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 - yvv

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 80
346
General Discussion / Re: Each witness is getting paid $1200+ because of the price rise.
« on: April 26, 2017, 06:34:52 pm »
How about, take daily (or monthly, or quarterly ) fees, and give 50% of these fees to witnesses, leave the rest in reserve to fund development? This way you don't need to worry if witnesses get too much or too little, they get whatever customers pay.


347
General Discussion / Re: Each witness is getting paid $1200+ because of the price rise.
« on: April 26, 2017, 03:35:31 pm »
Quote
If things were adjusted once a month that should be adequate IMO. Others may think quarterly is adequate.

Is it possible to do this completely automated way, based on daily amount of fees which DEX collects? They don't deserve more than DEX collects, right?

Also, do all witnesses really deserve same wage? They do different job, like produce different number of price feeds, etc, don't they deserve different wage in this case?

348
General Discussion / Re: bitassets market cap in coinmarcketcap wrong?
« on: April 24, 2017, 07:26:50 pm »
CMC updates data once in awhile, and the amount of  outstanding bitUSD changes every minute, so no wonder that CMC data is out of sync.

349
General Discussion / Re: LTM made up almost 1/3 of DAC revenue
« on: April 24, 2017, 03:43:22 pm »
Quote from: Geneko on April 24, 2017, 03:28:04 pm
Quote from: fav on April 24, 2017, 03:04:01 pm
2449553.496 BTS to the reserve pool.

How did you come up with this figure:
26% from 47,106,798 is 12,247,767.48

OMG does this mean network gets only 20% of LTM fee payed to this very network? This is insane!! WTF is going on?!
So you pay 17,611 BTS and get back 14088 BTS means actual LTM fee is only 3522 BTS. Right?

Actually, you pay 17,611 and your referrer gets 14088, so yes, network actually gets only 3522. And yes, this is insane.

350
General Discussion / Re: LTM made up almost 1/3 of DAC revenue
« on: April 24, 2017, 03:22:53 pm »
Quote from: fav on April 24, 2017, 03:04:01 pm

2449553.496 BTS to the reserve pool.

But this is not necessarily in addition to what would be paid without LTM. People chose to pay $100 in advance and then pay less per transaction. This just shifts the revenue flow. In fact, those who bought LTM sucked, because they could better wait until fees are reduced.

351
General Discussion / Re: LTM made up almost 1/3 of DAC revenue
« on: April 24, 2017, 02:55:42 pm »
Quote
fact: LTM is the best revenue product we got.

This is a very exaggerated conclusion. LTM offers 80% fee discount in exchange of $100 payment upfront. When the fees were high, people were reasonably seeking for cheaper option. But this does not mean that LTM helped to bring more money into reserve at all.

352
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares shorting is flawed and needs to be fixed ASAP
« on: April 23, 2017, 02:19:24 pm »
Quote from: pc on April 23, 2017, 08:03:26 am
Quote from: yvv on April 22, 2017, 09:27:37 pm
Quote from: nmywn on April 22, 2017, 08:12:29 pm
@yvv because he's thinking how to improve user experience through automation in GUI , not about changing contract design. If order is not filled and market moves wrong direction then you have margin call.

This is exactly a problem which automation should solve. It should close all  margin orders when a margin call is triggered. Why do you want to close them before?

Margin calls execute at 10% above the price feed, i. e. the shorter is punished for not managing his position properly.

No, it currently works differently. When the margin call is triggered, it takes all market orders up to short squeeze protection price, and leaves a limit order at SQP. The purpose is not to punish shorter, but opposite, to protect him from buying back his debt back too high. And this still does not explain, why do you want to cancel partially taken settle order?
 

353
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares shorting is flawed and needs to be fixed ASAP
« on: April 22, 2017, 09:27:37 pm »
Quote from: nmywn on April 22, 2017, 08:12:29 pm
@yvv because he's thinking how to improve user experience through automation in GUI , not about changing contract design. If order is not filled and market moves wrong direction then you have margin call.

This is exactly a problem which automation should solve. It should close all  margin orders when a margin call is triggered. Why do you want to close them before?

354
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares shorting is flawed and needs to be fixed ASAP
« on: April 22, 2017, 04:36:22 pm »
Quote from: svk on April 22, 2017, 07:44:53 am
You have to remember that unlike Poloniex bitshares is a blockchain based exchange which imposes some limitations on what is feasible in terms of performance.

Most if not all the changes you're talking about here would require a hard fork, but I can't judge if they're even technically possible.

Everybody keep saying that decentralization imposes this and that limitations. If it is so limited, why do we need decentralization at all? Imo, most of these "limitation" is just lack of competence.

Quote
One idea that I like is being able to close your position by using the collateral you've already set aside, I suspect the reason for that is the lack or market orders. However, that could be worked around by an operation that placed a limit order with a high enough price that it would just walk the orderbook. It would need to be a fill-or-kill order so that it fails of it can't get filled completely.

Here is a constructive talking. And why should it be fill-or-kill? You are 10 bitUSD short, you have enough collateral to buy up to collateral_ratio*call_price, you place a limit order to buy 10 bitUSD, you buy 1 bitUSD, you are 9 bitUSD short now, and you have 9 bitUSD buy order at same price.  What is wrong with that? As long as you collateral ratio stays  above MCR, you are safe, you can do whatever you want, borrow, settle, whatever .

355
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares shorting is flawed and needs to be fixed ASAP
« on: April 21, 2017, 11:54:57 pm »
Quote from: tbone on April 21, 2017, 09:32:08 pm
...

