Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - monsterer

Pages: 1 ... 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 [114] 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 ... 125
1696
General Discussion / Re: 100% delegate pay in USD could be $200/month due to slippage
« on: November 17, 2014, 11:55:51 am »
Quote from: cn-members on November 17, 2014, 11:53:55 am
Oh , I see where you are wrong .
There will not be 101 100% delegates .
By my est , there will only be 10-25 delegates who can have 100% payrate .
More than that , shareholders won't approve .
At this point , it's not even that easy to get all the developers to get a 100% delegate seat .

My calculations assume worst case, yes, but this is not an error, just the opposite end of the estimation bound.

So, lower bound is $200 / month, upper bound is $2500 / month.

1697
General Discussion / Re: 100% delegate pay in USD could be $200/month due to slippage
« on: November 17, 2014, 11:51:24 am »
Quote from: cn-members on November 17, 2014, 11:45:29 am
The order book can only see 30 lists  ? So I don't know all .

From current price to 0.0131USD , there are around 70000 USD worth of CNY buy orders .

And once the price is low enough , more people would want to buy , so the order book is not equal to reality .

So, that would be roughly 330 BTC worth of slippage. Or $700 / month at 100% pay.

1698
General Discussion / Re: 100% delegate pay in USD could be $200/month due to slippage
« on: November 17, 2014, 11:40:21 am »
Quote from: cn-members on November 17, 2014, 11:31:00 am
You can find the best trading pair to obtain the best fiat or BTC value .

You can go to the http://en.btc38.com/     BTS:CNY pair , there you can get a lot of CNY .

What is the total order book bid depth in CNY?

1699
General Discussion / 100% delegate pay in USD could be $200/month due to slippage
« on: November 17, 2014, 11:09:36 am »
I often see pay rate estimates in USD created by looking at the current 'price' of BTS and just doing a straight multiply to arrive at a number. However, this gives a distorted view because the top price often has so little volume associated with it.

Indeed the entire buy side order book at BTER.com for BTS/USD has less than $200!

This means, to cash out to USD, you have to go from BTS->BTC->USD.

Looking at the BTS/BTC market in BTER, a sell of 12,960,000 BTS (101 delegates at 100% pay rate for 1 month) would clean out the order book completely, and result in a slippage of around 500 BTC total value.

Long story short, on BTER, 100% pay, for 1 month, in USD at current market cap of 35M USD after slippage = ~$200

Obviously this is worst case, since I'm only considering 1 exchange here...


1700
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Bitshares client launch config
« on: November 16, 2014, 11:12:41 am »
Many thanks, guys :)

1701
Technical Support / Re: bitshares client command line parameters?
« on: November 15, 2014, 06:06:29 pm »
Quote from: robrigo on November 15, 2014, 05:19:13 pm
Translated the code referenced in my previous post to it's own page in the github wiki:

https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/wiki/BitShares-Client-Command-Line-Arguments

Good job!  +5%

1702
Stakeholder Proposals / Bitshares client launch config
« on: November 15, 2014, 05:06:31 pm »
Preparing my delegate, I'm at a bit of a loss for how to launch the bitshares client, unlock the wallet and set the unlock time to something decent via the command line.

I need to nohup the process in order for it to keep running when the bash session ends, but if I do that I cannot type any commands in, and there appears to be a very limited set of command line parameters which the client reads as it starts up?

1703
Technical Support / Re: bitshares client command line parameters?
« on: November 15, 2014, 04:43:41 pm »
Quote from: robrigo on November 15, 2014, 04:39:27 pm
I found it by searching the repository:

https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/blob/d80e5ff77c75156d064aa4236a28e2084f18066a/libraries/client/client.cpp#L89

line 94-141

Many thanks! Really surprised this is not in the wiki!

1704
Technical Support / bitshares client command line parameters?
« on: November 15, 2014, 04:32:17 pm »
Is there a list of the the command line parameters the client accepts?

