Show with some transcription to aid anyone who wishes to translate into small radio show. Willaim has volunteered for this for Chinese, but I'm also putting this out there for any Russian or Spanish community leaders, etc. There are others doing written translations. Thank you everyone!
BM - It has been a crazy week of development and updates. We've been making significant strides to the market maker and order matching engines. Both of which are updated this week. I think we have one more issue that is going to be deployed this weekend with a fix and it will be there.
Fuz asks - What is being fixed ?
BM - Sometimes there are sitautions where shorts do not get matched.
BM - Otherwise we have a giant short wall. BitUSD is holding very well and close to one dollar. Plus or minus 1 dollar. I am quite pleased with that. It is possible for market makers to make money while generally being long on Bitshares X. The main thing we are looking at now is ways of further enhancing the network and the peg and to level the playing field for all parties. The biggest challenge we have for BitUSD is of course liquidity. The primary reason it is not liquid is people want to go short and they don't want to cover. They want to stay short. The people that bought the bitUSD however want to get back in and out of Bitshares X to perhaps trade the market. Sometimes they have trouble finding a buyer. The market makers are helping with that but we need to encourage shorts to provide liquidity. I think we need to see shorts as liquidity providers as their primary goal and purpose. They get the benefit to go short but they have also have a corresponding obligation to provide liquidity to the people that they borrowed the dollars from. You can think of the people with BitUSD as lenders and the shorts at the borrowers. The borrowers were basically saying I don't have to pay you back, ever, unless a margin call occurs. So we are looking at adding a 1 month maximum time at which you are able to maintain sa hort. At which point you have to cover and go short agin. The benefits of this will be to encourage the shorts to look for good buying opportunities to rpvoide liquidity earlier as opposed to holding out to the end of the month at which point they are forced to cover at the market rate at that time. There is no fee associated with covering the short or expiration. This also aids in forcing collateral for shorts to maintain competitive collateral at all times. They can not get in a losing short position and stay their with low collateral. At the end of the month they have to cover and take their losses. If they want to short again they have to provide collateral. I think overall it will make the sstem mover stable, more liquid and it effectively charges longterm shorts (those holding over 1 month) a fee proportional to the spread. The smaller the spread the lower the fee. The wider the spread the higher the fee. If there is a high spread because no one is providing liquidity then it is going to discourage shorts from creating more. If there is high liquidity then it means the shorts are doing their job. Overall I think it means there is one additional tweak to what we are learning while going through this process of learning how the market responds to various aspects and rules.
4:35 Usually when you short there is a fee that is assessed upfront, why wait a month ?
5:20 Whats keeping someone from creating bots to create bots to cover and reshort ? Explain the monthly limit.
6:55 Talk of the bots that have been posted and released. How about a shorting bot ? How would it work ?
8:09 Will tweaks to bots be submitted to github ?
8:55 Another thing we are working on is a new transaction type. This is not a hard fork, just a wallet upgrade that allows you to simultaneously cancel multiple orders and place new orders. It should help with the bots and transaction fees.
9:13 BM - The other big event of the week is Nubits.
Bytemaster's official prognosis – It will likely be a raging success until it is not. The fundamental economics of Nubits is consistent inflation. The supply of Nubits is always increasing and never decreasing and there is no way to settle it. There is always a need to find another buyer, another holder. The way they incentivize finding more bag holders is creating more bag holders. Giving you a bigger bag to hold. Everyone works as long as people thinks they can sell them in the future. I suspect it is not as reliable as BitUSD in the long run. BitUSD at least has a mechanism to go back to 0 bit USD and takes them off the market. The people who are creating them are assuming risk when they do so.
With Nubits, the creators of Nubits vote to create more. If they vote to create too much then the interest would go very high which is basically a vote to create more. So if the make a mistake and overestimate the demand for Nubits and print up too many it is just round and round. The Nubit holders themselves have no say and are completely at the whim of the Nushare holders. Overall, the system closely resembles a Ponzi scheme. I do not throw that around lightly. Primarily the only way to sustain their peg is to find more and more buyers. I caution people in investing in Nubits. They are not going to go up because they are pegged to the dollar. The reason to buy Nubits would be for the interest they pay you. The whole operation seems shady to me, so I would urge caution there.
