BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: monsterer on March 12, 2015, 11:41:19 am
-
Hi everyone,
We're pleased to announce our partnership with trusted community
member spartako, who has become a metaexchange liquidity provider for
the bitCNY/BTC market:
https://metaexchange.info/markets/bitCNY/BTC
Liquidity providers act as market makers who run their own
metaexchange node. Due to our unique design they are able to run their
operations with zero counter-party risk while still providing the same
service they would have on a traditional centralised exchange, except with zero trading fees.
If you would like to talk more about becoming a liquidity provider,
please shoot me a PM.
Cheers, Paul.
-
SWEET! +5%
-
If I could just invest in metaexchange .. that would be awesome! :)
-
This is great, but can you defend the "zero counterparty risk" claim? My understanding is that counterparty risk using metaexchange would be dramatically lower than other exchanges, but not zero.
-
This is great, but can you defend the "zero counterparty risk" claim? My understanding is that counterparty risk using metaexchange would be dramatically lower than other exchanges, but not zero.
The risk is non-zero for the short time it takes for 1 BTC confirmation, i.e. 10 minutes. After that you are in control of your funds again.
-
This is great, but can you defend the "zero counterparty risk" claim? My understanding is that counterparty risk using metaexchange would be dramatically lower than other exchanges, but not zero.
The risk is non-zero for the short time it takes for 1 BTC confirmation, i.e. 10 minutes. After that you are in control of your funds again.
I think if you considered the odds of that happening at the exact same time as your transaction.. it would probably work out to something like 0.05% risk.. which if you eliminate the decimal points actually is zero. I haven't done the math.. maybe someone could.. but I think that does deserve the claim. There is nothing on the internet and I mean NOTHING that can claim absolute zero.
-
Oh yeah and freaken awesome! :D +5% +5% +5% +5%
-
This is great, but can you defend the "zero counterparty risk" claim? My understanding is that counterparty risk using metaexchange would be dramatically lower than other exchanges, but not zero.
The risk is non-zero for the short time it takes for 1 BTC confirmation, i.e. 10 minutes. After that you are in control of your funds again.
I think if you considered the odds of that happening at the exact same time as your transaction.. it would probably work out to something like 0.05% risk.. which if you eliminate the decimal points actually is zero. I haven't done the math.. maybe someone could.. but I think that does deserve the claim. There is nothing on the internet and I mean NOTHING that can claim absolute zero.
I think this is correct. So the profit potential for MetaExchange (or a liquidity provider) betraying the customers is their average volume multiplied by the time it would take people to hear they were unreliable and cease deposits. In normal operation this profit potential should be very low compared to the potential profit of operating honestly, so risk should be very low. However, the greater the number of separate liquidity providers involved sharing the same reputation, the more this could break down, because smaller liquidity providers have less stake in preserving MetaExchanges reputation. When you use MetaExchange, is there a way to know which liquidity provider you're trusting, or are you just trusting MetaExchange as a whole? Are liquidity provider operations monitored by the main site so they'll stop having business referred if they stop payouts?
-
This is great, but can you defend the "zero counterparty risk" claim? My understanding is that counterparty risk using metaexchange would be dramatically lower than other exchanges, but not zero.
The risk is non-zero for the short time it takes for 1 BTC confirmation, i.e. 10 minutes. After that you are in control of your funds again.
I think if you considered the odds of that happening at the exact same time as your transaction.. it would probably work out to something like 0.05% risk.. which if you eliminate the decimal points actually is zero. I haven't done the math.. maybe someone could.. but I think that does deserve the claim. There is nothing on the internet and I mean NOTHING that can claim absolute zero.
I think this is correct. So the profit potential for MetaExchange (or a liquidity provider) betraying the customers is their average volume multiplied by the time it would take people to hear they were unreliable and cease deposits. In normal operation this profit potential should be very low compared to the potential profit of operating honestly, so risk should be very low. However, the greater the number of separate liquidity providers involved sharing the same reputation, the more this could break down, because smaller liquidity providers have less stake in preserving MetaExchanges reputation. When you use MetaExchange, is there a way to know which liquidity provider you're trusting, or are you just trusting MetaExchange as a whole? Are liquidity provider operations monitored by the main site so they'll stop having business referred if they stop payouts?
I think this announcement answers some of your question.. they are openly telling you who the liquidity provider is.. in other assets they have done similar where they have announced who is providing the liquidity to what asset. So I think the model is to be transparent in that. It's too early for multiple liquidity providers I think.. at a later stage that could be addressed and I think after some time of operations any issues will make themselves known to help determine the best coarse on handling that... let them learn to walk before they run basically.
-
Working with monsterer was really great!
We set up the system from scratch in one week and now It starts a beta testing phase with low liquidity and high spreads.
I am working with my own liquidity so I can collect some analytics and evaluate some KPI of this business.
After this testing phase I would like to issue two UIA: SPKOBTC and SPKOCNY, so people without technical skill can invest in this business.
For doing that I would like to find a business partner (better if it is from chinese community but it is not a requirement) because I have technical skill but I need some one in the marketing/biz side. So if you are interested you can PM me.
Finally when they are ready the UIA will be listed obviously on metaexchage.
