"The NuBits project needs people/entities with substantial funds available to them to conduct automated exchange operations on an ongoing basis. No capital gains or losses are possible within the scope of the needed trading activity. Your funds will not be passed to anyone working on the NuBits project. You will need to deposit funds in your own account at an exchange and run a trading bot we will provide. Your principle risk will be exchange default. You will be compensated a negotiated rate for this risk. You will not be in a position to fill this role unless your net worth is well into the six figures USD or higher. Full details about the role you may fill and the NuBits project itself will be given to qualified candidates. Persons/entities that fill this role will be eligible to purchase shares of our venture immediately."
- Jordan Lee
Lol I hate the "pump wait" time going on here...I want to know what the hell it is already!! And if it can actually compete with Bitshares...that quote you provided sounds a bit odd to me. What is it telling us??
The nature of financial investment is that risk is commensurate with reward. It's a basic tenant of investing. NuBits is a very highly speculative venture to be sure, and the corresponding potential impact and profit aligns with that.
This particular aspect of our system however does not have capital gains and losses risk, only exchange default risk, as stated by Jordan above. Part of the difficulty in explaining this is that NuBits' design is unique and novel, and represents a new way of thinking about cryptocurrencies. The purpose of our trading bot is quite different than what is commonly expected of existing trading bots.
So, the nature of the design of our trading bot and NuBits system means that your scenario of an "unforeseen bug or external interference" is not likely.
In regards to seeking traditional venture capital; Jordan is in a better position to answer, but my understanding is that we are aiming for as decentralized a system as possible. Aligning ourselves with VC would compromise that goal. We also are not conducting an IPO, which rules out Peershares.
The nature of this position requires a high amount of liquid assets for reasons that will become apparent when our final design is released.
We will make the trading bot open source at the same time we release full project details to the public so there won't be any mystery about how it functions.
- Jordan Lee
QuoteWe will make the trading bot open source at the same time we release full project details to the public so there won't be any mystery about how it functions.
- Jordan Lee
Sounds similar to something Dan has recently talked about in one of the hangouts.
QuoteWe will make the trading bot open source at the same time we release full project details to the public so there won't be any mystery about how it functions.
- Jordan Lee
Sounds similar to something Dan has recently talked about in one of the hangouts.
It's been known for a while that bots can automate the process of maintaining pegs. Dan in his original whitepaper had automation as a core axiom. I don't know why more focus isn't on automation but I suppose there are more fundamental concerns.
were you expecting traders to maintain the peg by hand? lol..
All trading bots carry risk on the operator. Bots can only automate processes people can do by hand.
The economic incentive needs to be sound. If you rely on bots to perform then it is fundamentally broken.
If a low net worth individual is unable to use the same strategy then it is broken.
With nubits, buy the rumor sell the news
QuoteWe will make the trading bot open source at the same time we release full project details to the public so there won't be any mystery about how it functions.
- Jordan Lee
Sounds similar to something Dan has recently talked about in one of the hangouts.
It's been known for a while that bots can automate the process of maintaining pegs. Dan in his original whitepaper had automation as a core axiom. I don't know why more focus isn't on automation but I suppose there are more fundamental concerns.
Do you mean to say that Bitshares is planning on possibly implementing a bot to maintain the peg as well? That could be seen as trying to copy Nubits' technique at this point in the game...
All trading bots carry risk on the operator. Bots can only automate processes people can do by hand.
The economic incentive needs to be sound. If you rely on bots to perform then it is fundamentally broken.
If a low net worth individual is unable to use the same strategy then it is broken.
With nubits, buy the rumor sell the news
I agree. It seems BitSharesX remains the superior solution compares to Nubits, and Nxt Dex/CoinoUsd. Peer coin got pumped x2 its value on this news... I bet it gets dumped right back to where it was a few days ago.
QuoteWe will make the trading bot open source at the same time we release full project details to the public so there won't be any mystery about how it functions.
- Jordan Lee
Sounds similar to something Dan has recently talked about in one of the hangouts.
It's been known for a while that bots can automate the process of maintaining pegs. Dan in his original whitepaper had automation as a core axiom. I don't know why more focus isn't on automation but I suppose there are more fundamental concerns.
Do you mean to say that Bitshares is planning on possibly implementing a bot to maintain the peg as well? That could be seen as trying to copy Nubits' technique at this point in the game...
We'll see. Sunny King is no dummy and the group working on nubits has been basically doing most of it in the dark of night. We honestly have no way to know what is coming (thus, BM's "buy the rumor sell the news").
As far as CoinoUSD: it is a sad, sad attempt at trying to compete with a project that has proven it cares more about innovation than simply making bank off of a crypto-fad. NXT has been consistently losing my respect the more I read about their "assets" and the lack of accountability for rip offs.
BitShares and bitUSD are so much more than most people can even comprehend at this juncture. The implications are really going to be something spectacular.
We'll see. Sunny King is no dummy and the group working on nubits has been basically doing most of it in the dark of night. We honestly have no way to know what is coming (thus, BM's "buy the rumor sell the news").
As far as CoinoUSD: it is a sad, sad attempt at trying to compete with a project that has proven it cares more about innovation than simply making bank off of a crypto-fad. NXT has been consistently losing my respect the more I read about their "assets" and the lack of accountability for rip offs.
BitShares and bitUSD are so much more than most people can even comprehend at this juncture. The implications are really going to be something spectacular.
Sunny King is not involved with the project from what I can tell. Jordan Lee is the project's lead developer. Anyways.. I guess I read the announcement wrong, I thought this was the news. It is unclear to me if they will have a decentralized exchange, or if everything will be done with a market maker on a centralized exchange. If it is on a decentralized exchange, it seems they are going to put a market maker on the centralized exchange to claim their market peg works better than any other solution. On second thought this could be very bad PR for us if the latter is true.
I'm feeling a bit sorry for NuBits to have chosen this week to debut. Then again, the rate things move in cryptos, there's still time for another pump & dump or two before their announcement. Maybe we'll find out it's really just a bite-sized energy bar ("NuBits: A healthy snack on the go, anytime, anywhere").
could nubits be a threat? they seem to be climbing up steady lately.
Has anyone scoped the boards on their forum? The peer coin/primecoin community is almost non existent. This makes me think that they have a fishy market cap similar to ripples. http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=2731.0 (http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=2731.0) I found this on their forum, I guess one address is staking 25% of the new coins.
Has anyone scoped the boards on their forum? The peer coin/primecoin community is almost non existent. This makes me think that they have a fishy market cap similar to ripples. http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=2731.0 (http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=2731.0) I found this on their forum, I guess one address is staking 25% of the new coins.
You read my post wrong. That address generates 25% of new *blocks*. Those blocks are generated by many small stakes so the reward tends to be small, too. The address doesn't generate more new coins than its share of Peercoin money base on average.
The biggest Peercoin addresses are probably owned by btc-e.
So is it right to assume that these bots are going to be unleashed on Peercoin? Is PPC what they are trying to keep stable?
One of the developers mentioned that it involves bots. If there aren't counter-parties or trading restrictions, then aside from bots, how would you keep the price stable? The increase in Peercoin's price may be partly attributable to the bot owners' need to have a large supply.
One of the developers mentioned that it involves bots. If there aren't counter-parties or trading restrictions, then aside from bots, how would you keep the price stable? The increase in Peercoin's price may be partly attributable to the bot owners' need to have a large supply.
Ok, I hadn't heard that the developers actually did mention bots. Interesting.
To me, if their plan is to amass a large supply of PPC and then try to stabilize the price by playing central bank, they're just crazy. It's so blatantly obvious that it wouldn't work - unless when they say "stable price" they don't mean "constant price." Anyway, I don't think they're idiots, so I don't think they're trying to maintain a constant PPC price by playing central bank.
It seems like their plan must be to do something like launch cryptocurrency NuBits, then create some kind of price-stable derivative of NuBits (maybe with some similarities to BitUSD) whose price they control with bots via centralized exchanges. Maybe? In that case, the PPC pump is kind of a red herring; it's just people flailing around trying to figure out how to make money on NuBits before they know what it is.
Even though bots are involved, there may well be other elements. Perhaps bots could be deployed on a decentralized basis somehow? And I don't know if there is any currency involved besides Peercoin. So I'm assuming that if they're talking about an innovation that can keep crypto prices stable, they must be planning to unleash it on Peercoin first. But we will see when it comes out.
One of the developers mentioned that it involves bots. If there aren't counter-parties or trading restrictions, then aside from bots, how would you keep the price stable? The increase in Peercoin's price may be partly attributable to the bot owners' need to have a large supply.
Ok, I hadn't heard that the developers actually did mention bots. Interesting.
To me, if their plan is to amass a large supply of PPC and then try to stabilize the price by playing central bank, they're just crazy. It's so blatantly obvious that it wouldn't work - unless when they say "stable price" they don't mean "constant price." Anyway, I don't think they're idiots, so I don't think they're trying to maintain a constant PPC price by playing central bank.
It seems like their plan must be to do something like launch cryptocurrency NuBits, then create some kind of price-stable derivative of NuBits (maybe with some similarities to BitUSD) whose price they control with bots via centralized exchanges. Maybe? In that case, the PPC pump is kind of a red herring; it's just people flailing around trying to figure out how to make money on NuBits before they know what it is.
Unless PPC is held as a reserve currency for NuBits... and NuBits is a fancy name for BitUSD I fail to see how PPC can benefit.
One of the developers mentioned that it involves bots. If there aren't counter-parties or trading restrictions, then aside from bots, how would you keep the price stable? The increase in Peercoin's price may be partly attributable to the bot owners' need to have a large supply.
Ok, I hadn't heard that the developers actually did mention bots. Interesting.
To me, if their plan is to amass a large supply of PPC and then try to stabilize the price by playing central bank, they're just crazy. It's so blatantly obvious that it wouldn't work - unless when they say "stable price" they don't mean "constant price." Anyway, I don't think they're idiots, so I don't think they're trying to maintain a constant PPC price by playing central bank.
It seems like their plan must be to do something like launch cryptocurrency NuBits, then create some kind of price-stable derivative of NuBits (maybe with some similarities to BitUSD) whose price they control with bots via centralized exchanges. Maybe? In that case, the PPC pump is kind of a red herring; it's just people flailing around trying to figure out how to make money on NuBits before they know what it is.
Unless PPC is held as a reserve currency for NuBits... and NuBits is a fancy name for BitUSD I fail to see how PPC can benefit.
Supposedly NuBits will pay dividends in PPC.
Anything they have that is better than BTSX we can copy and deploy in a few weeks
One of the developers mentioned that it involves bots. If there aren't counter-parties or trading restrictions, then aside from bots, how would you keep the price stable? The increase in Peercoin's price may be partly attributable to the bot owners' need to have a large supply.
Ok, I hadn't heard that the developers actually did mention bots. Interesting.
To me, if their plan is to amass a large supply of PPC and then try to stabilize the price by playing central bank, they're just crazy. It's so blatantly obvious that it wouldn't work - unless when they say "stable price" they don't mean "constant price." Anyway, I don't think they're idiots, so I don't think they're trying to maintain a constant PPC price by playing central bank.
It seems like their plan must be to do something like launch cryptocurrency NuBits, then create some kind of price-stable derivative of NuBits (maybe with some similarities to BitUSD) whose price they control with bots via centralized exchanges. Maybe? In that case, the PPC pump is kind of a red herring; it's just people flailing around trying to figure out how to make money on NuBits before they know what it is.
Unless PPC is held as a reserve currency for NuBits... and NuBits is a fancy name for BitUSD I fail to see how PPC can benefit.
Supposedly NuBits will pay dividends in PPC.
That should generate selling pressure... where does the buying pressure in PPC come from?
http://www.nubits.com/
It's live. Seems to be a pegged asset. Do I miss something?
http://www.nubits.com/
It's live. Seems to be a pegged asset. Do I miss something?
http://www.nubits.com/
It's live. Seems to be a pegged asset. Do I miss something?
http://www.nubits.com/
It's live. Seems to be a pegged asset. Do I miss something?
Two things: NuBits, pegged to USD, and NuShares, whose section of the website doesn't work yet. Dollar pegging is not too far off on the exchange: https://www.ccedk.com/nbt-ppc (https://www.ccedk.com/nbt-ppc). Similar to BitSharesX on a high level; holders of NuShares can print NuBits whenever they want to keep the value of NuBits down; then they have a mechanism they call "Parking" which will incentivize holders of NuBits to take them out of circulation when they want to keep the value of NuBits up.
The website is still broken, but check out the press kit: https://nubits.com/sites/default/files/assets/NuBits-Press-Kit.zip (https://nubits.com/sites/default/files/assets/NuBits-Press-Kit.zip)
To access the website, remove the S in https://
http://www.nubits.com/
It's live. Seems to be a pegged asset. Do I miss something?
