Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Empirical1.2

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ... 92
211
General Discussion / Re: Would you support 2% dilution to BitAsset Yield for a 6 month limited trial?
« on: March 11, 2016, 11:27:40 am »
The immediate overnight impact of a temporary yield promotion would be a rapid expansion of the BitUSD supply. Becoming the crypto USD, Smartcoin market leader will significantly impact the perception of the DEX and it's future potential at a time when we have received a lot of positive momentum and attention.

What we've seen though is the amount of BTS on Polo increasing, if we want all those people who are suddenly interested in BTS to move their BTS off the exchanges, learn about Smartcoins and participate in the DEX then we need to give them a reason/incentive and the yield promotion is a great way to do that.

212
General Discussion / Re: Subsidizing Market Liquidity
« on: March 11, 2016, 11:19:49 am »
Quote from: Akado on March 11, 2016, 09:21:22 am
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on March 11, 2016, 08:38:16 am
Quote from: CoinHoarder on March 11, 2016, 04:38:22 am
Let me ask you this. Why should someone be allowed to place an order 50% away from the peg and earn any points towards the "reward system"? or 40%? or 30%? How useful are orders that far away from the peg, really? And why would shareholders want some of the funds going to those who place such useless orders? Obviously, some restrictions need to be in place.

 +5%

Given the current BTS momentum and spotlight, BTS will gain much more value from implementing an imperfect liquidity subsidy now and adjusting it based on participant behaviour than waiting a few weeks/months to get one right. So if the cost is reasonable to start one, <$100/200 a day, then I would start it sharpish to build on the current attention and momentum & get more people onto the DEX.

And who would do this? CNX is handling stealth. abit?

I don't know what's required. Maybe CNX, they get a bit under-appreciated doing the harder/higher cost dev work that doesn't have an immediate impact on BTS price whereas if this gets implemented while BTS has positive momentum, the results should be immediately visible.

213
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: March 11, 2016, 08:56:16 am »
Quote from: liondani on March 11, 2016, 12:52:15 am
prepare yourself for the coming weeks  ;)

The important thing when you have momentum is to build on it. I'm a big fan of the yield promotion bringing in new BTS demand, getting people onto the DEX and rapidly raising our valuation further.

However something most agree on is a liquidity subsidy, which can be implemented very quickly. So I think we should start a conservative one as soon as possible, which can be adjusted based on results. Improved DEX usage, liquidity and a tighter peg on key SmartCoins will help us build on the current momentum, attention and spotlight in the coming weeks.

214
General Discussion / Re: Subsidizing Market Liquidity
« on: March 11, 2016, 08:38:16 am »
Quote from: CoinHoarder on March 11, 2016, 04:38:22 am
Let me ask you this. Why should someone be allowed to place an order 50% away from the peg and earn any points towards the "reward system"? or 40%? or 30%? How useful are orders that far away from the peg, really? And why would shareholders want some of the funds going to those who place such useless orders? Obviously, some restrictions need to be in place.

 +5%

Given the current BTS momentum and spotlight, BTS will gain much more value from implementing an imperfect liquidity subsidy now and adjusting it based on participant behaviour than waiting a few weeks/months to get one right. So if the cost is reasonable to start one, <$100/200 a day, then I would start it sharpish to build on the current attention and momentum & get more people onto the DEX.

215
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: March 10, 2016, 10:27:48 pm »
Quote from: Ander on March 10, 2016, 10:11:30 pm
Always some idiot whale who doesnt realize he can easily sell the bts slowly over time at 2000+, he has to market dump to 1600 to try to kill bts while he gets out with less money.

Wasn't that little dump possibly the case of longs being under-margined and a big buy order being removed resulting in forced liquidations as you explained here?

Quote from: Ander on February 29, 2016, 10:46:46 pm
Lets say that the person with the buy wall at 850 sats in our example cancelled his order.  Now, polo recalculates how much you could sell your BTS for. Lets say that the 850 wall was a big wall and you were relying on its existence.  Without it, poloniex sees that you would have to dump all the way down to 400 sats in a liquidation!   It recalculates your margin and determines that you are below the 20% liquidation level and are no longer safe. Therefore it autoliquidates your position, and crashes the price to 400 sats.
So the removal of an order from the books on polo can trigger forced liquidations.

216
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: March 10, 2016, 08:59:54 pm »
Quote from: Akado on March 10, 2016, 08:58:51 pm
2k now on Polo

Excellent  :D


217
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: March 10, 2016, 08:57:57 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on March 10, 2016, 08:29:24 pm
How secure is Poloniex?  They have a lot of BTC and BTS there, would be a shame if something happened...

That's why I hope we provide a little incentive for people to move to the DEX before something serious happens.
If we wait for polo/BTC38 to be goxxed to provide the incentive, we would suffer & not benefit for a very long time because of our exposure to them. 

