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.

Topics - bitmarley

Pages: [1] 2 3
Stakeholder Proposals / Mergin liquidity
« on: October 21, 2015, 05:30:52 pm »
I want to trade BTC:USD.
There is not enough liquidity in BTC:USD.

Can't the network also utilize the BTS:BTC & USD:BTS liquidity?
So the BTC:USD market is actually a merge of BTC:USD + (BTC:BTS * USD:BTS)?

I read the paper posted at

There was a section therein which described crowd funders maintaining control of funds using a protocol of randomized juries. This sounds excellent especially since control is weighted by Stake. I'd be willing to contribute to such a fund for BitShares development if it existed. Basically it sounds like funders could maintain control over expenses through a system of rolling randomized juries that act as a temporary board for authorizing fund transactions. The end of the paper mentions an idea to extend bitcoin multi-signature accounts to be controlled by rolling juries/boards. Will someone do this with bitcoin and beat us to the punch? Is there anyone else that thinks BitShares could benefit by implementing such a protocol?

General Discussion / Too many 100% delegates are bad!
« on: June 26, 2015, 10:41:55 am »
This is not against any delegates in fact the point is that too many 100% delegates indicates  delegate pay is obviously not enough. How could it be that across the broad range of services that delegates provide they all require the same pay? Of course not. The problem is the pay rates are too low so they are all maxing out at the same 100% rate.

If the pay outs were higher then delegates could reduce their pay rates below 100% and then they would all have different levels and we could compare them against each other. As it is now, the pay outs are so low it seems that they all need 100% settings.

Is there a way to increase the pay outs so that delegates can function at pay rates below 100%?

Is it possible to fix the pay rates to a bitUSD price feed to stabilize delegate pay?

General Discussion / Privacy Idea: Add a setting for 'Privacy proxy'
« on: June 04, 2015, 12:01:55 am »
Add a setting for Privacy proxy so all identifying transactions like spending, shorting, ordering, voting go via the proxy.

But standard node behaviour uses the standard tunnel so the slow proxy speed doesn't mess up the blockchain synching etc.

General Discussion / New kind of order: Limit At Feed
« on: May 27, 2015, 06:44:34 pm »
There may be times when someone wants to buy an asset in a certain amount but they want the trade to happen only at the Price Feed. So perhaps we could add a new kind of order that would BUY/SELL with limit at the feed price.

General Discussion / Counter Party Risk
« on: May 08, 2015, 04:48:36 pm »
I don't know exactly how accurate it is but this is what I understand. .

In bitshares the 101 Delegates are voted in to execute the code for a bitAsset market engine which manages the market by:
keeping accurate price feeds (USD,CNY, EURO, GOLD, BTC),
creating bitAsset units against shorting trades,
signing bitAsset transfers,
expiring the short side of trades,
and triggering margin calls if collateral is squeezed by the price algorithm

This decentralizes the market administration which means traders do not have counter party risk while trading. So instead of only avoiding counter party risk while sitting in a basic account, with bitshares account holders also avoid counter party risk while trading bitAssets. Since the bitAssets are "Assets For Difference"* their value tracks external world assets. So bitAssets act as crypto currencies with values linked to external markets.
Bitcoin can do multi-signature accounts but it doesn't have such market engine features natively. I read assumptions about bitshares that seem unaware of the absence of counter party risk while trading and holding bitAssets. It is important when comparing with bitcoin, Tether, NuBits, etc to explain this particular feature as it's a very unique and valuable.   

*bitAssets should not be called contracts or CFDs because a contract implies something is unfinished and so obligations exist that still need to be performed. Since bitAssets are automated algorithms they are already completed when they are transferred and do not depend upon a counter party to perform anything further.

General Discussion / Shorting Best Practice help page
« on: May 01, 2015, 09:33:02 am »
Is there an official page somewhere that details how the shorting mechanism works expressed in a way that is easy for average users who want to short to understand. There appears to be a lot of confusion over shorting best practices. A flow chart would be nice explaining what happens is a variety of scenarios and what options are available to users. 

General Discussion / bitCNY demand is really firm
« on: April 30, 2015, 07:34:22 am »
Looking at bitCNY here and here:

Unfortunately one chart is market cap in USD and the other is CNY. But in both charts it appears that the demand for bitCNY over 365 days is very firm. Between April 11 and 14 someone bought 50k USD on bitCNY. In CNY the collateral locked by the network has tripled since December. On the other hand the bitUSD market cap has been falling. Unfortunately it the bitsharesblocks bitUSD charts do not display the supply charts for some reason.

I wish I could view all these charts based in BTS. Anyone know where to get the raw data from? Am I reading this data right?

General Discussion / Privacy and Addresses
« on: April 29, 2015, 09:38:51 am »
Currently to receive BTS we need to hand out a registered nickname. This is not very good for privacy.

The ideal method from the users perspective would be Payees can generate Master Receive Addresses. These are handed out to Payers who associate them with their contact list and can re-use them many times to generate a new unique receive address.

Is there any intention to implement receive addresses in BitShares or something else to improve privacy?

General Discussion / : Opensource HD Multi-wallet
« on: March 20, 2015, 02:31:24 am »
Seems like a great project. One HD password to protect many coins.

I've requested BTS, bitUSD support. If others could do same it may speed up inclusion.

Andreas Antonoplous : The Future of Crypto-currencies - 2014 Texas
Nice shirt Max ;)

Step 1. BitShares clients with Bitcoin wallet features
Step 2. BitShares clients with features for P2P exchange of BTC/BTS (via Delegate escrow
Step 3. We reach out to Andreas Antonoplous to fall in love with BitShares and become a 100% delegate 


General Discussion / Privacy and HD Public Keys per Contact
« on: March 19, 2015, 04:18:45 am »
Perhaps Bitshares could include a feature to generate a special HD Public Key which they can provide to each unique contact to maintain privacy to generate an infinite number of target addresses for payments to you. That way your privacy is better maintained. Ninki calls this "Air-gapped Address Exchange".

Problem for bitcoiners is that all your contacts must have the Ninki wallet to get the features. It may be a long while before other wallets start to incorporate the feature. Since bitshares it just getting started it could be included in all wallets by default.

Done my first short now when I press "Cover" under the Open Margin Orders section I see options for what appears to be a market order to cover.
But is there a way to cover with a limit order or will it force me to cover exactly at the current feed price?

General Discussion / If I short bitUSD will I maintain my BTS exposure?
« on: February 25, 2015, 01:46:51 am »
I'm wondering how creating a new bitUSD short position will modify my BTS exposure if at all.
Can anyone perhaps describe this and if the outcome is variable what the matrix of possibilities looks like?

"Mercury - The world's first trustless cryptocurrency exchange";all

Bitcoiners are getting excited about Mercury which is still in alpha. Bitshares can steal their thunder and attract bitcoin investors by adding atomic cross-chain trading features into the BTS client before they do. As mentioned here this is technically possible with bitshares. This would open a big decentralized gateway allowing the flow of unlimited bitcoins into bitshares.

Bitshares is well positioned to be the first and ultimate smart wallet. But Mercury appears to also be well positioned. We can request Mercury to include BTS and bitUSD but what if they include a bitUSD competitor instead? Are we at their mercy? Of course bitshares is still first mover on cfd type bitassets so it probably will be included. But winning the smart wallet race would be imho awesome for bitshares. Bitshares should be the world's first trustless cryptocurrency exchange.

Pages: [1] 2 3