too bad you cannot get a normal discussion, because this stupid attitude in crypto will never disappear....

i am asking about the real value of note in the muse chain.

How do you expect to have a normal conversation if you don't ask a normal question?  Fact is, you come across as a FUD'er.  But to answer your question with another question, why on god's green earth would NOTEs become worthless?  NOTEs are the underlying currency of the MUSE blockchain atop which PeerTracks is built.  I think NOTES will have great value and in fact their value is already going up.  Now if you ask me why MUSE needs it's own blockchain, I'm not not even remotely convinced that it's necessary or the best idea.  But that's another matter.

I still think there is more interest here than it seems, or at least I believe there *would* be if people could wrap their minds around this more fully.  So could you just walk us through what this would look like to the user?  You mentioned a standalone user interface.  So that would basically look like a wallet management utility, with deposit and withdrawal functionality allowing the user to move supported currencies into and out of the decentralized wallets, correct? 

Now this is where it gets hazy for me.  Would all trading then take place in this same interface, elsewhere, or both?  You mentioned possible margin trading and trollbox, so it sounds like in addition to decentralized wallets,. you also intend for this to be a full blown trading platform.  Is that correct?  If so, would users be *limited* to trading via this interface?  Or would they also be able to trade via the the Bitshares default trading interface and/or on an exchange participating in the Bitshares exchange network by somehow pointing their trading interface to the decentralized wallet(s)?  Please describe this in as much detail as possible.

Also, just to clarify, you're proposing an equity crowdfunder with 80% going to the backers in exchange for whatever amount they pledge beyond a minimum of $30k?  Is that how it would work?  Also, you mentioned extending the functionality to work with HZ and other non-Bitshares decentralized exchanges.  How would that get funded?  Thanks.

BitShares CryptoeXchange

BTSCX will provide a gateway for cryptocurrencies to a decentralized storage, backing assets tradable on the BTS network.

For a coin to be added there need to be at least three individuals, so called signers, who hold keys to multisig addresses to store coins and assets. Two of those keys are required for a transaction to get accepted in the blockchain. The signers watch each other and react to suspicious behaviour by locking out the malicious signer, and if possible replacing him.
A multisig address can be created with a variable number of signers and required signatures, so it can be raised per-coin when more individuals applied for signing and get voted in. The number of signers should be in some way proportional to the total deposited value for (obvious) security reasons.

When a coin is added (enough signers available + successful community vote), an asset representing that coin is issued by the signers (also multisig protected), which will be given out in return for deposited coins. The deposits are immediately sent to the multisig storage address.
Returning the asset to the issuer triggers a withdrawal of the respective amount of coins.

The gateway can sustain itself through fees taken from deposits and withdrawals.

The client will support adding new coins and applying as a signer for an added coin as well as voting, trading and community functions.
Like Graphene, the UI will be standalone and can work with remote BTSCX, BTS and coin nodes.
By connecting it to a local coin wallet it will support trading directly out of or into that wallet.

A main asset will be issued, which gives the community the possibility to vote on every variable that may be set, per coin.
Those variables are (list not necessarily complete):
- coins to add
- x-of-y multisig
- offline/dropout tolerance
- fees
- distribution of fees between asset holders and signers


80% of this asset will be sold before software development takes place, 20% stay with the to-be-formed company.

The team consists of 3 persons so far (2 coders, 1 designer). As a rough estimation it'll require about 6 months and at least 30k$ to develop a working product. Adding more features like a trollbox or margin trading will boost that up quite a bit, but if we don't raise enough from the crowd we can still try adding funds through a worker proposal later. If we'd manage to raise 100k$+ this shouldn't be necessary.
I think we'd begin with a StartJoin campaign to raise the initial 30k, so if that goal isn't met everyone will get their money back. When it is reached and 2.0 is out and running, we can add the possibility to send BTS too, and start coding.

The timeline and exact details regarding the fundraise will be announced soon.

Okay, it's been a week now. Nobody else interested in a good decentralized exchange here? 

I think this is something that is potentially of great interest here.  But I'm not sure it's clear enough to everyone exactly what you've proposed or what the ramifications might be in terms of the mechanics of trading on the Bitshares platform.  I tried to ask some questions in the chat during last week's mumble session to start shedding some light, but apparently you didn't see that. 

