The best I can come up with for getting yield to work is that delegates decide an interest rate that is then enforced by the blockchain somehow.

This interest would be paid by inflation, which isn't really a net gain of wealth, since money supply grows at the same rate that your balance grows. In the current system, the interest is paid by the shorting parties, which does not inflate supply. Key difference.

This proposed change deeply concerns me. I am not convinced this won't break the peg. Specifically, it seems there is no longer any guarantee that you can sell your BitUSD at the price feed within 30 days, since new shorts can always be created that undercut you.

New shorts can always be created that undercut you? Please extrapolate on this idea.

EDIT: Ah, the holder of the expiring short can issue a new asset to themselves, and close their old short with it, and you never get the chance to sell your at BitUSD at feed price to that person? Am I on track?

Is there a possibility of an attack wherein 51% of delegates decide to misreport a price feed much much too low, triggering a black swan for their own benefit? For example, by buying BitUSD before the attack, and liquidating during the event, for an outsized amount of BTS? What kind of profit could be made by delegates acting in this way (3x their investment, perhaps)?

If a majority can collude in a highly profitable way, it is naive to expect that they never will, simply because such an action would require a majority.

id: chr

Toast, as he's taken extra time to answer newbie questions around the forums. Thanks!

Quote from: Chronos on February 06, 2015, 10:10:06 pm

Would the black swan event described in this post result in the liquidation of all BitUSD in existence? Is it possible for any BitUSD to survive the margin call? What about other BitAssets -- can a black swan event liquidate BitUSD but leave BitGold untouched?

A black swan event could negatively effect bitUSD and at the same time positively effect bitGOLD and/or other bitAssets (ie. such as a huge unexpected devaluation of the USD).

That doesn't quite answer my questions, but I don't mean any arbitrary black swan event. I mean a BTS black swan as described in the blog post. This one:

---

"In order to break BitUSD the value of BitShares would have to fall by 67% in a market where no one was willing to sell enough BitUSD to allow all existing shorts to cover. For all practical purposes this fall would have to occur over just a few days, in thin markets, with no expectation for a rebound in value."

I found the cause.

Someone got scammed on the NBT/BTC pair on CCEDK exchange. They thought they were buying NBT for 0.004493201 BTC each, but there was no sell wall from NuBot, so they paid 0.04493201 BTC instead, and they spent 1.89 BTC. This means they tried to buy $420 of NBT and received only $42 worth. Ouch!

Because of this trade (there was more than one, but this was the largest), CMC thought NBT were worth $10 each. That skewed all NBT trading pairs, market caps, and volumes by 10 times, which is why the NBT volume showed as $1.5M instead of $150 000. That's also why it showed NSR as being worth many times more than reality, because of NSR/NBT pairs with NBT valued at $10.

Well, I hit Create New Account and registered it, and then I noticed I could have renamed the old one. Is there any way to delete the old unregistered account from my local wallet? Thanks.

The first release will not contain this feature, but it is planned.