218
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: March 10, 2016, 03:00:27 pm »
Quote from: Akado on March 10, 2016, 02:55:16 pm
Quote from: hcf27 on March 10, 2016, 02:53:14 pm
Well this is fun, are people responding the the new fee structure or is it just Azure´s specualtion ?

Azure speculation most likely. People just want to ride the pumps. However if you check on cryptofresh, filled orders and transfers have been slightly increasing in our DEX, that is a good sign and may be happening because of the new fee structure

Definitely Azure

Quote from: Empirical1.2 on March 03, 2016, 03:50:14 pm
I'm stocking up on BTS right now, hopefully I still have another few hours to get some under 0.00001


Quote from: Empirical1.2 on March 07, 2016, 01:35:42 pm
Quote from: Akado on March 04, 2016, 10:07:04 pm
It won't have an impact as big, it's not something new now, people might have got used to cryptos getting on Azure

I'm not expecting massive gains but it's particularly good news for BTS as we tend to be development strong but adoption/utility/known 3rd party weak so the name recognition of Microsoft Azure is a big positive & step in the right direction. I agree with Ander that we'll see 20-30 million and I also think we'll retain some of that additional value too, though we'll probably have to wait for at least a week after the announcement to get a sense of what it's worth to BTS.


Now all we need to do is add yield and liquidity subsidies to SmartCoins so we can overtake Ethereum and then I can retire  :D

219
General Discussion / Re: Maker Taker on Polo
« on: March 10, 2016, 10:24:47 am »
Quote from: Akado on March 10, 2016, 10:12:58 am
And there goes our advantage..

Many crypto exchanges already offer some form of maker/taker.

Besides offering very low fees attractive to both parties, BitShares is currently discussing the best way to go about implementing some form of maker subsidy which polo/others don't offer. (Funded by BTS shareholders to incentivize some liquidity within a useful range, which is what NBT does too.) So I don't think we've lost our advantage and will still attract useful liquidity to the key SmartCoins in the near future.


220
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: March 10, 2016, 08:23:25 am »
Quote from: puppies on March 10, 2016, 04:02:29 am
Quote from: Ander on March 10, 2016, 03:54:22 am
I saw the lending like that one time during our pre-2.0 rally.

This is great, finally some respect.

Azure was really a big deal apparently.

Fucking A it was.  I am stoked on this and I am a tiny tiny fish.  Some of our whales have made some good money today.

Historically the peak price is reached 4-8 days after its mentioned on the Azure blog post/Twitter feed (400k+ followers) will be interesting to see if this is the case with BTS.

As I mentioned in the other thread FCT and EMC managed to retain a large amount of the value they gained post addition which is a big positive and hopefully something BTS + increased brand recognition and association can build on.

221
General Discussion / Re: BitShares now Live on Microsoft Azure Blockchain as a Service (BaaS)
« on: March 10, 2016, 06:46:30 am »
 +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% +5% Excellent work Fox

Quote from: BunkerChain Labs on March 10, 2016, 04:31:49 am
Quote from: lil_jay890 on March 10, 2016, 04:27:35 am
So dumb question... What advantages does Azure give to bitshares other than being associated with the Microsoft name?  Is Azure BaaS a market place?  Can people develop for BTS through Azure?

The general idea of the BaaS is that when some company is looking to build a blockchain they can shop through Azure and spin one up.

As far as the crypto-traders are concerns though.. another reason to buy on the hype and sell on the news.

You're obviously free to advise BTS holders & all the outsiders and potential new BTS users and investors viewing this positive announcement thread to sell BTS right now, though I think that's probably best put in the price speculation thread instead.

As far as other DACs like Factom & Emercoin go they've since managed to retain a large amount of the additional value that was initially attributable to their addition on Azure. This adds utility, name recognition & greater confidence to a brand, one thing BTS in particular has been lacking. (Positive brand associations and integrations are something BTS has been much criticised for in the past,  so some real & retainable brand value has been created here especially if we capitalise and build on the opportunity.)

It also opens up BTS to a much wider technology savvy audience. The Azure Twitter feed alone, where it may be announced if the addition is added to a Marley blog post has 400k+ followers of people interested in new technology. So while yes we'll likely see an overshoot 4-8 days after it's announced on there. I believe Fox's efforts may have added real tangible value which BTS can build on.

Only a month ago you believed it was worth a lot of time and money being spent on this...

Quote from: BunkerChain Labs on January 22, 2016, 02:25:24 pm
If I don't see any movement on this in the coming month I promise you we will head this up and be the lead to ensure that we can be available on the Azure BaaS.

At present we are tied up with other things atm and this would require a great deal of attention money and time to execute.

I think it will be worth the effort though.

