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 - pariah99

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
46
General Discussion / Re: BitShares XT - Security against Market Manipulation FIND ATTACKS FOR TIPS
« on: March 10, 2014, 07:08:26 pm »
Quote from: toast on March 10, 2014, 04:47:07 pm
This is where I'm confused - this should never happen, unless the people who launched the chain clearly defined "GLD means 1/100kg of gold" vs "GLD means 1/1000kg of gold". I would assume people would think "GLD" means "1 oz 99.9%" which is standard for gold ETFs (I think?). Why would you expect the market peg to be so different on the different chains if they had the same properties?

This is getting a bit off topic, but my understanding was that the denominations of the share were going to be set by the chain creator.  If XA:USD an XB:USD were using denominations that varied by a factor of 10, I would expect the price to differ by a factor of 10 (all other things being equal).

I think the crux of the argument is whether or not denominations are going to vary between different chains of the same asset.  If the denomination is unchangeable at 1share=1oz, then everything I said is wrong.

47
General Discussion / Re: BitShares XT - Security against Market Manipulation FIND ATTACKS FOR TIPS
« on: March 10, 2014, 04:31:23 pm »
Quote from: toast on March 10, 2014, 04:22:30 pm
I'm not sure what you're saying here:
Person A makes BTS-XA with an asset GLD and person B makes BTS-XB with an asset GLD. You're saying XA:GLD and XB:GLD will trade at different prices? If you mean the XA to XA:GLD ratio will be different from the XB to XB:GLD ratio, then I think you are right, since XA and XB will unlikely be exactly the same price in terms of USD. If you mean that XA:GLD will not trade 1:1 to XB:GLD (different USD price), then I disagree - unless the chains have different properties (like one pays interest or something) they should trade at about the same. If the market peg works, it should work on both chains.

Well, both really...  I was trying to illustrate the concept of how there can be different chains for the same class of asset (Gold).  I thought that BTSdac was confused regarding whether the same class of assets would have one price per share in terms of BTS (or USD, or any other asset really).  If each share of XA:GLD could be redeemed for 1/100kg of gold and each share of XB:GLD could be redeemed for 1/1000kg of gold (due to them being different chains), then 1 share of XA:GLD would PROBABLY not trade for 1 share of XB:GLD, unless XB:GLD had some obscenely great features like 10% interest rate, free beer, and puppies.

48
General Discussion / Re: BitShares XT - Security against Market Manipulation FIND ATTACKS FOR TIPS
« on: March 10, 2014, 04:09:53 pm »
Quote from: BTSdac on March 10, 2014, 03:21:24 am
Quote from: bytemaster on March 09, 2014, 10:54:12 pm
The system has no way to identify a user with multiple positions because the concept of a user is outside the scope.   

A user who has a wallet with short and long positions will probably want to cover and combine his positions.
you know we usually say a function is convergence or divergence in area of mathematics
maybe we should consider if the system is convergence or divergence
different person created BTA with different ratio ,  but they exchange these in same market
it like , one person use 1kg gold cast 100 coins  another person use 1kg gold cast 1000 coins ,but all coins have same figure, and flow in same market, everyone tend to use equal gold to cast most coins.

maybe make creating process and selling process to be two independent process.  everybody create BTA with same ratio, also they can choice sell it or store it .
looking foreword  to your comments about this reply

Convergence/divergence in mathematics is a limit of a single function.  In economics, convergence is used colloquially to refer to the action of many rational actors acting in concert to reach a market equilibrium.  It's not really the same thing since you're talking about human psychology.

If you put something out there at a much higher price - nobody would buy it because there are a lot of sell orders at a lower asking price.  The person who is selling 1kg for 1000coins is not setting the price - he/she is ASKING for a price.

If the person were to make a completely different chain for their gold, then that's a different story:  If person A decides to sell 1kg gold and create 100 BTS-X:goldA and person B decides to sell 1kg gold and create 1000 BTS-X:goldB, then they would be DIFFERENT COINS.  One unit of BTS-X:goldA would not trade equally with one unit of BTS-X:goldB.

49
General Discussion / Re: BitAsset Predictions & Speculation
« on: February 27, 2014, 07:39:08 pm »
Quote from: clout on February 27, 2014, 07:33:08 pm
No one would enter into a market for BitAOEUI because it unclear what this should track.

