BitShares Forum
Main => Technical Support => Topic started by: Akado on September 02, 2015, 08:46:33 am
-
Will we have privatized bitAssets on 2.0?
Don't we trust someone else to maintain the peg? Is there any difference? If not, we might just taking an option that we really criticized in the past. Wouldn't we be better off partnering up with nubits them since they have more volume and liquidity?
-
Will we have privatized bitAssets on 2.0?
Don't we trust someone else to maintain the peg? Is there any difference? If not, we might just taking an option that we really criticized in the past. Wouldn't we be better off partnering up with nubits them since they have more volume and liquidity?
Privatised bitAssets (MPAs) have one price feed, that's basically the only difference from regular MPAs - they still have to be shorted into existance with a matching buyer and seller.
-
"privatized" in this case means that the issue can define the price producers on his own .. it's not the shareholders that vote for a price producer as is the case for bitassets ..
NuBits works pretty similar to the FED afaik. Some entity decides that new NuBits have to be created if demand rises and offers an interest rate for to holders if they park their shares (lock them away) to reduce effective supply
-
maybe we can someone from nubits team on here to join this discussion..
-
Nubits doesn't use a price feed or any short-term price peg mechanism except subsidized market making (maybe they've made it profitable b/c there seems to be about 1000x less volume since I last looked at what they are doing).
The nubits price mechanism is roughly NSR holders review custodian positions and adjust "interest" rates (how quickly to create nubits not backed by debt or any other on-chain contract)
-
The nubits price mechanism is roughly NSR holders review custodian positions and adjust "interest" rates (how quickly to create nubits not backed by debt or any other on-chain contract)
I thought it was the monopolist market maker model?
-
The nubits price mechanism is roughly NSR holders review custodian positions and adjust "interest" rates (how quickly to create nubits not backed by debt or any other on-chain contract)
I thought it was the monopolist market maker model?
The custodians are the market makers. The monopoly is over the ability to issue nubits.
-
The custodians are the market makers. The monopoly is over the ability to issue nubits.
The market is made and the peg is maintained solely by the market makers, isn't it?
-
maybe we can someone from nubits team on here to join this discussion..
What did you guys want to know? We're very friendly. You can come join our board if you have any questions :D discuss.nubits.com
-
The custodians are the market makers. The monopoly is over the ability to issue nubits.
The market is made and the peg is maintained solely by the market makers, isn't it?
Yes, except they can be tugged around by NSR holders via parking rates.
-
The custodians are the market makers. The monopoly is over the ability to issue nubits.
The market is made and the peg is maintained solely by the market makers, isn't it?
Yes, except they can be tugged around by NSR holders via parking rates.
We can also grant NuShares custodial grants now. We auction off the NSR (or sell it on the open market) to raise funds which allow us to buy and burn NBT. It was with the initial NSR distribution the past few times, but the concept in effect has worked. We leverage the value of NSR to stimulate NBT demand and then remove the NBT from the supply. Here's an example: https://discuss.nubits.com/t/passed-nsr-sale-and-nbt-burn/2138/49?u=coingame (https://discuss.nubits.com/t/passed-nsr-sale-and-nbt-burn/2138/49?u=coingame). There's some other interesting profit models for the network at a conceptual stage. B&C exchange is in rapid development though so the NuBits core dev team has their attention split.
-
maybe we can someone from nubits team on here to join this discussion..
What did you guys want to know? We're very friendly. You can come join our board if you have any questions :D discuss.nubits.com
I may not be from the NuBits team, but I'm quite familiar with it :)
Aren't we all friendly? :D
-
maybe we can someone from nubits team on here to join this discussion..
What did you guys want to know? We're very friendly. You can come join our board if you have any questions :D discuss.nubits.com
I may not be from the NuBits team, but I'm quite familiar with it :)
Aren't we all friendly? :D
Ehhhhh I'm not sure I would go that far given the posts I read about NuBits on here over the past year, but it's nice to see ponzi scheme isn't being thrown around so loosely anymore.
-
Ehhhhh I'm not sure I would go that far given the posts I read about NuBits on here over the past year, but it's nice to see ponzi scheme isn't being thrown around so loosely anymore.
Aren't you doing almost exactly what FED is doing?
-
Ehhhhh I'm not sure I would go that far given the posts I read about NuBits on here over the past year, but it's nice to see ponzi scheme isn't being thrown around so loosely anymore.
Aren't you doing almost exactly what FED is doing?
Nooo! The difference is, they announced to the public they are accepting private bids for their own 'feds' chairs. The Fed on the other hand starts the process by sending private invitation for the corresponding private auction.
BIG difference there :)
-
Nooo! The difference is, they announced to the public they are accepting private bids for their own 'feds' chairs. The Fed on the other hand starts the process by sending private invitation for the corresponding private auction.
BIG difference there :)
You got me ..
Good to have you back on board :D
-
[...]but it's nice to see ponzi scheme isn't being thrown around so loosely anymore.
I wouldn't hold single individuals responsible for a whole community!
Aren't you doing almost exactly what FED is doing?
Nooo! The difference is, they announced to the public they are accepting private bids for their own 'feds' chairs. The Fed on the other hand starts the process by sending private invitation for the corresponding private auction. :)
If you translate the 'feds' chairs to NuShares, then yes, I agree.
Everybody can have such a chair. They can be bought at exchanges.
Initially they haven't been distributed freely to everyone, but more like the fed approach: invitations to people.
It was argued that this was necessary to bootstrap the whole thing and I agree that giving the chairs to people who might be in for the long-run rather than a quick buck was helpful to get the ball rolling.
While one can find that segregating, a wide distribution was ensured to make sure the chairs are sufficiently decentralized.
Nu is not just a regular coin, but a corporation. While I might find it unfair how it started and that not everybody could be in from the start, I did not make the rules; rules which helped Nu get where it is today: having issued a stable crypto currency that has kept the peg closely for almost one year.
Regarding the mechanisms with that Nu controls NBT supply to keep the peg stable I might need to expand the scope.
Nu is run by the 'fed chairs', the NSR holders. Nu is using a PoS process.
NSR holders that mint can cast votes each time they successfully mint a block.
One type of vote is a custodial vote.
With such a custodial vote NBT can be granted. They appear from thin air by protocol on the custodial grant address as soon as 5,001 blocks in the last 10,000 consecutive blocks carried such a vote.
They are sold by the custodian and the revenue is meant to be distributed to the NSR holders, spent for development, spent for paying liquidity providers, etc. (whatever the intention of the custodial grant was).
This way new NBT get into circulation.
To reduce the number of circulating NBT there are basically two ways.
One is reducing the number of NBT only temporarily and in the end creates even more NBT: parking.