I hope you sold the news... -11% on peercoin
Again, referring to the press kit link I included above, the Nu system has very heavy reliance on voting. The way they reduce NuBits supply is clever, but my guess is it won't hold up to high volatility. This is a huge departure from the BitSharesX system. NuBits supply is reduced by paying variable interest on "parked" NuBits; if a NuBit is parked, then it is effectively removed from supply, but it accrues interest. This interest is set by a literal human vote, and there is some strange system of time periods in which votes are taken. And they called BitSharesX "Fed 2.0"...
The interest rate can be increased only by 1% per period, but decreased all the way to 0% in a single period. This strikes me as a bit hacky. One thing it means is that if NuBits ever require a huge supply contraction, the network will not be able to make it happen.
http://www.nubits.com/
It's live. Seems to be a pegged asset. Do I miss something?
I hope you sold the news... -11% on peercoin
That's exactly what just I did.. and just in time because it keeps dropping.
Doubled my investment of $4 from a few weeks ago. That was of course before I knew about BitSharesX. I'm smarter now. :)Again, referring to the press kit link I included above, the Nu system has very heavy reliance on voting. The way they reduce NuBits supply is clever, but my guess is it won't hold up to high volatility. This is a huge departure from the BitSharesX system. NuBits supply is reduced by paying variable interest on "parked" NuBits; if a NuBit is parked, then it is effectively removed from supply, but it accrues interest. This interest is set by a literal human vote, and there is some strange system of time periods in which votes are taken. And they called BitSharesX "Fed 2.0"...
The interest rate can be increased only by 1% per period, but decreased all the way to 0% in a single period. This strikes me as a bit hacky. One thing it means is that if NuBits ever require a huge supply contraction, the network will not be able to make it happen.
It does indeed sound hacky. On top of that, without an ecosystem (i.e. a corresponding DAC) like BTSX, it seems like a pegged asset is of limited utility.
http://www.nubits.com/
It's live. Seems to be a pegged asset. Do I miss something?
I hope you sold the news... -11% on peercoin
That's exactly what just I did.. and just in time because it keeps dropping.
Doubled my investment of $4 from a few weeks ago. That was of course before I knew about BitSharesX. I'm smarter now. :)Again, referring to the press kit link I included above, the Nu system has very heavy reliance on voting. The way they reduce NuBits supply is clever, but my guess is it won't hold up to high volatility. This is a huge departure from the BitSharesX system. NuBits supply is reduced by paying variable interest on "parked" NuBits; if a NuBit is parked, then it is effectively removed from supply, but it accrues interest. This interest is set by a literal human vote, and there is some strange system of time periods in which votes are taken. And they called BitSharesX "Fed 2.0"...
The interest rate can be increased only by 1% per period, but decreased all the way to 0% in a single period. This strikes me as a bit hacky. One thing it means is that if NuBits ever require a huge supply contraction, the network will not be able to make it happen.
It does indeed sound hacky. On top of that, without an ecosystem (i.e. a corresponding DAC) like BTSX, it seems like a pegged asset is of limited utility.
I don't know... I'm more of the opinion that a pegged asset is really the holy grail. I'm not sure what BTSX does that NuShares doesn't. I mean in a high-level community sort of way. To the spending public, if it has stable purchasing power, it's all it needs to be.
It's now clear that NuBits is the first true competitor to BitUSD. The race will be decided by these three factors, in no particular order
1. Community
2. Interest paid on the asset
3. Price Stability
For point #1, NuBits has all of Peercoin behind it; but I think the BitShares community believes in a better story than Peercoin.
For point #2, BitUSD yield comes from a fundamentally different source (trading revenue) than NuBits interest (central bank-style interest rate incentive).
For point #3, time will tell.
It's now clear that NuBits is the first true competitor to BitUSD. The race will be decided by these three factors, in no particular order
1. Community
2. Interest paid on the asset
3. Price Stability
Their community is almost non existent. Check out their forum http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?board=3.0
QuoteTheir community is almost non existent. Check out their forum http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?board=3.0
Our official forum is discuss.nubits.com
There wasn't much to talk about since we've been almost totally silent about the project until today. We know there's a lot of talented and educated individuals involved with BitShares. If you all would like to discuss NuBits with the dev team stop by our forum.
We have a busy day of getting everything sorted out. see ya!
cg
Here:QuoteTheir community is almost non existent. Check out their forum http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?board=3.0
Our official forum is discuss.nubits.com
There wasn't much to talk about since we've been almost totally silent about the project until today. We know there's a lot of talented and educated individuals involved with BitShares. If you all would like to discuss NuBits with the dev team stop by our forum.
We have a busy day of getting everything sorted out. see ya!
cg
Can you address sfgfd's post?
http://www.reddit.com/r/NuBits/comments/2h8bdk/where_to_buy/
Though many of you are already aware of everything I will say here, it should be said here for those who are not yet aware and those who will read it in the future.
The following rules regarding the use and sale of undistributed NuShares will be followed:
Though undistributed NuShares minted blocks to bootstrap the network, they will never again be used for minting or voting.
Dividends will be paid to undistributed NuShares just like other NuShares. These Peercoins will be used for development similar to the proceeds of NuShare sales.
The first 700 million undistributed NuShares will be sold for a total of not more than 1.5 million NBT. This includes seed funding received last January.
The last 300 million undistributed NuShares (plus a small amount that were minted during network bootstrapping) will be sold for a total of not more than 5 million NBT
Here's the down low on distribution of NuShares:
http://discuss.nubits.com/t/undistributed-nushares/125
By Jordan Lee:QuoteThough many of you are already aware of everything I will say here, it should be said here for those who are not yet aware and those who will read it in the future.
The following rules regarding the use and sale of undistributed NuShares will be followed:
Though undistributed NuShares minted blocks to bootstrap the network, they will never again be used for minting or voting.
Dividends will be paid to undistributed NuShares just like other NuShares. These Peercoins will be used for development similar to the proceeds of NuShare sales.
The first 700 million undistributed NuShares will be sold for a total of not more than 1.5 million NBT. This includes seed funding received last January.
The last 300 million undistributed NuShares (plus a small amount that were minted during network bootstrapping) will be sold for a total of not more than 5 million NBT
For now an unknown amount of the first 700million NuShares have been distributed to seed funders (and developers I guess?), and the shares will be sold in lots of 5 million.
Here's the down low on distribution of NuShares:
http://discuss.nubits.com/t/undistributed-nushares/125
By Jordan Lee:QuoteThough many of you are already aware of everything I will say here, it should be said here for those who are not yet aware and those who will read it in the future.
The following rules regarding the use and sale of undistributed NuShares will be followed:
Though undistributed NuShares minted blocks to bootstrap the network, they will never again be used for minting or voting.
Dividends will be paid to undistributed NuShares just like other NuShares. These Peercoins will be used for development similar to the proceeds of NuShare sales.
The first 700 million undistributed NuShares will be sold for a total of not more than 1.5 million NBT. This includes seed funding received last January.
The last 300 million undistributed NuShares (plus a small amount that were minted during network bootstrapping) will be sold for a total of not more than 5 million NBT
For now an unknown amount of the first 700million NuShares have been distributed to seed funders (and developers I guess?), and the shares will be sold in lots of 5 million.
Undistributed NuShares will be sold in lots typically 5 million in size to people who have demonstrated skills that will be helpful to the advancement of the network. We are in a sense
picking business partners. People will need to contact us via Bitmessage
at BM-2cX8PF84t2uhvtWE9E387V2f5Fz5iF8uUj to be screened. 5 million
NuShares are presently 9,000 NuBits, or 0.0018 NBT per NuShare.
biophil: thats nubits not nushares
svk: Any info on when? It seems they are selling
(their version of) bitusd but withholding btsx for the moment.
biophil: thats nubits not nushares
svk: Any info on when? It seems they are selling
(their version of) bitusd but withholding btsx for the moment.
smiley: explain? They're selling NuShares (NSR) for NuBits (NBT). NuBit is pegged to USD, so they're selling NuShares for USD. What am I missing?
An awesome part of their system is the Custodian Proposals, where anyone can propose doing things to support the network and get funding in the form of Nubits. Examples include building an Android wallet for Peercoin, providing liquidity to markets and more. Basically you can propose anything, and if the shareholders like your proposal and trust you they can create Nubits to fund you.
Definitely beats begging for donations or building stuff for free.
From my quick reading it seems there is no economic incentive to hold Peercoin. Is that correct?
I wondered if Peercoin would be the equivalent of BitsharesX, but clearly its not.
An awesome part of their system is the Custodian Proposals, where anyone can propose doing things to support the network and get funding in the form of Nubits. Examples include building an Android wallet for Peercoin, providing liquidity to markets and more. Basically you can propose anything, and if the shareholders like your proposal and trust you they can create Nubits to fund you.
Definitely beats begging for donations or building stuff for free.
From my quick reading it seems there is no economic incentive to hold Peercoin. Is that correct?
I wondered if Peercoin would be the equivalent of BitsharesX, but clearly its not.
I've read the whole whitepaper.
It's a joke.
I'm glad sunny king wasn't part of it .
The whole idea is : issue a worthless note,use shareholder's fund to buy in (via trading bot on exchange API) to maintain the price (and generate more notes if the price goes too high).Basically,you have to trust some "shareholders of nubits" would buy back the 1USD note at 1USD at all time ------mean while,the fund is in the shareholder's exchange account the whole time ,so the network can't really in full control of the fund to maintain the price if the shareholder decided not to buy the note back,they can simply just turn off the robot.
And the only reason we can remotely hope the shareholder to buy back the note,is because they enjoy the profit in this game.(buy low,sell high),so they want to go on with it .
And this will happen because....? What their ability to decide when to print dollars(NuBits)? I do not buy this...From my quick reading it seems there is no economic incentive to hold Peercoin. Is that correct?
I wondered if Peercoin would be the equivalent of BitsharesX, but clearly its not.
Peercoin holders receive dividend payments from the profits of the system. NuShares is where all of the capital appreciation will happen.
And this will happen because....? What their ability to decide when to print dollars(NuBits)? I do not buy this...From my quick reading it seems there is no economic incentive to hold Peercoin. Is that correct?
I wondered if Peercoin would be the equivalent of BitsharesX, but clearly its not.
Peercoin holders receive dividend payments from the profits of the system. NuShares is where all of the capital appreciation will happen.
An awesome part of their system is the Custodian Proposals, where anyone can propose doing things to support the network and get funding in the form of Nubits. Examples include building an Android wallet for Peercoin, providing liquidity to markets and more. Basically you can propose anything, and if the shareholders like your proposal and trust you they can create Nubits to fund you.
Definitely beats begging for donations or building stuff for free.
This is nothing more than Delegates with inflation and variable pay voted on by the shareholders...
And this will happen because....? What their ability to decide when to print dollars(NuBits)? I do not buy this...From my quick reading it seems there is no economic incentive to hold Peercoin. Is that correct?
I wondered if Peercoin would be the equivalent of BitsharesX, but clearly its not.
Peercoin holders receive dividend payments from the profits of the system. NuShares is where all of the capital appreciation will happen.
It's exactly that, they are printing USD out of thin air, how can they not profit from this? The Dev (Jordan Lee) already set out the distribution plan, the entire NuShares stake will be distributed for $4.5M, and it's a private sale, you have to message him to set up the deal to buy some shares.
ibery then capital appreciation though.
Anybody got a link explaining the distribution of those NuShares ?
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
So does someone can buy now Nushares or not yet? and if yes from where?svk is waiting for an answer here http://discuss.nubits.com/t/undistributed-nushares/125
Although I doubt that this will go any far away and they wont' be able to compete Bitshares X for 1 main reason no matter what they do... The name.
Who on earth from the outside world will ever in something called "Nushares"? BitsharesX on the contrary is very catchy... Just my 2bts anyway...
Who on earth from the outside world will ever in something called "Nushares"? BitsharesX on the contrary is very catchy... Just my 2bts anyway...
You think your name now is improvement over shadowbladex?Who on earth from the outside world will ever in something called "Nushares"? BitsharesX on the contrary is very catchy... Just my 2bts anyway...
Oh please. You know what my Everquest name was when I was 13? shadowbladex. That's what I think of when I hear BTSX.
If anything they're both equal. Plus I've definitely seen people confused about the whole Bitshares thing in general.
Plus I've definitely seen people confused about the whole Bitshares thing in general.
Who on earth from the outside world will ever in something called "Nushares"? BitsharesX on the contrary is very catchy... Just my 2bts anyway...
Oh please. You know what my Everquest name was when I was 13? shadowbladex. That's what I think of when I hear BTSX.
If anything they're both equal. Plus I've definitely seen people confused about the whole Bitshares thing in general.
Who on earth from the outside world will ever in something called "Nushares"? BitsharesX on the contrary is very catchy... Just my 2bts anyway...
Oh please. You know what my Everquest name was when I was 13? shadowbladex. That's what I think of when I hear BTSX.
If anything they're both equal. Plus I've definitely seen people confused about the whole Bitshares thing in general.
