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 - binggo

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 130
1

I do not want to explain more to the guys who just say others do not understand this and that, it's wasting time.

You are wasting BTS time,may i will call you “The killer of BTS”.

Your explanation is weak,it even can't convince yourself,but it can bamboozle your followers, how pathetic,blinded by the endless greed.

The reality will show the ignorance of somebody, ok, it has shown.

2
In August 1971, U.S. President Richard Nixon announced to remove the dollar peg to gold, the Bretton Woods System collapsed.

You surely can say that US cheated the whole world, but the point is, at that moment US has no other choice.

BTS also face similar problem, BTS need first to survive, and then can seek more.

BitAssets are not created as a killer to BTS.


You give an example that you didn't understand until now,that is such an irrelevant example.

If other stablecoin use BTS as collateral, then you will get a very good pretext to blame which is the culprit can‘t make BTS survive!

How pathetic and preposterous!

Then who is the killer to BTS?

3
The consequence of  global settlement already applies to bitasset holders; their held bitassets have depreciated significantly in value & they cannot be settled for the correct accurate value. Fixed feeds are not normal prices.

You misundertand something or not undertand something.

A bitasset is just like a country, now you shut down it, kill all the debtor(incloud healthy debtor),  people will choose to run away, no liquidity output, just make matters worse.

Global settlement is a very failed mechanism, it has been proved by the reality.

We should or must make a more better mechanism.


4
Ok, let's check the others how to design the stable coin, how to to prevent bad debt.

Maybe this can awaken someone.

MOV Stable Financial System

https://cdn.bytom.io/res/MOV-Stable-EN.pdf
Another NON solution. The solution was global settlement. Stop evading the consequences of bad gambling. BSIP76 shames CNY on an international level.

The global settlement is not the solution, it's will give more worse result to the normal debtor and holder, bitgold,bitbtc,bitsilver had been global settlement very long time, it didn't solve any problems.

Bonds give a choice to holders of biassets, and didn't need to bear too much dangerous, help to solve the bad debts getting the interest from the Bonds, or just want to wait the market giving a choice or surprise.
feed price will still be normal price.

5
I believe that charging 1% on force settlement will not lower the volume dramatically.

Yes the current trading volume in DEX in low, but definitely we need BSIP86 as a tax infrastructure.

and charging on margin call is also a must.

Yes we need DeFi, P2P Lending is on discussion in the next core worker, but we need this core prelude worker first. 

I hope you and @alt be the contributor, not the obstructor of BTS evolution.

Quote
BTS evolution
?

I think you even didn't understan what's that mean.

How are you so definitely in this? how to prove?  In my mind, you have defined something in the past.

This mini mainnet releases spent too much, but got less, only BSIP74 have its role, but BSIP76 and BAIP2 may make it useless.

I think you still didn't have any clear and whole framework for bitasset or defi,what role these BSIPs in this worker will play in the further?  what‘s the correlation between them?

Maybe you just want to charge fees and charge fees, and defined what you still didn't know.

6
中文(Chinese) / Re: 机制的一些看法与方案11/14/2019
« on: March 28, 2020, 02:02:43 am »
留档





7
看来,让抵押者自己去管理抵押资产并不是什么好事情,人在赌桌上输急了眼,各种出千耍赖的手段就会随之而来。

总而言之,抵押者的票权需要按照抵押率剥离出来。

当初@pc说的是对的,还不如直接交给cn-vote

8
General Discussion / Re: Hello 👋
« on: March 25, 2020, 11:55:38 pm »

https://cdn.bytom.io/res/MOV-Stable-EN.pdf

I went through your team's paper.  So it seems like you will try to achieve a targeted price by fee charge that will be determined by both your models and the price feed.  The fees charged will be the interest rate provided to the pegged asset holders.  Its almost acting like a federal reserve that tries to influence the federal funds rate, but without the ability to buy and sell reserves.

Correct me if I'm correct? 

This would have a real lag problem. 

Bonds also can deviate tremendous from their underlying assets they cover because of the lack of liquidity in the system.  Not sure how you solve that end of the problem.

Take part of it out, then use on bitasset.
Even have a little lag problem, we didn't need to copy all of it.

You should find there have two methods to adjust the liquidity from supply-side in 2.4, we seems didn't need to use all of these, we just use the Bonds to handle the bad debts.

 If the market can develop and have income sustainable, the liquidity will recover very quickly as the market environment become good and the Bonds will be bought back slowly.

Yes, the bonds also can deviate tremendous, the best result is ZERO, every bitasset market have different situation, then the time that buy back all the Bonds will be very different.
We must clear one point: The Bonds just a method, with it, the bad debt can be handled more quickly, if didn't have it, this will become very slowly.

