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 - JonnyB

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 ... 43
436
General Discussion / Bitcoin sidechain instead of bitBTC ?
« on: January 26, 2016, 02:03:33 pm »
The concept of sidechains is one where real BTC gets locked up in another blockchain contract and a token is issued in its place which can be redeemed at any time without human involvement.
So it is essentially a bitcoin IOU but from a decentralised smart contract instead of a company or person.

The guys at blockstream claim they have got sidechains working in a first version that they call liquid and say companies like bitstamp and bitfinex are using it.

If they really have made a working sidechain for bitcoin can't this be integrated into bitshares to replace BITBTC?

437
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares Telegram Group Chat and spartako_bot
« on: January 25, 2016, 10:40:17 pm »
Quote from: Thom on January 25, 2016, 08:36:06 pm
How do new witnesses or users get added to either the Telegram chat channel or spartako_bot app for telegram?

I'm not able to get on, tho I can find the BitsharesBot and send commands, but I get nothing back.

My new phone uses Telegram ID @Verbal Techguy

theres a link to join the telegram chat at the bottom of the bitshares.org homepage

438
General Discussion / Re: please don't dilution for any reason at this low price
« on: January 25, 2016, 04:37:28 pm »
Quote from: abit on January 25, 2016, 09:37:33 am
Quote from: xeroc on January 25, 2016, 06:25:11 am
Quote from: alt on January 25, 2016, 03:51:41 am
I believe when we dilution 1 USD value BTS, the share holders will lose more than 10 USD.
How so?

Do you think the committee would use their accumulated fee income to pay for workers instead?
I welcome your approach and am willing to be payed by other means as long as can fill my fridge
Although the accumulated fees of bitUSD and etc seem to be a bit high right now, they can only be spent one time.

In the long run, accumulated fee of an asset is not income, it's a swap position between BTS and that asset.

When the fee pool is running out, either sell the accumulated fee into market for BTS to charge fee pool, or request  more BTS via workers. I prefer the former.

Agree with abit here.

439
General Discussion / Re: [poll] Should we use a worker proposal to reduce the premium for bitassets?
« on: January 25, 2016, 01:46:56 pm »
what happened to this idea and the proposal to sell accumulated fees which are now sitting in the committee account?

440
General Discussion / Re: Fiat gateway is now up and running on OpenLedger!
« on: January 22, 2016, 04:37:09 pm »
Quote from: kenCode on January 22, 2016, 12:42:54 pm
Quote from: tbone on January 22, 2016, 08:30:46 am
Quote from: tbone on January 22, 2016, 06:40:57 am
This is great news.  Congrats, Ronny! 

So now we have a fiat gateway, stealth transfers/balances are on the way, we have prediction markets, point-of-sale capability is coming shortly, and soon we'll have percentage-based fees (which I think is more important than people realize).  It seems things are really starting to come together.

I forgot to mention kenCode's mobile wallet, another exciting development that seems to be close to fruition.  By the way, @kenCode, have you discussed with Ronny the possibility for you to include the new fiat gateway into your mobile wallet?  That would be pretty killer.

Yeah, Ronny and I just skyped about it last night I think it was. I have a feature-freeze on 1.0 so that we can stay on track, but I have added it to the roadmap for v1.2. There is still a limitation however in the Bridges as they currently force the coins accepted such as btc, ltc, ppc, etc into the Merchants BTS (as per Blocktrades). Ideally, I want to save the Merchants from all volatility so if they accept btc, ltc etc at the cash register, it would be best if that coin could be instantly converted into a stable coin such as bitEUR, bitUSD, bitCNY (or OPEN.EUR, OPEN.USD, OPEN.CNY). Bridging into BTS works great (thanx to Blocktrades), but that still has not solved the volatility issue for the Merchants.
 
So, if Blocktrades @dannotestein and Ronny @ccedk both could offer instant bridging into fiat equivalents, it will be an easier sell for us to the merchants. I plan on implementing these bridges into the mobile wallets and all of the POS systems.

Nobody is going to offer a smartcoin bridge to and from fiat because their is no real peg and no liquidity. Yes there is some for bitusd but still not enough for a bridge provider to feel safe that he can provide a steady stream at a constant rate.

441
General Discussion / Re: Is it me...
« on: January 21, 2016, 04:30:59 pm »
USD:GOLD 24hr Volume 0
USD:BTC 24hr Volume 0
BTC: BTS 24hr Volume 0.05BTC

442
General Discussion / Re: 10k of bitUSD just got destroyed for no reason
« on: January 21, 2016, 12:22:33 pm »
Quote from: alt on January 21, 2016, 11:11:31 am
no, force settle shouldn't used usually
we don't need give the force settle order the best price.
In fact we should  ask for a compensate from the force settle, give the compensate to shorters.
don't waste any time to develop this.

you wouldn't have to compensate the shorters if buy orders were used first because the smartcoins wouldn't have been destroyed/extinguished

if liquidity and volume is one of our biggest problems sure this would make sense because it stops the destruction of smartcoins?

443
General Discussion / Re: 10k of bitUSD just got destroyed for no reason
« on: January 21, 2016, 01:54:05 am »
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 01:37:20 am
Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 21, 2016, 01:34:14 am
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 01:16:58 am
Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 21, 2016, 12:53:21 am
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:48:54 am
Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 21, 2016, 12:44:00 am
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:41:18 am
Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 21, 2016, 12:37:52 am
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:21:45 am
It settles $10k short positions from the bottom collateral level. Buy orders never be matched.

