Main Menu

Nubits revisited

Started by Empirical1.2, November 11, 2015, 10:54:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

CoinHoarder

#15
Quote from: xeroc on January 31, 2016, 06:16:04 PM
It still shows that people need to provide the buy orders while in bitshares the protocol can deal with settlement (as a last resort)
I can admit that is true. However, so far Nushares has been able to provide sufficient incentive for people to have those buy and sell orders in place to hold the peg. It is unclear whether or not incentive can be maintained for a prolonged period of time (although it has worked quite well for over a year).

In my design I am proposing for Bitshares, it does away with the small army of people it takes to provide liquidity. It is almost purely autonomous, meanwhile Nubits' liquidity operations require a lot of "man power". My design would never succumb to the issue that post refers to since it is done autonomously.

Furthermore, my design is not meant to be a permanent solution like Nubits' solution is... it works like training wheels do on a bicycle. As soon as "natural liquidity" is established on the DEX, the autonomous liquidity operations cease and the BTS/SmartCoins that were used to provide it are burned.

I am about to post a more detailed synopsis that I have been working on all morning.

EDIT: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,21197.msg276084.html#msg276084
or https://www.docdroid.net/2OcoImM/autonomous-smartcoin-liquidity-funded-by-dilution.pdf.html
[url="https://www.decentralized.tech/"]https://www.decentralized.tech/[/url] -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
[url="https://www.cryptohun.ch/"]https://www.cryptohun.ch/[/url] -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

xeroc

Quote from: CoinHoarder on January 31, 2016, 03:57:40 PM
Quote from: xeroc on January 31, 2016, 11:29:24 AM
FYI:
https://www.reddit.com/r/NuBits/comments/42wj58/urgent_according_to_alix_the_alp_sell_side_at/

I guess you didn't take the time to read the link you posted... in particular the part where it explained that it was not a big deal?

QuoteIf you had looked at the liquidity broadcast of the NuBots (which I just now did), you had found out, that the situation isn't dire.
It still shows that people need to provide the buy orders while in bitshares the protocol can deal with settlement (as a last resort)

CoinHoarder

#13
Quote from: xeroc on January 31, 2016, 11:29:24 AM
FYI:
https://www.reddit.com/r/NuBits/comments/42wj58/urgent_according_to_alix_the_alp_sell_side_at/

I guess you didn't take the time to read the link you posted... in particular the part where it explained that it was not a big deal?

QuoteIf you had looked at the liquidity broadcast of the NuBots (which I just now did), you had found out, that the situation isn't dire.
[url="https://www.decentralized.tech/"]https://www.decentralized.tech/[/url] -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
[url="https://www.cryptohun.ch/"]https://www.cryptohun.ch/[/url] -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

Akado

[url="https://metaexchange.info"]https://metaexchange.info[/url] | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads


Zapply

have one idea to create a stable currency. create a X coin or UIA 50% that is volume of bitshares have the same price and is lock in the blockchain. The x coin have the same relationship like Singapore and Brunei. Example someone want to create stable USD currency. Now the Settlement price of BTS to USD is 300 BTS that person use 300BTS can create stable USD currency the x coin automatically top up the difference the BTS price the person use to create stable USD currency is show in his wallet

Pheonike

People don't mine that risk if they can get in/out fast. That's part of game. But if the risk of getting stuck is higher than the reward, nobody wants to play that game.

Empirical1.2

#8
Quote from: ccedk on November 12, 2015, 12:08:11 PM
Quote from: testz on November 12, 2015, 08:38:19 AM
Quote from: fuzzy on November 11, 2015, 11:16:59 PM
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on November 11, 2015, 10:54:43 PM
I was not a fan of bringing the Nubits style model to BitShares because when it invariably fails it will look very bad for BitShares.

However they still seem to be surviving. So far this month they've done circa $1.5 million in volume. That's a lot of liquidity that could help bootstrap the exchange and potentially a lot of fees.

Is there any merit to looking at the NuBits model and introducing some variation with a really big warning attached?

Why not simply open up a market for nubits to compete side by side against bitUSD?

CCEDK already has Nubits so for them it's will be very easy to open market OPENNBT:USD
https://www.ccedk.com/nbt-usd
@ccedk

have already asked to have it added, and waiting to hear what and when it i possible

+5%

Quote from: tonyk on November 11, 2015, 11:29:26 PM
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on November 11, 2015, 11:23:48 PM
I think they might have made some changes since then.

