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 - matt608

Pages: 1 ... 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
751
General Discussion / Re: Proposal to Resolve a Million Issues at Once
« on: October 19, 2014, 12:22:11 pm »
I like the sound of this but there's some things I'm not clear on.

My understanding:

This is about I3's focus.  I3 launches dacs.  All I3 dacs use the same core business model of Bitshares of issuing shares and promoting a stable bitasset which is created though collateralized shorting.  Even though dacs may be in completely different industries (voting, banking), because they all work by promoting a bitasset(s) they end up being in competition, when really it's better that they work together on bitasset promotion, and compete with their real competitors which are other companies in their industry, e.g BTSX is competing with banks, VOTE is competing with other voting systems, not each other. 

What I don't understand:

 - Is the VOTE dac an independent dac (like peertracks) or does this merger give BTSX holders a stake in it?  Or does VOTE cease to exist as a dac and its features just become something Bitshares can do?
 - Does this mean there will be 1 Bitshares blockchain?  All bitassets will be collateralized by the same shares, no competing chains apart from with independent dacs?
 - Will I3 release new dacs? Or because their work will now be on the same blockchain, these new dacs are actually just new features?
 - Should there be a contract written up between i3 and the Bitshares blockchain so ensure they can't launch any competing chains with competing bitassets? (maybe a stupid idea I don't know).
 - In the future, will stakeholders vote on which features they want I3 to work on?

If my understanding is wrong please correct me.

752
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0
« on: October 18, 2014, 09:00:30 pm »
What if there was a payment processor dac who's sole purpose was to allow merchants to accept all versions of bitUSD, or even better, all bitassets across all dacs via a single process.  That would be a way to peg the bitUSDs together as they would all be able to be exchanged for $1 of value with the merchant.  This payment processor dac releases shares.  They make money by taking a tiny fee (like bitpay) from the transaction, and/or they could charge a fee to accept another bitasset (from any dac) to be accepted by their network.

This way there would be no need for dacs to market directly to merchants to take only their bitasset, it would be mutually beneficial for all dacs to promote the payment processor dac to merchants rather than their individual bitasset.  This way if vote-bitUSD scores a big merchant, we all win, and if BTSX-bitUSD scores a big merchant, we all win too. 

All the value of the base assets ultimately comes from the faith of the investors in the success of the bitasset of that dac.  If we create a payment processor party dac that where if everyone uses that system it works better for everyone, then everyone will use that system because it lowers risk for all parties.

What if a dac promoties its own bitassets to merchants outside of the payment processor dac?

- It seems unlikely to happen much, the dacs are in very different niches, other than currency competition they are not in competition at all.  There's much more in it to be gained to just promote the bitasset payment processor than do it all themselves.  As well as a desire to generate good will between dacs.
 - A dac going 'rogue' and promting its bitassets to a large degree directly outside of the payment processor dac could be voted out by stakeholders of the payment processor shares perhaps? 


As this payment processor dac grows there becomes more and more incentive for dacs to keep using it because its payment network gets bigger and bigger.  The fee for bitasset signup could be increased perhaps as it grows to help the payment processor grow more and help the whole network of dacs. 


753
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0
« on: October 18, 2014, 06:51:49 pm »
From this thread:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=8527.msg115513#msg115513

Quote from: arhag on September 10, 2014, 09:09:21 pm
My guess is that BitShares X will keep the BitAssets meant for spending on "real world" goods/services, while BitAssets on other DACs will be kept only to pay for that DAC's "digital" services. This way DACs would all accept the BitAssets on their own blockchain for payment of services (they have to), but everyone else in the real world would still accept the BitShares X BitAssets for payment (so there shouldn't be any confusion).


Quote from: oco101 on September 14, 2014, 07:34:31 pm
The market makers in each chain they still need a certain depth before they can even provide liquidity. So there will be DAC's that will not have enough market depth to be able to mint bitUSD so what I think Darwinian Natural Selection will apply. If a DAC could not reach the market depth required it means that DAC business model is not good and there is not enough interests in it, or there need more marketing etc. Like for the brick and mortar company, only the one that are successful will survive (unlike the altcoins out there ) 
Being able to mint bitUSD it will be the equivalent of having a IPO of sorts.

Ok so basically the bitshares dac business model is:
1.  IPO/raising funds (with unpegged 'base asset' e.g. BTSX)
2.  Issue bitasset(s) (pegged)
3.  Generate demand for bitasset(s) by creating a popular service where they must be used.

Usually that asset will be a single currency which must be used on the dacs website.  A currency they have every interest in promoting to other merchants.  So arhags guess (quoted above) is not correct, especially seeing as the VOTE dac's bitUSD is getting its own debit card too.

Other dacs will market their bitUSD to merchants, this can't be prevented.  Different merchants will accept different types of bitUSD and they will be confused and so will users of those various bitUSD, they wont know if a place accepts it or not.  So how does merchant acceptance of multiple bitUSDs work? 

A bitUSD you can't spend anywhere wont be fungible with a bitUSD you can spend in lots of places.  How can they maintain the same value?  They are competing bitUSDs, there's no way around it.