Cheers, Fabio
-
This is great, but can you defend the "zero counterparty risk" claim? My understanding is that counterparty risk using metaexchange would be dramatically lower than other exchanges, but not zero.
The risk is non-zero for the short time it takes for 1 BTC confirmation, i.e. 10 minutes. After that you are in control of your funds again.
I think if you considered the odds of that happening at the exact same time as your transaction.. it would probably work out to something like 0.05% risk.. which if you eliminate the decimal points actually is zero. I haven't done the math.. maybe someone could.. but I think that does deserve the claim. There is nothing on the internet and I mean NOTHING that can claim absolute zero.
I think this is correct. So the profit potential for MetaExchange (or a liquidity provider) betraying the customers is their average volume multiplied by the time it would take people to hear they were unreliable and cease deposits. In normal operation this profit potential should be very low compared to the potential profit of operating honestly, so risk should be very low. However, the greater the number of separate liquidity providers involved sharing the same reputation, the more this could break down, because smaller liquidity providers have less stake in preserving MetaExchanges reputation. When you use MetaExchange, is there a way to know which liquidity provider you're trusting, or are you just trusting MetaExchange as a whole? Are liquidity provider operations monitored by the main site so they'll stop having business referred if they stop payouts?
I think this announcement answers some of your question.. they are openly telling you who the liquidity provider is.. in other assets they have done similar where they have announced who is providing the liquidity to what asset. So I think the model is to be transparent in that. It's too early for multiple liquidity providers I think.. at a later stage that could be addressed and I think after some time of operations any issues will make themselves known to help determine the best coarse on handling that... let them learn to walk before they run basically.
Don't misunderstand, I think what they're doing is great. My criticism is intended to be constructive, but I haven't read much detail about the multi-node model they're using.
-
This is great, but can you defend the "zero counterparty risk" claim? My understanding is that counterparty risk using metaexchange would be dramatically lower than other exchanges, but not zero.
It's zero counterparty risk for our liquidity providers, as compared to them running their market making operations on a traditional exchange.
Risk for our customers is unchanged - as low as possible while still allowing deposits. :)
-
This is great, but can you defend the "zero counterparty risk" claim? My understanding is that counterparty risk using metaexchange would be dramatically lower than other exchanges, but not zero.
It's zero counterparty risk for our liquidity providers, as compared to them running their market making operations on a traditional exchange.
Risk for our customers is unchanged - as low as possible while still allowing deposits. :)
Thanks, this makes much more sense. Since the subnodes are trading on MetaExchanges reputation, is all of their business initiated from the MetaExchange central site and monitored so it can be cut off if they halt payouts? Or does MetaExchange support TITAN?
-
If I could just invest in metaexchange .. that would be awesome! :)
+5%
-
I love what Metaexchange is doing, it really gives me hope for Bitshares future.
Do you think that you guys will eventually add fiat gateways and become a way to go directly form fiat into bitAssets? Fiat gateways are what we need most for BTS to thrive imo.
Once we have direct easy conversion at will of USD into bitUSD, a lot of people out there who are on the fence and worry that bitAssets are backed by nothing will have to realize that Bitshares has real potential.
-
I love what Metaexchange is doing, it really gives me hope for Bitshares future.
Do you think that you guys will eventually add fiat gateways and become a way to go directly form fiat into bitAssets? Fiat gateways are what we need most for BTS to thrive imo.
Once we have direct easy conversion at will of USD into bitUSD, a lot of people out there who are on the fence and worry that bitAssets are backed by nothing will have to realize that Bitshares has real potential.
IF we are doing FIAT in the future it will probably only EURO and GBP, because this is where we can handle the legal side.
but if someone is willing or already has done the FIAT side in the legal juristication you are dealing we are more then glad to talk about partnering up to make it possible.
-
I love what Metaexchange is doing, it really gives me hope for Bitshares future.
Do you think that you guys will eventually add fiat gateways and become a way to go directly form fiat into bitAssets? Fiat gateways are what we need most for BTS to thrive imo.
Once we have direct easy conversion at will of USD into bitUSD, a lot of people out there who are on the fence and worry that bitAssets are backed by nothing will have to realize that Bitshares has real potential.
IF we are doing FIAT in the future it will probably only EURO and GBP, because this is where we can handle the legal side.
but if someone is willing or already has done the FIAT side in the legal juristication you are dealing we are more then glad to talk about partnering up to make it possible.
You are absolutely right to be careful with the legal requirements for a direct fiat-exchange. This is especially so in the US where there are stringent requirements due to its strong anti-money-laundering stand.
-
Thanks, this makes much more sense. Since the subnodes are trading on MetaExchanges reputation, is all of their business initiated from the MetaExchange central site and monitored so it can be cut off if they halt payouts? Or does MetaExchange support TITAN?
We send the nodes customers and they process the orders, reporting back to us. If a node should go 'rouge' we can mark that node as 'down' and de-list it from the site. However, this is not a traditional trustless arrangement; we trust our liquidity partners implicitly and take care over who we allow to become part of the team.
-
The BTC/bitCNY market will be down for some time for upgrading to the new 0.9 client.
When it is again online I will announce here.
-
The BTC/bitCNY market is online again, upgraded to 0.9 client version