Well there is no reason it shouldn't it shouldn't take any buy ordrers  that are above the feed price first is there?

As far as I saw, there were no orders over the feed price when he settled bitUSD.

my order price of 322 is still there and you can see on the blockchain that it was there at 12:56 when the feed price was lower

He settled about 24h ago.

He requested settlement 24hrs ago yes but the settlement occurred an hour ago. look at his account it says order filled at 321

You may misunderstand about settlement. It has no relationship with buy orders.

I understand settlement well.
His order to force settle was filled at 23:56 24hrs after he requested settlement.

It is equivalent to a bts buy order which you know will execute in 24hrs at feed price with guaranteed liquidity.

It buys BTS collateral of lowest shorts, not BTS on the orderbook.

If you create smartcoin it is not always a short. it is only a short if you sell your newly created smartcoin.

when a smartcoin is force settled it takes the equivalent value in bts from the the lowest collateralised smartcoin and returns the remaining bts collateral to the smartcoin creator.

This is how it currently works and I understand it. What I am saying is that the system should check for any buy orders that are higher than the feed price first before taking collateral from the smartcoin creators. This way everyone wins.

444
General Discussion / Re: 10k of bitUSD just got destroyed for no reason
« on: January 21, 2016, 01:34:14 am »
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 01:16:58 am
Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 21, 2016, 12:53:21 am
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:48:54 am
Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 21, 2016, 12:44:00 am
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:41:18 am
Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 21, 2016, 12:37:52 am
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:21:45 am
It settles $10k short positions from the bottom collateral level. Buy orders never be matched.

Well there is no reason it shouldn't it shouldn't take any buy ordrers  that are above the feed price first is there?

As far as I saw, there were no orders over the feed price when he settled bitUSD.

my order price of 322 is still there and you can see on the blockchain that it was there at 12:56 when the feed price was lower

He settled about 24h ago.

He requested settlement 24hrs ago yes but the settlement occurred an hour ago. look at his account it says order filled at 321

You may misunderstand about settlement. It has no relationship with buy orders.

I understand settlement well.
His order to force settle was filled at 23:56 24hrs after he requested settlement.

It is equivalent to a bts buy order which you know will execute in 24hrs at feed price with guaranteed liquidity. 





445
General Discussion / Re: 10k of bitUSD just got destroyed for no reason
« on: January 21, 2016, 12:53:21 am »
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:48:54 am
Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 21, 2016, 12:44:00 am
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:41:18 am
Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 21, 2016, 12:37:52 am
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:21:45 am
It settles $10k short positions from the bottom collateral level. Buy orders never be matched.

Well there is no reason it shouldn't it shouldn't take any buy ordrers  that are above the feed price first is there?

As far as I saw, there were no orders over the feed price when he settled bitUSD.

my order price of 322 is still there and you can see on the blockchain that it was there at 12:56 when the feed price was lower

He settled about 24h ago.

He requested settlement 24hrs ago yes but the settlement occurred an hour ago. look at his account it says order filled at 321

446
General Discussion / Re: 10k of bitUSD just got destroyed for no reason
« on: January 21, 2016, 12:44:00 am »
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:41:18 am
Quote from: JonnyBitcoin on January 21, 2016, 12:37:52 am
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:21:45 am
It settles $10k short positions from the bottom collateral level. Buy orders never be matched.

Well there is no reason it shouldn't it shouldn't take any buy ordrers  that are above the feed price first is there?

As far as I saw, there were no orders over the feed price when he settled bitUSD.

my order price of 322 is still there and you can see on the blockchain that it was there at 12:56 when the feed price was lower

447
General Discussion / Re: 10k of bitUSD just got destroyed for no reason
« on: January 21, 2016, 12:41:04 am »
Quote from: lil_jay890 on January 21, 2016, 12:22:26 am
Brent has been around for a long time... I'm guessing he was in at much higher levels and is just cutting his losses.  Really too bad as he was pretty active too...

You understand that by settling bitusd you are actually buying. so brent was actually purchasing $10k worth of bts.

448
General Discussion / Re: 10k of bitUSD just got destroyed for no reason
« on: January 21, 2016, 12:37:52 am »
Quote from: clayop on January 21, 2016, 12:21:45 am
It settles $10k short positions from the bottom collateral level. Buy orders never be matched.

Well there is no reason it shouldn't it shouldn't take any buy ordrers  that are above the feed price first is there?

449
General Discussion / 10k of bitUSD just got destroyed for no reason
« on: January 21, 2016, 12:09:53 am »
Forced settlement is an essential function of smartcoins it is a function that gives guaranteed liquidity at feed price for sellers.

at 23:56pm UTC 20th jan a bts account named BRENTALLSOP had over 10k bitusd force settled at feed price.

I had a buy order for 10k in bitusd at just over feed price.  Why didn't our orders match?

If they had matched , BRENTALLSOP would have got a better price. 10k of bitusd wouldn't have been destoyed, loads of creators of bitusd wouldn't have just had their position liquidated. And I would have got some cheap bitusd.

the exchange engine needs to be updated so orders like this will get matched in the future.


450
General Discussion / Re: can we have a notifcation service
« on: January 20, 2016, 04:33:04 pm »
I would love to see a telegram bot that updated me of any activity on my bitshares account.

@spartako made the price bot and I have previously mentioned this idea to him before

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 ... 43

Page created in 0.193 seconds with 22 queries.