This raises a good point. BitShares is catchy and easy to understand/remember, but BitSharesX makes it sound "extreme", almost immature. Personally I feel that since BitSharesX is more-or-less the "mother DAC" of the entire ecosystem, it would be cool to just drop the X entirely. DACs would still be DACs of BitShares, and people wouldn't be making a mountain out of a molehill trying to figure out "what the hell's the difference between BitShares and BitSharesX???" I imagine this may cause some conflict with the whole BitShares chains vs BitSharesX chains thing going on, but for simplicity sake I think it would be awesome just to refer to everything as "BitShares".
...Not to mention the added confusion of having Bitshares-PTS. Feels like something needs to be done to better differentiate this stuff, but I don't necessarily know what.
You think your name now is improvement over shadowbladex?Who on earth from the outside world will ever in something called "Nushares"? BitsharesX on the contrary is very catchy... Just my 2bts anyway...
Oh please. You know what my Everquest name was when I was 13? shadowbladex. That's what I think of when I hear BTSX.
If anything they're both equal. Plus I've definitely seen people confused about the whole Bitshares thing in general.
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
They can't be closed source and be successful
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
They can't be closed source and be successful
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With current scheme they cannot be successful period. Make themselves rich? maybe.
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
They can't be closed source and be successful
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
NuBits was never intended to be close sourced forever. It will become open source in time.QuoteWith current scheme they cannot be successful period. Make themselves rich? maybe.
Do you think you could post in detail why it will not work? It seems NBT sales are doing very well at the moment with very little exposure/coverage. It's been out for 6 hours and you're already 100% sure it's going to fail?
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
They can't be closed source and be successful
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
NuBits was never intended to be close sourced forever. It will become open source in time.QuoteWith current scheme they cannot be successful period. Make themselves rich? maybe.
Do you think you could post in detail why it will not work? It seems NBT sales are doing very well at the moment with very little exposure/coverage. It's been out for 6 hours and you're already 100% sure it's going to fail?
It is long explanation - in short they issue money based on a decision of the Nushare holders, and enforce the peg on centralized exchanges. Support for the peg is also provided by giving interest. The decision if and how much interest is to be paid is done by vote of the NuShares holders. NuShares are distributed to 'trusted parties', read insider clique.
It is the same as you and me saying - here are some dollars (NuBits), we promise to find you people to always buy your NuBits at $1 a piece. If we happen to sell more NuBits than necessary, we will vote and give you some interest...
I collect outrageous ideas (and IPOs ideas) in crypto space. One day I will publish them as an entertaining reading - NuBit/Nushares will make one of the better chapters....
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
copy yourself (?)
... they are too greedy to honour 20% to AGS @ PTS holders :P
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
copy yourself (?)
... they are too greedy to honour 20% to AGS @ PTS holders :P
It's now clear that NuBits is the first true competitor to BitUSD. The race will be decided by these three factors, in no particular order
1. Community
2. Interest paid on the asset
3. Price Stability
4. Marketing
Why do you think it's outrageous? Is it because their solution to inflation is more inflation? HahaOur solution to inflation is to reduce the money supply and release it when demand is high. Like a central bank does. Sounds like a proven methodology, doesn't it?
Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2
It's now clear that NuBits is the first true competitor to BitUSD. The race will be decided by these three factors, in no particular order
1. Community
2. Interest paid on the asset
3. Price Stability
Our solution to inflation is to reduce the money supply and release it when demand is high. Like a central bank does. Sounds like a proven methodology, doesn't it?
BTW I'm Cybnate, from the peercointalk forums and discuss.nubits.com forum. Nice to meet you.
1. the homepage has much more information at this point in time than we provide
2. they have already plans for integration and give Nubits purpose. We should do it as well. bitUSD has to be used!
Our solution to inflation is to reduce the money supply and release it when demand is high. Like a central bank does. Sounds like a proven methodology, doesn't it?
BTW I'm Cybnate, from the peercointalk forums and discuss.nubits.com forum. Nice to meet you.
How will the money supply be reduced and released ?
We should add NuShares as a market-pegged asset =PNow that's how one makes real money shorting...
Why do you think it's outrageous? Is it because their solution to inflation is more inflation? HahaOur solution to inflation is to reduce the money supply and release it when demand is high. Like a central bank does. Sounds like a proven methodology, doesn't it?
Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2
BTW I'm Cybnate, from the peercointalk forums and discuss.nubits.com forum. Nice to meet you.
We are reducing the money supply by having people to park the Nubits at an attractive interest rate. The interest rate will depend on the shareholders voting for it. When there is lots of selling pressure the shareholders will increase the interest rates. When there is no selling pressure they will be zero. The shareholders can set interest rates independantly for short the term (days), months, years or basically infinite practically burning it.
Our solution to inflation is to reduce the money supply and release it when demand is high. Like a central bank does. Sounds like a proven methodology, doesn't it?
BTW I'm Cybnate, from the peercointalk forums and discuss.nubits.com forum. Nice to meet you.
How will the money supply be reduced and released ?
We thought about that process..have delegates publish interest rates rather than price feeds....
questions for Nubits:As I said in my previous post we maintain the peg by managing the amount of NBT in circulation. The exchange will buy your 20k NBT in principle as long as there are Custodians providing adequate liquidity which Shareholders will make sure of.
how do you guarantee 1 USD == 1 Nubits? . If you "grant" with voting 20.000 NBTS for "developing software" what will i do with NBT? I need someone who is willing to use and buy the NBT from me. Without this i will sell it under 1 USD because the NBTS are for "free".
It is basically postponing inflation until there is adequate demand.
Regarding taking them out (burning) someone has indeed to buy them so that is a last resort measure. Parking them for longer period would be more likely as long that there is confidence demand will increase later on.
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
They can't be closed source and be successful
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
NuBits was never intended to be close sourced forever. It will become open source in time.QuoteWith current scheme they cannot be successful period. Make themselves rich? maybe.
Do you think you could post in detail why it will not work? It seems NBT sales are doing very well at the moment with very little exposure/coverage. It's been out for 6 hours and you're already 100% sure it's going to fail?
It is long explanation - in short they issue money based on a decision of the Nushare holders, and enforce the peg on centralized exchanges. Support for the peg is also provided by giving interest. The decision if and how much interest is to be paid is done by vote of the NuShares holders. NuShares are distributed to 'trusted parties', read insider clique.
It is the same as you and me saying - here are some dollars (NuBits), we promise to find you people to always buy your NuBits at $1 a piece. If we happen to sell more NuBits than necessary, we will vote and give you some interest...
I collect outrageous ideas (and IPOs ideas) in crypto space. One day I will publish them as an entertaining reading - NuBit/Nushares will make one of the better chapters....
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
They can't be closed source and be successful
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
NuBits was never intended to be close sourced forever. It will become open source in time.QuoteWith current scheme they cannot be successful period. Make themselves rich? maybe.
Do you think you could post in detail why it will not work? It seems NBT sales are doing very well at the moment with very little exposure/coverage. It's been out for 6 hours and you're already 100% sure it's going to fail?
It is long explanation - in short they issue money based on a decision of the Nushare holders, and enforce the peg on centralized exchanges. Support for the peg is also provided by giving interest. The decision if and how much interest is to be paid is done by vote of the NuShares holders. NuShares are distributed to 'trusted parties', read insider clique.
It is the same as you and me saying - here are some dollars (NuBits), we promise to find you people to always buy your NuBits at $1 a piece. If we happen to sell more NuBits than necessary, we will vote and give you some interest...
I collect outrageous ideas (and IPOs ideas) in crypto space. One day I will publish them as an entertaining reading - NuBit/Nushares will make one of the better chapters....
Anyone want to try with a real response? This type of response is incredibly unattractive to new people like myself. BTSX is highly unprofessional if this is an example of how their community thinks.
In that unlikely and distant scenario that the Shareholders won't have that confidence anymore the peg will be lost. Depending on any remaining confidence a new peg might be established at a lower rate or against another currency or commodity. Again this is really an endgame scenario, not likely to happen even years from now. Zero risk doesn't exist in my opinion. The risk that the US$ crashes or suffers from extreme inflation is also not zero. Everyone has to assess their appetite to the amount of risk they are willing to take. And everyone's appetite is different like with any currency. I think Nubits has an attractive risk profile for many people though but time will tell.It is basically postponing inflation until there is adequate demand.
Regarding taking them out (burning) someone has indeed to buy them so that is a last resort measure. Parking them for longer period would be more likely as long that there is confidence demand will increase later on.
and what happens if demand don't increase later on ?
From what I can tell they use voting to set interest rates...
They are also thinking of being closed source because they are worried we might copy them (due to my comments on this thread).
They can't be closed source and be successful
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
NuBits was never intended to be close sourced forever. It will become open source in time.QuoteWith current scheme they cannot be successful period. Make themselves rich? maybe.
Do you think you could post in detail why it will not work? It seems NBT sales are doing very well at the moment with very little exposure/coverage. It's been out for 6 hours and you're already 100% sure it's going to fail?
It is long explanation - in short they issue money based on a decision of the Nushare holders, and enforce the peg on centralized exchanges. Support for the peg is also provided by giving interest. The decision if and how much interest is to be paid is done by vote of the NuShares holders. NuShares are distributed to 'trusted parties', read insider clique.
It is the same as you and me saying - here are some dollars (NuBits), we promise to find you people to always buy your NuBits at $1 a piece. If we happen to sell more NuBits than necessary, we will vote and give you some interest...
I collect outrageous ideas (and IPOs ideas) in crypto space. One day I will publish them as an entertaining reading - NuBit/Nushares will make one of the better chapters....
Anyone want to try with a real response? This type of response is incredibly unattractive to new people like myself. BTSX is highly unprofessional if this is an example of how their community thinks.
Anyone want to try with a real response? This type of response is incredibly unattractive to new people like myself. BTSX is highly unprofessional if this is an example of how their community thinks.
Anyone want to try with a real response? This type of response is incredibly unattractive to new people like myself. BTSX is highly unprofessional if this is an example of how their community thinks.
Shadow, don't take it personally. And by the way, welcome. This forum provides an open exchange of ideas and there are all kinds of people on here. Even decent folks have good days and bad days. Tonyk is a good sort once you get to know him; we just throw him some raw meat every once in awhile and he stays in line for a few days.
Anyone want to try with a real response? This type of response is incredibly unattractive to new people like myself. BTSX is highly unprofessional if this is an example of how their community thinks.
Shadow, don't take it personally. And by the way, welcome. This forum provides an open exchange of ideas and there are all kinds of people on here. Even decent folks have good days and bad days. Tonyk is a good sort once you get to know him; we just throw him some raw meat every once in awhile and he stays in line for a few days.
LOL
On the subject of 'raw' I do hope Bitshares Music comes with some more 'baked' and thought out ideas, so they do not make another chapter of my future book...
Anyone want to try with a real response? This type of response is incredibly unattractive to new people like myself. BTSX is highly unprofessional if this is an example of how their community thinks.
Shadow, don't take it personally. And by the way, welcome. This forum provides an open exchange of ideas and there are all kinds of people on here. Even decent folks have good days and bad days. Tonyk is a good sort once you get to know him; we just throw him some raw meat every once in awhile and he stays in line for a few days.
LOL
On the subject of 'raw' I do hope Bitshares Music comes with some more 'baked' and thought out ideas, so they do not make another chapter of my future book...
cough Agent86 DNS cough
... it all depends upon trust in a central authority to perform market intervention to buy back NuBits.....
... it all depends upon trust in a central authority to perform market intervention to buy back NuBits.....
This is not accurate.
There is no central authority and there is no need to buy back NuBits to support the price when demand is in decline. Instead, shareholders spread throughout the world can vote to provide incentives to hold NuBits by offering interest rates on parked NuBits.
... it all depends upon trust in a central authority to perform market intervention to buy back NuBits.....
This is not accurate.
There is no central authority and there is no need to buy back NuBits to support the price when demand is in decline. Instead, shareholders spread throughout the world can vote to provide incentives to hold NuBits by offering interest rates on parked NuBits.
The whole idea is to hope more sucker to joint the shareholders just to earn minting profit from the next batch of sucker who want to earn minting profit from
the next next batch of sucker.
The whole idea is to hope more sucker to joint the shareholders just to earn minting profit from the next batch of sucker who want to earn minting profit from
the next next batch of sucker.
And that's assuming someone votes to print more. Is endless inflation OK if the Federal Reserve Board governors vote for it? I was chatting with a couple of longtime PeerCoin members on and offline on Reddit. They like the fact that this uses the Peercoin ecosystem, but they certainly are not wild about it.
They understand that and are happy to see more use of PPC for various projects, but the members I chatted with do not view NuBits as a viable partner in the long run. A lot of PPC folks are pretty conservative, you know. It's hard enough getting them to believe in collateralized BitUSD, much less this NuBits house of cards.
I don't throw around the ponzi accusation lightly, but nubits is the first crypto I have seen that fits the description.
Propping up demand by increasing future supply hoping to sucker in a greater fool with the promise of more unbacked assets.
Sooner or later you run out of suckers willing to hold out for increased future demand at any interest rate.
