BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: topcandle on July 14, 2015, 05:31:17 pm
-
Bitshares?! Where are we. Are we sure the quality of our partners stacks up against these guys?
http://www.coindesk.com/deloitte-blockchain-auditing-consulting/
-
We need to get 2.0 out there so they can try us too.
-
ah, Deloitte's looking at accounting applications for blockchain tech ...there's little reason for them to recommend any of their clients use our blockchain when there are plenty of others out there, they can build their own internally managed one, or their clients could make their own.
what they ought to be looking into, however, are cash management options for their clients using bitUSD or similar bitassets on our blockchain.
-
Why is it always Ethereum and never Bitshares.
Where is Ethereum anyway? This is not a rhetorical question.
Do they have a client?
I went to www.ethereum.org but couldnt find anything there.
-
Why is it always Ethereum and never Bitshares.
Where is Ethereum anyway? This is not a rhetorical question.
Do they have a client?
I went to www.ethereum.org but couldnt find anything there.
For whatever reason, Etherium has very good PR behind them. As a result they've captured the majority of momentum in this space.
-
Where is Ethereum anyway? This is not a rhetorical question.
Do they have a client?
I went to www.ethereum.org but couldnt find anything there.
They are currently running a test network and are still in a pre-genesis stage ..
I am not so much into ethereum but regularily lurk in their subreddit .. it seems they are preparing to launch the blockchain soonish(tm) .. we may see the genesis within 2 weeks (don't bet on it)
-
Why is it always Ethereum and never Bitshares.
Simple: transparent trust
People know what it is, because it never changes.
BitShares investors have a flare for the grandiose avant-garde dynamo
-
People know what it is, because it never changes.
Are you positive about that?
How many ETH are created on each block? Can you tell me?
What's the hard cap, if there is any?
Ethereum never had to change (read: adapt) because they still don't have to ..
All they currently do is imaging how things might work in large scale ..
If BitShares was an experiment .. what would you call ethereum then?
-
Still in the ether...
http://intheoreum.org/#welcome
INTHEOREUM
ULTRA-CENTRALIZED TURING INCOMPLETE ARBITRARY TRUST APPLICATION ECONOMY
Based on Bobchain Technology
THE is the exchange symbol for Theory, the fuel that powers the InTheoreum network. Its kind of like money except we don't say that. Once a transaction has occured a C-APP can ask Bob about the state of a particular user account and Bob will respond with an accurate answer measured in Theory. Or not. It's as simple as that.
-
Why is it always Ethereum and never Bitshares.
Where is Ethereum anyway? This is not a rhetorical question.
Do they have a client?
I went to www.ethereum.org but couldnt find anything there.
I recall looking at their website and they had a huge page of consultants etc... IIRC dozens.
I visited it recently and noticed they only have a small group of like 6-7 people listed.
-
http://intheoreum.org/#welcome
Love this! :D I guess it applies to any cryptocoin, not just Ethereum, including us (hopefully only until 2.0, which means hopefully not for long)..
-
Still in the ether...
http://intheoreum.org/#welcome
Hilarious!
-
If BitShares was an experiment .. what would you call ethereum?
simple POW to POS chain, proposed with months of hindsight marketing advantage over the BitShrares real time dynamic development marketing plan (DDMPTM) which evolves over years of real time
-
Still in the ether...
http://intheoreum.org/#welcome
Hilarious!
lol yes, mavericks :)
-
Why is it always Ethereum and never Bitshares.
Where is Ethereum anyway? This is not a rhetorical question.
Do they have a client?
I went to www.ethereum.org but couldnt find anything there.
i wish Ethereum immense success, the world sure can use more crypto experimentation. Those guys seem to be trying to tackle the entire world of possible crypto, but no matter what their successes, we should always look to dominate the p2p asset exchange market. i think the worst decision we could make at this point is to dilute efforts to make the best exchanges and pegged assets with tangential ventures that butt up against other crypto ventures. simply producing a handful of winning pegged assets, like bitUSD, that go into broad circulation would make us all immensely rich and liberate countless sheeple from financial repression.
