BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: speedy on February 14, 2014, 09:50:09 pm
-
I havent yet read a confirmed time line for when Invictus will release a separate chain for stocks. How soon after BTS X will this happen? If not then I might just attempt this myself - I think it would just be a case of forking the code and renaming the asset enums (and initializing the genesis block to AGS/PTS holders of course).
Also, are we certain that 16 different assets is the practical upper limit before overloading the blockchain, or is this another variable that will have to be experimented with? It would be great if you could fit the entire Nasdaq on one chain, and the NYSE on another.
-
I havent yet read a confirmed time line for when Invictus will release a separate chain for stocks. How soon after BTS X will this happen? If not then I might just attempt this myself - I think it would just be a case of forking the code and renaming the asset enums (and initializing the genesis block to AGS/PTS holders of course).
Also, are we certain that 16 different assets is the practical upper limit before overloading the blockchain, or is this another variable that will have to be experimented with? It would be great if you could fit the entire Nasdaq on one chain, and the NYSE on another.
I strongly support creating new chains like this. I would wait until the BitShares XT test finds all the bugs prior to forking.
I believe we can increase the upper limit with some efficiency updates I have in mind for market making. The limit is really based upon transaction volume and block size, not the number of assets. I volume assets competing on the same chain will increase fees for everyone.
-
I havent yet read a confirmed time line for when Invictus will release a separate chain for stocks. How soon after BTS X will this happen? If not then I might just attempt this myself - I think it would just be a case of forking the code and renaming the asset enums (and initializing the genesis block to AGS/PTS holders of course).
Also, are we certain that 16 different assets is the practical upper limit before overloading the blockchain, or is this another variable that will have to be experimented with? It would be great if you could fit the entire Nasdaq on one chain, and the NYSE on another.
I strongly support creating new chains like this. I would wait until the BitShares XT test finds all the bugs prior to forking.
I believe we can increase the upper limit with some efficiency updates I have in mind for market making. The limit is really based upon transaction volume and block size, not the number of assets. I volume assets competing on the same chain will increase fees for everyone.
Creating 'different' chains to support different assets (F.E. bitUSD, bitEuro, bitBTC, bitLTC etc) requires a fork instead of included within bitShares X :o ? :-\
-
16 assets per chain.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
-
16 assets per chain.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Any eta for beta ?
Or is the 'live' alpha version still expected the end of February ?
-
I have a plan to aggressively fork BTS X the second it graduates from XT. I will honor PTS/AGS 50/50 with snapshot from the end of the previous month.
My first planned chain was a cryptocurrency chain so I can finally short shitcoins
-
I have a plan to aggressively fork BTS X the second it graduates from XT. I will honor PTS/AGS 50/50 with snapshot from the end of the previous month.
My first planned chain was a cryptocurrency chain so I can finally short shitcoins
That's a great idea +5% - then sites like cryptsy almost become redundant.
-
I have a plan to aggressively fork BTS X the second it graduates from XT. I will honor PTS/AGS 50/50 with snapshot from the end of the previous month.
My first planned chain was a cryptocurrency chain so I can finally short shitcoins
That's a great idea +5% - then sites like cryptsy almost become redundant.
So you are saying that Cryptsy will be toast?
Toast - that will honour AGS/PTS and NOT BitsharesXT, right? I hope several new DAC plans turn up soon otherwise there will be a PTS freefall after 28 Feb.
-
I have a plan to aggressively fork BTS X the second it graduates from XT. I will honor PTS/AGS 50/50 with snapshot from the end of the previous month.
My first planned chain was a cryptocurrency chain so I can finally short shitcoins
That's a great idea +5% - then sites like cryptsy almost become redundant.
So you are saying that Cryptsy will be toast?
Toast - that will honour AGS/PTS and NOT BitsharesXT, right? I hope several new DAC plans turn up soon otherwise there will be a PTS freefall after 28 Feb.
I think I will honor the same AGS/PTS snapshot as Bitshares XT, which is an approximation for honoring BTS X allocations. Honestly I'm not really looking out for PTS value (though I'll be hurting from the freefall as well unfortunately) and more interested in getting *some* BTS XCC chain out as soon as possible.
I have no particularly strong opinions one way or the other about PTS/AGS vs BTS X used as snapshots for BTS forks.
-
Toast... you are serving an excellent example of how free market forces will apply. In the interest of getting as many adopters as possible in your new chains I would suggest that there will be more individuals involved in BitShares XT than AGS and PTS and thus you can achieve a wider network effect by honoring those positions after they have proven the concept.
The launching of a clone requires more than just releasing the software, it requires servers, partnerships with exchanges, etc.
Market depth is very important to the functioning of BitShares X so if you fragment it too quickly many of your early clones will probably have trouble as there is only so much energy in the market able to feed these DACs.
I like the fact that the market will decide between AGS/PTS and XTS honoring...