We are reducing the money supply by having people to park the Nubits at an attractive interest rate. The interest rate will depend on the shareholders voting for it. When there is lots of selling pressure the shareholders will increase the interest rates. When there is no selling pressure they will be zero. The shareholders can set interest rates independantly for short the term (days), months, years or basically infinite practically burning it.My doubt is, how in the world do shareholders know what is the correct interest rate? It's the 'price' that should be decided by the market, not by some isolated group.
The shareholders will be fed with information from the bots about the liquidity position. Each shareholder will take their own position which will provide some market rate. If the interest rates are too low the bots will feed the information to the shareholders that not enough money is parked reducing the money supply and they will likely respond to that. So the interest rate will be set by the market indirectly. It is very similar how it happens in the fiat/banking world. On top of that I see the development of intelligent bots made and configured by shareholders to their views and best interests which may auto-respond to events fed by the NuNet bots. Every shareholder may still respond differently based on the same information. The network will respond to the 'view' of the majority.We are reducing the money supply by having people to park the Nubits at an attractive interest rate. The interest rate will depend on the shareholders voting for it. When there is lots of selling pressure the shareholders will increase the interest rates. When there is no selling pressure they will be zero. The shareholders can set interest rates independantly for short the term (days), months, years or basically infinite practically burning it.My doubt is, how in the world do shareholders know what is the correct interest rate? It's the 'price' that should be decided by the market, not by some isolated group.
... it all depends upon trust in a central authority to perform market intervention to buy back NuBits.....
This is not accurate.
There is no central authority and there is no need to buy back NuBits to support the price when demand is in decline. Instead, shareholders spread throughout the world can vote to provide incentives to hold NuBits by offering interest rates on parked NuBits.
Delayed inflation dependent upon continual growth to prevent losing all value.
Tell me this... If the dollar was loosing value and the us government decided they would prop it up by paying interest via inflation would you lock your savings away in a cd hoping that the interest earned would outpace the very inflation it creates?
Would you trust the fed to buy back dollars with their assets to stop inflation.
... it all depends upon trust in a central authority to perform market intervention to buy back NuBits.....
This is not accurate.
There is no central authority and there is no need to buy back NuBits to support the price when demand is in decline. Instead, shareholders spread throughout the world can vote to provide incentives to hold NuBits by offering interest rates on parked NuBits.
Delayed inflation dependent upon continual growth to prevent losing all value.
Tell me this... If the dollar was loosing value and the us government decided they would prop it up by paying interest via inflation would you lock your savings away in a cd hoping that the interest earned would outpace the very inflation it creates?
Would you trust the fed to buy back dollars with their assets to stop inflation.
In 1980 when demand for the US dollar was in decline the Federal Reserve raised interest rates to the high teens. People were quite happy to buy dollars and treasury notes to receive these high interest payments. Far from being an unsustainable action, it saved the US dollar from hyperinflation at that time. 34 years later it remains viable.
The Nu network's mechanisms for handling booms and busts in the level of demand for currency are classic, having long been demonstrated to be effective in the management of other currencies.
What is revolutionary about Nu is the decentralized control of these proven currency management mechanisms. Shareholders dispersed throughout the world simply configure their vote in their client and mint. Their votes are recorded in the blockchain and the protocol changes supply and interest rates accordingly.
In 1980 when demand for the US dollar was in decline the Federal Reserve raised interest rates to the high teens. People were quite happy to buy dollars and treasury notes to receive these high interest payments. Far from being an unsustainable action, it saved the US dollar from hyperinflation at that time. 34 years later it remains viable.This is a fallacious comparison. Paul Volcker's action of raising the federal funds rate from 1979 to 1981 had the effect of decreasing the total money supply, because the USA operates on a fractional reserve system. If a bank loans money in the USA, money is created. When it is repaid, the money is destroyed. This is completely incomparable to the NuBits interest rate mechanism.
In 1980 when demand for the US dollar was in decline the Federal Reserve raised interest rates to the high teens. People were quite happy to buy dollars and treasury notes to receive these high interest payments. Far from being an unsustainable action, it saved the US dollar from hyperinflation at that time. 34 years later it remains viable.
The Nu network's mechanisms for handling booms and busts in the level of demand for currency are classic, having long been demonstrated to be effective in the management of other currencies.
What is revolutionary about Nu is the decentralized control of these proven currency management mechanisms. Shareholders dispersed throughout the world simply configure their vote in their client and mint. Their votes are recorded in the blockchain and the protocol changes supply and interest rates accordingly.
I'm not sure the goal of crypto systems should be to recreate the fiat systems that have gone before.If NuBits recreates what the Federal Reserve has done since its founding in 1913, it will be a smashing success. An entire country (plus many others, via pegged currencies) have had relative stability under the US dollar. Of course, there are valid criticisms to fractional reserve, but the Fed's dollar has lasted over 100 years now. That's a pretty good run for anything crypto.
What is revolutionary about Nu is the decentralized control of these proven currency management mechanisms. Shareholders dispersed throughout the world simply configure their vote in their client and mint.
... it all depends upon trust in a central authority to perform market intervention to buy back NuBits.....
This is not accurate.
There is no central authority and there is no need to buy back NuBits to support the price when demand is in decline. Instead, shareholders spread throughout the world can vote to provide incentives to hold NuBits by offering interest rates on parked NuBits.
Delayed inflation dependent upon continual growth to prevent losing all value.
Tell me this... If the dollar was loosing value and the us government decided they would prop it up by paying interest via inflation would you lock your savings away in a cd hoping that the interest earned would outpace the very inflation it creates?
Would you trust the fed to buy back dollars with their assets to stop inflation.
In 1980 when demand for the US dollar was in decline the Federal Reserve raised interest rates to the high teens. People were quite happy to buy dollars and treasury notes to receive these high interest payments. Far from being an unsustainable action, it saved the US dollar from hyperinflation at that time. 34 years later it remains viable.
The Nu network's mechanisms for handling booms and busts in the level of demand for currency are classic, having long been demonstrated to be effective in the management of other currencies.
What is revolutionary about Nu is the decentralized control of these proven currency management mechanisms. Shareholders dispersed throughout the world simply configure their vote in their client and mint. Their votes are recorded in the blockchain and the protocol changes supply and interest rates accordingly.
You're comparing Nubits to the almighty US of A with the most economic power on earth ? Shouldn't you consider that if North Korean made the same move ,it would be another outcome ?
If USA FED give me a note says 100 USD,I'll trade it no matter what the low value it'll be ,because I know that USA is a super power,and super power have great futures no matter what the status quo says . It's this kind of confidence that brings more people to hold the USD value not just the FED's interest rate or
whatever technical detail they use to regulate the currency.
You can copy the method,but you can't copy the faith in people,so same method does not always get same result,that goes your entire theory .
I'm not sure the goal of crypto systems should be to recreate the fiat systems that have gone before.If NuBits recreates what the Federal Reserve has done since its founding in 1913, it will be a smashing success. An entire country (plus many others, via pegged currencies) have had relative stability under the US dollar. Of course, there are valid criticisms to fractional reserve, but the Fed's dollar has lasted over 100 years now. That's a pretty good run for anything crypto.
Good point. Dollars were backed by gold until Nixon did his thing in 1971, so I guess the Fed's actual magical hand-waving has only been going on for a little over 40 years.I'm not sure the goal of crypto systems should be to recreate the fiat systems that have gone before.If NuBits recreates what the Federal Reserve has done since its founding in 1913, it will be a smashing success. An entire country (plus many others, via pegged currencies) have had relative stability under the US dollar. Of course, there are valid criticisms to fractional reserve, but the Fed's dollar has lasted over 100 years now. That's a pretty good run for anything crypto.
For most of that 100 year history a FRN was a promise to pay Gold or Silver.... demand for it is created by LENDING it into existence backed by collateral. The collateral was originally Gold, now it is Mortgage Backed Securities... as the value of the collateral falls to 0 the value of the dollar will fall as well. It is further backed by taxation which creates demand for it.
If NuShares placed their Shares as collateral against NuBits then you would have BitShares assuming NuShares were a freely traded crypto and the interest rate voted on by NuShare holders was the interest rate PAID by the shorts to the longs.
If NuShares placed their Shares as collateral against NuBits then you would have BitShares assuming NuShares were a freely traded crypto and the interest rate voted on by NuShare holders was the interest rate PAID by the shorts to the longs.
What happens if the collateral loses value? This approach introduces a serious default risk. As it is, the viability of NuBits does not depend on maintaining the value of NuShares.
In 1980 when demand for the US dollar was in decline the Federal Reserve raised interest rates to the high teens. People were quite happy to buy dollars and treasury notes to receive these high interest payments. Far from being an unsustainable action, it saved the US dollar from hyperinflation at that time. 34 years later it remains viable.This is a fallacious comparison. Paul Volcker's action of raising the federal funds rate from 1979 to 1981 had the effect of decreasing the total money supply, because the USA operates on a fractional reserve system. If a bank loans money in the USA, money is created. When it is repaid, the money is destroyed. This is completely incomparable to the NuBits interest rate mechanism.
A high NuBits interest rate results in a higher total money supply, not a lower total supply.
If NuShares placed their Shares as collateral against NuBits then you would have BitShares assuming NuShares were a freely traded crypto and the interest rate voted on by NuShare holders was the interest rate PAID by the shorts to the longs.
What happens if the collateral loses value? This approach introduces a serious default risk. As it is, the viability of NuBits does not depend on maintaining the value of NuShares.
I appreciate you two duking it out publicly, but schedule a closed door session, both parties will benefit
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm not sure the goal of crypto systems should be to recreate the fiat systems that have gone before.If NuBits recreates what the Federal Reserve has done since its founding in 1913, it will be a smashing success. An entire country (plus many others, via pegged currencies) have had relative stability under the US dollar. Of course, there are valid criticisms to fractional reserve, but the Fed's dollar has lasted over 100 years now. That's a pretty good run for anything crypto.
If NuShares placed their Shares as collateral against NuBits then you would have BitShares assuming NuShares were a freely traded crypto and the interest rate voted on by NuShare holders was the interest rate PAID by the shorts to the longs.
What happens if the collateral loses value? This approach introduces a serious default risk. As it is, the viability of NuBits does not depend on maintaining the value of NuShares.
If NuShares placed their Shares as collateral against NuBits then you would have BitShares assuming NuShares were a freely traded crypto and the interest rate voted on by NuShare holders was the interest rate PAID by the shorts to the longs.
What happens if the collateral loses value? This approach introduces a serious default risk. As it is, the viability of NuBits does not depend on maintaining the value of NuShares.
I think if their is no collateral their is no value to maintain. :)
If NuShares placed their Shares as collateral against NuBits then you would have BitShares assuming NuShares were a freely traded crypto and the interest rate voted on by NuShare holders was the interest rate PAID by the shorts to the longs.
What happens if the collateral loses value? This approach introduces a serious default risk. As it is, the viability of NuBits does not depend on maintaining the value of NuShares.
I think if their is no collateral their is no value to maintain. :)
Agreed - but also the nubits system produces no value...
Unlike Btsx, which is an exchange with revenues (value creation) as well as a 200% collateralized bank.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But lets assume for second that NuBits remains pegged to the dollar... and the dollar dies in hyperinflation... opps. I don't want NuBits for the same reason I don't really want dollars.If the dollar dies in hyperinflation, most of the world will be badly damaged, and especially the USA. We saw what happened in the housing crisis of 2008. We are already exposed to the risk of USD failure.
If NuBits recreates what the Federal Reserve has done since its founding in 1913, it will be a smashing success. An entire country (plus many others, via pegged currencies) have had relative stability under the US dollar. Of course, there are valid criticisms to fractional reserve, but the Fed's dollar has lasted over 100 years now. That's a pretty good run for anything crypto.
In 1980 when demand for the US dollar was in decline the Federal Reserve raised interest rates to the high teens. People were quite happy to buy dollars and treasury notes to receive these high interest payments. Far from being an unsustainable action, it saved the US dollar from hyperinflation at that time. 34 years later it remains viable.
If NuShares placed their Shares as collateral against NuBits then you would have BitShares assuming NuShares were a freely traded crypto and the interest rate voted on by NuShare holders was the interest rate PAID by the shorts to the longs.
What happens if the collateral loses value? This approach introduces a serious default risk. As it is, the viability of NuBits does not depend on maintaining the value of NuShares.
I think if their is no collateral their is no value to maintain. :)
Agreed - but also the nubits system produces no value...
Unlike Btsx, which is an exchange with revenues (value creation) as well as a 200% collateralized bank.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The problem is the supply of NuBits is constantly growing with no way to reduce it... the only thing the system allows is to "kick the can" down the road of people looking to exit.
In 1980 when demand for the US dollar was in decline the Federal Reserve raised interest rates to the high teens. People were quite happy to buy dollars and treasury notes to receive these high interest payments. Far from being an unsustainable action, it saved the US dollar from hyperinflation at that time. 34 years later it remains viable.
