You need to try margin trading at other exchanges to see how screwed is bitshares shorting. I tried shorting at poloniex last night, and now very regret that I did not try this earlier, because it makes so much more sense than shorting in BTS. At poloniex, you deposit 1 BTC, and this allows you to short 2.5 BTC worth of any assets by simply placing sell orders. When your order is filled, BTC which you got from short selling, is added to your initial deposit to back up the debt which you just created. You settle your debt by simply placing a buy order. When it is filled, your collateral is transferred to other party and your debt is settled. This is how margin trading is actually supposed to work. You deposit only 40% collateral upfront, but your position is 140% collateralized.

The guys who coded shorting in BTS clearly had no clue what are they doing. To issue bitAsset, we need to deposit a double collateral upfront, and to settle the debt we need to deposit 100% on top of double collateral. This is ridiculous and defeats the whole purpose of margin trading, which is to trade large amount with small funds. MPA is a very nice concept, which is buried under flawed implementation. Shorting is a central piece of BTS monetary system, but it is totally screwed. This has to be fixed ASAP. BTS shareholders should hire somebody who has expertise in developing trading software, pay them well through worker and let them fix shorting and all other flaws. Before this is done, don't dream about mass adoption, because other exchanges offer much cleaner products.

Could you reduce MCR to 1.5?

What happens when bitRUB goes active? What is the plan to transfer?

We'll change RUBLE to BitRUBLE 1:1, and then close positions and stop price feed on RUBLE

Just buy RUBLE and force settle it. This is easy to do.

As for OP subject: come on guys, we need to support this. Gateway in Russia can give BTS a huge boost.

Quote

Problem that it solves: The Only Exchange Where You Control Your Private Keys

not true, and I'd be very careful with the wording here. world's first, the only yadayada... those things backfire very fast.

NXT / Counterparty / Omni are some examples of a DEX where you hold your own keys.

Agree with this remark. Let's try to stay away from lying.

Quote from: yvv on April 12, 2017, 06:10:12 pm

Quote from: sahkan on April 12, 2017, 05:35:20 pm

Quote from: Pheonike on April 12, 2017, 08:17:23 am

Quote from: sahkan on April 12, 2017, 07:59:37 am

Quote from: alt on April 12, 2017, 05:37:19 am

I want 1000 SILVER without interest even -1% interest, can anybody sell SILVER to me?

you don't need to encourage the shorter or the longer, you need to encourage the traders, reward the traders.
liquid is the real problem we need to resolve.
with good liquid, more people will accept holder bitasset, more people will accept shorter bitasset. this is what happened today in bitCNY/bitUSD

I will ask people borrow CNY/USD/SILVER..., and be a market maker in pairs: CNY/USD, USD/SILVER, CNY/SILVER,
and this will give you more profit than the poor interest.

Most new comers to DEX do not understand very well how bitAssets work. For example in my mind BitSilver should be backed by Silver (not BTS) and a broker of that asset should provide liquidity (maybe 1% over and 1% under the spot price for buy/sell). If I can't buy and sell at the current real market price or get that silver shipped to me, then what's the point of holding it?

You want exposer to the value of silver not the actual metal. If you truly want silver go out and buy some physical silver. That applies to all the assests on the DEX. You are exposed to the underlining assets value, not physical properties. These are derivatives. Also if the value depended on a 3rd party having the physical good then that introduces counterparts risk and adds centralization which is goes against being a DEX.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

No, I don't want exposure to the price. I want to invest in an asset, so if get USDT I am sure to get $1 for my 1 USDT because it's backed. On the other hand if I get bitSILVER I am making a bet that it will go up and since I can't get real silver out of it it's not really an asset, is it?

Yes, it is really an asset. No, it is not silver or something backed by silver. It is an asset which value is pegged to value of silver.

I know some of the long time members here have strong feelings about bitAssets, I am not trying to change that. But atm I don't see it as an asset.

And here is some other people view it: http://coinjournal.net/what-is-a-bitasset/  A bitasset is basically a derivative built on top of a cryptocurrency through the use of smart contracts. As a simple explanation, it’s useful to think of it as a bet...

No feelings has nothing to do with this. BitAsset is a derivative, and it is an asset, as good as many other assets in real world.

https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=asset+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

as·set
ˈaset/
noun
noun: asset; plural noun: assets

    a useful or valuable thing, person, or quality.

Quote from: yvv on April 12, 2017, 02:08:59 pm

There are no inherent obstacles in bts which prevent to offer 100-300x leverage. Markets are just too shallow for this at the moment.
 

To do that though, wouldn't the committee need to drop the MCR and sqpr well below 1? That greatly​ increases the risk to the bitasset holder. It basically puts the bitasset holder in the position of the broker.