Parking removes NBT (as far as I understand they are destroyed and created again (including the parking rate interest) after the parking period has ended), but only temporarily. Parked NBT will come back to haunt the network with even more NBT, because they generate a parking interest (which is voted for by, guess whom: the NSR holders). Parking was the reason why Nu was accused of being a ponzi scheme.
Without mechanisms to reduce supply permanently this accusation would have been fair.
Which leads us to permanent removal of NBT: burning.
NBT burning has been available right from the start of Nu. A convenient, reliable, decentralized mechanism to fuel the burning was missing, though.
The NSR holders understood that and made the developers create another type of grant: NSR grants. NSR holders can vote for NSR grants like they can vote for NBT grants.
The same rules that apply to NBT grants are in place: 5,001 of 10,000 blocks are required, issued NSR are created by protocol at the NSR grant address.
The NSR custodian sells the NSR, buys NBT and burns them. An example (https://discuss.nubits.com/t/passed-nsr-sale-and-nbt-burn/2138/49) has been given by @CoinGame
Tada!
Any more questions? :)
-
[...]but it's nice to see ponzi scheme isn't being thrown around so loosely anymore.
I wouldn't hold single individuals responsible for a whole community!
Aren't you doing almost exactly what FED is doing?
Nooo! The difference is, they announced to the public they are accepting private bids for their own 'feds' chairs. The Fed on the other hand starts the process by sending private invitation for the corresponding private auction. :)
If you translate the 'feds' chairs to NuShares, then yes, I agree.
Everybody can have such a chair. They can be bought at exchanges.
Initially they haven't been distributed freely to everyone, but more like the fed approach: invitations to people.
It was argued that this was necessary to bootstrap the whole thing and I agree that giving the chairs to people who might be in for the long-run rather than a quick buck was helpful to get the ball rolling.
While one can find that segregating, a wide distribution was ensured to make sure the chairs are sufficiently decentralized.
Nu is not just a regular coin, but a corporation. While I might find it unfair how it started and that not everybody could be in from the start, I did not make the rules; rules which helped Nu get where it is today: having issued a stable crypto currency that has kept the peg closely for almost one year.
Regarding the mechanisms with that Nu controls NBT supply to keep the peg stable I might need to expand the scope.
Nu is run by the 'fed chairs', the NSR holders. Nu is using a PoS process.
NSR holders that mint can cast votes each time they successfully mint a block.
One type of vote is a custodial vote.
With such a custodial vote NBT can be granted. They appear from thin air by protocol on the custodial grant address as soon as 5,001 blocks in the last 10,000 consecutive blocks carried such a vote.
They are sold by the custodian and the revenue is meant to be distributed to the NSR holders, spent for development, spent for paying liquidity providers, etc. (whatever the intention of the custodial grant was).
This way new NBT get into circulation.
To reduce the number of circulating NBT there are basically two ways.
One is reducing the number of NBT only temporarily and in the end creates even more NBT: parking.
Parking removes NBT (as far as I understand they are destroyed and created again (including the parking rate interest) after the parking period has ended), but only temporarily. Parked NBT will come back to haunt the network with even more NBT, because they generate a parking interest (which is voted for by, guess whom: the NSR holders). Parking was the reason why Nu was accused of being a ponzi scheme.
Without mechanisms to reduce supply permanently this accusation would have been fair.
Which leads us to permanent removal of NBT: burning.
NBT burning has been available right from the start of Nu. A convenient, reliable, decentralized mechanism to fuel the burning was missing, though.
The NSR holders understood that and made the developers create another type of grant: NSR grants. NSR holders can vote for NSR grants like they can vote for NBT grants.
The same rules that apply to NBT grants are in place: 5,001 of 10,000 blocks are required, issued NSR are created by protocol at the NSR grant address.
The NSR custodian sells the NSR, buys NBT and burns them. An example (https://discuss.nubits.com/t/passed-nsr-sale-and-nbt-burn/2138/49) has been given by @CoinGame
Tada!
Any more questions? :)
Unfortunately for me... but yes, I was fully aware of all this ...and so are countless others here, I am sure.
As for distributing it "in a 'close-auction' so it can be given to people who will care about it", is the same fake premise I am fighting with Stan in the other thread.
BS... and I do not mean Bit Shares!
-
maybe we can someone from nubits team on here to join this discussion..
wasn't meant as an invitation after all?
Unfortunately for me... but yes, I was fully aware of all this ...and so are countless others here, I am sure.
As for distributing it "in a 'close-auction' so it can be given to people who will care about it", is the same fake premise I am fighting with Stan in the other thread.
BS... and I do not mean Bit Shares!
Sorry for wasting your time if you and countless others here already know all this.
Which other thread do you mean in which you are fighting with Stan?
Maybe I find your problem with the distribution in that thread given that I'm still interested in spending my time here.
-
maybe we can someone from nubits team on here to join this discussion..
wasn't meant as an invitation after all?
sure it was .. i will try to reach out to tomJoad
-
maybe we can someone from nubits team on here to join this discussion..
wasn't meant as an invitation after all?
sure it was .. i will try to reach out to tomJoad
Thank you for your reply.
I was not sure whether I should rather spend my time somewhere else if everybody here already knows everything.
But I should stick to my own assessment:
I wouldn't hold single individuals responsible for a whole community!
[...]
Sending a message to Tom on the nubits forum (https://discuss.nubits.com/users/tomjoad/activity) should require registration. That is no big barrier, but if you'd like I can shoot him a message regarding your invitation.
-
[...]but it's nice to see ponzi scheme isn't being thrown around so loosely anymore.
I wouldn't hold single individuals responsible for a whole community!
Aren't you doing almost exactly what FED is doing?
Nooo! The difference is, they announced to the public they are accepting private bids for their own 'feds' chairs. The Fed on the other hand starts the process by sending private invitation for the corresponding private auction. :)
If you translate the 'feds' chairs to NuShares, then yes, I agree.
Everybody can have such a chair. They can be bought at exchanges.
Initially they haven't been distributed freely to everyone, but more like the fed approach: invitations to people.
It was argued that this was necessary to bootstrap the whole thing and I agree that giving the chairs to people who might be in for the long-run rather than a quick buck was helpful to get the ball rolling.
While one can find that segregating, a wide distribution was ensured to make sure the chairs are sufficiently decentralized.
Nu is not just a regular coin, but a corporation. While I might find it unfair how it started and that not everybody could be in from the start, I did not make the rules; rules which helped Nu get where it is today: having issued a stable crypto currency that has kept the peg closely for almost one year.
Regarding the mechanisms with that Nu controls NBT supply to keep the peg stable I might need to expand the scope.
Nu is run by the 'fed chairs', the NSR holders. Nu is using a PoS process.
NSR holders that mint can cast votes each time they successfully mint a block.
One type of vote is a custodial vote.
