Quote from: Shentist on January 24, 2016, 04:44:34 pm

what about a list of all existing accounts sorted when they are created and when they did the last operation on the network?

I am interested to have data about how many of the new created accounts are even used or just dead from the beginning.

I think this could be a great candidate for a custom report.. I'm considering adding a collection of paid reports to help subsidize costs.. would you be willing to pay, say, 5 USD for such a report?

Why not simply FIAT -> BIT${FIAT} and be done with it?

Quote from: yvv on January 24, 2016, 02:36:00 pm

Market cap of crypto token is one meaningless number.

Not when you depend on it to develop, grow and succeed. Once again people seem to forget who pays for development. If someone needs $50k to develop something at these prices, it will cost the chain 3x more BTS than if the price was at one cent. At the ath of 5cents or with a marketcap similar to what ethereum currently has, we would pay x16 times less!

It matters, whether you want it to or not. We got extremely lucky to have onceuponatime to pay 50k of his own pocket to develop a feature. What would you think it would happen if it was the chain who paid for it?

What do you think it will happen if we keep getting more and more worker proposals? What if we have a total of $100k, $200k? On one side is good we will have development. On the other side, it's not so good because we're walking that thin line at the moment. Too many worker proposals will get BTS diluted which was what caused this whole spiral all the way down.

The fact the chain can pay for development, which really is all of us, doesn't mean we have an infinite amount of money to fund whatever we want. Price matters in BTS because it's directly involved with it's own development.

You dont get worker proposals, you don't get development
You get too many or fail to manage them and it will go down since people hate the idea of dilution and already had a bad experience with it.

BitShares has to walk that thin line until we get to higher levels and we have more money for development. The good news is, if we succeed and go to way higher levels sometime in the future, then we will be able to have even more development made.

Just don't say marketcap is a meaningless number, not for BTS. It depends on it to survive. Unless you can assure me you can find more people like onceuponatime, willing to put money from their own pocket, which was something very very critical at this phase we're in. It was a one in a million luck shot we had. At least that's how I see it. At this moment - even though I don't agree it's the feature that should be developed - it was one of the best things that could have happened to BitShares.

Even with FBAs I doubt shareholders have much more money to throw at it, after all they've been through.

It would be nice to have market orders. where it always settles at the feed price.

So you may have more pending buyers or more pending sellers, depending on demand / supply. But it would make it fair for someone who wants to move bigger amounts.

Say someone wants to buy 1M BitUSD, they could put in their order and wait for it to fill at reasonable prices, even if it takes days/weeks, instead of spiking the low liquidity in one go.

I did not get who this guy [called 'issuer' in the OP] is?

Its not clear to me why ayone would want to use a CDF because the other side does not know how to assess whether or not the other party will settle or not.  Since they can't evaluate, traders will avoid it entirely.  There is always a fear of losing your position + more.  CDF's were only invented because there was no such thing as a stable asset.  But now we have that because of cypto, athough I'm convinced the way bitshares is implementing it will not work.  There is always a fear with putting up collateral, which is an obstruction to a frictionless transaction. 

Not to derail your post, but I have figured out a way to create true stablecoin without needing ANY COLLATERAL.  Its done using the LMSR structure that Augur and Bitcoin Hivemind are using for their Prediction Markets.  The only difference is that its a TRUE non-settling prediction market (something Bytemaster could not deliver on when he first created Bitshares).  Its effectively a LMSR that never ever has a maturity date and continues constantly. 

I think this is a better idea than doing a CDF, and will help Bitshares in creating a true stablecoin, where both sides of the bet have symmetric risk profiles.  You might be interested in this.  Take a look.  I think Bitshares should take advantage of this.   

http://forum.truthcoin.info/index.php/topic,206.msg1075.html#msg1075

We can *do* anything you can fully define.   Define the details of how it would work fully and then we can explore costs.