754
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0
« on: October 18, 2014, 04:51:29 pm »
Quote from: Graffenwalder on October 18, 2014, 04:47:13 pm


I guess the next step in evolution would be to fork VOTE, with a distribution that would satisfy/compensate BTSX holders

lol, yeah fork all the dacs, run all of them on one blockchain, all issuing bitassets in a global mega-dac and take over the world.  Shareholders could vote on whether to inflate the supply to fund the development of a new business to run on the dac.  There's gotta be 100 different ways of selling bitUSD.  Just do them all on one chain via 100 different businesses. 


755
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0
« on: October 18, 2014, 04:34:35 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on October 18, 2014, 04:07:47 pm
Quote from: tbkmcjl on October 18, 2014, 04:03:51 pm
how will the outside world identify all kinds of BitUSD ?

A:Do you have a account that accepts BitUSD ?
B:Of course.here,XYZ. (BTSX-wallet)
A:(using VOTE wallet to send BitUSD to XYZ).....Failed.
B:What's wrong?Why can't you send BitUSD to me?Oh,yours is vote-usd。。。。。you need to use ACCT to turn your BitUSD on vote into BitUSD on BTSX and then transfer to me ?

Why are people so panicking!? you are cross chain trading all the time when you do a wire transfer from your local bank account to another bank account
or transfer funds to you credit card ...

Quote from: oco101 on October 18, 2014, 04:16:18 pm
A:Do you have a account that accepts BitUSD ?
B:Of course.here,XYZ. (BTSX-wallet)
A:(because there is no way to send to bitUSD to a diffrent chain without ACCT by default, this type of transfer, will be ACCT ) using VOTE wallet to send BitUSD to XYZ ... Success

Different dacs could have different collateralization rules could't they? And varying quality of dev teams, varying strength of DPOS etc.  So 1 bitUSD backed by BTSX is different to 1 bitUSD backed by vote.  Because what gives bitUSD is value is its redeem-ability for BTSX, and what gives BTSX its value is investors faith in the project as a whole, which will be different for every dac.  Another DAC issuing bitUSD exposes BTSX holders to risk, what if that dac collapses and the good name of bitUSD is tarnished?  They're pretending it's the same product when it's not.

Another point, bitUSD is a great name, shouldn't other dacs call their currency something else?  It's pretty cheeky to fork someone's product and name it the exact same thing isn't it? (unless it's somehow mutually beneficial, I'm still trying to figure out if it is or not).  But if they name it something else how can it remain market pegged as the name is the key for that working?

What if I launched a ratty arse dac with 5% collateral (vs BTSXs 200%) and issued bitUSD, can that then be 'atomically cross chain traded' and exchanged for BTSX? 

This leads to the conclusion that bitUSD is only as strong as it's weakest issuing dac, and it's weakest dac can be made deliberately weak as an attack vector.  Unless the bitUSD all being joined up via acct means it wouldn't collapse in the event of a black swan on one of the dacs, maybe it would actually be stronger.

Either way it the competing bitUSD of VOTE is a very harmful force for BTSX.  BTSXers should be snapshotted in imo.

This is a bit over my head so I could be getting this all wrong. 


756
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0
« on: October 18, 2014, 03:45:06 pm »
If there was a way to combine the bitUSDs so it's effectively backed by the shares in all the dacs then that would make the whole system more stable wouldn't it?  At the moment bitUSD is backed only by BTSX, if it could be backed by BTSX, NOTE, VOTE etc it would get stronger and stronger and help protect all users from systemic failure (black swan event that causing flash crash in one of the dacs share price). 

I'm not sure if atomic cross-chain trading is the answer as I don't understand on a technical level. 


757
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0
« on: October 18, 2014, 03:21:24 pm »
Quote from: oco101 on October 18, 2014, 02:24:07 pm


The reason to have bitUSD is the same like in Music. If you have an account open and you put 10 dollars that are converted in Notes, the problem is NOTES fluctuates so 1 month later his 10 dollars in his account are not anymore 10 $. So every chain absolutely needs bitUSD(or bitCurrency) if not we go back to original problem : stability.



But bitUSD is already stable, there's no need for more versions of it to be launched in every dac for the sake of stability. The real reason for launching a new bitUSD the funding model.  The vote dac probably needs it's bitUSD to become popular to be able to make its shares become more valuable, just like Bitshares-X and peertracks, rendering them all competitors.  The Vote dac could get hired by the government for an election and BTSX holders wouldn't gain a bean.  bitUSD could take off around the world, but if that bitUSD is issued by peertracks or the vote dac, BTSX holders get nothing.


758
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0
« on: October 18, 2014, 09:35:43 am »
If the Vote dac used BTSX's bitUSD that would be fine, brilliant idea, launch more dacs that use bitassets.  Great way to increase demand.   I don't know why that's not the plan :s

759
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0
« on: October 18, 2014, 09:17:05 am »
Quote from: tbkmcjl on October 18, 2014, 09:14:58 am


Hongkong has multiple banks issue their version of HONGKONG DOLLOR.
Over the years,all the version of the HONGKONG DOLLOR still exist together peacefully.And none of them has the less value than the others.
As long as 1 BTSX-USD = 1 VOTE-USD,the benefit is mutual for both system.
It's not drawing blood when they're in the same ecosystem.
And I don't think some payment service would use "vote-bitusd" to issue a debit card instead of the BTSX-bitusd.

