This isn't a real suggestion, but just something to ponder. Assume the development work wasn't super involved, would it make sense to put a legitimate BTC wallet alongside a BTS wallet?
Assuming you could make the best BTC/BTS wallet.. would that even have value? At first it strikes me as a good idea (if you don't consider resources required). Or is it a bad idea? If it was as good as any wallet, and you could give people something to use it. Then once they are using the wallet, BTS onramp/offramp is integrated right there somehow?
Anything that gets people to do a side-by-side comparison is good.
"A Bitcoin wallet that pays yield" ...er, whaat?
Bitcoin users are living in a cult. They need to discover their own way out, without realizing they're being gently guided, else they'll feel antagonized and become suspicious of our intentions. 'Both is good' is awesome, because they immediately sense we're on their side.
Why not just promote BitBTC? 'BTC with interest'
Why not just promote BitBTC? 'BTC with interest'
"novel product that bridges between the familiar and the ground-breaking." - Stan
This plan is around the familiar. It's the same thing they are doing right now, just adding the Bitshares checking/savings. If that's not possible in one wallet, I see the bitBTC being another option.
Bitcoin Wallet (powered by bitshares) Transmute your coins and earn interest in Bitcoin, Gold, Oil, or USDollars.
Keeping bitcoin as the focus would be important to gain bitcoin purists interest without creating opposition or defensiveness.
Primarily as a bitcoin wallet, you wouldn't even need to mention BTS/bitUSD/bitBTC but that is how it works in the background. They would still be able to send receive bitUSD etc but it wouldn't be billed as a bitshares wallet. (perhaps an advanced feature where you could change the wallets 'Focus' from default-bitcoin to BTS or bitUSD etc)
In addition, once we have some automated BTC<>bitBTC transmutation, users of this wallet could then gain all the benefits of named accounts, faster confirmation times, lower transaction fees, etc. between BTC users of this wallet and not even realize they're using the bitshares network.
There's no reason to try and replace bitcoin and we have more to gain by embracing and including bitcoin.
.... "bitshares makes it better"
For online-merchants (bitUSD) -> avoid recalculating prices everyday, instant confirmation, no chargebacks.
For Bitcoin (bitBTC) -> embrace ideology and terminology/memes - "to the moon" etc, extend, extinguish.
Positioning needs to be different for different end-users.
There's no reason to try and replace bitcoin and we have more to gain by embracing and including bitcoin.
.... "bitshares makes it better"
a lightweight bitcoin implementation to have any chance of merging it with our wallet and having a positive user experience. So... is this possible ? blockchain.info? Anything like that? thoughts?
Yea, I was just thinking. That is the nice thing about how using the qt-web or whatever it is. We could release a wallet that basically just relies on a web based centralized type wallet for BTC. There may even be centralized wallets that have APIs. The problem is the Bitshares brand would be very tied into the security and rep of such a centralized system. Otherwise such a solution is probably relatively easy to do (if there are bitcoin wallet sites with APIs). THat still doesn't take care of the part where you move bitshares back and forth from BTC. You need a real market or some peg. I suppose price feeds would work. Use the same keys on both chains. It seems doable to me but I haven't really thought about it.
Toast is working on the BTS side of an API. This discussion to me is about getting a combo BTC wallet with a decent user experience that had value etc.
Toast's work might actually lead to a combo wallet that is strictly web-based. Hmmm. That is probably best anyway, because then official bitshares wallet is never tied into a centralized third party.
Need an integrated wallet which uses only BitBTC along with BTC.
Need an integrated wallet which uses only BitBTC along with BTC.
Hedging btc by using bitBTC and the 5% yield is not going to be particularly important when it swings that much daily it seems. So what are your thoughts on the value here ?
Need an integrated wallet which uses only BitBTC along with BTC.
Hedging btc by using bitBTC and the 5% yield is not going to be particularly important when it swings that much daily it seems. So what are your thoughts on the value here ?
Its a stealth attack. We want to put it into the heads that BitBTC is interchangeable with BTC, and with the advantages it provides (speed, yield, anonymity) might capture a part of the BTC use.
BTS came in a direct competitor, made the Bitcoin community angry and defensive. BitUSD aims for a slightly different userbase, and also has a higher barrier to entry as a lot of infrastructure is needed in place. BitBTC, on the other hand can be marketed as something which makes using BTC easier, and the target would be a community who are not that finicky about user experience and would be willing to meet half way.