It seems way off target to argue against NuBits by attacking the US Dollar. Again, if NuBits is as sound as the USD, then it is a raging success. That appears to be the entire point.
On top of that, the NuBits protocol can use its mechanism to peg tokens against any asset, even inflation-protected assets. If the USD fails, NuBits shareholders could create a new set of tokens within the same network to peg to the value of whatever currency replaces it.
It seems way off target to argue against NuBits by attacking the US Dollar. Again, if NuBits is as sound as the USD, then it is a raging success. That appears to be the entire point.
On top of that, the NuBits protocol can use its mechanism to peg tokens against any asset, even inflation-protected assets. If the USD fails, NuBits shareholders could create a new set of tokens within the same network to peg to the value of whatever currency replaces it.
I think everybody reading this got that point... you can create as many assets is you desire and the only limiting factor is the available air...
Destroying said assets is technically impossible (at least above your abilities). The best surrogate you have come up with is to sit on them... willing sitters will be paid with a new dose of thin air....
Dare to answer ANY of my questions, or you are here to just re-iterate the whitepaper?
Undistributed NuShares will be sold in lots typically 5 million in size to people who have demonstrated skills that will be helpful to the advancement of the network. We are in a sense
picking business partners. People will need to contact us via Bitmessage
The problem is the supply of NuBits is constantly growing with no way to reduce it... the only thing the system allows is to "kick the can" down the road of people looking to exit.
Is bitUSD supply not as well constantly growing with no way to reduce it? (I believe the answer will help us to make the right comparison)
BitUSD can go back to 0 as a result of margin calls or covering.
BitUSD can go back to 0 as a result of margin calls or covering.
0 supply, or 0 price?
How would the price of bitUSD withstand a rapid collapse in the price of the BTSX that is being used as collateral by the shorts?
Thanks!
0 supply...BitUSD can go back to 0 as a result of margin calls or covering.
0 supply, or 0 price?
..........
Thanks!
An instant revaluation? Then bitassets go to 0 value. A slow fall toward 0 over a month? Then shorts will have covered and bitusd holders would have sold for usd.
An instant revaluation? Then bitassets go to 0 value. A slow fall toward 0 over a month? Then shorts will have covered and bitusd holders would have sold for usd.
That is somewhat concerning, given that over its history bitcoin has had a few flash crashes where it lost a huge portion of it value instantly.
Are there any mechanisms in place that could help maintain order in a scenario like this? Perhaps the delegates wouldnt all update feed prices to represent the flash crash, and things could proceed more orderly?
A slow fall toward 0 over a month? Then shorts will have covered and bitusd holders would have sold for usd.Forgive me for my ignorance: I don't understand Bitshares too well (yet). If Bitusd holders sell for USD, doesn't that mean that the entity on the other side of the trade is buying Bitusd with USD, so this generates no net effect on the overall network?
... Start with what is criteria in selecting to whom you are going to sell a seat in this self appointed FED of yours, please?Well, it's not my FED, haha. Only Jordan can answer that question. It sounds like you have two complaints, though:
... Start with what is criteria in selecting to whom you are going to sell a seat in this self appointed FED of yours, please?Well, it's not my FED, haha. Only Jordan can answer that question. It sounds like you have two complaints, though:
1) NuBits shares are worthless because the system is borked
2) NuBits shares are too hard to buy
I don't think both of these can bother you at the same time. ;)
... Start with what is criteria in selecting to whom you are going to sell a seat in this self appointed FED of yours, please?Well, it's not my FED, haha. Only Jordan can answer that question. It sounds like you have two complaints, though:
1) NuBits shares are worthless because the system is borked
2) NuBits shares are too hard to buy
I don't think both of these can bother you at the same time. ;)
Ah, I see. So, the stance is more like: "NuBits shares are worthless because the system is borked. And besides, if the system isn't borked, then NuBits shares are too hard to buy."It sounds like you have two complaints, though:When you debate with someone sometimes you can "take one of their assumptions as true" and then make your point using their own assumption. That doesn't make you inconsistent... it just further harms the opposing argument that you can attack their system using their own assumptions without having to convince them of your own values which they have rejected.
1) NuBits shares are worthless because the system is borked
2) NuBits shares are too hard to buy
I don't think both of these can bother you at the same time. ;)
Let's try remain to remain civil guys.
Although I must say this.. I just visited Nubits homepage to see what it was all about and I was shocked to see this in large letters.. it is the first thing you see when going to their webpage:
"The World's First Stable Digital Currency"
That is a flat out lie, no? Seeing as though bitUSD has been trading for a while now it seems pretty disrespectful to BitsharesX and bitUSD.
I prefer the collateralized model over the custodian model. Nubits is too centralized relying on certain individuals, although elected, to make decisions with other people's money. Central banks are basically elected custodians who make decisions about other people's money... very similar models.
... Start with what is criteria in selecting to whom you are going to sell a seat in this self appointed FED of yours, please?Well, it's not my FED, haha. Only Jordan can answer that question. It sounds like you have two complaints, though:
1) NuBits shares are worthless because the system is borked
2) NuBits shares are too hard to buy
I don't think both of these can bother you at the same time. ;)
When you debate with someone sometimes you can "take one of their assumptions as true" and then make your point using their own assumption. That doesn't make you inconsistent... it just further harms the opposing argument that you can attack their system using their own assumptions without having to convince them of your own values which they have rejected.
I will quote the bible as an "absolute authority" when debating Christians about government and libertarian principles to support NAP even though I don't hold it as an "infallible absolute authority" like they do. Effectively I can use the bible to support that Christians shouldn't support government or use of force even to enforce "God's laws" on others. That is just good debating.
Assuming the system worked economically, the control / limited access / insider only process of getting the NuShares is a kiss-o-death and someone could "clone it" with a far more transparent and open process honoring AGS/PTS in the genesis block.
Given the general arrogance of your projectNuBits isn't my project. I'm just here for the trolling. Looks like a success to me. :P
Given the general arrogance of your projectNuBits isn't my project. I'm just here for the trolling. Looks like a success to me. :P
I'd like to mention, though, that most of the world trusts the Fed to keep a stable dollar. Most USA citizens keep their savings exposed to USD. Attacks on Helicopter Ben, although fun, are actually in the minority.
Well, "trolling" is a little harsh, I guess. I should say, I'm just here for the drama. I'm only joking, though. It's been fun, and I've learned more about Bitshares in the process.
I do wonder what happens if the market has high demand for "pegged" BitAssets, but low demand for "unpegged" BitsharesX. That's a topic for another thread, though.
Well, "trolling" is a little harsh, I guess. I should say, I'm just here for the drama. I'm only joking, though. It's been fun, and I've learned more about Bitshares in the process.
I do wonder what happens if the market has high demand for "pegged" BitAssets, but low demand for "unpegged" BitsharesX. That's a topic for another thread, though.
I do wonder what happens if the market has high demand for "pegged" BitAssets, but low demand for "unpegged" BitsharesX. That's a topic for another thread, though.
QuoteI do wonder what happens if the market has high demand for "pegged" BitAssets, but low demand for "unpegged" BitsharesX. That's a topic for another thread, though.
What happens is that due to the magical power of free market forces, BitsharesX gains more demand and increases in price! Our system works! :D
NuBits == DOA
I prefer the collateralized model over the custodian model. Nubits is too centralized relying on certain individuals, although elected, to make decisions with other people's money. Central banks are basically elected custodians who make decisions about other people's money... very similar models.
That's what should one HelikopterBen think...
"very similar models" ... how are they similar?
ONLY their final goal, 'price stability' is the same....
I prefer the collateralized model over the custodian model. Nubits is too centralized relying on certain individuals, although elected, to make decisions with other people's money. Central banks are basically elected custodians who make decisions about other people's money... very similar models.
That's what should one HelikopterBen think...
"very similar models" ... how are they similar?
ONLY their final goal, 'price stability' is the same....
How are central banks not similar to custodians who are elected to manage other people's money?
I prefer the collateralized model over the custodian model. Nubits is too centralized relying on certain individuals, although elected, to make decisions with other people's money. Central banks are basically elected custodians who make decisions about other people's money... very similar models.
That's what should one HelikopterBen think...
"very similar models" ... how are they similar?
ONLY their final goal, 'price stability' is the same....
How are central banks not similar to custodians who are elected to manage other people's money?
NuBits == DOA
for
DIE
OUT
ASAP ?
NuBits == DOA
for
DIE
OUT
ASAP ?
DOA == Dead on Arrival
Hmm. I'm a bit shocked by Nubit's volume.. I am not sure what to make of it.
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/nubits/#markets
http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/bitusd/#markets
I am puzzled seeing as though I think BitsharesX is a better solution.. less prone to manipulation just vote out delegates if they act up with their price feeds (Nushareholders holders can't be ousted for manipulating interest rates or printing of money)... more fair distribution and release (AGS/PTS vs internal funding, even now u have to message the dev and give him a reason why u should be able to buy Nushares)... bitUSD has collateral ( Nubits are Non collateralized and can be printed by Nusharesholders)... set free market dynamics that don't change after we get them right (vs Nusharesholders adjusting interest rates and printing money)... Nothing like the Feds (Nushares similar to the Feds.)
What am I missing? Is it because they are on more exchanges? Because it's new and people want to mess around with it? Marketing? Long time Peercoiners support that will fade away eventually once they run out of crypto/capital?
Let's see what its volume looks like in a couple of weeks. People may just be trying it out, especially Peercoiners. Is it possible also that market makers and their bots need to acquire a supply with which to conduct their trading activity?
If you saw what brian+cass+marketing bros were up to I think you'd be ok with waiting another month or so before a "big" push. I hate vague promises of "something big is coming", but actually...
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
If you saw what brian+cass+marketing bros were up to I think you'd be ok with waiting another month or so before a "big" push. I hate vague promises of "something big is coming", but actually...
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
If you saw what brian+cass+marketing bros were up to I think you'd be ok with waiting another month or so before a "big" push. I hate vague promises of "something big is coming", but actually...
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
We will quickly start loosing our launch benefit window for marketing by the end of Sept IMO. I hope whatever they have cooking is VERY substantial. Enough to overcome this lost opportunity.
If you saw what brian+cass+marketing bros were up to I think you'd be ok with waiting another month or so before a "big" push. I hate vague promises of "something big is coming", but actually...
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
We will quickly start loosing our launch benefit window for marketing by the end of Sept IMO. I hope whatever they have cooking is VERY substantial. Enough to overcome this lost opportunity.
+5%
With nubits, buy the rumor sell the news
If you saw what brian+cass+marketing bros were up to I think you'd be ok with waiting another month or so before a "big" push. I hate vague promises of "something big is coming", but actually...
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
We will quickly start loosing our launch benefit window for marketing by the end of Sept IMO. I hope whatever they have cooking is VERY substantial. Enough to overcome this lost opportunity.
+5%
Relax and enjoy the chance to spend one more paycheck at these prices. ;)
The window they plan to open is to a whole new world of users who have never even heard of coinmarketcap.(http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20050809073106/memoryalpha/en/images/thumb/9/94/Crew_observes_the_american_revolution.jpg/180px-Crew_observes_the_american_revolution.jpg)
This, in turn, will place BTSX at #2 on coinmarketcap and constitute the real cryptogeek "launch benefit window" you are talking about.
"Roads? Where we're going they don't need roads!"
(http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/2013-10/enhanced/webdr03/28/21/anigif_enhanced-buzz-19236-1383009679-5.gif)
I like it!
Just remember you have one time to make a first impression.......and thats usually at your first introduction.
Regardless, I think it's time for Bitshares to really up our marketing game. I have heard we've been waiting to fix bugs and the software is ready for prime time. I think now that we have competition we should advance this timeline and the time is now! Despite our opinions on being a better solution to the same problem, the better technological/ideological solution doesn't always win!
"Nubits" (mmm... pet food?)
... just another altcoin. people may have wasted their investments . but who knows?
Hmm. I'm a bit shocked by Nubit's volume.. I am not sure what to make of it.
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/nubits/#markets
http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/bitusd/#markets
I am puzzled seeing as though I think BitsharesX is a better solution.. less prone to manipulation just vote out delegates if they act up with their price feeds (Nushareholders holders can't be ousted for manipulating interest rates or printing of money)... more fair distribution and release (AGS/PTS vs internal funding, even now u have to message the dev and give him a reason why u should be able to buy Nushares)... bitUSD has collateral ( Nubits are Non collateralized and can be printed by Nusharesholders)... set free market dynamics that don't change after we get them right (vs Nusharesholders adjusting interest rates and printing money)... Nothing like the Feds (Nushares similar to the Feds.)
What am I missing? Is it because they are on more exchanges? Because it's new and people want to mess around with it? Marketing? Long time Peercoiners support that will fade away eventually once they run out of crypto/capital?
Hmm. I'm a bit shocked by Nubit's volume.. I am not sure what to make of it.