Again excellent work and THANK YOU Fox for your efforts
 

222
General Discussion / Re: Crowd Lending vs. Crowd Funding
« on: March 09, 2016, 08:12:43 pm »
Quote from: yvv on March 09, 2016, 08:01:41 pm
Quote from: Empirical1.2 on March 09, 2016, 07:50:12 pm
Quote from: bitsapphire on March 22, 2015, 10:41:41 pm
We have decided to hold the fundraiser exclusively in BTC, there won't be a BTS or bitAsset option. The reasons are that the liquidity between BTS and BTC is so low that selling 130k USD worth opf BTS into BTC to cash out into fiat would according to our calculations move the market simply too much.

BitSapphire cited liquidity, but when they talk about moving the market they mean they would significantly reduce the short term value of BTS if they crowdfunded in BTS & then converted it to BTC/Fiat for their needs.


He came up with a trivial solution: raise funds in asset which he can easily cash out. No conversion is required. Same solution is good for crowd lending.

Yes provided the loan is raised in BTC/other then it is fine but large loans raised in BTS/SmartCoins would put significant downward pressure on the BTS price.


223
General Discussion / Re: Crowd Lending vs. Crowd Funding
« on: March 09, 2016, 07:50:12 pm »
Quote from: Stan on March 09, 2016, 07:16:59 pm
We've been mostly talking about counter party free bonds and counter party stocks, but we could also offer some interesting other products using UIA's.

Of course these are only as interesting as the trustworthy ability to pay interest by serious institutions and startups, but you could offer CD's and annuity bonds backed by quality UIA's.

The issuer sells a transferrable bond denominated in their UIA which locks up the principle + interest in one of two ways:

Certificate of Deposit (CD) which pays interest and principle at the end of its term (90 days, 1 year, 10 years...)
Annuity Bond (AB) which pays interest and principle as a series of periodic payments as an income stream.

In other words, instead of institutions lending money to unaccountable consumers,
we have consumers lending money to accountable institutions.

Now we just need issuers who can convince buyers they are a good risk over that period of time...

This might be called "crowd lending"

It's certainly doable and we've already seen some small examples of micro-lending on the BTS blockchain  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20530.0.html

However like crowd-funding, large crowd-lending loans may have a negative short to medium term BTS price effect because the borrower would convert the large loaned amount into fiat/BTC creating significant BTS sell pressure which would only be returned slowly after varying periods.

Quote from: bitsapphire on March 22, 2015, 10:41:41 pm
We have decided to hold the fundraiser exclusively in BTC, there won't be a BTS or bitAsset option. The reasons are that the liquidity between BTS and BTC is so low that selling 130k USD worth opf BTS into BTC to cash out into fiat would according to our calculations move the market simply too much.

BitSapphire cited liquidity, but when they talk about moving the market they mean they would significantly reduce the short term value of BTS if they crowdfunded in BTS & then converted it to BTC/Fiat for their needs.

So as most loans result in the principal leaving BTS over a short period into a fairly illiquid BTS/Crypto market,  thus creating BTS sell pressure and even potentially decreasing BTS value by more than the loan amount. I don't think I'd see a lot of value in promoting them in the short to medium term personally.

(This could be a potential market with a BTC sidechain though as funds raised in BTC wouldn't have an impact.)

224
General Discussion / Re: too many bts in centralized exchanges. Danger!
« on: March 09, 2016, 04:25:30 pm »
Quote from: cube on March 09, 2016, 04:06:58 pm
Quote from: tbone on March 09, 2016, 03:28:37 pm
Quote from: mf-tzo on March 09, 2016, 03:22:14 pm
Please consider withdrawing your bts from external exchanges if you do not intend to sell them.. More than 30% of BTS are in the top two exchanges. This is very dangerous and if something goes wrong with any of these exchanges you can kiss goodbye your bts investment forever.

If you do not sell your bts, why not just held them in your wallet and be the king to your castle?

If we offer yield during the bootstrapping phase, it will encourage many people to move their BTS off the centralized exchanges and onto the DEX and many good things will result.  If you think that is important, I hope you will get behind @Empirical1.2's idea.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,21597.msg284481.html#msg284481

What would stop the centralised exchanges from distributing its earned yields to their bts users, if they choose to do so?

AFAIK, they currently don't do this with other forms of POS rewards as it's not part of their business model. Yield harvesting is more complicated too and some also argue it carries some risk & management/maintenance requirements if you want to maximise your gain, which might put them off and also might make it something they couldn't get away with engaging in if customers hadn't explicitly given them permission. At the very worst case, if they did do this they would create millions of BitUSD,  which at least has the benefit of making BTS the USD crypto market leader by size.

Quote from: Akado on March 09, 2016, 04:21:01 pm
We could offer yield to non exchange accounts to attract people to the dex

If it ever became an issue perhaps that could be a possibility too.

225
General Discussion / Re: too many bts in centralized exchanges. Danger!
« on: March 09, 2016, 04:00:20 pm »
Quote from: bitacer on March 09, 2016, 03:59:36 pm
Danger to those holding them there, for others it could have a nice deflationary effect

When they get dumped on the market by whoever has access to them?

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ... 92

Page created in 0.184 seconds with 20 queries.