-
It is frustrating when Bitshares seems to be the redheaded step child of the crypto world (apologies to any redheaded step children out there). As near as I can tell Etherium has a great image, a great scope, but suffers from the same problem every large project does: It is worked on by humans. Where there are humans there is politics and conflict. They present a good external image but Vitalik's recent lashings out at Dan speak to an environment more akin to a traditional project than the dream team/project they show the media.
To beat some dead horses: Apple was late to the MP3 game with the iPod. Apple was late to the cell phone game with the iPhone. Tesla was late to the electric car game with their roadster.
Point being that the darling of the media's eye can quickly shift when better products emerge. Bitshares and Etherium can have great success without it needing to be at the expense of the other. Two approaches to similar problems opening up onto a massive market place.
Our time will come. In hodling I trust.
-
It is frustrating when Bitshares seems to be the redheaded step child of the crypto world (apologies to any redheaded step children out there). As near as I can tell Etherium has a great image, a great scope, but suffers from the same problem every large project does: It is worked on by humans. Where there are humans there is politics and conflict. They present a good external image but Vitalik's recent lashings out at Dan speak to an environment more akin to a traditional project than the dream team/project they show the media.
To beat some dead horses: Apple was late to the MP3 game with the iPod. Apple was late to the cell phone game with the iPhone. Tesla was late to the electric car game with their roadster.
Point being that the darling of the media's eye can quickly shift when better products emerge. Bitshares and Etherium can have great success without it needing to be at the expense of the other. Two approaches to similar problems opening up onto a massive market place.
Our time will come. In hodling I trust.
i agree completely. in fact, i consider myself lucky to be able to continue loading up on BTS at these suppressed prices. BTS being successful is anything but certain, so we def need to keep building the core products, marketing the hell out of them, and looking to bring on more application devs to plug us into other parts of the economy.
-
It is frustrating when Bitshares seems to be the redheaded step child of the crypto world (apologies to any redheaded step children out there). As near as I can tell Etherium has a great image, a great scope, but suffers from the same problem every large project does: It is worked on by humans. Where there are humans there is politics and conflict. They present a good external image but Vitalik's recent lashings out at Dan speak to an environment more akin to a traditional project than the dream team/project they show the media.
To beat some dead horses: Apple was late to the MP3 game with the iPod. Apple was late to the cell phone game with the iPhone. Tesla was late to the electric car game with their roadster.
Point being that the darling of the media's eye can quickly shift when better products emerge. Bitshares and Etherium can have great success without it needing to be at the expense of the other. Two approaches to similar problems opening up onto a massive market place.
Our time will come. In hodling I trust.
Good insights. +5%
-
As a first approximation, the failure rate of Bitcoin exchanges is 45%. The median lifetime of exchanges is 381 days.
http://www.coindesk.com/45-percent-of-bitcoin-exchanges-fail-study-finds/
If you translate the risk of holding a fiat iou on a centralised exchange into an annualised cost, it is an extremely risky proposition.
However someone like me who is doing a lot of trading lately with a portion of my portfolio, it is my only option (BitAssets 1.0 are not liquid enough) and I am in fiat IOU's up to 50% of the time.
I'm not sure about the very short term prospects for BTS price but there is definitely a market for a simple, robust, decentralised blockchain with liquid BitAssets & performance (BTS 2.0) that competes with a centralised exchange. + BitAssets have already been in existence for nearly a year.
Coinbase for example has already received >$75 million in investment and is only currently 7th in daily volume on CMC.
BTS has many areas of opportunity but just becoming a top 10 exchange (With BitUSD being far less riskier than centralised options) would still make it very successful regardless of what happens with Ethereum.