12:14 Do you think there is a risk to Peercoin by Nubits ?
12:52 Lets highlight the difference in approaches between nubits vs the collateralization approach.
15:08 Dan points out how in fairness, Bitshares X has been called a ponzi scheme.
16:45 People were claiming nubits could fund development of peercoin and family, thoughts ?
21:03 How explaining things in the company metaphor helps in aiding the explanation of Bitshares X relative to other products.
23:40 Does Nubits hyper inflation affect Nushare price ?
25:20 Joking talk about a BitNuBit and being able to short it.
26:00 Is it possible to make an API for outside exchanges ?
27:55 What is the relation between I3 and the developers of Music DAC ?
29:30 Discussion of changes made
BM - Lets discuss planned updates to the toolkit that will not necessarily make it into Bitshares X because of the social contract against printing Bitshares X. I wanted to add the ability to short anything against anything. Including shorting Bitshares X against bitUSD … or bitGLD or whatever. So the idea of that is that the bitAssets are now collateralized not just by Bitshares x or shares in the DAC, but by all the other assets in the system. Which means that everything is backed by a basket of assets instead of a single asset. Which means that if any single asset falls in value dramatically it does not affect the entire backing of the assets.
30:52 Why would the social contract prohibit the previous mentioned improvement ? Discussion on the 2 camps in the community and their wishes. How about over-leveraging the system with catastrophic effects ?
40:55 Can we have a feature that allows shareholders to propose a poll on the blockchain to vote on ?
43:00 What about Dacsunlimited cloning Bitshares X into other coins to maximize value to Bitshares X holders ?
BM - Thats equivalent to the market approach of polling the userbase to see what they want. I suppose what people will do is they'll jump from one ship to another depending on what policy they prefer. If they are worried about inflation then they might dump that one and buy the deflationary one or vice versa. If they like both then they might stay with both and see where they go. However, I do not wish to encourage a split at this time, it fragments the userbase, The shares are not usable across the 2 DACS, the exchanges have to now list 2 currencies, and we have 2 codebases to maintain. So I am not really interested in that. Most of this conversation is hypothetical in nature, but it is something that should be discussed because of the 10 rules. If a system is more competitive and someone thinks they can do it then they will do it. All coin and coin holders are responsible for adapting to market conditions as they may be.
45:55 Regarding DDOS attacks, how does POW compare to DPOS in regards to resiliency to attacks ?
50:05 What role are the delegates who are not in top 101 and can be they be analyzed as easily ?
51:03 It is likely Bitcoin will switch to DPOS and what effect would it have on Bitshares ?
BM - I think it would be unlikely they would switch to DPOS. The architecture is just too different. I would expect them to switch something closer to peercoin before DPOS. I don't think bitcoin has the ability to fund the development necessary to make such a sweeping change and get all participants on board. I think in the free market, the only way to upgrade Bitcoin is to out compete it in the market.
53:20 The market overview page in the GUI, are there plans to make it nicer looking ?
BM - Yes! Yes! Yes! There are certainly plan to make that better. I have hated that page.. but.. uhm we are focused on functionality before aesthetics. So that is where all our priority has been.
54:00 Daniel Larimer starts to departs but says one last thing.
BM - I thank everyone for showing and apologize for being 20 minutes late. All I can say is the stuff we are planning is big and it will be hard to compete with. We are doing the best we can to provide value and innovate. I think that the number one thing we have is being agile to respond to market forces instead of being rigid and I think you will see that working to our advantage in the months ahead.
55:10 Post show starts. Talk of Cob from Music DAC will be coming next week. Talk of his his new non-technical whitepaper and how impressive it is. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9360.0
An open discussion largely about Music DAC. A viewer thinks the possibility might be larger than Bitshares X?