Not to the core of their genius model. But what do I know, new kids are eager to drink from that fountain of wisdom... like MKR.

From what I understand, Nubits will likely fail, but for the last year, it seems the markets value the liquidity they provide over that risk. 
If you want to take the island burn the boats

openledger

Quote from: testz on November 12, 2015, 08:38:19 AM
Quote from: fuzzy on November 11, 2015, 11:16:59 PM
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on November 11, 2015, 10:54:43 PM
I was not a fan of bringing the Nubits style model to BitShares because when it invariably fails it will look very bad for BitShares.

However they still seem to be surviving. So far this month they've done circa $1.5 million in volume. That's a lot of liquidity that could help bootstrap the exchange and potentially a lot of fees.

Is there any merit to looking at the NuBits model and introducing some variation with a really big warning attached?

Why not simply open up a market for nubits to compete side by side against bitUSD?

CCEDK already has Nubits so for them it's will be very easy to open market OPENNBT:USD
https://www.ccedk.com/nbt-usd
@ccedk

have already asked to have it added, and waiting to hear what and when it i possible
OpenLedger blockchain in services and solutions - [url="https://openledger.info"]https://openledger.info[/url]
BitShares explorer: [url="https://bitsharescan.com"]https://bitsharescan.com[/url]
BitShares commitee member since 2015

testz

Quote from: fuzzy on November 11, 2015, 11:16:59 PM
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on November 11, 2015, 10:54:43 PM
I was not a fan of bringing the Nubits style model to BitShares because when it invariably fails it will look very bad for BitShares.

However they still seem to be surviving. So far this month they've done circa $1.5 million in volume. That's a lot of liquidity that could help bootstrap the exchange and potentially a lot of fees.

Is there any merit to looking at the NuBits model and introducing some variation with a really big warning attached?

Why not simply open up a market for nubits to compete side by side against bitUSD?

CCEDK already has Nubits so for them it's will be very easy to open market OPENNBT:USD
https://www.ccedk.com/nbt-usd
@ccedk

tonyk

Quote from: Empirical1.2 on November 11, 2015, 11:23:48 PM
I think they might have made some changes since then.

Not to the core of their genius model. But what do I know, new kids are eager to drink from that fountain of wisdom... like MKR.
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Empirical1.2

Quote from: fuzzy on November 11, 2015, 11:16:59 PM
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on November 11, 2015, 10:54:43 PM
I was not a fan of bringing the Nubits style model to BitShares because when it invariably fails it will look very bad for BitShares.

However they still seem to be surviving. So far this month they've done circa $1.5 million in volume. That's a lot of liquidity that could help bootstrap the exchange and potentially a lot of fees.

Is there any merit to looking at the NuBits model and introducing some variation with a really big warning attached?

Why not simply open up a market for nubits to compete side by side against bitUSD?

Yeah possibly.

Quote from: monsterer on November 11, 2015, 11:20:55 PM
Is Nubits model what governments use to enforce their own monetary peggs?

Not sure. Bytemaster did a blog post/review of NuBits a while back that was pretty informative. I think they might have made some changes since then.
If you want to take the island burn the boats

monsterer

Is Nubits model what governments use to enforce their own monetary peggs?
My opinions do not represent those of metaexchange unless explicitly stated.
[url="https://metaexchange.info"]https://metaexchange.info[/url] | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

fuzzy

Quote from: Empirical1.2 on November 11, 2015, 10:54:43 PM
I was not a fan of bringing the Nubits style model to BitShares because when it invariably fails it will look very bad for BitShares.

However they still seem to be surviving. So far this month they've done circa $1.5 million in volume. That's a lot of liquidity that could help bootstrap the exchange and potentially a lot of fees.

Is there any merit to looking at the NuBits model and introducing some variation with a really big warning attached?

Why not simply open up a market for nubits to compete side by side against bitUSD?
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Empirical1.2

I was not a fan of bringing the Nubits style model to BitShares because when it invariably fails it will look very bad for BitShares.

However they still seem to be surviving. So far this month they've done circa $1.5 million in volume. That's a lot of liquidity that could help bootstrap the exchange and potentially a lot of fees.

Is there any merit to looking at the NuBits model and introducing some variation with a really big warning attached?
If you want to take the island burn the boats