-
As a first approximation, the failure rate of Bitcoin exchanges is 45%. The median lifetime of exchanges is 381 days.
http://www.coindesk.com/45-percent-of-bitcoin-exchanges-fail-study-finds/
If you translate the risk of holding a fiat iou on a centralised exchange into an annualised cost, it is an extremely risky proposition.
However someone like me who is doing a lot of trading lately with a portion of my portfolio, it is my only option (BitAssets 1.0 are not liquid enough) and I am in fiat IOU's up to 50% of the time.
I'm not sure about the very short term prospects for BTS price but there is definitely a market for a simple, robust, decentralised blockchain with liquid BitAssets & performance (BTS 2.0) that competes with a centralised exchange. + BitAssets have already been in existence for nearly a year.
Coinbase for example has already received >$75 million in investment and is only currently 7th in daily volume on CMC.
BTS has many areas of opportunity but just becoming a top 10 exchange would still make it very successful regardless of what happens with Ethereum.
yeah except that i'm worried the incentive to buy bitassets, esp bitUSD, is being killed with 2.0:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17576.msg223724.html#msg223724
i completely agree that the financial world needs a blockchain-based p2p asset exchange and i loved the idea of the pegged assets that offered yield to buyers as an incentive to park capital. doing away with that yield and instead charging a premium to buy bitassets will erase a lot of the potential demand.
i hope i'm grossly misunderstanding this change, so i look forward to comments from others in community.
-
As a first approximation, the failure rate of Bitcoin exchanges is 45%. The median lifetime of exchanges is 381 days.
http://www.coindesk.com/45-percent-of-bitcoin-exchanges-fail-study-finds/
If you translate the risk of holding a fiat iou on a centralised exchange into an annualised cost, it is an extremely risky proposition.
However someone like me who is doing a lot of trading lately with a portion of my portfolio, it is my only option (BitAssets 1.0 are not liquid enough) and I am in fiat IOU's up to 50% of the time.
I'm not sure about the very short term prospects for BTS price but there is definitely a market for a simple, robust, decentralised blockchain with liquid BitAssets & performance (BTS 2.0) that competes with a centralised exchange. + BitAssets have already been in existence for nearly a year.
Coinbase for example has already received >$75 million in investment and is only currently 7th in daily volume on CMC.
BTS has many areas of opportunity but just becoming a top 10 exchange would still make it very successful regardless of what happens with Ethereum.
yeah except that i'm worried the incentive to buy bitassets, esp bitUSD, is being killed with 2.0:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17576.msg223724.html#msg223724
i completely agree that the financial world needs a blockchain-based p2p asset exchange and i loved the idea of the pegged assets that offered yield to buyers as an incentive to park capital. doing away with that yield and instead charging a premium to buy bitassets will erase a lot of the potential demand.
i hope i'm grossly misunderstanding this change, so i look forward to comments from others in community.
I personally don't mind losing the yield, I think that can be achieved in the bond market.
For me the question is whether the market will find BTS sufficiently decentralised, robust and simple and will the premium associated with making BitAssets more liquid make them attractive by comparison to using a centralised exchange. If so, you can compete with centralised exchanges or in partnership with them (in the case of CCEDK) & in that alone there is a reasonably lucrative future/base.
-
I personally don't mind losing the yield, I think that can be achieved in the bond market.
For me the question is whether the market will find BTS sufficiently decentralised, robust and simple and will the premium associated with making BitAssets more liquid make them attractive by comparison to using a centralised exchange. If so, you can compete with centralised exchanges or in partnership with them (in the case of CCEDK) & in that alone there is a reasonably lucrative future/base.
OK so if the bond market functions well enough to replace the current yield on bitUSD, then i agree...not a bad idea to segment the currency from the interest-bearing asset. the bond market may need to mature before there'll be much demand for bitUSD, though. we'll see, i suppose...
-
Why is it always Ethereum and never Bitshares.
People know what it is, because it never changes.
Sounds like a group that knows how to iterate and pivot, great stuff for innovation.
Read 'the lean startup'. I think you will enjoy it