Not if Pat Sajak starts selling BitVowel on Jeopardy...

50
General Discussion / Re: Collapsed MtGox is Bitshares X gain
« on: February 27, 2014, 04:00:05 pm »
Quote from: clout on February 27, 2014, 02:48:05 pm
This helps in two ways: Firstly by weeding out an illegitimate exchange, this situation only serves to make the ecosystem around crypto currencies more secure. Second, this situation undermines confidence in bitcoin, both for reasons due to security and price instability, ultimately making more attractive the alternatives that serve to rectify bitcoin's failings. In concept bitshares is the greatest of these alternatives.

I'd agree that relative to other cryptocurrencies, it is probably a good thing for bitshares; however, against regular currencies, it's probably a net negative due to the "flight to safety" effect that negative economic shocks have.

Also, nobody wants bitcoin to fail.  It wouldn't exactly be hyperbole to assert that all future cryptocurrency success are tied to the fate of bitcoin, since it enjoys a hefty infrastructural advantage compared to other coins.

51
General Discussion / Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« on: February 27, 2014, 03:54:34 am »
Okay, I guess we're splitting hairs here, but tracking would imply that somebody would value it relative to the other assets on the market.  I understand you could theoretically generate a chain for ANYTHING, but I'd wager that unobtainium's value in BTS-X would remain precisely zero (unless you were referring to the cryptocurrency)

That's an interesting experiment.  I should generate a chain of shares in "pariah99's pity/beer fund" and hope for the best... speaking of which, I have to go to a bar now :D

52
General Discussion / Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« on: February 27, 2014, 02:29:13 am »
Quote from: Markus on February 27, 2014, 01:47:41 am
If the kind of asset the BitAsset is to track is defined fuzzy ("Oil" instead of "Brent Crude as traded on the IntercontinentalExchange") then arbitrageurs and other market participants can not provide a narrow tracking as they don't always know if it is over- or undervalued. Spreads will widen and the BitAsset market will be less liquid.

I'm sure that they will be very specific, since the creators of the chain will have to create some mechanism by which shareholders can redeem their shares for physical assets.  In the case of perfectly fungible assets like stocks and currency, the specificity will already be built in.

e;fb

53
General Discussion / Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« on: February 27, 2014, 12:29:09 am »
Under the current paradigm, the dollar (or any currency) serves as an intermediary to determine the relative price of goods.  It's like asking how much gold you could get for a barrel of oil.

Say you want to exchange 1 barrel of oil for a certain amount of gold.   You know how much gold you can get because oil is valued at a certain amount of dollars per barrel, and gold is valued at a certain amount of dollars per ounce.  The dollar doesn't have any inherent value (it used to until we went to a fiat money system) - it just serves as a common denomination.

This might be an oversimplification, but this is how I think about it: Think of BTS-X as a currency like the dollar.  Now think of a dollar as a commodity (just like Oil)

1 BitUSD will be equivalent to a certain amount of BTS-X
1 BitOil will be equivalent to a certain amount of BTS-X
It won't be set in stone to begin with, but by the action of many parties trading both BitUSD to BTS-X and BitOil to BTS-X, there will be an equilbrium reached between BitUSD and BitOil via BTS-X.

If there's a difference between the (PRICE OF OIL) and the (BitUSD to BitOil ratio), that would present an arbitrage gap which traders could take advantage of to make a profit.  Eventually, the gap would close as more trades were made; hence, the price would tend towards the real-world equilibrium.

Edit: This was in response to both delulo and unlimited_power.  I just realized that what they were asking was regarding what the unit of BitOil was, which I'm guessing is in barrels.

54
General Discussion / Re: Collapsed MtGox is Bitshares X gain
« on: February 26, 2014, 02:40:03 pm »
It's certainly not going to help; however, going forward, I seriously doubt that any exchange will repeat their mistake.

MtGox's problem was that their wallets were accepting unconfirmed transactions, which made them vulnerable to transaction malleability.  As long as any BTS-X wallet implementations don't make the same mistake, it won't be an issue.

It's important to note that the POTENTIAL exists for people to make insecure wallets, but as it's a known weakness at this point, that would be about as stupid as posting your private key on a public forum, then complaining that BTS-X is flawed because it didn't secure your coins.

