect "Producers" who job it is to create and manage Bitshare blockchain products inline with the market?
3.  My initial thought is privatized assets is a step towards shifting responsibility away from Bitshares and a possible surrender of what should be considered a core business activity.

Offline joele

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
I assume the feed providers will receive commission from the Asset owner.
So a user who wants to be a feed provider will apply to the Asset owner.
and peg asset required at least 51 feed providers to work, right?
So more jobs will create on Bitshares if we have this feature.




TurkeyLeg

  • Guest
+5% interesting stuff!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline milkmeat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: milkmeat
This is very good idea. Separating "feed provider" function from delegates will definitely make people more creative.
Suppose I want to create a peg asset to trace NYSE index today, I have to wait until all BTS holders agree and enough delegates to publish feed.
If I can create peg asset by myself, it can be created in minutes. If it can be successful or not will only depend on my marketing capability.

Offline joele

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
+5%
Not only currency assets, altcoins, stocks, indices can now be created and traded in bitshares market with feed precision.

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
How about starting a distributed collaborative organization similar to what SwarmFund is doing?
.

I had a dream where some delegates were already working on something similar, even bigger.

I had discussions last year with someone on this forum about forming a Bitshares cooperative. We looked into it but legally we couldn't figure out how to do it. The DCO gives us all the legal tools we need to go that route.

And I think it could make Bitshares much stronger to be a DCO combined with a blockchain rather than just a blockchain because it gives us legal protections we wouldn't have otherwise.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
How about starting a distributed collaborative organization similar to what SwarmFund is doing?

We could then use that legal organization to issue anything we want in a trusted manner.

http://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/news/swarm-advised-that-crowdsale-model-falls-under-securities-laws-launches-distributed-collaborative-organizations/
http://bollier.org/sites/default/files/misc-file-upload/files/DistributedNetworksandtheLaw%20report,%20Swarm-Coin%20Center-Berkman.pdf
http://www.scienceofteamscience.org/2011-sessions-virtual
....

Great finds luckybit!   What is amazing is that they came to many of the same conclusions we ultimately came to.  After reading the findings I feel pretty good about AGS:

1) Non Transferrable Asset  was considered a strong indicator for not being a security or expecting to profit from it.
2) Being presented as a no-strings-attached donation also negated the expectation of profit.
3) We only promised to use funds to build software that others could use to launch systems.. the software was to be free and open source which supports the lack of expectation of profit.

It is all a gray and subject to interpretations, but from what I could tell everything is this area of law is gray.  We are upgrading terminology in our referral system to call everyone members which is also in line with their recommendations.

 +5% +5% +5%
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
I never liked the mixing of platform and asset roles (delegates both doing block verification and price feeds). Theoretically, the roles being performed by the same people centralizes the system (delegates have extra power/responsibility, and little incentive to think creatively about generating diversified feeds, and the market itself was just responding to external inputs the delegates didn't have a direct incentive to perform).

I'd like bitshares to eventually be asset agnostic, thus just a platform of rules people can use however they see fit. It is a blockchain with a specific and powerful set of features. At this point, demonstration of bitUSD and other bitassets are important, but allowing others to implement their own may be the future.

I guess I think of bitshares as http. You can do a lot over http besides websites, and html (bitasset) is separate from but is served over http (bitshares)

I agree with this direction.

Do you think we should start the discussion about separating block-signers from payed businesses (currently: >3% payed delegates) again? I'd like to see this separation!

Offline rnglab

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: rnglab
Markets are not my field but at a first glance I'd like to se price feed capability on UIAs.
I think we shouldn't modify actual market issued assets (with delegate feeds) to keep things simple (or less scary) for normal users.

Offline bytemaster

I never liked the mixing of platform and asset roles (delegates both doing block verification and price feeds). Theoretically, the roles being performed by the same people centralizes the system (delegates have extra power/responsibility, and little incentive to think creatively about generating diversified feeds, and the market itself was just responding to external inputs the delegates didn't have a direct incentive to perform).

I'd like bitshares to eventually be asset agnostic, thus just a platform of rules people can use however they see fit. It is a blockchain with a specific and powerful set of features. At this point, demonstration of bitUSD and other bitassets are important, but allowing others to implement their own may be the future.

I guess I think of bitshares as http. You can do a lot over http besides websites, and html (bitasset) is separate from but is served over http (bitshares)

I agree with this direction.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline bytemaster

Hello BM
              what is the reason you want to change now?  is it the current BTA is not good enough ?

I am merely trying to align incentives to promote growth.  Nothing has to change, just adding new options.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline bytemaster

How about starting a distributed collaborative organization similar to what SwarmFund is doing?

We could then use that legal organization to issue anything we want in a trusted manner.

http://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/news/swarm-advised-that-crowdsale-model-falls-under-securities-laws-launches-distributed-collaborative-organizations/
http://bollier.org/sites/default/files/misc-file-upload/files/DistributedNetworksandtheLaw%20report,%20Swarm-Coin%20Center-Berkman.pdf
http://www.scienceofteamscience.org/2011-sessions-virtual
....

Great finds luckybit!   What is amazing is that they came to many of the same conclusions we ultimately came to.  After reading the findings I feel pretty good about AGS:

1) Non Transferrable Asset  was considered a strong indicator for not being a security or expecting to profit from it.
2) Being presented as a no-strings-attached donation also negated the expectation of profit.
3) We only promised to use funds to build software that others could use to launch systems.. the software was to be free and open source which supports the lack of expectation of profit.

It is all a gray and subject to interpretations, but from what I could tell everything is this area of law is gray.  We are upgrading terminology in our referral system to call everyone members which is also in line with their recommendations.   

For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline BTSdac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: K1
Hello BM
              what is the reason you want to change now?  is it the current BTA is not good enough ? 
github.com :pureland
BTS2.0 API :ws://139.196.37.179:8091
BTS2.0 API 数据源ws://139.196.37.179:8091

Offline rnglab

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: rnglab
How about starting a distributed collaborative organization similar to what SwarmFund is doing?
.

I had a dream where some delegates were already working on something similar, even bigger.