Here's what I don't get then.
If UIAs are preferred, then really, what is the advantage to get OPEN.EUR, TRADE.EUR or META.EUR (if it exists) versus simply leaving an EUR balance at a centralized exchange and not buying any crypto with it?
One might answer "these tokens are on the blockchain!" .. to which I'd answer, yeah but so what?
Now everyone knows my balance instead of just the centralized service.
It seems clear to me that if we have all these UIAs floating around, and they're (much) easier to get than the Smartcoin, then people will just hold these instead of the Smartcoins.. we are then left in a situation where there are dozens of tokens representing pretty much the same thing, they don't trade against each other (wanna get in through A and out through B? sorry, not possible, at least not in a straightforward way)
Is any of this then that much different from Paypal? I don't think so.
And note that I'm not saying metaexchange and blocktrades etc shouldn't exist.. but do you see the point?
From what I'm reading here, the DEX is not used and smartcoins are not used and holding centralized tokens that'll be worthless should the company behind them decide to disappear tomorrow .. is seen as perfectly acceptable indefinitely rather than a temporary necessary evil (if I got the gist of the replies right... correct me if that's not the case)
What's the appeal for the platform, then?
Well, as Marty McFly once said, "History is gonna change."
Just because most people are content to trust centralized tokens now, does not mean that will continue to be true in the coming collapse. When the flight to safety starts, the value proposition of autonomously tracking the value of external assets without counterparty risk goes through the roof.
Patience.
In the meantime, the chain does need other reasons for people to use it. Lots are being discussed.
One of my favorites is the concept of DPOS sidechains that BM has spent the past three Mumbles discussing.
If DPOS nodes are collectively trusted enough to secure a single asset then they can hold all coins just like a single exchange does. This is the true exchange on a block chain. Right now we are using only half of the concept:
Half 1: The trading engine and native tokens are secured on the chain.
Half 2: Actual BTC, DOGE, etc. are still held by centralized exchanges. Why?
The new side chain concept uses those existing witness nodes to do Half 2 as well. Why not? We trust them under DPOS consensus to secure the most important digital asset in the world, BTS. Why can't we trust them to do the centralized exchanges job of collectively holding our BTC and DOGE for us too?
Only then will be have a fully decentralized exchange... and unification of all blockchains on a financial superhighway as a byproduct.
With this approach the uber-trusted witness nodes themselves can issue light-speed "claim check" tokens for all the other real chain token they are holding in multi-sig escrow. Just like banks used to issue much more portable receipts for gold in their vaults. People quit redeeming those receipts for real metal and just kept passing them around - trusting paper because they new the could redeem them if they wanted to.
DPOS lets us do this traditional bank function so much better! And we have real BTC and Doge in our witness vaults!
This is the holy grail that takes BitShares to the next level. It is the killer meta-app that only BitShares is in a position to offer.
As this catches on, BitShares witnesses will become the most trusted and therefore biggest holders of all other currencies.
What? You're trusting your coins to the owner of a single exchange company with no supervision by other independent cosigners? Really?