MCR=1 gives you infinite leverage. You deposit 1 USD, short it for 1 USD worth of BTS (let's ignore fees, slippage etc), borrow 1 bitUSD, short it for 1 USD worth of BTS, borrow another bitUSD, short it ... and so on infinite number of times. We don't want this to happen, that's why we have MCR > 1. But, with MCR=1.75 a safe collateral ratio is somewhere around 2x, and you don't have a leverage anymore at this CR (for 1 USD invested your can short 1 bitUSD maximum). If BTS price moves up, you still make more profit if you short bitUSD, than if you just buy and keep BTS, but this profit does not outwheight the risk you take at short position. If we want to attract shorters, we need to offer at least same leverage as poloniex offers (they require 1.4x collateral to open position (2.5x leverage) and allow it to go down all the way to 1.2x).

Quote from: logart on April 12, 2017, 05:34:19 am

If any DEV seeing this, please we need this feature, If we want mass adoption in our DEX we need to have enough liquidity for all stable fiat assets, we will never see mass adoption if we rely only on users to create BITusd or BitCNY .

In fact, I'm proposing that the BTS blockchain automatically creates and pays an equal or fixed amount of value diversified in all Bit-assets. Not just in BitUSD. That way there will be liquidity distributed among all the Bit-assets too, we want liquidity in BitGold, BitSilver, BitEUR, BitUSD, bitCNY, Bitbtc. Witnesses and workers should like the idea too because they are incentivized in diversified assets and they know that diversification is the best and recommended way to store the value of money. And if in the future the more bit-assets are added to DEX like BitCHF or BitMXN,  etc the more diversification they will get

Bitshares is really appealing for traders but traders search two main things when choosing a broker liquidity and leverage. Leverage is also important for traders in Forex because Forex currencies only move less than a cent sometimes so there's logically the need of leverage to make a profit. 100-500X leverage is needed in forex. 3-10X is only needed in cryptos because they are far more volatile.

While I agree that in order to attract traders, you need to offer leverage, I don't believe this should be offered "on chain".

In the current forex market, it's the brokers that are offering the traders leverage.  Leverage is actually a tool that they exploit to make money since they know 90% of traders who use high leverage end up blowing up their accounts. The brokers  that allow 100x leverage don't pass the clients orders to the actual market, they take the opposite side of the trade and pocket any spreads or commissions as well as all the clients cash when they blow up from over leveraging.  It's a business plan that has worked for decades.

Bitshares is not designed to act as a broker and offer leverage. Not only are the mechanics to process the leveraged trade not present, but the risk management protocol would also need to be developed. All brokers have the possibility of blowing up in extreme market conditions, and I don't believe bts should be taking those risks. Bitshares needs to continue to act as an exchange like the nasdaq, and hopefully start making money off of fees.  Let third parties come in and offer leverage off chain.

Check out bitAssets dude, they do offer you leverage right "on chain", with no broker. Yes, short position with 1.75 collateral gives you 1.33x leverage, do your math. This 1.33x can be easily increased to at least what poloniex offers by bringing MCR down to 1.4.

Quote from: sahkan on April 12, 2017, 07:59:37 am

Quote from: alt on April 12, 2017, 05:37:19 am

I want 1000 SILVER without interest even -1% interest, can anybody sell SILVER to me?

you don't need to encourage the shorter or the longer, you need to encourage the traders, reward the traders.
liquid is the real problem we need to resolve.
with good liquid, more people will accept holder bitasset, more people will accept shorter bitasset. this is what happened today in bitCNY/bitUSD

I will ask people borrow CNY/USD/SILVER..., and be a market maker in pairs: CNY/USD, USD/SILVER, CNY/SILVER,
and this will give you more profit than the poor interest.

Most new comers to DEX do not understand very well how bitAssets work. For example in my mind BitSilver should be backed by Silver (not BTS) and a broker of that asset should provide liquidity (maybe 1% over and 1% under the spot price for buy/sell). If I can't buy and sell at the current real market price or get that silver shipped to me, then what's the point of holding it?

You want exposer to the value of silver not the actual metal. If you truly want silver go out and buy some physical silver. That applies to all the assests on the DEX. You are exposed to the underlining assets value, not physical properties. These are derivatives. Also if the value depended on a 3rd party having the physical good then that introduces counterparts risk and adds centralization which is goes against being a DEX.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

And there is no broker to provide liquidity at 1% spread. This is the idea behind DEX, you are your own broker. In this case, liquidity comes only with mass adoption. No mass adoption -> no liquidity, no liquidity -> no mass adoption, ... and so on in circle.