Need an integrated wallet which uses only BitBTC along with BTC.
Hedging btc by using bitBTC and the 5% yield is not going to be particularly important when it swings that much daily it seems. So what are your thoughts on the value here ?
Its a stealth attack. We want to put it into the heads that BitBTC is interchangeable with BTC, and with the advantages it provides (speed, yield, anonymity) might capture a part of the BTC use.
BTS came in a direct competitor, made the Bitcoin community angry and defensive. BitUSD aims for a slightly different userbase, and also has a higher barrier to entry as a lot of infrastructure is needed in place. BitBTC, on the other hand can be marketed as something which makes using BTC easier, and the target would be a community who are not that finicky about user experience and would be willing to meet half way.
The value proposition for bitUSD seems far greater than the value proposition for bitBTC. bitBTC is more like a toy people can hedge with to be frank.
I do agree about needing to making bridges with BTC. I used Proof of Waste in some of the original wiki writings. I removed it because it was too divisive at the time. (IIRC) I am not sure it is a good idea to use it all the time either. How I expect people to respond is not how most people are. They just push back psychologically. So.. we definitely need to not draw a line between the 2 projects.
It doesn't matter which is the greater value proposition(BTC or USD), all options would be available. Of course more people use USD than BTC, but more people currently use crypto BTC than crypto USD, and nobody has a decentralized way to hedge BTC.
This wallet would specifically target bitcoin users. Its not the only bitshares wallet, and certainly not the primary bitshares wallet. Its a bitcoin wallet that you can hedge in anyway you like, or if you're die hard bitcoin, you can at the very least capture 5% on your hodl.
the appeal is similar to inputs.io and coinlenders, if you remember them. where you could earn close to 30% interest on your bitcoins if you locked them in a CD or less just by holding them in their wallet, only they were centralized and obviously vulnerable to attack as they lost everything. This wallet would offer far more diverse hedging options in a decentralized user controlled way.
There's already a large group of people who already use bitcoin, it would not be a hard sell. You wouldn't have to explain anything. If its popular, now you have a grass roots army of bitcoin(powered by bitshares) evangelists.
Bottom line, if its not too difficult to make a simple lightweight client like this. Why wouldn't you? It seems to me, an easy way to leverage the existing bitcoin userbase. And at the time when bitshares is accepted everywhere, this wallet would still work and you could use bitUSD or whatever you like for all your purchases etc. (advanced setting | 'Change Focus=>bitUSD' |)
It doesn't matter which is the greater value proposition(BTC or USD), all options would be available. Of course more people use USD than BTC, but more people currently use crypto BTC than crypto USD, and nobody has a decentralized way to hedge BTC.
This wallet would specifically target bitcoin users. Its not the only bitshares wallet, and certainly not the primary bitshares wallet. Its a bitcoin wallet that you can hedge in anyway you like, or if you're die hard bitcoin, you can at the very least capture 5% on your hodl.
the appeal is similar to inputs.io and coinlenders, if you remember them. where you could earn close to 30% interest on your bitcoins if you locked them in a CD or less just by holding them in their wallet, only they were centralized and obviously vulnerable to attack as they lost everything. This wallet would offer far more diverse hedging options in a decentralized user controlled way.
There's already a large group of people who already use bitcoin, it would not be a hard sell. You wouldn't have to explain anything. If its popular, now you have a grass roots army of bitcoin(powered by bitshares) evangelists.
Bottom line, if its not too difficult to make a simple lightweight client like this. Why wouldn't you? It seems to me, an easy way to leverage the existing bitcoin userbase. And at the time when bitshares is accepted everywhere, this wallet would still work and you could use bitUSD or whatever you like for all your purchases etc. (advanced setting | 'Change Focus=>bitUSD' |)
I think you are over selling the desire for bitBTC by BTC holders. They have a digital currency, they don't need a derivative of their digital currency. BTC is basically the cash of the crypto-world. Putting it into bitBTC doesn't strike me as a strong selling point.
I think we would start to muddy up the marketing message of such a site. Perhaps as a later feature, but I still think the interaction between bitUSD and bts to be of a lot more value. bitBTC is more for people who are already in the bitshares world and want it to hedge, not people who are in btc.
I think you are over selling the desire for bitBTC by BTC holders. They have a digital currency, they don't need a derivative of their digital currency. BTC is basically the cash of the crypto-world. Putting it into bitBTC doesn't strike me as a strong selling point.
Anyone? :)