Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - yvv

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ... 80
151
Quote
Despite technical hurdles, OpenLedger should still simplify this process for laymen. Taxes affect most people and sooner or later most of them will have to deal with the subject. I think such problems limit the growth of OpenLedger and bitshares.

It may be very difficult for one company to provide a tax service for every possible jurisdiction. However, export of history based on simple filters should be provided as a built into client feature or as a stand alone tool. This is a high demand feature. 100 records is not enough to prepare a tax form.



152

For those of you worried that this would damage the value of BTS I disagree because all fees will still ultimately be paid in BTS even when paying or collateralising in SIDE.BTC

It is all set up such that you need to be bullish on BTS to use the DEX. This is not good, because this cuts off many traders who are not bullish on BTS. Ideally, a user should be able to use the DEX without keeping any BTS at all, just like on other exchanges, you don't give a crap how much their stocks cost, you just use their platform for trading, saving etc. BTS would serve only as a proof of stake for voting in this case and as an internal currency. Even the reserve fund could be easily diversified into a portfolio of top 100 coins, such that development funding would not depend on BTS price.

153
Quote
I have also signed two NDAs, but I'm not going to disclose with whom or on what terms, they're called non-disclosure for a reason, you know

This is right. It is strange that some people don't get this.

If this is a problem, we could require candidates for committee/witness positions to sign an agreement not to make any NDAs in the future, however, this could create more pita than we want.

to sign a NDA to not sign NDAs? :]

Yes!1 Let's make it crazy :)

154

If it is possible to use BTC (via the trustless gateway) as collateral for smartcoins, BitShares will provide a trustless way to enter a leveraged long BTC position. You can simply borrow bitUSD against BTC and sell the borrowed bitUSD for more BTC. You have entered a leveraged long BTC position, while providing additional bitUSD supply. I imagine demand for that would be huge, which would drastically improve liquidity for all smartcoins.


I agree, this would be a great improvement for bitshares. Volatile collateral is a weak point of MPA. BTC is as volatile as BTS, but they are not completely correlated, so if we could chose which coin to deposit in collateral, that would greatly reduce the risk of shorting.

155
Quote
I have also signed two NDAs, but I'm not going to disclose with whom or on what terms, they're called non-disclosure for a reason, you know

This is right. It is strange that some people don't get this.

If this is a problem, we could require candidates for committee/witness positions to sign an agreement not to make any NDAs in the future, however, this could create more pita than we want.

156

 So why would this project "go to the moon" after EOS? Could anyone explain that to me?

It will not. It will become obsolete. Which is great, because then we can switch to better platform.

So why bother at all to try and improve it if it becomes obsolete next year?
I am seriously worried. I am a fan of bitshares and am doing what i can to contribute, but that's just disheartening.

This is a very valid concern. For now, there is no alternative to bitshares, and since we use it, we need to improve it to make it more useful.  But if you want to build a long term business on blockchain, you have to think twice, and at least have in plans how you migrate when another, more advanced blockchain comes out.

157

 So why would this project "go to the moon" after EOS? Could anyone explain that to me?

It will not. It will become obsolete. Which is great, because then we can switch to better platform.

158


and it's still nothing they can work on right now.

Not a fact.
Current Bitshares functionality will need to be implemented as an EOS native smart contract. This work can start now.

We don't know, may be Larimer's team is already working on this right now.

159
General Discussion / Re: DEX comparison: Bitshares.org vs Etherdelta.com
« on: October 24, 2017, 04:53:11 pm »
Also, they say that Etherdelta does not actually do automated order matching like bitshares. Not sure if this is true or not.

160
General Discussion / Re: DEX comparison: Bitshares.org vs Etherdelta.com
« on: October 24, 2017, 04:51:02 pm »
Quote
Example: a transfer in bts is 0.22 bts which if bts is trading for 5 cents is 1.1 cents.

Order create is 0.0121 BTS. This is what you mostly pay, when you trade.