In any event, as you know, Bitshares already has decentralized exchange.  So are you just talking about a decentralized wallet component that would allow actual coins to be stored and traded on the existing exchange as opposed to needing to create pegged assets for each coin that would be traded?  That sounds very interesting.  But if I'm getting it wrong, please explain. 

Can you also explain some other details.  Are you proposing to create a version of this specifically FOR the Bitshares platform?  Or is this something which, once developed, would work with any decentralized exchange?

Finally, can you offer a rough estimate as to a) how long this would take to develop, and b) what the cost would be?  Thanks.

well I thought  he will be called at 2800 and I removed everything...nobody else did so, so I re-placed my order at 3500... preferring my own interest like the rest of us

Why not remove your sell orders at least until we break out?  Personally, I have not placed any sell orders at all since I don't plan to sell even a small chunk anytime soon.  I could start strategically placing a few sell orders at much higher prices, but that adds to the total available on the ask side, which as you know is a number that is displayed on the Poloniex order book.  People do look at that, so I would like that number to be as small as possible.

Only account upgrades do vest for 90 days. Fees are paid within 20 minutes I think

I don't see why referral fees for upgraded accounts would need to vest either.  Assuming I'm not missing something, any vesting will diminish the effectiveness of the program, so I hope the concept is completely removed so we can start it off on the right foot instead of generating negative buzz and having to vote to fix it later anyway.

Is it possible to have some sort of whitelist for users to specify trusted sources of funds?  So for example, two users that trust each other could whitelist one another to enable immediate transactions between them.  Whereas a transaction originating from an untrusted source might require additional blocks depending on preferences specified by the user.  Aside from trusting the other party or not, the size of the transaction would obviously be another factor and it seems that users should have the ability to determine how many blocks they want to wait based on a mix of factors.  Does this make sense?

I think in the stricter sense, all blockchains are platforms since you can build functionality and even entire businesses on top of them.  But when people refer to blockchain platforms, I believe they are describing a new breed of blockchains that are more feature-rich.   So on one hand you have the simple cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin and litecoin which are tradeable assets, stores of value, mediums of exchange, not to mention protocols that can be built upon.  But then you also have the blockchain platforms such as Bitshares, NXT, Qora, NEM, HZ, IOC, etc.  In addition to what the simple cryptocurrencies offer, these platforms offer a rich set of features which may include some combination of: decentralized exchange, smartcoins, multi-sig, governance, chat, forums, storage, etc.  Then you have Ethereum and the lesser known Crypti.  These are also platforms, but more akin to a development environment where the tools to build your own features are all integrated. 

That pretty much sums it up from my point of view.

Deviated a bit, but perhaps on track again?  We're getting a nice bounce right above the 50% fib of the move from 1700-3100.  Actually, we bounced right on the 38.2% fib (heavier dashed line) of the larger move from 1400-3100. 

Notice that I added to the original chart the 3 most relevant fib lines from the larger move, excluding the other levels to keep the chart from getting too cluttered.  Just keep in mind that those heavier dashed lines are fib retracement levels for the larger move from 1400-3100. 

In any event, hopefully it's up from here, although we may bounce around a bit first.  It also should not be surprising at all to see further retracement to any of the next 2 lower fib levels of both the 1700-3100 and the 1400-3100 moves. Interestingly, these 2 next levels down line up almost dead on (i.e. 61.8% of smaller move lines up with 50% of larger move, and 76.4% of smaller move lines up with 61.8% of larger move.).  While these levels are certainly possible, each successively lower level is increasingly less likely.  And if visited, I will personally consider each of them opportunities to increase my position further (I have been buying constantly since May and have not sold even a single BTS along the way).

-----

P.S.  You may have noticed that the 2nd chart has the 100% level at the top while the 1st and 3rd charts have the 100% level at the bottom.  That's because I often reverse the fib levels to look at the fib extensions to help predict where we might be headed after we break above the recent highs...and I forgot to unreverse it before posting the 2nd chart a few days ago.  Maybe I'll have time to post a new chart showing those fib extensions at some point. 




https://www.coinigy.com/assets/img/charts/560945a7.png

So far so good.   



https://www.coinigy.com/assets/img/charts/5605455b.png

Quote from: tbone on September 24, 2015, 01:51:24 am

I don't think we've put in the low for this correction.  My guess is that we'll see a 50% retracement, which would take us to about 2400.  Then we'll bounce around between 50% and the 38.2% fib line for 3-4 days before taking off to around 3900.  Something like this:



https://www.coinigy.com/s/i/560354f9/