With such a custodial vote NBT can be granted. They appear from thin air by protocol on the custodial grant address as soon as 5,001 blocks in the last 10,000 consecutive blocks carried such a vote.
They are sold by the custodian and the revenue is meant to be distributed to the NSR holders, spent for development, spent for paying liquidity providers, etc. (whatever the intention of the custodial grant was).
This way new NBT get into circulation.
To reduce the number of circulating NBT there are basically two ways.
One is reducing the number of NBT only temporarily and in the end creates even more NBT: parking.
Parking removes NBT (as far as I understand they are destroyed and created again (including the parking rate interest) after the parking period has ended), but only temporarily. Parked NBT will come back to haunt the network with even more NBT, because they generate a parking interest (which is voted for by, guess whom: the NSR holders). Parking was the reason why Nu was accused of being a ponzi scheme.
Without mechanisms to reduce supply permanently this accusation would have been fair.
Which leads us to permanent removal of NBT: burning.
NBT burning has been available right from the start of Nu. A convenient, reliable, decentralized mechanism to fuel the burning was missing, though.
The NSR holders understood that and made the developers create another type of grant: NSR grants. NSR holders can vote for NSR grants like they can vote for NBT grants.
The same rules that apply to NBT grants are in place: 5,001 of 10,000 blocks are required, issued NSR are created by protocol at the NSR grant address.
The NSR custodian sells the NSR, buys NBT and burns them. An example (https://discuss.nubits.com/t/passed-nsr-sale-and-nbt-burn/2138/49) has been given by @CoinGame
Tada!
Any more questions? :)
Thanks for the explanation :)
-
As for distributing it "in a 'close-auction' so it can be given to people who will care about it", is the same fake premise I am fighting with Stan in the other thread.
The market price of NSR has been close to -- even at times dipping below -- the IPO price for a while now. Anyone who wants to get in at the IPO price ($18 - $24 / 10k NSR) is having the opportunity.
-
Ehhhhh I'm not sure I would go that far given the posts I read about NuBits on here over the past year, but it's nice to see ponzi scheme isn't being thrown around so loosely anymore.
Aren't you doing almost exactly what FED is doing?
Our project has various approaches to manage the available supply. That is the vaguest comparison to the FED that could be made, and it could probably envelop BitShares as well in how vague it is. Even so, "Aren't you doing almost exactly what the FED is doing?", to me, is like asking if we practice dark magic. Next comes baseless uneducated murmurs that we're performing witchcraft (see the post above by tonyk), and without any investigation people are trying to burn us at the stake. Does that make sense? It's like me asking "Doesn't xeroc do exactly what a hacker does?" because you use a computer, the internet, and type on a keyboard. The only point of the question from the get go is to play off peoples negative view of what i'm comparing you with.
It's unfair, but that's nothing new on this forum.
What we do is give people who own NuShares the ability to vote on actions of the network.They've included who is in charge of representing Nu in an official capacity, protocol changes of the client, and how to represent information on official properties (and a lot more). All through the motion system. Those same shareholders can vote on decisions that can adjust the supply. Their job is to maintain the peg, and they're given as many tools as possible to do that. There's transaction fee voting, park rate voting, NuBits and NuShares grants (each with their own roles and implementations that is constantly evolving). People have even invented ways outside of the protocol to help perform that duty. https://docs.nubits.com/liquidity-pools/ (https://docs.nubits.com/liquidity-pools/)
There's a lot of really cool stuff happening, an even more coming down the pipeline. It's an open direct democracy in action, and that's what people love so much about it. That and the fact our project maintains a consistent direction, and we meet our goals. Our successes and failures are well known, but we have managed to persevere through all of them. We're about to hit our one year anniversary of our launch later this month and it's been one hell of a ride. https://docs.nubits.com/history/ (https://docs.nubits.com/history/)
-
To reduce the number of circulating NBT there are basically two ways.
Actually, now that Nu v2.0 has released we have 3 ways to reduce the supply. In addition to parking and burning, we also now have variable transaction fees. Shareholders have the ability to vote on the transaction fee to set it higher or lower. As the number of transactions on the Nu Network rises, we can use the fee as a tool to slowly erode the supply over time. I'm also sure that more methods of reducing the supply will be discovered in the future.
-
To reduce the number of circulating NBT there are basically two ways.
Actually, now that Nu v2.0 has released we have 3 ways to reduce the supply. In addition to parking and burning, we also now have variable transaction fees. Shareholders have the ability to vote on the transaction fee to set it higher or lower. As the number of transactions on the Nu Network rises, we can use the fee as a tool to slowly erode the supply over time. I'm also sure that more methods of reducing the supply will be discovered in the future.
Actually I lake MKR more - they have our (BTS) ways, your(Nubies) ways and collateral by other assets (BTC, real gold etc).
-
Oh my, this speaks volumes...
...although I'm completely new here, I'm going to make use of a forum feature, I've never used at any forum before: the ignore list.
But as tonyk doesn't seem to be interested in discussion and rather wants to cause a disturbance, I might very well save myself from reading his/her posts.
I might have found the link to this thread
[...]As for distributing it "in a 'close-auction' so it can be given to people who will care about it", is the same fake premise I am fighting with Stan in the other thread. [...]
with a forum search, but answering this question
[...]Which other thread do you mean in which you are fighting with Stan?
Maybe I find your problem with the distribution in that thread[...]
would have been polite and helpful.
I don't want to get the rest of the discussion spoiled by this single user (and sooner or later I'd feel the urge to get down to his/her level), so
Bye, tony!
[edit]
And to all others, especially to @cass and @betax: thank you for the welcome!
[/edit]
-
Oh my, this speaks volumes...
...although I'm completely new here, I'm going to make use of a forum feature, I've never used at any forum before: the ignore list.
But as tonyk doesn't seem to be interested in discussion and rather wants to cause a disturbance, I might very well save myself from reading his/her posts.
I might have found the link to this thread
[...]As for distributing it "in a 'close-auction' so it can be given to people who will care about it", is the same fake premise I am fighting with Stan in the other thread. [...]
with a forum search, but answering this question
[...]Which other thread do you mean in which you are fighting with Stan?
Maybe I find your problem with the distribution in that thread[...]
would have been polite and helpful.
I don't want to get the rest of the discussion spoiled by this single user (and sooner or later I'd feel the urge to get down to his/her level), so
Bye, tony!
unfortunately for each and all of us there is no "ignore button"...
but Bye anyway!
-
maybe we can someone from nubits team on here to join this discussion..
wasn't meant as an invitation after all?
sure it was .. i will try to reach out to tomJoad
Thank you for your reply.
I was not sure whether I should rather spend my time somewhere else if everybody here already knows everything.
But I should stick to my own assessment:
I wouldn't hold single individuals responsible for a whole community!
[...]
