Mt Gox > Cryptsy - Time for BTS?

[cube]

what if Polo had an api call :  Convert all funds to BTS and withdraw post-haste. lol

some features of the BTS network are marketable to traders.  The speed of the transfers is one thing, you can move in or out of an exchange in usually less than 10minutes.  You have some ability (albeit limited) to hedge your positions from your own wallet. Plus the fact that it uses a different api, it has different attack vectors which make it more likely to survive an exchange hack.

BTS is a cool fast network indeed but it does not have the liquidity to absorb polo's fund at one go yet.

[xh3]

what if Polo had an api call :  Convert all funds to BTS and withdraw post-haste. lol

some features of the BTS network are marketable to traders.  The speed of the transfers is one thing, you can move in or out of an exchange in usually less than 10minutes.  You have some ability (albeit limited) to hedge your positions from your own wallet. Plus the fact that it uses a different api, it has different attack vectors which make it more likely to survive an exchange hack.

[Akado]

http://www.bitcoinfuturesguide.com/bitcoin-blog/cryptsy-makes-deal-with-hackers-to-return-stolen-13000-btc-pays-13-fee-to-the-culprit


Cryptsy Makes Deal With Hackers to Return STOLEN 13,000 BTC, Pays 13% Fee To the Culprit LOL

[Shentist]

for example https://metaexchange.info/markets/METAEX.BTC/BTC

look left top you will see the maximum recommended sell side or, this is the created METAEX.BTC for customers.

In my opinion the best part will be something like BTC(on your wallet; no 3rd party risk)-->METAEX.BTC(3rd party risk)-->bitBTC(pegged asset on your wallet no 3rd party risk)

so goal should be to minimize the 3rd party risk as low as possible. so you should not hold all your coins on poloniex, bitshares UIAs or bitshares

in anycases you can loose some of your assets. spread the risk, use different computers, make yourself as risk free as possible.

[xeroc]

Why is BitShares not ready to offer protection against Mt. Gox / account hacking right now? Isn't it only a matter of educating admins (such as those for metaX, Blktrades & ccedk) on how to use the hierarchical account structure, i.e. multisig? Or are there still bugs in the GUI render that crippled?

The only way to be completely free of counterparty risk is to use pegged assets; that's where bitshares real strength lies.

+5% make bitDOGE bitDASH bitETH bitLTC bitNNN available tomorrow!

Exchanges won't be creating any bitassets because of the amount of collateral required, specially when they can just create an UIA. It would be the best option but they won't do it.

If exchange issues UIA, it would need to make market for it. Issuing MPA instead is not a bad option for exchange. Yes, exchange would have to keep BTS collateral, but no trust would be involved in the process.

The cool thing is that you CAN market make them ..
you can have a market coinbaseBTCIOU : ccedkBTCIOU among others of course .. this wouldnt be pausible without the shared order books of centralized exchanges

[yvv]

Why is BitShares not ready to offer protection against Mt. Gox / account hacking right now? Isn't it only a matter of educating admins (such as those for metaX, Blktrades & ccedk) on how to use the hierarchical account structure, i.e. multisig? Or are there still bugs in the GUI render that crippled?

The only way to be completely free of counterparty risk is to use pegged assets; that's where bitshares real strength lies.

+5% make bitDOGE bitDASH bitETH bitLTC bitNNN available tomorrow!

Exchanges won't be creating any bitassets because of the amount of collateral required, specially when they can just create an UIA. It would be the best option but they won't do it.

If exchange issues UIA, it would need to make market for it. Issuing MPA instead is not a bad option for exchange. Yes, exchange would have to keep BTS collateral, but no trust would be involved in the process.

[Akado]

Why is BitShares not ready to offer protection against Mt. Gox / account hacking right now? Isn't it only a matter of educating admins (such as those for metaX, Blktrades & ccedk) on how to use the hierarchical account structure, i.e. multisig? Or are there still bugs in the GUI render that crippled?

The only way to be completely free of counterparty risk is to use pegged assets; that's where bitshares real strength lies.

+5% make bitDOGE bitDASH bitETH bitLTC bitNNN available tomorrow!

Exchanges won't be creating any bitassets because of the amount of collateral required, specially when they can just create an UIA. It would be the best option but they won't do it.

[karnal]

Why is BitShares not ready to offer protection against Mt. Gox / account hacking right now? Isn't it only a matter of educating admins (such as those for metaX, Blktrades & ccedk) on how to use the hierarchical account structure, i.e. multisig? Or are there still bugs in the GUI render that crippled?

The only way to be completely free of counterparty risk is to use pegged assets; that's where bitshares real strength lies.