55
General Discussion / Re: BitShares XT - Security against Market Manipulation FIND ATTACKS FOR TIPS
« on: February 24, 2014, 11:08:44 pm »
Quote from: Markus on February 24, 2014, 10:55:58 pm
I am a bit sceptical about BitCryptos (BitBTC, BitLTC etc.) catching on.

What is the incentive of being long in such an asset? It is already virtual with all associated benefits (speedy transfer, pseudonymity, easy storage, ...). It is not like with BitUSD or BitGold that you have any advantages over the original.

This is why I suggest more fiat. At least CNY and EUR.

There's already a large infrastructure supporting the BitCoin ecosystem, same as with the US Dollar.

BTS-X is a pilot run and it might have some kinks to iron out - Better to fix them while there's a limited set of assets rather than complicate things with a whole slew of them.

56
BitShares AGS / Re: help with AGS donation
« on: January 18, 2014, 07:13:38 pm »
AGS will be distributed to the private keys that the protoshares and bitcoins were donated from.  When future DACs go live, all you have to do is to add your private key to the wallet and the appropriate shares will appear.

TL;DR - if you donate from either btc/pts, keep the wallet that you donated from to claim your shares.

57
BitShares PTS / Re: Why is ypool destroying PTS? (70% mined by ypool)
« on: January 17, 2014, 12:00:19 am »
It's one of the few shortcomings of the proof-of-work design.  Even though a solution exists in the bitcoin world (p2pool), people prefer to stay on the larger pools like gigahash to reduce their variance.

I think a potential solution to this would be to release a distributed pool alongside future DACs which have a built-in mechanism to reward extra shares if people choose to use the distributed pool.  i.e. say 2.5% of ALL mined blocks will be included in the reward for the distributed pool but not for any centralized pools; that way, people could start their own pools if they want, but the distributed pool would have be slightly more profitable and would give incentive for people to switch to it.

Also, proof-of-stake would solve this problem unless somebody accumulates a ridiculous amount of the currency.

58
BitShares PTS / Re: Why is ypool destroying PTS? (70% mined by ypool)
« on: January 15, 2014, 09:34:59 pm »
Quote from: fishseeds on January 15, 2014, 09:23:58 pm
When you say 'higher variance' do you mean the chance of finding a block or a higher value share increases?

Well, neither - I was referring to how consistently the pool will generate protoshares for you.  The earnings each day are going to be a lot more spiky than a larger pool, but on average, after the pool fees are subtracted, they should be higher.

Quote from: JustHayden on January 15, 2014, 09:30:56 pm
ypool can abuse it, which doesn't mean they are, but the fact that they are able to will drive the price down. We need to boycott ypool.

This sucks for ypool because it's not ypool's fault that everybody's flocking to it, but I guess it doesn't suck too much because they are raking in the fees.

59
BitShares PTS / Re: Why is ypool destroying PTS? (70% mined by ypool)
« on: January 15, 2014, 03:23:53 pm »
Quote from: mav2000 on January 15, 2014, 02:43:01 pm
Would moving to another pool reduce the payouts?

The only thing I dont like about Ypool is the 1 pts payout. But other than that I kind of like it. I dont mind checking out 1Gh or Beeeeer, but which one would be better? 1Gh seem to have a better interface

You'll have higher variance in smaller pools; however (assuming that you have the same hashrate) on average, a lower fee pool should pay out more than a high fee pool.

be^5 is 2.5% vs ypool's 6%, and I'm planning to have all my machines pointed there for a long time, so I don't mind.  Plus, having that much hashing power at one node opens up the risk of a double spend attack :/  I think it would be neat if somebody could develop a standard p2pool-like distributed pool for current and future DACs.

60
BitShares AGS / Re: [TRADE] Service: Tradable Angelshares (tAGS)
« on: January 14, 2014, 06:07:21 pm »
Quote from: donschoe on January 13, 2014, 07:18:41 pm
I wonder why these questions were not raised when AGS was introduced. I did not invent the wheel, I'm using it.

I mean, lets be fair, adding the ability to trade shares adds a huge layer of complexity; hence, it wasn't raised as an issue when AGS was introduced.  PTS has a built in mechanism for dealing with that, but AGS was not designed for it.

I think it's cool that you're offering the flexibility of trading AGS, but I don't think there's any way that you could provide the trade volume that blockchain-based currencies offer.  Therefore, AGS should still be viewed more as an illiquid long-term investment :/

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

Page created in 0.173 seconds with 20 queries.