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/nubits/#markets
http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/bitusd/#markets
I am puzzled seeing as though I think BitsharesX is a better solution.. less prone to manipulation just vote out delegates if they act up with their price feeds (Nushareholders holders can't be ousted for manipulating interest rates or printing of money)... more fair distribution and release (AGS/PTS vs internal funding, even now u have to message the dev and give him a reason why u should be able to buy Nushares)... bitUSD has collateral ( Nubits are Non collateralized and can be printed by Nusharesholders)... set free market dynamics that don't change after we get them right (vs Nusharesholders adjusting interest rates and printing money)... Nothing like the Feds (Nushares similar to the Feds.)
What am I missing? Is it because they are on more exchanges? Because it's new and people want to mess around with it? Marketing? Long time Peercoiners support that will fade away eventually once they run out of crypto/capital?
I think that they sell their nubitshares in 5m "packets" for 9000 nubits each (A recent post says that they can sell 1m packets too ) if the selling period is not over then maybe this creates this volume. http://discuss.nubits.com/t/undistributed-nushares/125
If you saw what brian+cass+marketing bros were up to I think you'd be ok with waiting another month or so before a "big" push. I hate vague promises of "something big is coming", but actually...
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
We will quickly start loosing our launch benefit window for marketing by the end of Sept IMO. I hope whatever they have cooking is VERY substantial. Enough to overcome this lost opportunity.
There is no way anyone would buy thousands of NBTs without purpose at the moment. Or all the buyers are unaware that they buying the 1 USD and not the crypto share Nushares.Well, there are a few reasons, such as parking incentives. However, the volume shocked me, too. I would guess that quite a few buyers did not realize they were buying a pegged asset. :-\
There is no way anyone would buy thousands of NBTs without purpose at the moment. Or all the buyers are unaware that they buying the 1 USD and not the crypto share Nushares.Well, there are a few reasons, such as parking incentives. However, the volume shocked me, too. I would guess that quite a few buyers did not realize they were buying a pegged asset. :-\
That is true, BTER trades nubits for btc, but if someone wants to buy nushares(from Jordan Lee?) he can do it only with nubits, so he has to buy nubits and sell them for nushares. I don't know if there is something else happening.
That is true, BTER trades nubits for btc, but if someone wants to buy nushares(from Jordan Lee?) he can do it only with nubits, so he has to buy nubits and sell them for nushares. I don't know if there is something else happening.
This is not true. In fact, the team received the first request to pay for NuShares with NuBits on Wednesday. As of this moment, no NuShares have been purchased with NuBits.
That is true, BTER trades nubits for btc, but if someone wants to buy nushares(from Jordan Lee?) he can do it only with nubits, so he has to buy nubits and sell them for nushares. I don't know if there is something else happening.
This is not true. In fact, the team received the first request to pay for NuShares with NuBits on Wednesday. As of this moment, no NuShares have been purchased with NuBits.
Ah, but only those elites with $9,000 to burn can get in this game, right?
That is true, BTER trades nubits for btc, but if someone wants to buy nushares(from Jordan Lee?) he can do it only with nubits, so he has to buy nubits and sell them for nushares. I don't know if there is something else happening.
This is not true. In fact, the team received the first request to pay for NuShares with NuBits on Wednesday. As of this moment, no NuShares have been purchased with NuBits.
That is not correct either. Anyone who has something to offer the network can get NuShares, in many cases without paying so much as a bitcent for them. I detailed this here:
http://discuss.nubits.com/t/undistributed-nushares/125/9
Even though bots are involved, there may well be other elements. Perhaps bots could be deployed on a decentralized basis somehow? And I don't know if there is any currency involved besides Peercoin. So I'm assuming that if they're talking about an innovation that can keep crypto prices stable, they must be planning to unleash it on Peercoin first. But we will see when it comes out.
Anything they have that is better than BTSX we can copy and deploy in a few weeks ;) Unless it involves large financial partners making the market (which it seems to require...) but we will have bots for that this week.
The reason why I will be voting “no” for open-source until a later date
[David]
Today I came across a fan-club thread of ours (well, not really) at BitsharesX.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9057.011
A key quote from Bitshares creator Dan Larimer (bytemaster):2 "Anything they have that is better than BTSX we can copy and deploy in a few weeks. wink"
Jordan is correct that we will likely have several groups try and imitate our design after release. Bitshares currently has a much larger community than ours and would be a direct threat to our success if they can access the code. While they can probably reverse-engineer something in time, having access to the source code would speed this outcome up considerably.
We need to establish momentum early on before others can attempt to catch up.
And that's why I will not be voting for an "open-source" motion in the near future.
A final quote from our website that should help ease some fears about transparency:
"NuBits developers who have access to the source code are encouraged to describe it using natural language (such as English) in any level of detail publicly as people ask questions. Small code snippets (less than 20 lines) may even be posted publicly to illustrate how specific aspects of the software work."
Well, there are a few reasons, such as parking incentives.parking incentives - is a good, should I say great, idea, imo.
Well, there are a few reasons, such as parking incentives.parking incentives - is a good, should I say great, idea, imo.
Too many cars moving around, might be my city only, but, way too many cars moving around.
Parking incentives - is a great idea to save the planet... who will want to use his/her car if we have parking incentives!
And now with NuBits we have!
Sunny King just weighed in on NuBits, calling it the Peercoin ecosystem's first "DAC". And so the "DAC" term continues to spread far and wide.
http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=3440.msg33283#msg33283 (http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=3440.msg33283#msg33283)
I don't think there's a video of this guy, period. Or even a real identity. In fact, this is one of the only pictures I've found.
(http://i832.photobucket.com/albums/zz249/nomad68/1227029039lg.jpg)
Wow, almost 2.3M$ worth of Nubits as per CMC. A volume of 1550BTC traded in the last 24 hours...
That's a large community of bag holders there.
Well, good for those who will cash out first.
right hand changed to lefe hand......No one is really buying that .
If not perhaps even advertised in the main banner, even we need to come together as a community to pay for it. )
Its not fake volume. Its probably done by bots but the trades are real and bter is getting .2% of them. Looks like bter has got a couple thousand dollars worth of nubits this morning. Good for them, help them recover from that NXT hack.
This is the kind of volume we want to see in bitUSD. Right now Nubits is being used far more than us.
Its not fake volume. Its probably done by bots but the trades are real and bter is getting .2% of them. Looks like bter has got a couple thousand dollars worth of nubits this morning. Good for them, help them recover from that NXT hack.
This is the kind of volume we want to see in bitUSD. Right now Nubits is being used far more than us.
As I understand it from their forum, one custodians wall accidentally hit another custodians wall at some point in last few days. That may also help explain a one-off spike in volume if that's what occurred (?).
Its not fake volume. Its probably done by bots but the trades are real and bter is getting .2% of them. Looks like bter has got a couple thousand dollars worth of nubits this morning. Good for them, help them recover from that NXT hack.
This is the kind of volume we want to see in bitUSD. Right now Nubits is being used far more than us.
sorry, but trading via bots is not used!
the only use at the moment is to buy Nushares.
If I just look at numbers, it seems NuBits is in front of bitUSD in the adoption race (for now) for hedging against crypto volatility. 5246BTC of volume in one day, it's quite impressive. I understand the temporary need to hedge against Bitcoin drop, but it's surprising how much people can buy into something that is economically flawed. Is it misinformation, or people are convincing themselves they won't be the bag holders at some point?
Because let's face it, if Bitcoin rally and for any reason go back up to 600-700$, those Nubits holders who see that will jump ship and go back on the BTC train... And if new buyers aren't there to buy it up, it could mean trouble.
Is my understanding flawed?
If I just look at numbers, it seems NuBits is in front of bitUSD in the adoption race (for now) for hedging against crypto volatility. 5246BTC of volume in one day, it's quite impressive. I understand the temporary need to hedge against Bitcoin drop, but it's surprising how much people can buy into something that is economically flawed. Is it misinformation, or people are convincing themselves they won't be the bag holders at some point?
Because let's face it, if Bitcoin rally and for any reason go back up to 600-700$, those Nubits holders who see that will jump ship and go back on the BTC train... And if new buyers aren't there to buy it up, it could mean trouble.
Is my understanding flawed?
You're correct.
The buyer of Nubits can just hope that the ones holding the money won't get away after earning millions of dollars from thin air.Or they have to pray for another people to pick up mess.
If I just look at numbers, it seems NuBits is in front of bitUSD in the adoption race (for now) for hedging against crypto volatility. 5246BTC of volume in one day, it's quite impressive. I understand the temporary need to hedge against Bitcoin drop, but it's surprising how much people can buy into something that is economically flawed. Is it misinformation, or people are convincing themselves they won't be the bag holders at some point?
Because let's face it, if Bitcoin rally and for any reason go back up to 600-700$, those Nubits holders who see that will jump ship and go back on the BTC train... And if new buyers aren't there to buy it up, it could mean trouble.
Is my understanding flawed?
Yes Nubits is bad.
But this was an excellent weekend to kickstart and bootstrap BitAssets within the Alt-Coin market for very little outlay as many who stay exclusively in BitCoin nearly all the time would have been looking at other options.
BTSX at no.4 doesn't advertise BitAssets, even when you go to the website.
Our BitAssets are listed on a separate page, they also have a low CAP.
Then of course we've got the hurdle of getting your account on a wallet.
Alot of the trading seems to be happening on the exchange. So I guess seems need a market maker with a high volume of BitUSD available for trade on Bter. On Bter may also be best if BitUSD was on main page like Nubits.
A simple BitUSD website with a walkthrough like Nubits perhaps.
Adverts on CMC/Coindesk if we can't get BitAssets listed on main page.
Just some ideas.
Reality is NBT so far works better than BitUSD, when it comes to liquidity. Can you buy/sell 1000 BTC worth of BitUSD without pushing the market? No.
Reality is NBT so far works better than BitUSD, when it comes to liquidity. Can you buy/sell 1000 BTC worth of BitUSD without pushing the market? No.
Reality is NBT so far works better than BitUSD, when it comes to liquidity. Can you buy/sell 1000 BTC worth of BitUSD without pushing the market? No.
Straw man argument. You can't argue against the potential wet bag of shit Ponzi scheme that is NuScam
Bitshares requires bag holders as well. If everyone decides to get out of BitUSD what next? How well will it "track" the price?
Reality is NBT so far works better than BitUSD, when it comes to liquidity. Can you buy/sell 1000 BTC worth of BitUSD without pushing the market? No.
Straw man argument. You can't argue against the potential wet bag of shit Ponzi scheme that is NuScam
So...we just say over and over that NuBits is a scam.
Plenty of other people say bitUSD is a scam and the peg wont work.
How are we different?
We need to bring technical arguments to these discussions to demonstrate why bitUSD is better.
We need to have more market volume in bitUSD, to show that it is the superior choice.
We dont need to circlejerk and repeat 'nubits is a scam' over and over whenever anyone talks about it. Having our heads in the sand and just 'believing' in BTSX isnt going to accomplish anything. This isnt a religion.
Bitshares requires bag holders as well. If everyone decides to get out of BitUSD what next? How well will it "track" the price? You are missing my point. BitUSD has problem with liquidity. Right now if you were to buy and sell a measly $10k in BitUSD within a second what is your spread? What about $100k? So unless there are buyers of BitUSD, it doesn't work. And unless it works there are no serious buyers for BitUSD. See the similarities? You can throw interest, bots and what not at it. But BTSX is not an ideal solution either.
+5% Hearing these arguments I feel like Im looking at one of the many superior products that were destined to fail against lesser competition. The fact is that Nubits works right now. Very few people ever care to look under the hood to understand the technicalities as to WHY something works. To argue against Nubits' economically flawd model gets us nowhere. Right now they are beating us in this area even though they just launched (2 months after BTSX). The reason: 1) They stabilized their product faster 2) They apparently have better marketing.Reality is NBT so far works better than BitUSD, when it comes to liquidity. Can you buy/sell 1000 BTC worth of BitUSD without pushing the market? No.
Straw man argument. You can't argue against the potential wet bag of shit Ponzi scheme that is NuScam
So...we just say over and over that NuBits is a scam.
Plenty of other people say bitUSD is a scam and the peg wont work.
How are we different?
We need to bring technical arguments to these discussions to demonstrate why bitUSD is better.
We need to have more market volume in bitUSD, to show that it is the superior choice.
We dont need to circlejerk and repeat 'nubits is a scam' over and over whenever anyone talks about it. Having our heads in the sand and just 'believing' in BTSX isnt going to accomplish anything. This isnt a religion.
Also, NuBit volume is the result of bots trading. It's not organic.
Why are you so in such a hurry ? Nubits promoters themselves know and say that one day nubits will be worth 0$. If people flock to the bandwagon, it will just hinder bitUSD until the first big crisis. It's condemned to death. Regarding bitshares, the devs are devoted to making a great product, the marketing plan is mouth watering, and in a year or two BTSX may change history. Can't we just sit back and relax ?
None of the pegged currency concepts is yet ideal. And all are in constant development. So I think its important to not get on our high horses and be overly critical of any innovation, its all moving to a better world.
