Because nobody cares about 5%+ arbitrage opportunity*. One of the reasons why I consider this project dead.




*
193/167 =1.15568; 15.568 % return

Capital needed 2x short bitUSD; 1x buy bitCNY . Total 3x

15.568 %/ 3 = 5.19%

Quote from: Xeldal on May 24, 2015, 01:43:37 PM

Quote from: karnal on May 24, 2015, 01:31:00 PM
Has this been discussed before? Surely it must have.

Was/is anyone working on cooperating with exchanges to implement the pairs?

Yunbi and BTER have BTC:bUSD
https://yunbi.com/markets/btcbitusd
https://bter.com/trade/btc_bitusd

Quote from: dannotestein on May 24, 2015, 06:19:06 PM

Quote from: eazyigz on May 24, 2015, 05:05:46 PM
I believe Shapeshift.io let's you exchange any digital currency into another.

BlockTrades.us and Metaexchange.info also support these pairs

In other words Xeldal and Riverhead are the only 2 people supporting it...

Sorry Dan, I cannot call 157.0278 BitUSD per BTC (54% premium) really supporting it...

Quote from: ThePiachu on May 23, 2015, 05:38:50 PM
Recently at Decentral in Vancouver we had a meetup with Max Wright to discuss BitShares and BitUSD:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p023lanFsJE

This inspired me to write a blog about a possible attack on BitUSD and similar derivative currencies:

http://tpbit.blogspot.ca/2015/05/inert-versus-volatile-currencies.html

I am wondering - has there been some analysis done on this subject by the BitShares developers and if so, how do they assess the risk involved with a similar attack?

I wish you explain your attack with a bit more detail.

What you claim is that there is some multiplier when the short bitUSD are called and this puts a pressure on the BTS price???

In reality when the shorts are called they do try to buy bitUSD [i.e sell BTS if you wish to call it that], but it:
- happens on the internal market [as opposed on external one, where they would actual drive the price down in comparison with say BTC]
- they use BTS held in collateral for this operation
- and most importantly they do not drive the price down...they just sit there trying to buy bitUSD at the current feed [or 0.9 of it, unfortunately, in the current design].

I really do not see/understand how your multiplier is supposed to work.
Thanks.

Quote from: gamey on May 22, 2015, 05:50:18 PM

Quote from: kenCode on May 22, 2015, 05:39:25 PM
Think of paid Workers like government employees..

Everybody knows what the Postman does all day.
Everybody knows what the Toll-Booth worker does all day.
Everybody knows what the public kindergarten teacher does all day.

But what did the Postal Service warehouse guy do all day today? Yesterday? What did he say he would have done by thursday of next week?

If he's a 100% payrate worker, then he should be proving himself 5 days/week, right?

So what was that logo designer doing for the last 2 months? What's she going to get done tomorrow?

Basics guys, that's all I'm asking. Work hours are part of keeping track too.
If I'm/we're paying someone 100% (a full time job) then I want to know what his real name is, I want to see his face once in a while and I want him to tell ME what's been going on. I shouldn't have to babysit our employees.

Let BlockchainHR at least handle these basics.
That's not too much to ask from someone who is using your money.

You have no way to verify their work hours.  Thats why people have managers etc in the real world.  You're just asking for a system where honest people are screwed and the dishonest continue on. That was my point about the blockchain.  You are misunderstanding what blockchains can do.  They do not have anyway to enforce anything except by the economics of their tokens.  So yes you can easily fire someone, but you can't get a blockchain to make that decision, nor can you make the blockchain  report hours in a trustless (? trustful ?) manner.

All people need are tools that shows how much workers are paid and what they've done.

You shouldn't have to babysit the employees, but if you ask too much you'll never ever hire talent that is anywhere near the top. I personally would never work for such a micromanager. Goodluck finding a productive employee that does high level work and is willing to tell everyone what they're going to do the next day .. and if they do thats just time they could be doing work, no?


I liked the idea of the blockchain hiring people, but never liked the idea of having 100000s of bosses. The reason should be obvious.

You were a bigtime developer in early internet days, so you should have some idea about the job market for developers.  At least in the West, they're being paid quite well these days.  The 100% delegate doesn't touch such a salary, but you seem to suggest they should be working 5 days a week.  How do you justify all this?  It is all a bit nuts to me.  One size fits all approach.

