University thesis on Bitshares

[xeroc]

the only reasons for the 30 day delay from announcement to launch was that short positions have a chance to reevaluate and leave their positions ...
OF COURSE will 0.9 shorts be migrated to 2.0 ..
Read: https://bitshares.org/blog/2015/06/08/migrating-to-bitshares-2.0/#bitasset--user-issued-asset-migration

What will be closed are OPEN BUY and SELL ORDERS ... NOT short ORDERS

[tonyk]

Right, they arent forced to exit old positions, but wont the old bitassets and the new bitassets be different things?  So people would rather get the new ones? 

Maybe I am incorrect.

Well, that was the idea at some point, but BitAssets are now supposed to migrate as such.  Hopefully, otherwise this will cause massive trouble... especially since the text in the link says explicitly that the value will remain. And I remember that BM said that current shorts are completely portable to the new system, but I wouldn't mind re-having a confirmation of that.

Forget about a debate - I have shorted thousand of bitUSD based on the assumption that my shorts will convert to shorts in BTS 2.0 

same with me!
But why are you angry? It was clearly stated from bytemaster that all bitassets and all short positions will be transferred to the new chain...
confirm that again please @bytemaster , uncertainty is a bad thing .....

bitAssets in 9.x make me angry anytime I look or think of them.
 I am angry even when I short them at 30% premium knowing full well it will likely be big % all profit. I am angry when this fool continues to put his overpriced bids for bitUSD and I am all out of BTS to short....It makes me angry cause it was so easy to improve the situation with several hours of coding....instead the time was spent to get us the poop-colored nonsense asset.

[liondani]

Right, they arent forced to exit old positions, but wont the old bitassets and the new bitassets be different things?  So people would rather get the new ones? 

Maybe I am incorrect.

Well, that was the idea at some point, but BitAssets are now supposed to migrate as such.  Hopefully, otherwise this will cause massive trouble... especially since the text in the link says explicitly that the value will remain. And I remember that BM said that current shorts are completely portable to the new system, but I wouldn't mind re-having a confirmation of that.

Forget about a debate - I have shorted thousand of bitUSD based on the assumption that my shorts will convert to shorts in BTS 2.0 

same with me!
But why are you angry? It was clearly stated from bytemaster that all bitassets and all short positions will be transferred to the new chain...
confirm that again please @bytemaster , uncertainty is a bad thing .....

[tonyk]

Right, they arent forced to exit old positions, but wont the old bitassets and the new bitassets be different things?  So people would rather get the new ones? 

Maybe I am incorrect.

Well, that was the idea at some point, but BitAssets are now supposed to migrate as such.  Hopefully, otherwise this will cause massive trouble... especially since the text in the link says explicitly that the value will remain. And I remember that BM said that current shorts are completely portable to the new system, but I wouldn't mind re-having a confirmation of that.

Forget about a debate - I have shorted thousand of bitUSD based on the assumption that my shorts will convert to shorts in BTS 2.0 

I thought all the shorts covered at the feed prior to the switch over.

This is not very fair, to the bitUSD holders in particular, without a long long notice. And such notice is lacking.

[lil_jay890]

Right, they arent forced to exit old positions, but wont the old bitassets and the new bitassets be different things?  So people would rather get the new ones? 

Maybe I am incorrect.

Well, that was the idea at some point, but BitAssets are now supposed to migrate as such.  Hopefully, otherwise this will cause massive trouble... especially since the text in the link says explicitly that the value will remain. And I remember that BM said that current shorts are completely portable to the new system, but I wouldn't mind re-having a confirmation of that.

Forget about a debate - I have shorted thousand of bitUSD based on the assumption that my shorts will convert to shorts in BTS 2.0 

I thought all the shorts covered at the feed prior to the switch over.

[tonyk]

Right, they arent forced to exit old positions, but wont the old bitassets and the new bitassets be different things?  So people would rather get the new ones? 

Maybe I am incorrect.

Well, that was the idea at some point, but BitAssets are now supposed to migrate as such.  Hopefully, otherwise this will cause massive trouble... especially since the text in the link says explicitly that the value will remain. And I remember that BM said that current shorts are completely portable to the new system, but I wouldn't mind re-having a confirmation of that.

