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.
@Yao excellent man! I knew that this was a good ides despite what my friend @fav thinks.. Make sure that you explain them that they can also short bitassets such as bitbtc..
so "hundreds" joined wechat, but did they convert to bitshares customers? account creations should skyrocket, right?
Since that's the only metric we can use in this case, spoiler: account creations do no skyrocket.
They will learn ..
low fees
could not be closed
could not be hacked
Yeah right, and after openledger API goes down as usual people who bought this slogans will be embarrassed.
... how to switch to another API
low fees
could not be closed
could not be hacked
Actually, there is no need to put 2.5x collateral. If there are no offers between feed and SQP price, borrow bitUSD with minimum (1.75x) collateral and let it be margin called as soon as an offer appears between feed and SQP.Depends. Margin Calls can force you to pay up to 10% above the feed while if you maintain collateral, you can just to partially close your position at lower premium.
Given that the shareholders (on paper) pay with more dilution for this worker already, I don't think it's fair to also ask them to pay for margin calls. Hence, 2.5x collateral.
Makes sense?
You are NOT properly stating the alleged "imbalances". The fact is, the required collateral is less than 200% (175% in bitshares.org/wallet, and a little more in the OL wallet). And what do you do after borrowing (let's say butUSD, for example)? You short it. So you're selling it to someone for 100% face value. So now your collateral goes from 175% to 75%. Which means you actually have NET LEVERAGE when shorting BitAssets. So there really is no imbalance with collateral.
5) Bots -- I would love to see even better, easier-to-use bot options. btsbots is a really nice step in the right direction, but the interface is not very intuitive. And there's no way to manage the balancing of your inventory within some constraints. If you're not careful, you could end up with all of your funds in just one of the assets you're trying to provide liquidity to. As discussed in #4 above, this is not as big of a deal in a 1:1 market like bitUSD : USDT. But you still probably don't want to end up so imbalanced like that. So for the sake of making it easier for people to provide liquidity to ALL markets, I hope btsbots continues to improve.
Second change. After receiving some requests, we will enable the force settlement setting.
This option allows anyone with BTWTYs to force the market to buy the asset(s) they own at the price feed. The fact that this market is traded much higher than the theoric price feed make this option irrelevant because it's easy to sell at a better price than the price feed.
Thanks I checked the missing part.
Your concern is reasonable. In my proposal, I attempt to deal with it by taking part of fees into the network (10% for non LTM) to prevent spamming attack.
Also, as xeroc mentioned, one possible scenario is borrow Smartcoin, keep it, and obtaining profit from fees. This seems the low-hanging fruit, however, I think it is not 100% safe method. Because this needs at least 2x collateral in BTS and the person is exposed to BTS price. For instance, if one issues 2k BitUSD with 1M BTS collateral, he can enjoy profits from fee but if BTS price decreases 10% he will lose 10% of value when his position is cleared.