Sending a message to Tom on the nubits forum (https://discuss.nubits.com/users/tomjoad/activity) should require registration. That is no big barrier, but if you'd like I can shoot him a message regarding your invitation.
thx i'm in contact with!
edit: i've invited TomJoad from NuBits team to join this discussion
-
Nooo! The difference is, they announced to the public they are accepting private bids for their own 'feds' chairs. The Fed on the other hand starts the process by sending private invitation for the corresponding private auction.
BIG difference there :)
Good to have you back on board :D
this +5%
-
Oh my, this speaks volumes...
...although I'm completely new here, I'm going to make use of a forum feature, I've never used at any forum before: the ignore list.
But as tonyk doesn't seem to be interested in discussion and rather wants to cause a disturbance, I might very well save myself from reading his/her posts.
....well I found for you the perfect avatar to use on our forums :P
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HDwU54-LGG8/Ve171l-Wo6I/AAAAAAAADds/-lxB-LCSpbs/s1600/nubits.png)
edit:
I improoved the avatar :P
-
But as tonyk doesn't seem to be interested in discussion and rather wants to cause a disturbance {aka: posts things I do not like}
I might very well save myself from reading his/her posts.
....well I found for you the perfect avata [for you] to use on our forums :P
(https://s3-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.Mddbb69186cf92dd37099227562056078o0%26pid%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=d9b0a7afdc92f12f65a084a7fb41631e)
PS You have always been good with those pic's dani the lion, but this one is a home run (American reference you do not need to get, but a big time score)
-
Oh my, this speaks volumes...
...although I'm completely new here, I'm going to make use of a forum feature, I've never used at any forum before: the ignore list.
But as tonyk doesn't seem to be interested in discussion and rather wants to cause a disturbance, I might very well save myself from reading his/her posts.
....well I found for you the perfect avatar to use on our forums :P
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HDwU54-LGG8/Ve171l-Wo6I/AAAAAAAADds/-lxB-LCSpbs/s1600/nubits.png)
edit:
I improoved the avatar :P
Yeah, you are right. Let me guess: you need the motto of this avatar if you look at the bitUSD exchange rate (http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/bitusd/)? :P
For documentation purposes (in case it might soonTM look better than in the last few days) - oops, that's what I wanted to prevent...
edit: Once I've calmed down, I'll remove the image and put you to the ignore list as well :P
(http://i.imgur.com/p50vp6k.png)
-
...
So you point is - everyone needs some a fed like system (or NU bits price fixers- however they are called) and there is absolutely no, No way around it ?
-
Sending a message to Tom on the nubits forum (https://discuss.nubits.com/users/tomjoad/activity) should require registration. That is no big barrier, but if you'd like I can shoot him a message regarding your invitation.
thx i'm in contact with!
edit: i've invited TomJoad from NuBits team to join this discussion
I wonder whether he wants to join this partly hostile environment...
In my world hospitality looks different from what I see here.
Yeah, I live in a strange world ;)
-
Yeah, you are right. Let me guess: you need the motto of this avatar if you look at the bitUSD exchange rate (http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/bitusd/)? :P
It could be a possibility if I was not aware of the Graphene(bts2.0) release in about 30 Days ;)
Believe it or not if we had not this information the pegg to the dollar would be just fine...
PS I am not expecting you will understand this now, but you surely will in the near future. If I am wrong and you get it now, good for you,
since you will have the opportunity to make some decent profit's ;)
-
Sending a message to Tom on the nubits forum (https://discuss.nubits.com/users/tomjoad/activity) should require registration. That is no big barrier, but if you'd like I can shoot him a message regarding your invitation.
thx i'm in contact with!
edit: i've invited TomJoad from NuBits team to join this discussion
I wonder whether he wants to join this partly hostile environment...
In my world hospitality looks different from what I see here.
Yeah, I live in a strange world ;)
believe me at the end of the day you will love tonyk @ co.
speaking from self experience ;)
-
Sending a message to Tom on the nubits forum (https://discuss.nubits.com/users/tomjoad/activity) should require registration. That is no big barrier, but if you'd like I can shoot him a message regarding your invitation.
thx i'm in contact with!
edit: i've invited TomJoad from NuBits team to join this discussion
I wonder whether he wants to join this partly hostile environment...
In my world hospitality looks different from what I see here.
Yeah, I live in a strange world ;)
we will see .. to offer the possibilty is what counts to me ...
-
Sending a message to Tom on the nubits forum (https://discuss.nubits.com/users/tomjoad/activity) should require registration. That is no big barrier, but if you'd like I can shoot him a message regarding your invitation.
thx i'm in contact with!
edit: i've invited TomJoad from NuBits team to join this discussion
I wonder whether he wants to join this partly hostile environment...
In my world hospitality looks different from what I see here.
Yeah, I live in a strange world ;)
I for one do not care about being nice or hospitable.[and no, I I have never called Nu ponzi... while I have never spared epithets like 'stupid, idiotic, etc' ]
So... NuBits is a idiotic creation of people who think they are better than the world we live in. Also soooo proud of their *wrong* perception of how things work.
They might be great coders but the time it will take to reeducate them...just not worth the effort.[but BM might have some other inclement at the time you contact him... after all, on a dark day of his, he created brownies...]
-
edit: Once I've calmed down, I'll remove the image and put you to the ignore list as well :P
I wonder whether he wants to join this partly hostile environment...
In my world hospitality looks different from what I see here.
Yeah, I live in a strange world ;)
You are welcome to open a private conversation on our forums vs TomJoad :P
PS just kidding! But I couldn't resist after your post's :)
Hope you have a sense humor :)
-
FYI: TomJoaD answered me, he will join this conversation later this day!
Pls guys let's not hijack this thread.. come on, let's calm down and try to stick to facts and give a warm welcome ..
i'm really appreciated his joining! my 2 cents
-
FYI: TomJoaD answered me, he will join this conversation later this day!
Pls guys let's not hijack this thread.. come on, let's calm down and try to stick to facts and give a warm welcome ..
i'm really appreciated his joining! my 2 cents
Sure. I will give him my [ fairly ] worm shot. :)
I treat all N[ew/u]Bi[dd/t] ers equally!
ohh, we will have a paaaarty [dancing white man style]
-
tony was ahead of his time and went long on the wrong wave. tony's funny in a dennis leary vs george carlin death match sort of way. and while all this was heppening the nubits team was making some money by teaching the humans what a focussed and trusted team of investors and developers can do for those looking to hedge the crypto decline of 2014. a fine service considering the primitive tools available. an effort and.purpose that they can b proud of. and judging by the recent rise in bts price on news of a launch date, it looks like those who made money on Peercoinubits will be timing the next set of bts waves
well said...but I truly doubt anyone who saw Nub as something good, can appreciate the true beauty of BTS. Something like doubting that just because Nazi party has come to power against oppression, its members will ever deeply appreciate democracy.