The robustness problem with NuBits is well acknowledged here. But there are positives from a user perspective that should also be acknowledged - it is very simple and accessible.
BitUSD is not ideal yet either.
Though BitUSD has a flexible supply to deal with demand shocks, sellers of any size will still need to take some haircut to the peg to exit. The proposed rule that shorts must cover in 30 days will help to ensure the discount does not grow too great.
But the main issue to adoption in my view is complexity. It requires a BTSX wallet (and BTSX as collateral) to access and hold BitUSD. Its a multi-step process. And trading it requires a knowledge of some quite complicated (and constantly shifting) rules to understand the market dynamic, at least until enough history means people can just default to trusting it. For outsiders interested in holding BitUSD it requires some view on this relatively unknown thing called BTSX, which is held as additional collateral at risk, but also if it moves up too far can knock you out of your BitUSD position through a margin call. This requires another layer of monitoring and risk.
These are big hurdles for the outside layman, and does not facilitate easy trading of BitUSD outside its specialised environment, so heavily constrains liquidity. NuBits by comparison is bought and sold like any other crypto and so can be used easily by traders on the exchanges.
I'm not taking any sides here.
But I think it would be useful if BitUSD could be wrapped in some way that is simpler to handle. For example, if there were a fund/DAC/crypto/ETF that did the job of managing all this on behalf of the underlying investors.
None of the pegged currency concepts is yet ideal. And all are in constant development. So I think its important to not get on our high horses and be overly critical of any innovation, its all moving to a better world.
The robustness problem with NuBits is well acknowledged here. But there are positives from a user perspective that should also be acknowledged - it is very simple and accessible.
BitUSD is not ideal yet either.
Though BitUSD has a flexible supply to deal with demand shocks, sellers of any size will still need to take some haircut to the peg to exit. The proposed rule that shorts must cover in 30 days will help to ensure the discount does not grow too great.
But the main issue to adoption in my view is complexity. It requires a BTSX wallet (and BTSX as collateral) to access and hold BitUSD. Its a multi-step process. And trading it requires a knowledge of some quite complicated (and constantly shifting) rules to understand the market dynamic, at least until enough history means people can just default to trusting it. For outsiders interested in holding BitUSD it requires some view on this relatively unknown thing called BTSX, which is held as additional collateral at risk, but also if it moves up too far can knock you out of your BitUSD position through a margin call. This requires another layer of monitoring and risk.
These are big hurdles for the outside layman, and does not facilitate easy trading of BitUSD outside its specialised environment, so heavily constrains liquidity. NuBits by comparison is bought and sold like any other crypto and so can be used easily by traders on the exchanges.
I'm not taking any sides here.
But I think it would be useful if BitUSD could be wrapped in some way that is simpler to handle. For example, if there were a fund/DAC/crypto/ETF that did the job of managing all this on behalf of the underlying investors.
I think you're misunderstanding a few things. You don't have to hold BTSX to hold bitUSD, and a margin call will not compromise your bitUSD. BitSapphire is also working on a simplified wallet for those who just want to transact simply, and already in the existing wallet most of the complexity can be switched off and ignored if all you want to do is use bitUSD. You can buy bitUSD directly without holding BTSX first.
But the main issue to adoption in my view is complexity. It requires a BTSX wallet (and BTSX as collateral) to access and hold BitUSD. Its a multi-step process. And trading it requires a knowledge of some quite complicated (and constantly shifting) rules to understand the market dynamic, at least until enough history means people can just default to trusting it.
But the main issue to adoption in my view is complexity. It requires a BTSX wallet (and BTSX as collateral) to access and hold BitUSD. Its a multi-step process. And trading it requires a knowledge of some quite complicated (and constantly shifting) rules to understand the market dynamic, at least until enough history means people can just default to trusting it.
Listen to the most recent podcast:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9666.0
Bytemaster describes a potential future system where the average person could use bitUSD without all this complexity, without owning BTSX. They use bitUSD the way they use a credit or debit card, and all of the complexity is handled by the payment processor.
This, or something like it, is what we need to happen to have widespread bitUSD adoption.
If I make a coin with 100% premine , I can easily do the same trick,as long as I don't run off with the money I sold from the coin.
And ,the team maybe only 1 person ,even after selling some shares in the public,the main power and fund still controls in 1 person.
That is because ALL Nubits is owned by one team.
They sold 100 NBTS,get 100USD CASH.
IF they do not wish to run off with the 100USD CASH AT THE MOMENT,they can easily do whatever liquidity they like .Because everytime they sold a NBTS,
THEY GET CASH !!!!!!
Of course,as long as they do not want to run off ,even after selling 2 Million NBTS and get 2 Million USD eash CASH .
If I make a coin with 100% premine , I can easily do the same trick,as long as I don't run off with the money I sold from the coin.
And ,the team maybe only 1 person ,even after selling some shares in the public,the main power and fund still controls in 1 person.
Reality is NBT so far works better than BitUSD, when it comes to liquidity. Can you buy/sell 1000 BTC worth of BitUSD without pushing the market? No.
Straw man argument. You can't argue against the potential wet bag of shit Ponzi scheme that is NuScam
So...we just say over and over that NuBits is a scam.
Plenty of other people say bitUSD is a scam and the peg wont work.
How are we different?
We need to bring technical arguments to these discussions to demonstrate why bitUSD is better.
We need to have more market volume in bitUSD, to show that it is the superior choice.
We dont need to circlejerk and repeat 'nubits is a scam' over and over whenever anyone talks about it. Having our heads in the sand and just 'believing' in BTSX isnt going to accomplish anything. This isnt a religion.
Makes us no better than Bitcoiners otherwise. The way I understand it is NuBits can't contract it's supply, while the supply of BitUSD reaches equilibrium naturally.
Also, NuBit volume is the result of bots trading. It's not organic.
EDIT: Truthfully though, I've been keeping an eye on both communities. I'll switch to NuBits if they implement a superior marketing strategy and I think they have a shot at gaining network effect. I like the simplicity of NuBits and their singular marketing/development focus. The BitShares devs have spread themselves thin across multiple DACs and their branding is needlessly complex.
TL;DR: Nubits is a ponzi scheme.
Can someone explain to me though why they have such high volume, ($1 million 24 hours) but the CAP of Nubits is staying the same, this week, circa $2.3 million? I don't understand.
QuoteCan someone explain to me though why they have such high volume, ($1 million 24 hours) but the CAP of Nubits is staying the same, this week, circa $2.3 million? I don't understand.
NuBits market capitalization isn't changing, because the supply of NBT hasn't measurably changed and the price per NBT hasn't fluctuated much. CMC reports market cap as:
* Marketcap = Price x Total Supply
* Prices are calculated by averaging the prices at the major exchanges weighted by volume
Source: bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=199685.0
The NuBits project needs people/entities with substantial funds available to them to conduct automated exchange operations on an ongoing basis. No capital gains or losses are possible within the scope of the needed trading activity. Your funds will not be passed to anyone working on the NuBits project. You will need to deposit funds in your own account at an exchange and run a trading bot we will provide. Your principle risk will be exchange default. You will be compensated a negotiated rate for this risk. You will not be in a position to fill this role unless your net worth is well into the six figures USD or higher. Full details about the role you may fill and the NuBits project itself will be given to qualified candidates. Persons/entities that fill this role will be eligible to purchase shares of our venture immediately.
QuoteCan someone explain to me though why they have such high volume, ($1 million 24 hours) but the CAP of Nubits is staying the same, this week, circa $2.3 million? I don't understand.
NuBits market capitalization isn't changing, because the supply of NBT hasn't measurably changed and the price per NBT hasn't fluctuated much. CMC reports market cap as:
* Marketcap = Price x Total Supply
* Prices are calculated by averaging the prices at the major exchanges weighted by volume
Source: bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=199685.0
Yes, since the price stays at $1 (until if/when it fails) then the market cap should closely resemble the demand for Nubits. If you guys remember prior to Nubits' launch they were soliciting for wealthy "market makers" to provide liquidity: http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=3190.0QuoteThe NuBits project needs people/entities with substantial funds available to them to conduct automated exchange operations on an ongoing basis. No capital gains or losses are possible within the scope of the needed trading activity. Your funds will not be passed to anyone working on the NuBits project. You will need to deposit funds in your own account at an exchange and run a trading bot we will provide. Your principle risk will be exchange default. You will be compensated a negotiated rate for this risk. You will not be in a position to fill this role unless your net worth is well into the six figures USD or higher. Full details about the role you may fill and the NuBits project itself will be given to qualified candidates. Persons/entities that fill this role will be eligible to purchase shares of our venture immediately.
If you look at the market cap history, you can see the market cap for Nubits started around $2 million dollars. In other words, I speculate that this ~$2 million is the above solicited market makers. Subtract $2 million from the current market cap... $2,282,597 ... and you get $282,597 worth of demand for Nubits. In other words $282,597 is the "real" market cap from demand by the end users.
In comparison, the bitUSD market cap is sitting at $357,394 a large majority of which (~100%?) is actual demand from end users and not as purely a mechanism to provide liquidity and temporarily stabilize the price to $1. We were first and gained somewhat of a network effect, we have the lead as far as demand goes, we had a much more fair release of BTSX vs Nushares, we have a better underlying solution for a stable decentralized cryptocurrency, and our "market peg" is pretty damn accurate as it is currently sitting at $0.990355 per bitUSD. There is literally nothing to worry about, although I think we can all agree we would benefit from some marketing.
The only thing that puzzles me is Nubits' volume which is insanely higher than ours. This can be manipulated though, so I wouldn't give too much credence in the volume being higher. For instance, today's volume of $858,192 worth of Nubits could be bought for $1716.384 since CCEDK/BTER both charge 0.2% trading fees. It is for that reason I think the market cap is a better indicator of demand. Since the Nubits "market makers" started out with about $2 million worth of Nubits, you can assume that they will indefinitely keep $2 million worth of Nubits to provide liquidity and hold the market peg temporarily until changing the interest rates or printing new money can bring it back to equilibrium.
Maybe I am completely wrong, but I find it hard to believe the volume is not being manipulated considering the dynamics of the situation and the kind of volume CMC has been reporting. The Nushares holders could compensate the market makers for the 0.2% trading fees by printing more money or raising interest rates, so again it could be easily manipulated by the whole system.
Another theory is that since Nubits is still very new, they are still playing around with the interest rates and printing of money ratios to hold the market peg at a $1. Perhaps they were at first (possibly they still are) setting the interest rates on Nubits too high which would cause more demand. Which would then cause the Nushares holders and the market makers to have to print and sell more Nubits to maintain the market peg, thus creating somewhat artificial volume by both the demand of too high interest rates and the selling of the printed Nubits to maintain the market peg.
So, I think the market cap is a better measurement of the success of bitUSD vs Nubits and more closely resembles demand from end users (minus the ~$2 mil market cap Nubits started at.)
There is no proof that the $2MM initial supply was even created by infusing $2MM USD. I suspect barely any of their market cap began as more than: Each nubit = $1 = one breath of air
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Regarding the cause of the high NuBits volume:
NuBits is traded on bter.com. The NuBits devs maintain a bot which trades NuBits on bter, with a very large supply, and low spread. There were thousands of bitcoins worth of nubits available on the ask, and hundreds of bitcoin worth on the bid side. The bot fixed the price of NuBits very close to $1.
On bter, volume in trading bitcoin into USD or CNY is quite low. Most trades there are between bitocin and altcoins. If someone had a large amount of bitcoins on bter during the bitcoin price crash last weekend, and they wanted to hedge their position, they couldnt just sell the bitcoins into cash, wait for what they thought was the bottom, and then buy back. The spread was too large, and the volumes were too low for this to be possible without massive slippage.
However, due to the NuBits bot, and its low spread and high volume, it WAS possible to sell into cash. And people did this. Thousands of BTC worth of volume traded back and forth between BTC and NuBits, with NuBits essentially acting like USD.
This is why NuBits had such high volume.
Takeaways:
A market maker bot operating on a small spread, with a large capacity to buy and sell will do a VERY good job at both enforcing a peg, and providing liquidity! It will be heavily used in the absence of other market makers who are providing liquidity.
I anticipate that there will be a lot of volume in bitUSD as well in the future, once we have a similar market maker bot buying at .995 and selling at 1.005, with hundreds of thousands of bitUSD available on both the bid and ask.
Regarding the cause of the high NuBits volume:
NuBits is traded on bter.com. The NuBits devs maintain a bot which trades NuBits on bter, with a very large supply, and low spread. There were thousands of bitcoins worth of nubits available on the ask, and hundreds of bitcoin worth on the bid side. The bot fixed the price of NuBits very close to $1.
On bter, volume in trading bitcoin into USD or CNY is quite low. Most trades there are between bitocin and altcoins. If someone had a large amount of bitcoins on bter during the bitcoin price crash last weekend, and they wanted to hedge their position, they couldnt just sell the bitcoins into cash, wait for what they thought was the bottom, and then buy back. The spread was too large, and the volumes were too low for this to be possible without massive slippage.