Not true because when bitUSD which is backed by BTSX is bought it directly increases the value of BTSX.  A competing bitUSD on another blockchain is not a good idea and harms BTSX.  It's a direct attack, forking the main product of BTSX.

760
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0
« on: October 18, 2014, 09:13:35 am »
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on October 18, 2014, 09:09:33 am
Quote from: matt608 on October 18, 2014, 09:01:06 am
It's not very encouraging when the leader of the project you've invested in says the project is "hamstrung" and "limited growth potential" and now reveals this vote dac he's working on instead (with some unknown amount of transferable tech) will a have its own bitUSD rather than using bitshare's X bitUSD, which, if this was really about a way to fund BTSX would be an obvious move surely, as that directly increases the value of BTSX.  Why does it need its own bitUSD?


The product you have donated to and the marketing strategy for it is being forked by the lead developer in a project not directly snapshotted off BTSX.

Now that's an idea, if the Vote Dac snapshotted BTSX holders a portion of the shares, that would be ok.

761
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0
« on: October 18, 2014, 09:01:06 am »
It's not very encouraging when the leader of the project you've invested in says the project is "hamstrung" and "limited growth potential" and now reveals this vote dac he's working on instead (with some unknown amount of transferable tech) will a have its own bitUSD rather than using bitshare's X bitUSD, which, if this was really about a way to fund BTSX would be an obvious move surely, as that directly increases the value of BTSX.  Why does it need its own bitUSD? 

Also there have been numerous offers by btsx holders to raise funds for btsx. If more funds would be useful then lets do a fundraiser. 

762
General Discussion / Re: Closing PTS would limit the growth of our community in the future
« on: October 17, 2014, 06:36:00 pm »
Quote from: Pheonike on October 17, 2014, 06:34:46 pm
If they want exposure to future DACS then they can buy and hold BTSX.

How does holding BTSX expose its holders to future DACs?

763
General Discussion / Re: Our most immediate needs: a good wallet
« on: October 17, 2014, 04:46:52 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on October 17, 2014, 04:42:37 pm
Quote from: matt608 on October 17, 2014, 04:38:33 pm
I've heard talk of bitUSD being marketed as a savings account, in which case there needs to be a wallet just for bitUSD, and a wallet just for bitCNY (as the main two bitassets for now).  May help if the wallet resembles an online banking account for ease of use + trust.
AFAIK that's the whole purpose of having a 'simple' wallet .. and if I had to guess it will not include a market .. as there will be a SECOND whole new trading software released for that TOO!

Cool, just went I looked at the bitsapphire screenshots it looked like a wallet for lots of bitassets (with no market), rather than a wallet for a single bitasset.

764
General Discussion / Re: Our most immediate needs: a good wallet
« on: October 17, 2014, 04:38:33 pm »
I've heard talk of bitUSD being marketed as a savings account, in which case there needs to be a wallet just for bitUSD, and a wallet just for bitCNY (as the main two bitassets for now).  May help if the wallet resembles an online banking account for ease of use + trust.

765
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting
« on: October 17, 2014, 04:10:44 pm »
Quote from: fluxer555 on October 17, 2014, 03:20:57 pm
I just wanted to thank everyone here for the enlightening conversations on consciousness, especially bytemaster, matt608, and CLains, and BldSwtTrs.

Quote from: BldSwtTrs on October 16, 2014, 09:00:02 am
If you control the reality why aren't you living in a world which is closer to heaven than the one you are right know? Why have you chosen to create pain, poverty, wars, ebola, etc?

I think we should all be asking ourselves this question.

Life may be the ultimate fantasy.  Real relationships, real struggle, real adversity, real victory, real emotions, real highs and lows.  From mortal terror to divine love, life has it all.  If you just sat around in a bliss-puddle in heaven eventually you would get bored and start fantasising and loose yourself in the dream of life.  We could be in these limited forms for fun and self-edification.

Ultimately though I think existence is pointless, in a beautiful and liberating way, which means we are free to do anything. There's no pressure to do anything at all, not even to keep living.  It's voluntary.  No one paid anything to be born.  Life is free.  The Universe or super-consiousness is infinitely rich.  The source of all wealth, is us, we are wealth itself, and life itself and many other things.  The imaginary authorities of our psyche's keep us living between the lines, when really, anything goes.  Hence the saying "if you meet buddha, kill him", because if you meet buddha, it means you think you are not buddha.

I could start wearing socks on my hands on Tuesdays and start a morning ritual of pouring buckets of sand over my head for no reason at all, Whatcha gonna do? lol. Doing completely pointless stuff is freedom and we're already doing it all the time.

This is a totally brilliant talk on the matter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBV9wr2k8ys&list=UUeYOS3W6aVelr9x2zHqITyg

Pages: 1 ... 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 23 queries.