[the above is figure of speech of course - Nubits is not Nazi nor Ponzi in any way shape or form...faar, faar from it]
-
tony was ahead of his time and went long on the wrong wave. tony's funny in a dennis leary vs george carlin death match sort of way. and while all this was heppening the nubits team was making some money by teaching the humans what a focussed and trusted team of investors and developers can do for those looking to hedge the crypto decline of 2014. a fine service considering the primitive tools available. an effort and.purpose that they can b proud of. and judging by the recent rise in bts price on news of a launch date, it looks like those who made money on Peercoinubits will be timing the next set of bts waves
well said...but I truly doubt anyone who saw Nub as something good, can appreciate the true beauty of BTS. Something like doubting that just because Nazi party has come to power against oppression, its members will ever deeply appreciate democracy.
[the above is figure of speech of course - Nubits is not Nazi nor Ponzi in any way shape or form...faar, faar from it]
Yes.. and yes to your previous comments. +5%
-
So, I'll go ahead and put my head in the sand here and just blithely push forward what a NBT/BitUSD partnership would look like.
An NBT/BitUSD peg:
There are arguments that can be made about who would benefit more from such a pegged pair. However, a simple compromise could easily be reached between the two parties such that all users of BitUSD can utilize the liquidity of NBT markets while still keeping their funds primarily in BitUSD. Such an operation would need to be paid for, and the compromise would be such that Nu pays for the NBT side and BitAssets pays for the BitUSD side. Of course there would be no price feed, 1 NBT = 1 BitUSD.
What is the cost in BitUSD?
I am going to guess that the cost is something like 0.2%/day. Looking at the BitUSD daily volume on coinmarketcap, it looks like $1,000 targets would suffice. The end cost would be $2/day, or 730 BitUSD/year.
-
maybe we can someone from nubits team on here to join this discussion..
What did you guys want to know? We're very friendly. You can come join our board if you have any questions :D discuss.nubits.com
I may not be from the NuBits team, but I'm quite familiar with it :)
Aren't we all friendly? :D
Ehhhhh I'm not sure I would go that far given the posts I read about NuBits on here over the past year, but it's nice to see ponzi scheme isn't being thrown around so loosely anymore.
Touché!
-
FYI: TomJoaD answered me, he will join this conversation later this day!
Pls guys let's not hijack this thread.. come on, let's calm down and try to stick to facts and give a warm welcome ..
i'm really appreciated his joining! my 2 cents
+5%
This! Both communities only have to gain with this and any other discussion. We both want to succeed and our objective is the same, provide stable currencies with the best peg possible in the more secure and decentralized way. We all can learn a lot with each other, who knows, this could even spark the next big idea for decentralized currencies that could be a considerable better way to achieve it, other than the ways we found out. I would appreciate if members from Nu community didn't leave. Whoever doesn't like each other, please just ignore, it's not that hard. We are all in the same boat, we all want the same. What if both communities have completely different ways to achieve a stable currency or whatever they want to achieve? What matters is trying to develop the best way possible and this is done much more easier than working separately, without discussing and sharing ideas from both sides.
The fact I choose this or that way, doesn't make it the supreme way, both can succeed or fail miserably. It's up to us to try and do something better.
-
[...]Both communities only have to gain with this and any other discussion.[...]
Discussion would be nice. So far I've mostly seen insults, prejudice and mockery.
There are for sure exceptions like @cass, @betax or @akado in this thread (I hope I don't tread on someone's toes forgetting him/her in this list), but I'm not going to waste time in environments in which "normal" or friendly behaviour is the exception.
....well I found for you the perfect avatar to use on our forums :P
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HDwU54-LGG8/Ve171l-Wo6I/AAAAAAAADds/-lxB-LCSpbs/s1600/nubits.png)
edit:
I improoved the avatar :P
tony was ahead of his time and went long on the wrong wave. tony's funny in a dennis leary vs george carlin death match sort of way. and while all this was heppening the nubits team was making some money by teaching the humans what a focussed and trusted team of investors and developers can do for those looking to hedge the crypto decline of 2014. a fine service considering the primitive tools available. an effort and.purpose that they can b proud of. and judging by the recent rise in bts price on news of a launch date, it looks like those who made money on Peercoinubits will be timing the next set of bts waves
tony was ahead of his time and went long on the wrong wave. tony's funny in a dennis leary vs george carlin death match sort of way. and while all this was heppening the nubits team was making some money by teaching the humans what a focussed and trusted team of investors and developers can do for those looking to hedge the crypto decline of 2014. a fine service considering the primitive tools available. an effort and.purpose that they can b proud of. and judging by the recent rise in bts price on news of a launch date, it looks like those who made money on Peercoinubits will be timing the next set of bts waves
well said...but I truly doubt anyone who saw Nub as something good, can appreciate the true beauty of BTS. Something like doubting that just because Nazi party has come to power against oppression, its members will ever deeply appreciate democracy.
[the above is figure of speech of course - Nubits is not Nazi nor Ponzi in any way shape or form...faar, faar from it]
Yes.. and yes to your previous comments. +5%
-
If y'all can figure out how to get together a couple hundred bitUSD, or at least pass the idea around, I could get a thread going on the nubits forum, or even draft up a motion. We could probably get bter or ccedk on board with an nbt/bitUSD pair, I'm sure Ronny would be thrilled if we asked him. I could support the pool as a NuPond project myself. We could even do a 4% spread, y'all swing by as much as 30 or 40% some days, so even that should be very beneficial.
Anyway, I'll just throw that at the board and see if it sticks.
-
An NBT/BitUSD peg:
There are arguments that can be made about who would benefit more from such a pegged pair. However, a simple compromise could easily be reached between the two parties such that all users of BitUSD can utilize the liquidity of NBT markets while still keeping their funds primarily in BitUSD. Such an operation would need to be paid for, and the compromise would be such that Nu pays for the NBT side and BitAssets pays for the BitUSD side. Of course there would be no price feed, 1 NBT = 1 BitUSD.
I don't think this would actually work, since bitUSD is designed to have a value floor at 1 USD, and will trade at a premium at other times, whereas (I think) nuBits is pegged at parity with USD?
Certainly if I added a nuBits/bitUSD market to metaexchange right now, bitUSD would trade at $1.25 worth of nuBits and above, but that's the 'old' bitUSD...
edit: having said all that, I think having a nuBits/bitUSD market would be a good thing in the long run. If anyone has 10 or so BTC worth of bitUSD and we can get a similar amount of nuBits together we could have an interested party run a metaexchange node to provide liquidity for that market.
-
value floor at 1 USD
Oh I see. So you guys aren't even trying to keep BitUSD equal to a dollar then, just more than $1. Yah, in that case it's an asymmetric peg and it wouldn't work properly. There are ways to do it, but not efficiently with the current software.