However, due to the NuBits bot, and its low spread and high volume, it WAS possible to sell into cash. And people did this. Thousands of BTC worth of volume traded back and forth between BTC and NuBits, with NuBits essentially acting like USD.
This is why NuBits had such high volume.
Takeaways:
A market maker bot operating on a small spread, with a large capacity to buy and sell will do a VERY good job at both enforcing a peg, and providing liquidity! It will be heavily used in the absence of other market makers who are providing liquidity.
I anticipate that there will be a lot of volume in bitUSD as well in the future, once we have a similar market maker bot buying at .995 and selling at 1.005, with hundreds of thousands of bitUSD available on both the bid and ask.
Fascinating explanation. Thanks for the perspective.
They also had at least some high volume that did not represent market demands because the walls their bots had in place were shifting frequently and crashing into each other during the most volatile period.
Regarding the cause of the high NuBits volume:
NuBits is traded on bter.com. The NuBits devs maintain a bot which trades NuBits on bter, with a very large supply, and low spread. There were thousands of bitcoins worth of nubits available on the ask, and hundreds of bitcoin worth on the bid side. The bot fixed the price of NuBits very close to $1.
On bter, volume in trading bitcoin into USD or CNY is quite low. Most trades there are between bitocin and altcoins. If someone had a large amount of bitcoins on bter during the bitcoin price crash last weekend, and they wanted to hedge their position, they couldnt just sell the bitcoins into cash, wait for what they thought was the bottom, and then buy back. The spread was too large, and the volumes were too low for this to be possible without massive slippage.
However, due to the NuBits bot, and its low spread and high volume, it WAS possible to sell into cash. And people did this. Thousands of BTC worth of volume traded back and forth between BTC and NuBits, with NuBits essentially acting like USD.
This is why NuBits had such high volume.
Takeaways:
A market maker bot operating on a small spread, with a large capacity to buy and sell will do a VERY good job at both enforcing a peg, and providing liquidity! It will be heavily used in the absence of other market makers who are providing liquidity.
I anticipate that there will be a lot of volume in bitUSD as well in the future, once we have a similar market maker bot buying at .995 and selling at 1.005, with hundreds of thousands of bitUSD available on both the bid and ask.
Fascinating explanation. Thanks for the perspective.
They also had at least some high volume that did not represent market demands because the walls their bots had in place were shifting frequently and crashing into each other during the most volatile period.
Park Rates in Effect
No. Blocks Rate Duration 8,192 0.002% 5 days 16 hours
Rates will have to rise way more than 0.002% before they'd be any indicator of the health of the peg. A better metric would be the amount of buy offers for NuBits at the pegged $1 price. Right now, according to the client (which reports via RPC), it's at about USD $140000, spread across a couple different exchanges. This means that, if $140000 of NuBits were suddenly sold, the peg would be in trouble.
If that number goes down, that's bad for the network, but if it goes up, it's a sign of growing demand.
Rates will have to rise way more than 0.002% before they'd be any indicator of the health of the peg. A better metric would be the amount of buy offers for NuBits at the pegged $1 price. Right now, according to the client (which reports via RPC), it's at about USD $140000, spread across a couple different exchanges. This means that, if $140000 of NuBits were suddenly sold, the peg would be in trouble.
If that number goes down, that's bad for the network, but if it goes up, it's a sign of growing demand.
He's saying that changes in the interest rate will be an indicator. The interest rate just increased from 0% to 0.002%; that means maybe the NuShareholders are trying to get people to park, because demand for NuBits is decreasing. Maybe.
The number of buy orders essentially tells you nothing, since we have no idea how much the trading bots have on reserve that they haven't entered as orders. If we could actually see the bots' reserves, we could use that to measure NuBits' health. Right now if $140,000 NuBits were sold, my guess is the bots would immediately throw up another $140,000 of buy orders at the peg.
Rates will have to rise way more than 0.002% before they'd be any indicator of the health of the peg. A better metric would be the amount of buy offers for NuBits at the pegged $1 price. Right now, according to the client (which reports via RPC), it's at about USD $140000, spread across a couple different exchanges. This means that, if $140000 of NuBits were suddenly sold, the peg would be in trouble.
If that number goes down, that's bad for the network, but if it goes up, it's a sign of growing demand.
He's saying that changes in the interest rate will be an indicator. The interest rate just increased from 0% to 0.002%; that means maybe the NuShareholders are trying to get people to park, because demand for NuBits is decreasing. Maybe.
The number of buy orders essentially tells you nothing, since we have no idea how much the trading bots have on reserve that they haven't entered as orders. If we could actually see the bots' reserves, we could use that to measure NuBits' health. Right now if $140,000 NuBits were sold, my guess is the bots would immediately throw up another $140,000 of buy orders at the peg.
Trading bots with "secret" reserves... sounds like a very opaque system.
What kind of buy support does BitUSD have?Well, I decided to do a little research on my own question. Below is a screenshot from just now, from the BTER BitUSD/USD market.
Given the general arrogance of your projectNuBits isn't my project. I'm just here for the trolling. Looks like a success to me. :P
Breaking news!!
Zimbabwe adopted nubits!!!
Thanks to nubits supreme technology, Zimbabwe dollar(from now on known as "nubits") will reach USA dollar parity!!
Those "parking incentive" interest rates are miraculous!!
(http://i.imgur.com/1lUpADO.jpg)
blissful citizens all over the country hurry to park their money...
(http://i.imgur.com/37N4paA.jpg)
Regarding the cause of the high NuBits volume:
NuBits is traded on bter.com. The NuBits devs maintain a bot which trades NuBits on bter, with a very large supply, and low spread. There were thousands of bitcoins worth of nubits available on the ask, and hundreds of bitcoin worth on the bid side. The bot fixed the price of NuBits very close to $1.
On bter, volume in trading bitcoin into USD or CNY is quite low. Most trades there are between bitocin and altcoins. If someone had a large amount of bitcoins on bter during the bitcoin price crash last weekend, and they wanted to hedge their position, they couldnt just sell the bitcoins into cash, wait for what they thought was the bottom, and then buy back. The spread was too large, and the volumes were too low for this to be possible without massive slippage.
However, due to the NuBits bot, and its low spread and high volume, it WAS possible to sell into cash. And people did this. Thousands of BTC worth of volume traded back and forth between BTC and NuBits, with NuBits essentially acting like USD.
This is why NuBits had such high volume.
Takeaways:
A market maker bot operating on a small spread, with a large capacity to buy and sell will do a VERY good job at both enforcing a peg, and providing liquidity! It will be heavily used in the absence of other market makers who are providing liquidity.
I anticipate that there will be a lot of volume in bitUSD as well in the future, once we have a similar market maker bot buying at .995 and selling at 1.005, with hundreds of thousands of bitUSD available on both the bid and ask.
Doing some research into Nubits this afternoon...nice find .. didn't know they reached out to dan
It is funny how Dan tells them (Sunny and Jordan) his pet project in a chat on May 8th (bitUSD) and Nubits was announced on June 5th.. less than one month later. No wonder BM has acted the way he has towards Nubits... I'm certain he believes it's flawed, but the Nubits community has been giving him crap for being "hostile" or "unprofessional". You know what is unprofessional.. when another community reaches out to you to see how you both can help each other out and you go copy their idea, albeit with a flawed implementation... but still THAT is hostile and unprofessional...
http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=2794.0
http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=2923.0
nice find .. didn't know they reached out to dan
Doing some research into Nubits this afternoon...Nubits did not copy the idea of BitUSD,it's nothing like BitUSD at all.
It is funny how Dan tells them (Sunny and Jordan) his pet project in a chat on May 8th (bitUSD) and Nubits was announced on June 5th.. less than one month later. No wonder BM has acted the way he has towards Nubits... I'm certain he believes it's flawed, but the Nubits community has been giving him crap for being "hostile" or "unprofessional". You know what is unprofessional.. when another community reaches out to you to see how you both can help each other out and you go copy their idea, albeit with a flawed implementation... but still THAT is hostile and unprofessional...
http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=2794.0
http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=2923.0
the idea of a stable cryptoasset token and tying the price point to a fiat currency isn't a novel idea.
Edit: typo
Nubits can issue NBT more than America's GDP as long as "the share holder agrees".
Nubits can issue NBT more than America's GDP as long as "the share holder agrees".
You got it wrong. NuNet can generate NBT more than America's GDP as long as "the share holder agrees". Those NBT don't enter circulation unless someone pays $1/NBT to buy or paid out as interest. If they don't enter circulation, for all practical purposes they don't exist.
right.... that goes without saying,because circulation means buy and sell.
Nubits can issue NBT more than America's GDP as long as "the share holder agrees".
You got it wrong. NuNet can generate NBT more than America's GDP as long as "the share holder agrees". Those NBT don't enter circulation unless someone pays $1/NBT to buy or paid out as interest. If they don't enter circulation, for all practical purposes they don't exist.
right.... that goes without saying,because circulation means buy and sell.
You seem to miss the point that a Nubit sold by the bot to enter circulation is backed up by 1 USD cash -- paid by the initial buyer.
I mean that you will need an increasing number of buyers day after day just to buy the new generated from interest nubits, the moment that you will have more nubits generated than the buyers can buy, it will be the moment this ponzi will colapse, the interest rate will rise even more to keep the price down but all those new generated nubits will be even harder to be sold.Fair point, so we worked on a solution to burn NuBits
I mean that you will need an increasing number of buyers day after day just to buy the new generated from interest nubits, the moment that you will have more nubits generated than the buyers can buy, it will be the moment this ponzi will colapse, the interest rate will rise even more to keep the price down but all those new generated nubits will be even harder to be sold.Fair point, so we worked on a solution to burn NuBits
If you are interested it is currently a proposal for NuShareholders to consider. You can find it in our forum (discuss.nubits.org)
I mean that you will need an increasing number of buyers day after day just to buy the new generated from interest nubits, the moment that you will have more nubits generated than the buyers can buy, it will be the moment this ponzi will colapse, the interest rate will rise even more to keep the price down but all those new generated nubits will be even harder to be sold.Fair point, so we worked on a solution to burn NuBits
If you are interested it is currently a proposal for NuShareholders to consider. You can find it in our forum (discuss.nubits.org)
Just when I thought you little OlBugs were all removed ... :)
Stan吹牛逼 牛逼破了If you saw what brian+cass+marketing bros were up to I think you'd be ok with waiting another month or so before a "big" push. I hate vague promises of "something big is coming", but actually...
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
We will quickly start loosing our launch benefit window for marketing by the end of Sept IMO. I hope whatever they have cooking is VERY substantial. Enough to overcome this lost opportunity.
+5%
Relax and enjoy the chance to spend one more paycheck at these prices. ;)
The window they plan to open is to a whole new world of users who have never even heard of coinmarketcap.(http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20050809073106/memoryalpha/en/images/thumb/9/94/Crew_observes_the_american_revolution.jpg/180px-Crew_observes_the_american_revolution.jpg)
This, in turn, will place BTSX at #2 on coinmarketcap and constitute the real cryptogeek "launch benefit window" you are talking about.
"Roads? Where we're going they don't need roads!"
(http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/2013-10/enhanced/webdr03/28/21/anigif_enhanced-buzz-19236-1383009679-5.gif)
Stan吹牛逼 牛逼破了If you saw what brian+cass+marketing bros were up to I think you'd be ok with waiting another month or so before a "big" push. I hate vague promises of "something big is coming", but actually...
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
We will quickly start loosing our launch benefit window for marketing by the end of Sept IMO. I hope whatever they have cooking is VERY substantial. Enough to overcome this lost opportunity.
+5%
Relax and enjoy the chance to spend one more paycheck at these prices. ;)
The window they plan to open is to a whole new world of users who have never even heard of coinmarketcap.(http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20050809073106/memoryalpha/en/images/thumb/9/94/Crew_observes_the_american_revolution.jpg/180px-Crew_observes_the_american_revolution.jpg)
This, in turn, will place BTSX at #2 on coinmarketcap and constitute the real cryptogeek "launch benefit window" you are talking about.
"Roads? Where we're going they don't need roads!"
(http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/2013-10/enhanced/webdr03/28/21/anigif_enhanced-buzz-19236-1383009679-5.gif)
NuShares just listed separately on the main coinmarketcap page, but they share a blockchain with NuBits right?This is correct, and I agree. NBT (the pegged asset) and BitUSD (the pegged asset) really ought to be on the same page.
If that's the case we would have a higher chance of getting BitUSD on the main page now too.
Since i have found nubits i can sleep again. i have 50 % btc and 50 % nubits and it's always the same in usd. and if btc is rising or falling like an idiot so i sell or by some btc or nubits. And it works. Hope both btc and nubits live long.
Since i have found nubits i can sleep again. i have 50 % btc and 50 % nubits and it's always the same in usd. and if btc is rising or falling like an idiot so i sell or by some btc or nubits. And it works. Hope both btc and nubits live long.when you find the next big thing... let us known...