BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: davidpbrown on January 21, 2015, 01:33:27 pm
-
See 6 minutes in, within talk of developing Overstock's Stock Exchange Overstock Communications Director re Medici: Most users will "have to exchange dollars into some kind of USD coin" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkiyRV99eEI#t=6m)
Any chance that could become BitShares bitUSD?.. Might need to be proactive engaging them before they make their own, which I guess by default would be some token on CounterParty. Perhaps they won't have a good peg sorted out which might give BitShares an edge?
Also interesting @10:40 Overstock Communications Director re ambitions. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkiyRV99eEI#t=10m40s)
-
+1
-
Medici won't even be run on Counterparty. TBH I don't really see the advantage of putting fully regulated real world stocks on a blockchain anyway, all i can possibly imagine it'll do is to make stock trading less private. So now everyone, not just the NSA, will be able to figure out what you invest in.
-
well spotted.
-
Medici won't even be run on Counterparty. TBH I don't really see the advantage of putting fully regulated real world stocks on a blockchain anyway, all i can possibly imagine it'll do is to make stock trading less private. So now everyone, not just the NSA, will be able to figure out what you invest in.
A huge advantage you are missing is that you do not need to maintain "the books" and records .. that's done by the blockchain .. though this approach comes with it's own issues (security, ...)
-
Medici won't even be run on Counterparty.
What has you suggest that?..
PhantomPhreak and others suggested a while back "Overstock.com has committed to using Counterparty as the platform for issuing securities on the Bitcoin blockchain" (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg9109649#msg9109649). Also re the Overstock system.. "It'll be a frontend to the existing network, and it'll use XCP like everything else." (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=395761.msg9109760#msg9109760)
-
Why would it be our bitusd? Probably it will be normal gateway IOUs.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
-
Why would it be our bitusd? Probably it will be normal gateway IOUs.
I don't know.. the question is, why not? How do we make it, that it is.
Counterparty devs likely have enough on their plate, if you can solve a problem for them, then they (Overstock at least) seem open to broadly supporting blockchain technology, rather than trying to make a monopoly.
I guess the broader question is, what needs to be done to make BitShares bitUSD simple to integrate into any application looking to do the same move from fiat into crypto-currency.. and how do we get there? The merchant cart plugin options look one good step in the right direction but is more needed for something as big as Medici?
-
Also, note in that video talk of Overstock looking to give Bitcoins to its many millions of customers directly, with a clear suggestion of how to use it. Perhaps they could gift bitUSD instead of BTC?
-
Medici won't even be run on Counterparty. TBH I don't really see the advantage of putting fully regulated real world stocks on a blockchain anyway, all i can possibly imagine it'll do is to make stock trading less private. So now everyone, not just the NSA, will be able to figure out what you invest in.
A huge advantage you are missing is that you do not need to maintain "the books" and records .. that's done by the blockchain .. though this approach comes with it's own issues (security, ...)
But putting something like this on the blockchain when it still requires full centralized control makes no sense to me. All it does is make every transaction cost more money, without adding any security because ultimately the entire ledger has to be centrally controlled anyway. They probably still have to keep external books and records as well, and have to do constant data analysis.
-
I don't see why you're struggling with the idea. If any blockchain technology is possible, then any company could choose to issue shares to a blockchain, with all the upside that brings, regardless of the hoops that are put in place by legislators relative to blockchain technology. That's what we're waiting for, is one Government to suggest such a capability is permissible, and then their country can play host to an exchange. It might be different but there's value there.
I'll just drop this link here while I think of it: Counterparty foundation: Consulting Services (http://counterpartyfoundation.org/consulting-services/) - does BitShares need to do the same perhaps?
-
with all the upside that brings
But what are upsides are there for issuing traditional stock on a blockchain? This is what I'm trying to understand.
What would make a client choose to buy stock on the blockchain instead of through a regular stockbroker if they have to do exactly the same registration procedures and fund it the same way?
All I can see that will happen is that trading will happen much more slowly, all trading data will be public for anyone to perform data analysis on, and transactions will be more costly due to the high redundancy of the blockchain validation process.
-
But what are upsides are there for issuing traditional stock on a blockchain? This is what I'm trying to understand.
I don't know the advantage to companies, as I don't know enough about regular stock markets, but I imagine it will be a lot cheaper - for customers. That is, more money then is available for the investment.
The UK.gov's call for information, was on the back of two priorities: Achieving strong and sustainable economic growth and Making it easier for people to access and use financial services. The UK's budget appears to need for people to get into debt, so the Government is looking for alsorts of ways for people to spend what credit they have.
Blockchain shares could make shareholding practical to a wider audience.. just have to make it simple and accessible.
Perhaps there is more to it but I take it to be the same as providing any other financial service within the blockchains, it does away with the third party authority. Perhaps some regulation of stock will always exist but perhaps there are efficiency saving at least to be made.
-
You guys are getting ahead of yourselves.
Patrick clearly wants to have a big stake in whichever chain has all these companies issuing stocks. That won't be compatible with our bitUSD because its a different chain. Patrick already turned down our chain as the one on which to issue his stocks.
Focus on DACx, overstock is almost definitely not happening.
-
With a decentralized stock exchange, you get immediate ownership of your property, your private keys. You think you own the stocks you "own"? Its almost certainly in your brokers name, while the broker issues you an IOU. You have to make a specific request to get stock issued in your own name.
-
.. That won't be compatible with our bitUSD because its a different chain.
You know better than I but Bitcoin is on a different chain and we see monsterer suggesting a bitcoin->bitBTC gateway. Can we not make bitUSD ubiquitous?
-
.. That won't be compatible with our bitUSD because its a different chain.
You know better than I but Bitcoin is on a different chain and we see monsterer suggesting a bitcoin->bitBTC gateway. Can we not make bitUSD ubiquitous?
You wouldn't be able to trade bitUSD against their stocks on their chain.
-
I think the Overstock CEO wants to do his own coin or sidechain with Bitcoin.
-
The current bitshares exchange is too limited to be used in real life applications similar to NASDAQ. Would take a massive revolution or innovation to change this.
-
with all the upside that brings
But what are upsides are there for issuing traditional stock on a blockchain? This is what I'm trying to understand.
What would make a client choose to buy stock on the blockchain instead of through a regular stockbroker if they have to do exactly the same registration procedures and fund it the same way?
All I can see that will happen is that trading will happen much more slowly, all trading data will be public for anyone to perform data analysis on, and transactions will be more costly due to the high redundancy of the blockchain validation process.
The advantage is that the are no more parties involved than the company that is issuing the shares and the shareholders. Nowadays clearinghouses, brokers etc. could manipulate ownership and go broke.
With shares on a blockchain you still have the company that is in control of the stock (because of regulatory compliance) but it can be made so that if the ownership (private keys) of some shareholders is changed to any degree it would be visible to everyone that that happened.
Todays clearing and settlement systems al depend on contracts and are not unambiguous. A blockchain is unambiguous as long as the networks works.