...Not the in program command line, the parameters you pass when you launch the client.

1705
General Discussion / Re: BTS is Not an Alt Coin
« on: November 15, 2014, 03:54:56 pm »
Here's something to turn this on its head: alt-coins are DACs.

1706
General Discussion / Re: NXT have a solution to the crowd funding regulation problem
« on: November 14, 2014, 03:30:08 pm »
Quote from: Agent86 on November 14, 2014, 03:18:16 pm
this sounds like an "assurance contract."   This type of contract has some use for money raising.  Basically if you don't get enough money to do what you were trying to do the money is returned, sort of like a kickstarter campaign that doesn't reach the goal or maybe like groupon.  I don't think it get's around any regulation.  If the goal is met and you sell something that is viewed as a security than you still sold a security.  This isn't like the self funding DAC concept as far as I can tell.

I understand the key point is that when doing an IPO, you are selling something which represents a portion of the value of your company. Before you sell it, you own it. Afterwards the buyer does. In this scheme, you never owned the token representing the proportion of value in the first place.

1707
General Discussion / Re: NXT have a solution to the crowd funding regulation problem
« on: November 14, 2014, 03:07:24 pm »
Quote from: biophil on November 14, 2014, 02:59:22 pm
Oh, and my actual question: how does this solve the regulation problem? My view is that the regulation problem is that we're trying to issue a security; escrowing the funds we raise doesn't magically make it "not a security." Or did I misinterpret your point?

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer and this analysis is based on my assumptions.

The problem as I understand it, is that if you issue an Asset for an IPO, the issuer owns the tokens (shares) of the asset (company), and the user's buy those tokens with currency. I think this causes the IPO to fall under various different legal jurisdictions and hence all the current problems with IPO and the paid delegates bitshares currently has adopted.

With this new system, the issuer never owns the tokens (shares) and isn't even paid by the user so falls into a neat loophole in the current regulations.

1708
General Discussion / Re: NXT have a solution to the crowd funding regulation problem
« on: November 14, 2014, 03:01:56 pm »
Quote from: biophil on November 14, 2014, 02:56:14 pm
I've always thought the Nxt MS was a gimmick made obsolete by the asset exchange. Why don't they incorporate those features into the asset exchange instead of creating the monetary system?

That's what I thought at first, but the use cases are different. For example, you can create a proof of work MS currency on top of this system (presumably aimed at the altcoin market) which inflates like bitcoin does, but is secured by the NXT POS system.

1709
General Discussion / NXT have a solution to the crowd funding regulation problem
« on: November 14, 2014, 11:41:20 am »
Don't know if you have read about one of the features of the new Monetary System in NXT?

https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/issue/136/monetary-system

MS currencies are like assets, but with much more control.

One such control is the ability for the blockchain to actually hold the funds from the sales of MS currencies. The issuer defines block height limit and reserve minimum parameters at currency issuance time. Purchases of the currency are held by the blockchain until either the currency reserve minimum is reached, at which point the NXT is paid to the issuer, or the block height is reached at which point the blockchain refunds all purchasers, and the currency is deleted.

This means that the issuer never holds the tokens which represent the currency, and furthermore, the blockchain actually pays the issuer, not individual investors.

Interesting.

1710
General Discussion / Re: My preferred solution for delegates
« on: November 12, 2014, 11:18:49 am »
Quote from: gamey on November 12, 2014, 10:55:44 am
Why do you think a talented person would give their time to prove themselves so that they are confident in the gamble of 2 weeks wages where they have to work free for 2 weeks to break even? 

Is that making good use of inflation ... ?

To be honest, its a huge risk. The only way to mitigate it is through crowd-funding the fee, so you drum up support for the voting process as well as distributing the risk among your supporters.

For me it wasn't even an option to front the cost myself, as I don't have a grand and a bit lying around spare.

Pages: 1 ... 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 [114] 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 ... 125

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 23 queries.