2326
General Discussion / Re: BitShares X vs emunie
« on: January 30, 2014, 11:12:50 pm »
The friends in your example would be new buyers/demand?
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.
How does Keyhotee relate / compare to KryptoKit?
I guess not everyone is impressed by the ... http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/01/28/bitcoin-conference-miami/
Ad- and disadvantages to the fixed 5% meme. Attracts attention but can come across as ponzi. It's like going all in at poker. If you are 100% sure you can guarentee the 5% you may surprise and convince like bitcoin did. If you have to step back from it you might loose credit... All you need is trust and people dont trust things that are too good to be true.... In my opinion it is definitely not a good idea if you are not 100% sure yet that it's gonna be 5%
Actually I am 100% sure the first one will be 5%, hard coded into the block chain.
I guess not everyone is impressed by the ... http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/01/28/bitcoin-conference-miami/
Apart form legal considerations...
What about the possibility of shorting shares of a company via Bitshares and then attacking that company in the real world making the price of the company's shares drop? Due to the anonymous nature of BTS the attacker with his short position could get away with it and take huge profits... Think of airlines. Of course it is bluntly criminal but would Bitshares allow to take profits form this criminal actions and therefore provide incentives to do so? What is stopping anyone from doing this if Bitshares works?
I actually do not believe this is criminal or immoral the act of going short in the first place signals to the market that new information suggests the price should be lower. Imagine what would happen if investors had to discount news until it was verified because everyone knows this kind of attack is possible. It would create a profit opportunity for everyone who isn't suckered into the attack (which I presume is a false attack full of lies). In effect, the market can handle these kinds of manipulations when people are not lulled into complacency that some regulatory body can outlaw this kind of behavior...
In other words this kind of attack only works in markets where people are not fact checking and instead trusting regulators. The result of the regulators is that these types of attacks still occur and are in fact far more successful.
What about the possibility of shorting shares of a company via Bitshares and then attacking that company in the real world making the price of the company shares drop? Due to the anonymous nature of BTS the attacker with his short position could get away with it and take huge profits... Think of airlines....I think it is not possible because on Bitshares such a share is not real share but only CFD.
CFD is something like bet on price.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_for_difference
Would it make sense for I3 to merge AGS and PTS after donation period is over?
As I said in the other thread, in future, I3 MAY list the AGS in cryptostocks or something similar and make them tradeable; awarding shares to the accounts in that 'exchange'.
Delulo - I know you are not too in favour of AGS due to they being unsellable. But look at it this way - do you believe the PTS shares in the future DACs will make it so expensive that you are willing to write off the extra BTSX earned now through AGS? Remember, in future, the DACs will allot upto 80% through other means, so its not as if PTS is the only way to gain them. In fact, it may even turn out that PTS price goes down while BTSX price goes up after BTSX release.
The point is that there is no easy answer - its all wildly speculative. Hence, IMO its best to spread out among both.
Quote... and tbh I secretly think people in the future (not invictus) would honor PTS but not AGS.
Why?
Well...
People will be able to buy PTS later. Whereas AGS to my understanding can only be acquired during the AGS funding period. Furthermore the AGS funding is controlled by III.
If I were developing a DAC I could acquire PTS and only honor PTS in the launch of my DAC, viewing AGS as dilution of my new DAC holdings.
Is this actually the case? I don't know.
I would imagine that having both AGS & PTS holders would strengthen my DAC's ecosystem by increasing the number of shareholders. Simultaneously I imagine that most AGS holders also hold PTS, so perhaps my equity in the DAC would be diluted without really increasing the number of people who have a stake in the DAC.
... and tbh I secretly think people in the future (not invictus) would honor PTS but not AGS.