Forget about a debate - I have shorted thousand of bitUSD based on the assumption that my shorts will convert to shorts in BTS 2.0 

[inarizushi]

Right, they arent forced to exit old positions, but wont the old bitassets and the new bitassets be different things?  So people would rather get the new ones? 

Maybe I am incorrect.

Well, that was the idea at some point, but BitAssets are now supposed to migrate as such.  Hopefully, otherwise this will cause massive trouble... especially since the text in the link says explicitly that the value will remain. And I remember that BM said that current shorts are completely portable to the new system, but I wouldn't mind re-having a confirmation of that.

[Ander]

Right, they arent forced to exit old positions, but wont the old bitassets and the new bitassets be different things?  So people would rather get the new ones? 

Maybe I am incorrect.

[inarizushi]

You should definitely analyze how 2.0 does, I expect it to hold better than 1.0. 

Note that the peg in 1.0 was effected heavily by a software bug for a while, and then more recently by the fact that it is being phased out to make way for the 2.0 system.  So right now bitusd has been worth more than $1 for a while because the shorts are trying to get out of their positions and eliminate the old bitusd (because they are forced to), but some of the bitusd has been distributed to people who either arent paying attention or cant sync the client or arent doing anything, and the supply and demand imbalance has been pushing it over $1.

Bitusd were definite a good store of value throughout, not only did they not break below $1, but they ended up being worth more than a dollar.

Nobody is forced to exit old positions or BitAssets, they should migrate seamlessly !
https://bitshares.org/blog/2015/06/08/migrating-to-bitshares-2.0/

[cass]

Concerning the bitshares 2.0 / bitshares 1.0 confrontation I think it's a great idea! I still have a few months so I will be able to analyze the impact of the new protocol!

just noticed great!!

[cass]

Do you have a deadline for your thesis? Maybe you could compare bitasset 1.0 with bitassets 2.0 and show the differences between both .. in particular in regards to stability.

This would be indeed great if this would be possible .. after the 2.0 launch we can also assist you more on any question you'll have about ..

[Ander]

You should definitely analyze how 2.0 does, I expect it to hold better than 1.0. 

Note that the peg in 1.0 was effected heavily by a software bug for a while, and then more recently by the fact that it is being phased out to make way for the 2.0 system.  So right now bitusd has been worth more than $1 for a while because the shorts are trying to get out of their positions and eliminate the old bitusd (because they are forced to), but some of the bitusd has been distributed to people who either arent paying attention or cant sync the client or arent doing anything, and the supply and demand imbalance has been pushing it over $1.

Bitusd were definite a good store of value throughout, not only did they not break below $1, but they ended up being worth more than a dollar.

[filippo]

Hi guys, thanks a lot for your answers!

Considering the problem of the "fast moving" subject, I agree with inarizushi: it is not a problem if bitshares 1.0 will be fast surpassed. In any case it allows useful thoughts on an interesting way to realize a stablecurrency, even if it wasn't completely successfull

Concerning the bitshares 2.0 / bitshares 1.0 confrontation I think it's a great idea! I still have a few months so I will be able to analyze the impact of the new protocol!

[inarizushi]

Guys, remember that failed experiments give more knowledge than successful ones. Plus I'm pretty sure that with decent volumes and trust, the current mechanism would do the job satisfyingly. Research is not about finding the exact solution, it's about learning as much as possible in the process. BitShares is very interesting theoretically, I think it's a great idea, I wish I could have done a thesis on the subject!

[donkeypong]

As much as I love Bitshares and love academics, I think this is a tough subject for a thesis. BitShares basically hasn't come out yet with its product. You could write quite a bit about its context and its trailblazing nature in terms of economics and cryptocurrencies. It has the potential to accomplish a great deal in the future. But any research about prices so far would be useless; this product has been in beta testing and the market trading volumes have been low because it's still in development. There's still so little money in crypto that one or two big buyers can completely swing the markets at will. So as far as putting something new in your thesis, I'd say that you'd need to wait for this product to launch and develop some history. What you write today may need to be changed (literally) tomorrow; this field just moves so fast.