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 - JonnyB

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [29] 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 ... 43
421
For simplicity once the order is placed on the books at +10% maybe it should be left there. Trying to adjust it adds un needed complexity.
even if the order isn't executed for months it will still be good for the system as it adds depth.

Simple is best. Perhaps the committee should collect and sell the fees on the first day of every month and leave them there.
This would make it simple for the rest of us to quickly audit what has happened.

422
Why 10% above the peg?

I would have thought more like 2%? Or are you going to start at 10 and move closer to the peg if they don't get bought?

if the don't get bought they sit there on the order book and add depth

423
Yes I fully agree with what Akado is saying.
A first step would be to sell the fee pool reserves in to the markets at feed +10%

Could the committee please inform us of what it has planned to increase liquidity in the near term?

424
General Discussion / Please vote out Bitcrab if you care about bitshares.
« on: January 28, 2016, 04:46:29 pm »
Please vote out Bitcrab if you care about bitshares.

He has too much power, and is getting use of an exchanges votes.
He previously bullied the committee in to suspending forced settlement because he'd done his own maths wrong.
He is very pushy and I think he needs less votes.

425
General Discussion / Re: OBITS HODLERs, your money is in danger.
« on: January 28, 2016, 04:33:47 pm »
Please vote out Bitcrab if you care about bitshares.

He has too much power, and is getting use of an exchanges votes.
He previously bullied the committee in to suspending forced settlement because he's done his maths wrong.
He is very pushy and I think he needd less votes.

426
General Discussion / Re: poll for the "1 BTS for transfer" proposal
« on: January 28, 2016, 04:24:59 pm »
Can we just take this to voting and get done with it please? I think we need @kenCode , @ccedk, @JonnyBitcoin and @monsterer / @Shentist  to tell us if they agree/disagree with this and the impact it would have to their businesses so everyone gets enlightened. Wasn't Metaexchange thinking about the possibility to migrate to BitShares? How would this affect you?

Then finally vote and get this done with. We have already lost too many time to this kind of discussions instead of addressing other important matters.

If we only dedicated so much time to find new ways to provide liquidity instead of insisting on this matter, I'm sure we would already have figured something out. Instead, we're constantly beating the same stuff over and over again..

@Akado  Totally agree with you here, we waste too much time on little things like this, I think fees are fine how they are now. 
We really need to prioritise what are the most important things (liquidity)
I'm always bringing it up but nothing ever gets done. Can't the committee just sell the trade fees in to the market. that would be a start.

427
General Discussion / Re: poll for the "1 BTS for transfer" proposal
« on: January 28, 2016, 07:20:37 am »
Just leave the fees as they are.


428
General Discussion / Re: Radical ideas for liquidity
« on: January 27, 2016, 10:05:15 pm »
Maybe the committee could create and offer the main gateways a straight swap for their existing IOUBTCs to BitBTC.



429
General Discussion / Re: Radical ideas for liquidity
« on: January 27, 2016, 08:42:20 pm »
"Abandon all smartcoins except BitUSD to drive liquidity to it and then think about adding another smartcoin in a years time."
Definitely NOT. We don't use Dollars over here in Europe and neither does China.
 
The POS systems need AT LEAST those top 3 as liquid choices:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMECm8bqKaE&index=5&list=PLjbx3qSmDe7RYkRMIEuFyYyG7_vvKgou0
 
The free market UIA's will also become liquid as demand increases.
Just because it's slow to grow doesn't mean it's broke.

I live in Europe too. I don't think smartcoins are broke I just think we need to walk before we can run.
The biggest bitcoin exchange Bitstamp is based in europe, it trades in dollars not euros.

430
General Discussion / Radical ideas for liquidity
« on: January 27, 2016, 08:21:51 pm »
The dex is not a decentralized exchange without a functioning smartcoin. Trading UIAs is nice but can be done faster and cheaper on poloniex.
We are 4 months in to bts 2.0 and none of the smartcoins are liquid. Something big needs to change.
People keep saying we just need a bridge to smartcoins but nobody will provide that bridge without liquidity
Here are some radical ideas of how to increase liquidity.

- The committee or a worker proposal should use reserve pool funds to create smartcoins and sell them in to the market at feed price plus 10%
- Abandon all smartcoins except BitUSD to drive liquidity to it and then think about adding another smartcoin in a years time.
- Get all gateways to offer the same btcUIA instead of each having their own separate ones. Could be a multisig wallet controlled by committee.
- Get the reserve pool to pay for a bitcoin-BitBTC bridge with guaranteed 2-way liquidity
- Limit trading pairs in the GUI to just USD vs XXX
- Buy an existing exchange like poloniex and migrate its backend over to bitshares.
- Pay some altcoins that are struggling but have big communities to migrate their coins over to bitshares through proof of burn.

Loads of people are going to moan about these ideas but we need to prove a smartcoin works.
The trading volume of USD:BTC over the last 24hrs is actually zero as it is on most days.

431
General Discussion / Re: Bitcoin sidechain instead of bitBTC ?
« on: January 27, 2016, 02:31:00 am »
another take on sidechains but slightly different and bitshares is even mentioned in the infographic.

http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/drivechain/

432
General Discussion / Re: Bitcoin sidechain instead of bitBTC ?
« on: January 26, 2016, 08:04:54 pm »
We can accomplish this with a pretty straight forward Smart Contract on Bitshares I believe.

The process would basically involve creating an EBA (UIA) that interfaces with a hosted wallet of said coin.

Similar to how blocktrades works, a deposit address associated with the EBA would be generated.

When the deposit hits the address a transaction is sent via the smartcontract to issue the EBA to the associated Bitshares account.

When the user wants to withdraw, they would perhaps send the amount they want to withdraw to a given bitshares address with a certain memo to specify the target address. The EBA is removed from their account and the coin is transferred to where ever they wanted it to go.

This would require maintaining a very secure environment.. but it's been done before.

This would effectively transfer coins in and out of bitshares in their full value.

It's doable.. I bet blocktrades is already like 90% of the way there. :)

There is no need for a secure bitcoin wallet with sidechains as bitcoin just gets frozen on the bitcoin blockchain and only the token holder can unlock it. AFAIK


433
General Discussion / Re: Bitcoin sidechain instead of bitBTC ?
« on: January 26, 2016, 07:54:03 pm »
oh yummy.  @JohnnyBitcoin if technically feasible (should be) this is a great idea.  perhaps we could reach out to the blockstream guys and try to hire them on to build it :)

One thought that comes to mind though....why not use something like what seraph was going to build where it was a multisig gateway that essentially automates all that without a sidechain.

The only person who should be able to unlock the real btc should be the holder of the btc token.With a true sidechain there is zero need for committee control or any type of multisig. I hope it is feasible. Some say blockstreams implementation is not perfect yet and they've had $21 million in funding so far.

434
General Discussion / Re: Bitcoin sidechain instead of bitBTC ?
« on: January 26, 2016, 06:23:45 pm »
and ethereum have just announced a sidechain peg (dogecoin)

http://forklog.net/dogecoin-integrates-in-ethereum-for-application-in-smart-contracts/

435
General Discussion / Re: Bitcoin sidechain instead of bitBTC ?
« on: January 26, 2016, 02:33:17 pm »
I'm not smart enough to understand how it it works I just understand the concept, but they have a whitepaper explaining the technicals on their website

https://blockstream.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/sidechains.pdf


Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [29] 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 ... 43