161
General Discussion / Re: DEX comparison: Bitshares.org vs Etherdelta.com
« on: October 24, 2017, 02:10:07 am »
Etherdelta was created specially for exchange between ERC20 tokens and ETH, because ERC20 tokens are not always listed on other exchanges. Reviews say that it is pita to use etherdelta, because ETH blockchain is slow and expensive. Never used it myself though.


162
General Discussion / Re: Marketing efforts
« on: October 23, 2017, 05:22:11 pm »
What about the margin trading? What's wrong with it?

Currently, you can be margin called even if you have enough balance to cover your entire debt in your account, because  MPA contract is not smart enough to be aware that no debt exists until bitAsset is transferred from the issuing account. To close your position, you need to add funds on top of your 2x collateral first, which is nonsense. and if you have, say, 1000 USD worth of BTS in your account, and you want to short bitUSD, you need to issue 500 bitUSD, sell them, add BTS to collateral manually, issue 250 bitUSD more, sell, ..., keep repeating this infinite number of times until you get old and die. This is not how shorting should work. You should be able to go ahead and put 1000 bitUSD sell order on bitUSD/BTS market. Alternatively, you could put 500 bitUSD order on any other market or send them to your friend. Or, you could put 800 bitUSD sell order on bitUSD/BTS market and send another 100 bitUSD to your friend at the same time. In all these cases your position would be covered by 2x collateral all the time, because bitUSD which is sitting in a limit order is not your debt, and when the order is (partially) taken, a smart contract which is really smart would top up the collateral as needed. This is how shorting works on other exchanges.

I repeat myself, decentralized margin trading is an awesome idea, and a greatest selling point of bitshares. It should be advertised proactively, because people trade on margin like crazy on other exchanges, which indicates that a huge demand exists. But, it would be easier to convince everybody to switch to DEX if the major flaws were fixed.

163
General Discussion / Re: OpenLedger propose Bitshares 3.0 enhancements
« on: October 23, 2017, 01:25:20 pm »
Quote
The strategic goal of OpenLedger is to create such a platform which will outpace the competition and allow for the creation of a truly decentralized and trusted digital economy.

Greate! Than why don't you start with improving your gateway, because there are quite a lot of complains in this forum. If you could provide a gateway between bitAssets and their underlying assets, that would be great too.

164
General Discussion / Re: Marketing efforts
« on: October 22, 2017, 02:56:49 pm »
I don't know much about marketing. Not far ago I've seen on steemit one guy called bitshares "a Lamborghini in a farm barn". I feel exactly the same way. We have a car with a super advanced turbo charged engine which lacks a finish layer of paint, has bolts and nuts loose and full of cow crap inside. How do you want to market such a car? I don't see any way to sell it, but to finish paint, fix all loose parts and to clean up all shit.

Finally, we have a GUI which has a nice overview page (it was a shame before the last update not only buy its look, but by content too). This is a good progress, but there are still so many little flaws to fix. The biggest one imo is a margin trading. The idea of decentralized margin trading is brilliant, but current implementation on BTS is flawed, I insist on this, and this is one of the reasons why whales don't want to put their money into issuing bitAssets. I don't believe that a bunch of amateur enthusiasts, like most of us are, are able to fix this. This is a job for professionals who have experience in building traditional trading platforms. I know that the DEX by its nature is very different from forex etc, but it has to be at least not worse than traditional platforms by user experience to attract traders with big money.  This is not possible to achieve without special skills which developers of traditional finance platforms have. We need to get such people onboard.

165

You didn't fix it, you suggested an alternative. lower collateral requirements might incentivise shorters but it would make BitUSD less safe.

Less safe, but probably still safe enough to not worry. It all depends on details of implementation. Who said that safety threshold is at MCR=1.75? Why not 1.5? Still far above 1.

At the moment, there are only two MPAs with relatively big supply - bitUSD and bitCNY. What about decreasing MCR for these two in small decrements, e.g. 0.05 every 6 months? Both bitUSD and bitCNY survived latest big price decrease, after hard fork it would be even safer.

 +5% I would support such gradual decrease, after black swan revival is online.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ... 80