The "liquidity" of stable coin market come from the confidence of the market.
if using the global settlement to crash all the debtors, then the confidence and liquidity will lost very quickly, no one want to come in again.
We have eight bitassets were global settlement, the truth is cruel.

if using the BSIP71 or lock the feed price, the devalue of bitasset will become very seriously, the market will lost confidence very quickly too, and will harm the benifit of the holder of bitasset, they will leave very quickly.
We knew the situation now.

if we use an account or a pool to take charge of the bad debts, the income and the Bonds of this bitasset market will slowly cover the bad debts, didn't need the global settlement and the BSIP71 or lock the feed price, if the holders of bitassets believe and be sure the market will become good, he should buy the Bonds.




9
General Discussion / Re: Hello 👋
« on: March 25, 2020, 03:23:51 am »

In other words, if the market can develop and have income sustainable, it can issue "stability bond" to handle these bad debts.

Can you explain the stability bond?

https://cdn.bytom.io/res/MOV-Stable-EN.pdf

10
General Discussion / Re: Hello 👋
« on: March 25, 2020, 01:10:53 am »

The ratio of debt/collateral can't avoid this Black Swan global settlement trigger, price can fall down and down to trigger it.



I thought a global settlement trigger happens when there isn't enough collateral in $Value backing it to match the amount of BitUSD?  So having not enough collateral is part of the problem?

The problem of global settlement is if one debt became insolvent all debts will be global settlement,just like a customer of a bank can't pay off his debt and became insolvent,then the bank will be global settlement.

Yes, having not enough collateral is part of the problem, but shouldn't global settlement all the pledgor.

In other words, if the market can develop and have income sustainable, it can issue "stability bond" to handle these bad debts.

11
中文(Chinese) / Bytom 稳定币设计 多看多学
« on: March 25, 2020, 12:08:39 am »
这是比原链的稳定币设计:

MOV稳定金融体系

https://cdn.bytom.io/res/MOV-Stable-ZH.pdf

其它:

DAI: https://oasis.app/trade/market/WETH/DAI
USDE: https://www.pizzadex.io/?pair=usdt2usde
WUSD:https://sw91.net/whitepaper/whitepaper-zh.pdf

去中心化稳定币的货币政策与财政政策治理--A Framework for Decentralized Stablecoin Monetary Policy
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=29662.0



不要天天蹲在井里观天,别人在井外被雨淋了还要嘲笑一下,没有能力去设计就去反抄一下,照抄总会吧?


我也是无奈,没有金融设计能力何必要天天的牵强附会?还一次一个认识的...

真是坐守钻石金山,穿金戴银吃蚂蚁!

12
General Discussion / Re: Hello 👋
« on: March 24, 2020, 11:52:31 pm »
Hi Folks,

Haven't been here in a while, but intrigueing to see how things have changed.

What level of debt / collateral would have been sufficient to avoid this Black Swan global settlement trigger?  I assume 1.5X is still the minimum requirement?  Would a 3X or 4X have prevented it?  If I remember correctly, getting to 3X and 4X is a whole another question of liquidity, and no shorter is willing to put up that amount.

I'm gathering BTS avoided a global settlement by using a peg freeze that was introduced in BSIP76?

First, the global settlement is very foolish.

The ratio of debt/collateral can't avoid this Black Swan global settlement trigger, price can fall down and down to trigger it.

The right way is how to handle the bad debt, not use peg freeze, not use global settlement, we can find the right way easily in the realistic financial market, yes, it is  "stability bond"!


13
Ok, let's check the others how to design the stable coin, how to to prevent bad debt.

Maybe this can awaken someone.

MOV Stable Financial System

https://cdn.bytom.io/res/MOV-Stable-EN.pdf

14
The math and numbers is simple,i have got these numbers and the questions long time ago, it seems nobody care.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=26759.0

The fundamental questions is:

Why we found these questions so late, it should must be clearly in the beginning of the project: How this project can feed itself?

Even have the BSIP86, the system still can't get enough income to feed itself, BSIP86 only can earn a very very little income, we can find the result and truth from these closed gateways. Bitcrab knew that very clearly.

now we have 0.04826 BTS transaction fee to place order, the only problems is we lost very much transactions in the bitassets.

So BSIP86 is not so important in this mini mainnet releases, it can be put into a max mainnet releases.

About BSIP74, i have asked for this fee long longs time ago, even i open an issue in github for it, still nobody like and care about it, this is the problems.
BSIP74 will be the maximum income for bts in the future(if we have a suitable feed price, without BSIP76 and a reasonable risk management mechanism).
The bitasset still will own the largest group of clients from past to the future, this is the truth,we have to admit these.

About BSIP87, i don't like it, the reason i have said very clearly, the price fluctuation only must be spreaded and transferred, shouldn't be destroied, this is a very simple finance concept, BM didn't understand that, most of bts holder didn't that, but the other people outsids know that.
They just want use BSIP87 to charge fees and destroy the pledgor with a non-normal means.
So i think it shouldn't be in this mini mainnet releases, it just wastes money and time.

BSIP77 is more important than BSIP86 and BSIP87 together, seems nobody clear about it, just want to charge fees charge fees.

The most of DEX income is inadequate to meet the expense, this is the cruel reality, even we make a BSIP86, only defi can give the help for now.

and everything is not free on the BLOCKCHAIN, every operations have paid fees.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 130