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 - Bitcoinfan

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 16

In the orginal Bitshares, or the new one now, how often was a delegate producing feeds, and how often would the Bitshares Exchange read the median of those feeds?

General Discussion / Re: Hello 👋
« on: March 25, 2020, 08:41:19 pm »

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.

General Discussion / Re: Hello 👋
« on: March 25, 2020, 02:59:50 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? 

General Discussion / Re: Hello 👋
« on: March 25, 2020, 12:50:20 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?

General Discussion / Re: Hello 👋
« on: March 24, 2020, 08:28:45 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?

General Discussion / Re: BTS Price spike
« on: December 15, 2017, 07:17:26 pm »

I've forgotten why forced settlement was instituted in Bitshares 2.0.  Does anyone remember?  I recall that Bitshares 1.0 wasn't working because of the lack of short liquidity and for this reason force settlement was put in?  Or was there not enough buyers of Bitusd to guarantee a peg?

General Discussion / No EOS for Bitshares users.
« on: June 10, 2017, 03:15:16 am »
Looks like Bitshare users won't get any token drop for Dan's latest work.  Am I wrong here, but what was sold from Bitshares 2.0 with Dan focusing his attention on Bitshares projects, has now been reneged once again.  So shameful.  Maybe there will still be a sharedrop and this is several different crowdfunding platforms (eg. Bitcoin, Ethereum)??

What are your views on LMSR market makers?  Is CNX thinking about including this in the future?

Technical Support / Re: Discussion of a CFD market on Bitshares
« on: January 28, 2016, 11:19:09 pm »
what i love is, that anyone just post in "General" because on the subforums your posts get no attention at all.
Maybe you could bring this up on tomorrow's mumble?

would be nice, but i am not available at he mumble times, because of work. I will add this as a question. Thanks for the idea!

Why do you need CDF contracts , when you have a stablecoin? 

Technical Support / Re: Discussion of a CFD market on Bitshares
« on: January 28, 2016, 11:16:30 pm »
I conclude that BitShares itself should NEVER every run a LMSR market maker.

BUT: we could have a feature that let's others provide funds for the market maker und still offer the prediction market in a decentralized manner.
This could indeed be built into the protocol to remove the trust that would be required if someone just put a buy and a sell wall at the LMSR price.

What's your evidence for this conclusion?  Does the right of the team agree with you?

Could you also explain more how you would do things in a decentralized manner-- that isnt Dan Laimer's competitive price feeds. 

Technical Support / Re: Discussion of a CFD market on Bitshares
« on: January 24, 2016, 11:06:04 pm »

Can this LMSR thing be implemented as a 3rd party market maker bot which runs in BitShares markets, if have some fund? Thanks.

No its a protocol level feature. Otherwise it would be no different from a centralized PM such as Predictit, Intrade, Groupgnosis etc. 

I'd encourage you to take a look at LMSR.  It shouldnt be overlooked. 

Technical Support / Re: Discussion of a CFD market on Bitshares
« on: January 23, 2016, 10:39:18 pm »
1.So you have never heard of contracts that can be 'settled' before expiration? Or do you believe no trades in them exist, as it is? I will not go that far and ask about knowledge of mathematically correct ways to determine if and when to do such settlements?

Sorry but Hivemind and Augur's Prediction Markets will make use of CDF's go obsolete...  for the reasons I stated before... holding up collateral is risky and just another needless cost for a trader. 

2. While I have my thoughts on if this is gonna actually work (or work better), I want to ask a simple question first.
Why do you believe it cannot be done in bitshares? What is wrong with the feed price being your reference price and forcing trades within 0.5% of that price during your 'freeze window'/ locking period?

No it can't be done in Bitshares because Bitshares does not use LMSR.  Bitshare needs another party to have collateral, which ensures liquidity problems and thus the bulk of Bitshares problems.  LMSR does not have liquidity issues. 

Technical Support / Re: Discussion of a CFD market on Bitshares
« on: January 23, 2016, 03:56:37 am »
Its not clear to me why ayone would want to use a CDF because the other side does not know how to assess whether or not the other party will settle or not.  Since they can't evaluate, traders will avoid it entirely.  There is always a fear of losing your position + more.  CDF's were only invented because there was no such thing as a stable asset.  But now we have that because of cypto, athough I'm convinced the way bitshares is implementing it will not work.  There is always a fear with putting up collateral, which is an obstruction to a frictionless transaction. 

Not to derail your post, but I have figured out a way to create true stablecoin without needing ANY COLLATERAL.  Its done using the LMSR structure that Augur and Bitcoin Hivemind are using for their Prediction Markets.  The only difference is that its a TRUE non-settling prediction market (something Bytemaster could not deliver on when he first created Bitshares).  Its effectively a LMSR that never ever has a maturity date and continues constantly. 

I think this is a better idea than doing a CDF, and will help Bitshares in creating a true stablecoin, where both sides of the bet have symmetric risk profiles.  You might be interested in this.  Take a look.  I think Bitshares should take advantage of this.,206.msg1075.html#msg1075

General Discussion / Re: Millions of Features, Features for Me!
« on: December 15, 2015, 09:11:08 pm »

So I would like to take some time to outline a plan I am devising for getting features lined up and prioritized based upon the concept of Fee Backed Assets (FBA).  For each of the following features I will create a UIA that represents stake in the future fees generated from that feature. 

2. Prediction Market (Auger Style)


That's two for two -- Sooner or later I knew you'd come around... 



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 16