+5% make bitDOGE bitDASH bitETH bitLTC bitNNN available tomorrow!

[monsterer]

Why is BitShares not ready to offer protection against Mt. Gox / account hacking right now? Isn't it only a matter of educating admins (such as those for metaX, Blktrades & ccedk) on how to use the hierarchical account structure, i.e. multisig? Or are there still bugs in the GUI render that crippled?

The only way to be completely free of counterparty risk is to use pegged assets; that's where bitshares real strength lies.

[Akado]

Why is BitShares not ready to offer protection against Mt. Gox / account hacking right now? Isn't it only a matter of educating admins (such as those for metaX, Blktrades & ccedk) on how to use the hierarchical account structure, i.e. multisig? Or are there still bugs in the GUI render that crippled?

If this basic functionality is broken how the hell can BM say with a straight face the DEX is "done"?

And is it possible to expose when entities like ccedk, metaX etc are not using best practices in their account management? Seems like as a community we should put pressure on them to convince us they are indeed following best practices to insure user's funds are always safe.

Presumably we're only talking about the UIAs and IOUs administered by these organizations, b/c users' assets should be held on the BitShares blockchain, and they private keys under their own control.

What am I missing here?

It's ready in the sense that you own the assets on your wallet. When I say it's not it's because we're dealing with UIAs. Exchange can go rogue at any time with the real funds and user's are left with a useless asset from that exchange that no one will want because it can't be redeemed for whatever it is it's real asset.

That's why I insist on shared order books, on top of liquidity, it keeps users safe. There's still the problem of good exchanges carrying the burden of a rogue one so that's why I suggested multi sig accounts shared between all participant exchanges.

Atm I really don't see any other solution. Other would be sidechains I guess... Moonstone might be able to help with this? The wallet is supposed to have exchanges integrated if im not mistaken though Im not really sure how that would work or if it makes any difference at all in relation to this specific issue.

[gamey]

Why is BitShares not ready to offer protection against Mt. Gox / account hacking right now? Isn't it only a matter of educating admins (such as those for metaX, Blktrades & ccedk) on how to use the hierarchical account structure, i.e. multisig? Or are there still bugs in the GUI render that crippled?

If this basic functionality is broken how the hell can BM say with a straight face the DEX is "done"?

And is it possible to expose when entities like ccedk, metaX etc are not using best practices in their account management? Seems like as a community we should put pressure on them to convince us they are indeed following best practices to insure user's funds are always safe.

Presumably we're only talking about the UIAs and IOUs administered by these organizations, b/c users' assets should be held on the BitShares blockchain, and they private keys under their own control.

What am I missing here?

I see it from the other side.

What does BitShares actually provide that gives distinct value ?

All this hierarchial stuff doesn't seem to be an improvement over a well administered hot/cold wallet.  If the process is automated, then it can be hacked.  At best, you could have a convoluted automated withdrawal system that makes hacking seem less likely, but that is going to be a lot of work and complexity.  Complexity is great for allowing exploitable bugs to creep in. It is far from clear that it is even an advantage.

I am not sure what assets you can even protect with BItShares?  BitShares's assets?  Well there aren't that many.  People are interested in altcoins, not BitShares assets.

My question is why did CNX continue to go with such a weird non-standard system, when all it would do is slow adoption. Back whenever, we heard that the BTC api was crap, but who cares if everyone uses it ?  BTS was rewritten from scratch, so why repeat the same mistakes?  For an exchange to receive BItShares they have to use a memo field.  All that sort of stuff does is slow adoption. 

BitShares biggest allies have been BTC38 and Poloniex.

[Thom]

Why is BitShares not ready to offer protection against Mt. Gox / account hacking right now? Isn't it only a matter of educating admins (such as those for metaX, Blktrades & ccedk) on how to use the hierarchical account structure, i.e. multisig? Or are there still bugs in the GUI render that crippled?

If this basic functionality is broken how the hell can BM say with a straight face the DEX is "done"?

And is it possible to expose when entities like ccedk, metaX etc are not using best practices in their account management? Seems like as a community we should put pressure on them to convince us they are indeed following best practices to insure user's funds are always safe.

Presumably we're only talking about the UIAs and IOUs administered by these organizations, b/c users' assets should be held on the BitShares blockchain, and they private keys under their own control.

What am I missing here?

[Akado]

is bts ready ？  bts iou  have the same risk
atom cross trade  would it be possible?
QORA did have it?

Exactly, it's not. Please check the link above and give your input

[sudo]

is bts ready ？  bts iou  have the same risk
atom cross trade  would it be possible?
QORA did have it?

[CLains]

the insanity continues, bitcoin in distress and exchanges falling left and right, bitshares arise