Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)  (Read 1110 times)

Offline xeroc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11904
    • View Profile
    • BitShares.Europe
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc

BitShares 2.0 Technologies
User-Issued Assets



Issue stocks, bonds, or other tokens while being compatible with KYC and AML regulations
The BitShares platform provides a feature known as "user-issued assets", designed to help facilitate profitable business models for certain types of services that integrate with the platform. The term user-issued asset refers to a type of custom token registered on the platform, and which users can hold and trade while obeying certain specified restrictions. The creator of such an asset gets to publically name, describe, and distribute its tokens as desired. In addition, the issuer can specify certain custom requirements for the asset: such as allowing only an approved whitelist of user accounts to hold the tokens, or requiring users to pay certain fees when transferring or trading the tokens.

full length
« Last Edit: June 08, 2015, 06:31:40 PM by xeroc ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ »
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu

Offline joereform

Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2015, 11:26:45 PM »
Just to be clear, let's say a user has already issued assets without the new KYC/AML requirements. Does that user have to retroactively go back and get all of that info?

And what about assets like NOTE, that are just placeholders for a future blockchain?

This is not good news to me. Pseudonymity and TITAN were two of the biggest selling points for Bitshares for me.

Offline robrigo

Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2015, 11:41:54 PM »
Just to be clear, let's say a user has already issued assets without the new KYC/AML requirements. Does that user have to retroactively go back and get all of that info?

And what about assets like NOTE, that are just placeholders for a future blockchain?

This is not good news to me. Pseudonymity and TITAN were two of the biggest selling points for Bitshares for me.

User issued assets can choose to retain or revoke the permissions that enable them to halt balances and markets, as well as retract assets. In this way a UIA issuer can have anywhere from full control to no control.

Offline starspirit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
  • Financial markets pro over 20 years
    • View Profile
  • BTS: starspirit
Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #3 on: June 11, 2015, 01:44:54 AM »
Why are privatised bitAssets being treated as user-issued assets (UIAs) rather than market-issued-assets (MIAs)? I am confused on what delineates the two - is there a definition?

It seems to be that privatised bitAssets are not actually being issued by a user, and outcomes are not subject to the ongoing performance of the person setting it up. Like MIAs, somebody is merely establishing the software rules under which different parties can interact with each other in a decentralised fashion. Why aren't these just a privatised form of MIA?

I guess there might be pragmatic reasons to do it this way. But I'm wondering how it might look legally (at least on the surface) if, by name at least, we infer these tokens are being issued by a particular party.

Offline starspirit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
  • Financial markets pro over 20 years
    • View Profile
  • BTS: starspirit
Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #4 on: June 20, 2015, 12:34:37 AM »
What is the mechanism to pay feed producers for privatised Smartcoins?

Offline xeroc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11904
    • View Profile
    • BitShares.Europe
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #5 on: June 20, 2015, 10:05:05 AM »
What is the mechanism to pay feed producers for privatised Smartcoins?
I thought the issuer can take the trading fees
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu

Offline starspirit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
  • Financial markets pro over 20 years
    • View Profile
  • BTS: starspirit
Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #6 on: June 20, 2015, 10:32:59 AM »
What is the mechanism to pay feed producers for privatised Smartcoins?
I thought the issuer can take the trading fees
So I think you're saying the issuer is expected to pay the feed producers directly from the revenue they receive. Since the issuer has the power to appoint and fire feed producers, and also to pay them as they please, could the issuer then be perceived as having some form of control over financial outcomes for users, and is that likely to pose any legal issue?

Offline monsterer

Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #7 on: June 20, 2015, 11:11:46 AM »
So I think you're saying the issuer is expected to pay the feed producers directly from the revenue they receive. Since the issuer has the power to appoint and fire feed producers, and also to pay them as they please, could the issuer then be perceived as having some form of control over financial outcomes for users, and is that likely to pose any legal issue?

Privatised bitAssets only have 1 feed producer, who is presumably the issuer - that's what I understand anyway.
My opinions do not represent those of metaexchange unless explicitly stated.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline Shentist

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1605
    • View Profile
    • metaexchange
  • BTS: shentist
Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #8 on: June 20, 2015, 08:09:16 PM »
would it be possible to introduce a different naming for UIAs and MPAs?

12 chars are not much, if you consider that most will create a minimum of 6 chars to prefend the high fee of 500.000 BTS.

Maybe we can copy NXT. You can create the same name multiple times, but the Asset ID is unic!

Offline monsterer

Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #9 on: June 20, 2015, 09:37:15 PM »
Maybe we can copy NXT. You can create the same name multiple times, but the Asset ID is unic!

They have a huge problem with scam assets with the same name as genuine assets. Much worse than squatters, IMO.
My opinions do not represent those of metaexchange unless explicitly stated.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline MrJeans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
    • View Profile
  • BTS: mrjeans
Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #10 on: July 02, 2015, 04:30:13 PM »
Ive got some easy questions  :)

What is the fee for issuing a UIA?

My understanding is that a UIA can be traded against any other asset on the network. So can trade against bitUSD and does not need to trade against BTS, correct?

Why then is the NOTES market NOTES:BTS when NOTES:bitUSD would make more sense?

Offline bytemaster

Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #11 on: July 02, 2015, 04:49:08 PM »
Ive got some easy questions  :)

What is the fee for issuing a UIA?

My understanding is that a UIA can be traded against any other asset on the network. So can trade against bitUSD and does not need to trade against BTS, correct?

Why then is the NOTES market NOTES:BTS when NOTES:bitUSD would make more sense?

Because that is where all the volume went.  BTS is more liquid than USD and NOTEs and BTS are highly corelated and thus have less volatility than USD vs NOTEs.   
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 MrJeans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
    • View Profile
  • BTS: mrjeans
Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #12 on: July 02, 2015, 05:08:03 PM »
Ive got some easy questions  :)

What is the fee for issuing a UIA?

My understanding is that a UIA can be traded against any other asset on the network. So can trade against bitUSD and does not need to trade against BTS, correct?

Why then is the NOTES market NOTES:BTS when NOTES:bitUSD would make more sense?

Because that is where all the volume went.  BTS is more liquid than USD and NOTEs and BTS are highly corelated and thus have less volatility than USD vs NOTEs.
Makes sense.

What will the fee be on Bitshares 2.0 for issuing a UIA? I assume this may be adjusted by delegates.
If an exact figure cant be given, maybe an estimate of the fee?

Offline MrJeans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
    • View Profile
  • BTS: mrjeans
Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #13 on: July 03, 2015, 10:29:14 AM »
Another question.

Are users allowed to register and reserve a prefix or suffix.
This would be important to allow them to create branding and direct people to their particular array of assets.

E.g DACx has the BDR. prefix. If someone else is allowed to create a scam BDR.something users may think its a DACx product and purchase it where they may be no 'underlying asset'.

If the registering of a prefix is not enabled I think this would be a huge plus for implementation in 2.0.
Users can pay a much higher fee to register a prefix and then a much smaller fee to register new names with that prefix. We dont want someone creating a scan bitstamp.USD and bitstamp.EUR and then running off with the sales.


Offline bytemaster

Re: [BitShares 2.0 Technologies] User-Issued Assets (Discussion)
« Reply #14 on: July 04, 2015, 04:00:43 AM »
I think our preferred approach is to make the issuer account name prominent in the user interface.
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.

 

Google+