1) Implementing a virtual machine (like Ethereum’s’ Virtual Machine) into Graphene.
Once created, it will allow each user to produce smart contracts that work with assets and Smartcoins. The mechanisms of ICOs, trusted systems for the payments of dividends, and hosting various games/shares/lotteries, are examples of possible, future business cases.
By combining the strengths of the two platforms (the flexibility of ETH Smartcontracts and the speed/throughput of BitShares), they will get the symbiosis of the advantages and eliminate the weaknesses of these two platforms.
As seen already, Daniel Larimer had negotiations with EOS over the past, before real launch of EOS, and he dropped them. Probably because 'mechanisms' of ETH blockchain and it's Centralized autonomy is nothing to implement from. BEOS is far better proposal than this.
2) Implementation of the Atomic Swap mechanism.
Such a mechanism will allow the exchange of funds from one blockchain (Bitshares) to another (bitcoin, as the first), without any participation from third parties. In this case, BTS, MPA (bitUSD), and UIA can be used as bitshares funds.
Given the fact that there is only one real decentralized exchange, the ability to enter it from other blockchains, without any risks (technical and regulatory), and the participation of third parties (gateways), creates huge economic potential for the platform and the cryptocurrency economy.
You are fun
If you can provide corporate developer estimate with stages/descriptions/proposal of actual integration of Atomic Swap to Bitshares, I would made entire Bitshares to vote for this. But since we both know that you don't have idea or clue how it can be done actually or its going to work, and when it's going to work, let's drop it as well.
3) Creation of Fee Backed Asset.
The idea of creating the FBA was proposed back in 2015, but was never implemented. (http://docs.bitshares.org/bitshares/user/fba.html)
In addition to implementing the mechanisms for automatic dividends distribution, it is proposed to discuss additional options for managing fees (the ability to impose payments on the issuer, change the fee rules for creating/closing the order, so that the person who closed the order pays 100% of the fees or 50/50).
It would create more Chaos on already chaotic market we are running here. If it's not done since 2015. it shouldn't be left alone completely.
- Now, someone mentioned BEOS and how it's all cool, and should be STARTING EARLY DEVELOPMENT AS FROM NOW! Being part of Steem and Bitshares Blockchain, i've seen in both that Daniel had serious issues when he originally wrote both blockchains and launched them. Steem had 6 hardforks before blocks really start being written and "fully functional", so lets put it this way:
THERE IS NO WAY THAT ANYONE REASONABLE WILL GO TO 3RD PRODUCT of 2 SEMI PRODUCTS to START WRITING NEW DEV for the PRODUCT ORIGINALLY CREATED BY SAME DEV AUTHOR, where project are still being under FIXES/ONGOING Development.
Is there any reasonable mind to bare with me on this one, please ?
Many thanks.
Lucifer.