-
value floor at 1 USD
Oh I see. So you guys aren't even trying to keep BitUSD equal to a dollar then, just more than $1. Yah, in that case it's an asymmetric peg and it wouldn't work properly. There are ways to do it, but not efficiently with the current software.
If it doesn't work, then a Bitusd will do a forced settlement and get the pegged price 24 hours later. Not sure why you say it won't work. Sounds like you still need to do more digging before you reach this conclusion.
-
If it doesn't work, then a Bitusd will do a forced settlement and get the pegged price 24 hours later. Not sure why you say it won't work. Sounds like you still need to do more digging before you reach this conclusion.
As a market maker, how do you price that in though? It makes designing a model much more complicated - IMO it will just lead to a wider spread due to uncertainty.
-
https://www.ccedk.com/bitusd-usd
There are over $10,000 in buy orders above $1.01. As long as that's the case, a custodian trying to keep a peg with any kind of reasonable spread would drown. Why aren't those people cashing in for 24 hours later at 1% gains? That pair is highly unlikely to experience that kind of volume in a 24 hour period. Forgive my ignorance of how bitUSD works.
Also, the 'it' i was referring to when saying it wouldn't work was an NBT/BitUSD shareholder supported peg. I wasn't saying your entire cryptosystem doesn't work, as y'all are clearly still here.
-
value floor at 1 USD
Oh I see. So you guys aren't even trying to keep BitUSD equal to a dollar then, just more than $1. Yah, in that case it's an asymmetric peg and it wouldn't work properly. There are ways to do it, but not efficiently with the current software.
If it doesn't work, then a Bitusd will do a forced settlement and get the pegged price 24 hours later. Not sure why you say it won't work. Sounds like you still need to do more digging before you reach this conclusion.
If you find a way, I am ready to support it! I am oh such a sucker for untraditional ways of thinking which could in fact turn into a successful change of outcome.
-
If it doesn't work, then a Bitusd will do a forced settlement and get the pegged price 24 hours later. Not sure why you say it won't work. Sounds like you still need to do more digging before you reach this conclusion.
As a market maker, how do you price that in though? It makes designing a model much more complicated - IMO it will just lead to a wider spread due to uncertainty.
Higher spread true. But does that mean the peg won't share the same volatility of Bitusd? That's what is really needed at first anyways.
-
https://www.ccedk.com/bitusd-usd
There are over $10,000 in buy orders above $1.01. As long as that's the case, a custodian trying to keep a peg with any kind of reasonable spread would drown. Why aren't those people cashing in for 24 hours later at 1% gains? That pair is highly unlikely to experience that kind of volume in a 24 hour period. Forgive my ignorance of how bitUSD works.
Also, the 'it' i was referring to when saying it wouldn't work was an NBT/BitUSD shareholder supported peg. I wasn't saying your entire cryptosystem doesn't work, as y'all are clearly still here.
Oh I gotcha. Well Bitusd is not implemented yet, so I'm taking a glancing guess that those buy orders will stay above 1.01 in Bitshares 2.0. The custodian will not have to maintain the spread. People aren't cashing in for a 1% gain because they probably purchased it at a 1% cost. So it would generally net out.
-
value floor at 1 USD
Oh I see. So you guys aren't even trying to keep BitUSD equal to a dollar then, just more than $1. Yah, in that case it's an asymmetric peg and it wouldn't work properly. There are ways to do it, but not efficiently with the current software.
If it doesn't work, then a Bitusd will do a forced settlement and get the pegged price 24 hours later. Not sure why you say it won't work. Sounds like you still need to do more digging before you reach this conclusion.
If you find a way, I am ready to support it! I am oh such a sucker for untraditional ways of thinking which could in fact turn into a successful change of outcome.
I dont understand this statement? This is whats going to be implemented in Bitshares 2.0. Is there something I am missing?
-
Higher spread true. But does that mean the peg won't share the same volatility of Bitusd? That's what is really needed at first anyways.
The spread in a nuBits/bitUSD market would be as wide as the bitUSD volatility + nuBits volatility
-
My bad guys-- I jumped mid-way into the conversation. Didn't realize this was talking about a Privatized Nubits on the BTS network....
-
I bet we could peg the price at $1.05 with +-$0.05 offset. The reward for y'all is that people would have somewhere to buy BitUSD. Custodians that sell their BitUSD for NBT would proceed to trade it for USD at a 0.4% loss here: https://www.ccedk.com/nbt-usd. Then they could trade on the meta-exchange to get BitUSD back again. I still don't really get how BitUSD are created though, so I might be wrong. If a custodian has $109.4 and wants at least 100 BitUSD and is willing to wait 24 hours, can this be done on the bitshares network? Would it involve buying BTS and turning it into BitUSD? In that case, it might be easier to sell the nbt for btc. Anyway, this could totally work. In return, NBT holders would have another thing they can sell their NBT for.
-
So, we could even do away with the dual sided support entirely. Y'all seem to have buy support figured out pretty well, so we could focus purely on BitUSD sell support (which is equivalent to NBT buy support, something we need). We'd just need to figure out a price feed mechanism using your internal price feed mechanism and a few particularly chosen Nu liquidity pathways. I'd expect that price feed would deviate from $1 far less than than the actual BitUSD price on the market does. Essentially, y'all would end up paying us BitUSD which we would then put up as a sell wall and use the NBT we receive to subsidize custodians who are willing to hold BitUSD as a sell wall and convert it back into BitUSD via the meta-market or whatever when it gets sold. Since it's decentralized, the wait times are mitigated by having custodians take turns or whatever. It works out, we've seen it happen. The hard part is calculating the price feed because I don't know your system very well at all.
-
So, we could even do away with the dual sided support entirely. Y'all seem to have buy support figured out pretty well, so we could focus purely on BitUSD sell support (which is equivalent to NBT buy support, something we need). We'd just need to figure out a price feed mechanism using your internal price feed mechanism and a few particularly chosen Nu liquidity pathways. I'd expect that price feed would deviate from $1 far less than than the actual BitUSD price on the market does. Essentially, y'all would end up paying us BitUSD which we would then put up as a sell wall and use the NBT we receive to subsidize custodians who are willing to hold BitUSD as a sell wall and convert it back into BitUSD via the meta-market or whatever when it gets sold. Since it's decentralized, the wait times are mitigated by having custodians take turns or whatever. It works out, we've seen it happen. The hard part is calculating the price feed because I don't know your system very well at all.
Am I the only one not getting what you mean?
-
Subsidized liquidity services. You give us money, we give you liquidity.
-
Subsidized liquidity services. You give us money, we give you liquidity.
Aha!
-
Ah Ho!
-
Ah Ho!
hey tom welcome aboard..nice u joined the discussion ... :)
-
FYI: TomJoaD answered me, he will join this conversation later this day!