I am not comparing zebras and apples, I am comparing two crypto exchanges with similar set of features if you noticed. And this comparison is not in favor of bitshares, particularly in margin trading part. I am not talking about bond market, I am talking about bitAsset, which are issued through shorting, which is trading on margin.  If forex brokers do margin trading even better than poloniex, this does not make bitshares shorting look any better. And don't tell me that this is because DEX is so special, that you can't do shorting a sane way, I don't buy this. Could you give a reasonable explanation, why you need to deposit almost 200% collateral upfront, before you short sell? And why do you need to deposit additional 100% on top of 200% collateral to close the position? May be I am wrong and there is such necessity, but I would like see a reasoning.

356
General Discussion / Re: What is a Decentralized Exchange? CryptoCompare Analysis
« on: April 21, 2017, 06:26:58 pm »
Quote
Downsides
Decentralized
- Not easy to use.
- Basic features.
- Low liquidity.

These are not inherent downsides of decentralized exchange. There are bunch of centralized exchanges with same downsides out there. These are consequences of poor implementation. Decentralized exchanges named in the article are build by amateur enthusiasts, but development of trading platform requires expertise in markets and finances. Experience in JS coding (or python, or whatever programming language) is not enough to build a high quality product. 

357
General Discussion / Re: Each witness is getting paid $1200+ because of the price rise.
« on: April 21, 2017, 04:26:10 pm »
Quote from: Akado on April 21, 2017, 10:54:30 am
Quote from: yvv on April 20, 2017, 11:21:26 pm
Should we raise this question again next week if BTS prise drops to what it was a month ago?

Make it dynamic. We have USD feeds so use that to make the chain adapt and pay the equivalent of X USD worth of BTS. That way even if price changes witnesses will get roughly the same dollar value every month.

Agree. We have a price feed, let's use it for good. What are those "smart" contracts worth if we can't use them to fix witness wages?

The only obstacle I see here is witnesses collude and start manipulating the feed, because they all benefit from this.

358
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: April 21, 2017, 04:20:51 pm »
It is interesting that OPEN.BTC is traded below BTC feed price these days. I interpret this as people moving funds into DEX through openledger gateway. They need to sell their OPEN.BTC in this case, right?
 

359
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares shorting is flawed and needs to be fixed ASAP
« on: April 21, 2017, 03:49:22 pm »
Quote from: paliboy on April 21, 2017, 02:30:16 pm

Yes, technically my debt would be 5 bitUSD but if I understand it correctly, it works differently right now. My account would have 5 bitUSD and 10 bitUSD debt, in the case of margin call, whole 10 bitUSD would be settled and I would still have my 5 bitUSD in my account, wouldn't I?

Yes, exactly. Currently, you may have 5 bitUSD short position opened and 1000 bitUSD on your balance, and you can be margin called if BTS/USD price moves. This does not make sense to me at all.

Quote
Your proposal suggests "normal" and "margin" accounts - I'm not sure how difficult would it be to implement.

Not at all. This could be the same account, but you lock a fraction of BTS into "margin deposit". This means that you can't use these BTS other way than to settle margin position. This would define how much you can go below your current balance. Suppose, you have 1000 BTS and 10 bitUSD in your account. BitUSD is falling, you want to short. You lock 1000 BTS into margin deposit, and this allows you to sell 20 bitUSD at 100 BTS/bitUSD. Now you are 10 bitUSD short, covered with 2000 BTS collateral, and you have another 1000 BTS unlocked, which you can transfer, sell, or add to margin deposit and short 10 bitUSD more. Currently, bitshares allows you to achieve the same result either by going through more steps, or by adding more funds into your account.

Quote
+5% I completely agree, this might be the first candidate for improvement. Would it require a hard fork? How to handle already-open positions? Could we implement it iteratively, e.g. handle collateral for bitUSD and bitCNY as one unit, it it's stable, add bitBTC, bitSILVER etc?

I have no idea what it would take to fix this. One thing I know for sure, that if you keep adding new features on top of old mistakes, you are going to end up with complete mess.

360
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares shorting is flawed and needs to be fixed ASAP
« on: April 21, 2017, 12:29:08 pm »
Quote from: paliboy on April 21, 2017, 07:11:37 am


Let's say that I borrowed 10 bitUSD @ 100 BTS with 2000 BTS collateral and then sold it for 10x100 BTS.

  • I buy 5 bitUSD @ 84 BTS in market, half of the debt could be automatically settled - do we want to do it? How would it adjust the collateral? Proportionately or should it keed some platform-defined/user-defined collateral ratio?

If you were 10 bitUSD short and you bought back 5 bitUSD, you owe only 5 bitUSD. You want it or not does not matter, your debt is 5 bitUSD, that's the fact.

Quote
  • I want to settle half of my debt, I click "Update position" in "Margin Positions" in Bitshares wallet, enter 5 into Debt input box and click "Update positon" button. Network buys necessary assets for me at market rate and updates the collateral ratio - the same problem as in point 1.

None of these "borrow asset" or "update position" buttons are needed. Margin trading is not different from regular trading except for the amount of funds available to spend. You should be able to run a regular trading bot on margin account, which knows only "buy" and "sell" operations the same way as you run it on regular account, and exchange engine should open and close position for you when needed up to the limit defined by your margin deposit. Check polo, coinbase, bitfinex, everywhere you don't "borrow" or "update", you just buy and sell. This makes a lot of sense to me.

Edit: Oh, and you don't need to keep a separate deposit for each opened position, because it is a ratio of total equity to total dept which matters. If your MCR=2 and you are short in bitUSD and bitSilver with 2.2x collateral, and bitSilver goes up by 10%, there is no need to trigger a margin call yet, because your deposit is still enough to back both positions.


Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 80

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 23 queries.