Discussing the stupidity of this clown ken, on a 8 page thread never the less,  makes this community look even more desperate and pathetic. To say nothing that every other post same ken is praised as 'one of more effective members of this community'. ken - the self proclaimed  enforcer that even the lead developer should report to! Pretty sad.

Quote from: Permie on May 21, 2015, 07:16:44 PM
Can anybody convince me that another project can do this better?

I will ask the same guy(s) that convince you that promises made = result delivered...if no luck there, ask the guy that told you that "block propagation speed" (repeated twice in your post)  is one of the leading Bitshares features.... (My guess is it was your own mind, but not sure).

The bears will cry all the way up!!!   :'( :'( :'(   up  to 2K satoshi.

But it is to be expected before the big announcement(s)!!!!

Then the announcement will come:

Quote from: bytemaster on November 05, 2013, 11:33:34 PM
BitShares will support merged mining, but not with ProtoShares only among peer chains.

and the bulls will get a chance to buy at 700 satoshi, shortly thereafter! Then at 500, 400 etc.

Quote from: Tuck Fheman on May 20, 2015, 07:43:54 PM

Quote from: jshow5555 on May 20, 2015, 05:34:37 PM
This project died between Feb and early March this year, Thom.
Do not get too pumped up. It is all history now. You can wait and see what the next big thing is...trinity-Dpos, bitAssets 2.0 and the 17,000 lines of code solving 17 non-existing issues ... a whole lot of nonsense and dust in the eyes of the few left... Just save your nerves, it is all BS that gonna come supposedly early June.
There will probably be one more round on 'great news/secret sauces' iteration   6-9 mo. later, but the thing died several months ago.

This project has been dead for months, jshow.
Don't get your "small stakes" in a wad or get too excited to post here, it's all history now.
You can move on, it's ok. You're good enough, you're smart enough, and doggone it, people like you ... on other forums, I'm sure ... I mean, it's possible.
Why stick around a dead project coding 17,000 lines of new code for a new faster way to do things when they could have spent that time fixing old code that's flawed and should be done away with forever!
This place works completely backwards, jshow. You should be heading up the team, because we need to look backwards, not forwards! We need to dwell on our mistakes, try to fix code we've proven cannot possibly work in the future and stop coming up with solutions and new ideas. If I see one more round of secret sauce sagacity I'm going to spew!
But this thing died several months ago, so none of this matters. I don't even know why the two of us are still here, do you?

I for one, know why I am here....I think I have a few good friends here still with their heads in the sand, not fully realizing that slightly changing DPOS to 'Delegated proof of witnessing'....and slightly improving bitAssets from 1.0 to 2.0, while a progress is not a tide changing improvement. The 9 month to do so little is still an enormous loss though.

The only true progress that might have been made is bonds...but they are just a pipe dream...no concept, no idea how they gonna actually work (feeding you shit BCJ2.0 as I put it; but you believe if they really put their heads into it they can turn pretty much everything into gold....well some very talented and smart people tried it for hundred of years...no gold at the end as you might know)

The ship has sunk...I am just the messenger here...

BM is feeding you shit, Jesus iteration 2.0.

Is anybody have any clue how this 'bond' market works? Any clue at all? AT ALL? - white paper? I will not ask for such a overuse of mental power...but just a proof that anything remotely working is even thought of ????

Bond market is a big deal...unfortunate it ends in 3 forms on a blockchain:
-  complete lack of liquidity for the borrower and total security for the lender;
-  complete lack of security for the lender and total liquidity for the borrower;
-   compromise by the 2 above - totally useless for either one....

Quote from: Thom on May 20, 2015, 05:14:36 PM

Quote from: fuzzy on May 19, 2015, 04:46:53 AM

Quote from: karnal on May 18, 2015, 09:19:19 PM

Quote from: mf-tzo on May 18, 2015, 07:50:33 PM

Quote from: cass on May 18, 2015, 07:47:47 PM
Nullstreet Journal ... that is what shareholders or investors want to read IMO ...

True! +5%

+5%

Yep.

Talking about what shareholders want to read, what happened to Stan's Monday dev meeting report?

One thing you gotta acknowledge about "management", it's not too consistent on the follow through. The consistency I can see lies within BM's recital of founding principles (plying politics or real conviction?) and the dedication of the dev team. Beyond that I see pivots come without much of a warning and things change at the drop of a hat around here. No wonder Taluant (sp? moonstone) had a zillion questions for BM the other day, before they took their convo into private space. Do you believe like you once believed in the rhetoric of politicians, or will you wise up and demand tangible accountability in our grassroots ecosystem currently under reconstruction?