Pls guys let's not hijack this thread.. come on, let's calm down and try to stick to facts and give a warm welcome ..
i'm really appreciated his joining! my 2 cents
+5%
This! Both communities only have to gain with this and any other discussion. We both want to succeed and our objective is the same, provide stable currencies with the best peg possible in the more secure and decentralized way. We all can learn a lot with each other, who knows, this could even spark the next big idea for decentralized currencies that could be a considerable better way to achieve it, other than the ways we found out. I would appreciate if members from Nu community didn't leave. Whoever doesn't like each other, please just ignore, it's not that hard. We are all in the same boat, we all want the same. What if both communities have completely different ways to achieve a stable currency or whatever they want to achieve? What matters is trying to develop the best way possible and this is done much more easier than working separately, without discussing and sharing ideas from both sides.
The fact I choose this or that way, doesn't make it the supreme way, both can succeed or fail miserably. It's up to us to try and do something better.
:-*
HUGS not BUGS ^^
-
I'm not Tom, I'm Nagalim, http://nupond.net/ operator. Hello, though, thanks for the gracious welcome :D
-
The hard part is calculating the price feed because I don't know your system very well at all.
Have you read this? Price-Stable Cryptocurrencies (https://bitshares.org/technology/price-stable-cryptocurrencies/)
It is for 2.0 market pegged assets, although we are still in the 0.9.2. Because the release of 2.0 is becoming closer, any liquidity systems should probably be designed for it and not for the 0.9 we have now.
-
Yah I read that. Honestly, if y'all want me to figure out a price feed for you you'll have to pay me. I was thinking more along the lines of you provide a trusted server with api-accessible price feed and we take care of liquidity provision. Then, we both go in 50/50 and we both get liquidity for half the cost of what we would pay on other pairs.
-
I would have asked what do you need the feed for, if I considered even remotely possible this thing to be a go on the BTS side.
Here... I put as mildly as I could.
-
I would have told you, had you asked.
Some communities engage with people thinking outside the box. Others tell them how much they don't care. Which are you?
-
That's an encrypted message for you...
@bitcoinsatan
(https://s3-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.jmcatalog.com%2Fprdimgs%2FuNI84ChE%2FSPAR%2FSPAR3005-1.JPG&sp=98d926f8a65b20507f0fb5bda96b424e)
-
What is happening?
I never told y'all to go fuck yourselves, I very carefully skirted that by asking if y'all wanted to fuck yourselves and proposing an alternative.
True, I could just start providing an Automatic Liquidity Pool (ALP) on an nbt/bitusd pair on my own (I could almost definitely get Ronny in on it, and probably even get a little funding from Nu). Except why would I? I own nsr not bts. If y'all want some of this cake you better bring the icecream.
-
That's me...
(https://s3-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fleaderinme.files.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F05%2Fconfidence1.gif&sp=48fd2888533fdaabe038574afd0030f0)
-
Fun Fact 3 - BTS/Nubits partnership will bring more liquidity and adoption to both Nubits and BitUSD simultaneously because the business models are fundamentally unequal while providing a similar service.
^That bit, however, is 110% on point.
-
Fun Fact 3 - BTS/Nubits partnership will bring more liquidity and adoption to both Nubits and BitUSD simultaneously because the business models are fundamentally unequal while providing a similar service.
^That bit, however, is 110% on point.
If both win, why not?
And could everyone stop attacking each other and take this more seriously? ffs this is not bitcointalk
-
Why not? Because it will cost money. No one seems to be asking how much and how I came to those numbers. Those are the questions I would ask anyway. If I gave you free liquidity y'all would be ecstatic. If I asked for $1/year, you would still probably be comfortable with that. If I asked for 100 grand each year, you would probably give me one of those wedgies and send me on my way. So what is liquidity worth to you? Start asking that question and you start thinking like Nu.
-
Why not? Because it will cost money. No one seems to be asking how much and how I came to those numbers. Those are the questions I would ask anyway. If I gave you free liquidity y'all would be ecstatic. If I asked for $1/year, you would still probably be comfortable with that. If I asked for 100 grand each year, you would probably give me one of those wedgies and send me on my way. So what is liquidity worth to you? Start asking that question and you start thinking like Nu.
That is the point though -I refuse to start thinking like Nu.
-
Enjoy your echo chamber tonyk, the adults are talking.
-
Why not? Because it will cost money. No one seems to be asking how much and how I came to those numbers. Those are the questions I would ask anyway. If I gave you free liquidity y'all would be ecstatic. If I asked for $1/year, you would still probably be comfortable with that. If I asked for 100 grand each year, you would probably give me one of those wedgies and send me on my way. So what is liquidity worth to you? Start asking that question and you start thinking like Nu.
Actually I don't think so. If people did it, it would be because they don't like Nu simply because it's a rival. However the BitShares community is currently trying to pay for liquidity via MineBitshares. It wouldn't make much sense if they didn't agree with this. But people prefer to fail and drag others down instead of benefiting both
-
I'm just barely starting to Google 'minebitshares' but I'm seeing numbers like $10/day for tech and $10/day for rewards. Lol. I'm asking like $2/day for liquidity ($4,000. It would only be ~$0.5/day for a grand, but that's hardly worth the operator fee) and $2/day operator expense and y'all get weird. I didn't even take the competition between our currencies into account. Maybe I should ask for $10/day for operator expense just cause y'all are doing a good job of reminding me that we're supposed to be rivals.
-
I don't think bitNubits would succeed and am not willing to try. I am interested in providing bitUSD sellside liquidity rewards on a ccedk nbt/bitusd market whereby any bitUSD sold for nbt (at a large spread) can be converted back to bitUSD via Nu liquidity channels and buying bts on the open market. The custodian can even take a loss if they think they can make it back via the reward rate.
If you want a bitNBT y'all can make it yourselves. I'm offering ALP services for decentralized liquidity on-exchange as the operator of NuPond.
-
I say liquidity providing is its own reward. The only thing paying you to provide it would be to reduce the spread. I say you should provide it at a profit first then give us a price per point reduction in spread.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
That's the reason you guys don't have liquidity or trade volume: you think liquidity is its own reward. Why should I put my money up as a bitusd sell order and make pennies if I'm lucky when I could put my money up as nbt buy or sell (whatever currency there's a pool for) and make a fixed amount per day?
If you're happy with how liquid your markets are and your daily trade volume, this proposal is worthless. If you kinda wish people could buy bitUSD easily for less than a 40% markup, maybe you should consider decentralized liquidity services like nupond.
If it's so profitable to provide liquidity for bitAssets why is none doing it?
-
I just wish that there was some official instructional videos on the bitassets.
There's so much talk about BitUSD, but it seems no one seems to care about how to teach others how to grow the other bitasset currencies. Why?