Until the details are revealed about the revamping of DPoS into the "trinity" scheme, I will be uneasy with this round of koolaid. I like what I hear so far, but it's not enough to increase my confidence that BitShares will live up to the vision that has been hyped. I truly hope it's not the "devil in the details" but rather benevolent angels.

Off the top of my head, here are a few important questions that come to mind:

• How will multisig be used by delegates? (to choose proposals for what gets on the ballot for shareholder voting or...)
• Will multisig require unanimous (all 101 delegates must sign off) or some lesser %?
• How will dev team's major milestones be set? Proposed to delegates first then approved by shareholders?
• How will the 101 delegates be transitioned into the new "trinity" scheme? Details are important here!

I was once punch drunk with optimism like KC, and I think such enthusiasm is great. But once you've been here awhile you begin to think more critically about this project and how it's run. Being critical is a characteristic we also need in greater supply as the project matures, if done right it's one aspect of keeping people accountable, of growing towards improvement. If there's one thing I see in KC's posts it's the need for accountability, and I can't agree with that more.

I'm not asking for full disclosure of every last detail right now before the dev staff is ready to release this "next big thing", but I am saying this community will forever be negatively affected if the dev staff fails to deliver commensurate with the level of hype and expectations being set. It will very much feel like the disillusionment that comes from faith placed in politicians for tangible, positive change.

I sure hope BM & "the gang" have thoroughly thought through what their about to spring on this community. If they misjudged anything we need to let them know, loudly. It would be great if that can be accomplished using new tools built into the code rather than thru ad hoc means like this forum or scattered conversations. The community has no choice atm except to wait for more info, as it seems whatever is going to happen is mostly already decided.

This project died between Feb and early March this year, Thom.
Do not get too pumped up. It is all history now. You can wait and see what the next big thing is...trinity-Dpos, bitAssets 2.0 and the 17,000 lines of code solving 17 non-existing issues ... a whole lot of nonsense and dust in the eyes of the few left... Just save your nerves, it is all BS that gonna come supposedly early June.
There will probably be one more round on 'great news/secret sauces' iteration   6-9 mo. later, but the thing died several months ago.

Have similar thoughts watching '60minute' on the subject, when they talked about their banking problems.

Can you elaborate more on those 'buy & burn bots'? I do not remember anything about them in your previous papers. I guess they are kind of like the buy-back that Play DAC uses for their artists shares. But that is just a guess.

bts: jshow

He is asking something different...

The answer is:
-The 101 deletes with the most votes @ block n, are  put in randomly order to produce - blocks from n+a to n+a+100;

As for the value of 'a' and questions regarding the consensus who has the most votes in block 'n', you should wait for some dev to answer that, or alternatively check the code yourself.

Quote from: Chronos on January 28, 2015, 08:07:56 PM

Quote from: speedy on January 28, 2015, 07:59:09 PM

Quote from: Chronos on January 28, 2015, 07:48:48 PM
Critics say that BitUSD is only repackaged exposure to BTS. Does this change increase, or decrease, the risk to "normal folks" holding BitUSD, who don't want to mess with suddenly receiving BTS in their wallet instead of BitUSD?

You are overstating the likelihood of this happening. Check this out: http://bitsharesblocks.com/assets/market

BitUSD is still 229% collaterlized.

I'm not overstating anything, because I'm not stating anything.  I'm asking a question.  ;D

Well, I guess I'm stating that critics say this. Here's some evidence. https://discuss.nubits.com/t/bitshares-black-swan-event-analysis-by-dan-larimer/1279/2

Quote from: a criticwhen there is widespread realization that every Bitasset is just repackaged Bitshares

I will take repackaged Bitshares over packaged air in the form of Nubits. But that's just me, you go for the vaporware if you so  like, it is a free world.

Can anybody link to where this 'cover with collateral' feature was suggested to be coming at all, let alone before 1.0?

Thanks.

Quote from: bytemaster on January 21, 2015, 04:21:58 AM
Look into drop shipping.

Drop Shipping

Or even better 'wrap around' site -  Buy anything with bitUSD  from any site like https://brawker.com/