I think the rest of the bitasset currencies would actually take off, if there was instructional videos of people actually showing how the beginning of each market is created.
Right now there is no BitAUD, BitMXN or BitNZD.
So let's take BitNZD...
Suppose I am your grandma living in New Zealand and yet there's no bitNZD currently in existence, how do I effectively create some bitNZD for myself to use?
I would want to see a step by step tutorial, with all the caveats so I know what potential risk I could be getting myself into (shorting, covering, etc...).
In fact, I would want to see a video demonstration of someone making some bitNZD, and show how the supply of bitNZD can now be seen on bitsharesblocks.com
-
That's the reason you guys don't have liquidity or trade volume: you think liquidity is its own reward. Why should I put my money up as a bitusd sell order and make pennies if I'm lucky when I could put my money up as nbt buy or sell (whatever currency there's a pool for) and make a fixed amount per day?
If you're happy with how liquid your markets are and your daily trade volume, this proposal is worthless. If you kinda wish people could buy bitUSD easily for less than a 40% markup, maybe you should consider decentralized liquidity services like nupond.
If it's so profitable to provide liquidity for bitAssets why is none doing it?
You do realize you are talking about a test network that won't even be operational in a couple months?
-
It seems Tomjoad is having trouble signing up to the forum...
"the issue is that the authorization email never arrives in my inbox. I've used the automatic re-send link a couple of times and it doesn't do anything."
CoinGame seems to think it might be a tor issue...
"probably because you came through tor and maybe its a spam fighting technique same as how bitcoin talk requires you pay in btc to sign up through tor"
Anybody have any ideas?
-
You do realize you are talking about a test network that won't even be operational in a couple months?
Maybe I understand this totally wrong...
Just to be clear: are you saying there's not testnet available at the moment? Only the production network?
-
You do realize you are talking about a test network that won't even be operational in a couple months?
Maybe I understand this totally wrong...
Just to be clear: are you saying there's not testnet available at the moment? Only the production network?
Perhaps I shouldn't call it a test network because all assets are real assets that will be transferred over to 2.0, but for functionality purposes, bitshares 1.0 has become the first test network. The point is that you shouldn't compare liquidity on a network that no one really uses any more and won't exist in 2-3 months with a network that is fully functional.
-
Perhaps I shouldn't call it a test network because all assets are real assets that will be transferred over to 2.0, but for functionality purposes, bitshares 1.0 has become the first test network. The point is that you shouldn't compare liquidity on a network that no one really uses any more and won't exist in 2-3 months with a network that is fully functional.
To call bitshares 1.0 a test network is frankly absurd. No one else believes that.
-
Perhaps I shouldn't call it a test network because all assets are real assets that will be transferred over to 2.0, but for functionality purposes, bitshares 1.0 has become the first test network. The point is that you shouldn't compare liquidity on a network that no one really uses any more and won't exist in 2-3 months with a network that is fully functional.
To call bitshares 1.0 a test network is frankly absurd. No one else believes that.
Then why is it being replaced? Production networks don't get replaced.
-
Then why is it being replaced? Production networks don't get replaced.
Iteration?
The original client was horribly broken and the only way to fix it was to change the protocol so much a new chain was required?
...Show me any actual test network which is listed on multiple exchanges and has a daily trade volume in the top 10 in the world?
-
Then why is it being replaced? Production networks don't get replaced.
Iteration?
The original client was horribly broken and the only way to fix it was to change the protocol so much a new chain was required?
...Show me any actual test network which is listed on multiple exchanges and has a daily trade volume in the top 10 in the world?
Ethereum frontier - today's volume 3x bitshares, market cap 9x bitshares. If it's CLI only and for devs only, then I would consider it a test network. I suppose it depends on your definition of a test network... at most you may could call it beta, but probably alpha.
Edit: maidsafe
-
Ethereum frontier - today's volume 3x bitshares, market cap 9x bitshares. If it's CLI only and for devs only, then I would consider it a test network. I suppose it depends on your definition of a test network... at most beta, probably alpha.
Your definition of test network is broken.
A test network contains coins which *have no value*.
-
Ethereum frontier - today's volume 3x bitshares, market cap 9x bitshares. If it's CLI only and for devs only, then I would consider it a test network. I suppose it depends on your definition of a test network... at most beta, probably alpha.
Your definition of test network is broken.
A test network contains coins which *have no value*.
So if it's not in a testing phase, then it must be production right? Again, why replace a production network?
-
So if it's not in a testing phase, then it must be production right? Again, why replace a production network?
Why do car manufacturers keep releasing new versions of the same models? The previous versions were not test cars, were they?
-
Although I didn't find a specific answer to my question for a testnet, I come to the conclusion there is no such thing for Bitshares 1.0.
Will there be a testnet for Bitshares 2.0?
-
Although I didn't find a specific answer to my question for a testnet, I come to the conclusion there is no such thing for Bitshares 1.0.
Will there be a testnet for Bitshares 2.0?
It's running right now: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17962.0.html
-
Although I didn't find a specific answer to my question for a testnet, I come to the conclusion there is no such thing for Bitshares 1.0.
Will there be a testnet for Bitshares 2.0?
It's running right now: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17962.0.html
Ok, so this is the testnet to prepare the launch of Bitshares 2.0, right?
Will there be a continuously available testnet after Bitshares 2.0 has been released?
-
So if it's not in a testing phase, then it must be production right? Again, why replace a production network?
Why do car manufacturers keep releasing new versions of the same models? The previous versions were not test cars, were they?
If only mechanics could successfully drive previous versions, then yes they were test cars. Let's just agree to disagree.
-
Although I didn't find a specific answer to my question for a testnet, I come to the conclusion there is no such thing for Bitshares 1.0.
Will there be a testnet for Bitshares 2.0?
It's running right now: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17962.0.html
Ok, so this is the testnet to prepare the launch of Bitshares 2.0, right?
Will there be a continuously available testnet after Bitshares 2.0 has been released?
We will continue to maintain a test network for active BTS development after 2.0 is launched.
-
If only mechanics could successfully drive previous versions, then yes they were test cars. Let's just agree to disagree.
You imply that only programmers use bitshares 1.0, but this is clearly not the case.
-
That's the reason you guys don't have liquidity or trade volume: you think liquidity is its own reward. Why should I put my money up as a bitusd sell order and make pennies if I'm lucky when I could put my money up as nbt buy or sell (whatever currency there's a pool for) and make a fixed amount per day?
If you're happy with how liquid your markets are and your daily trade volume, this proposal is worthless. If you kinda wish people could buy bitUSD easily for less than a 40% markup, maybe you should consider decentralized liquidity services like nupond.
If it's so profitable to provide liquidity for bitAssets why is none doing it?
You do realize you are talking about a test network that won't even be operational in a couple months?
Correction.. one month and two days precisely.