Quote from: Ander on December 17, 2014, 08:23:54 pm

Quote from: spartako on December 17, 2014, 08:17:29 pm

I think ripple and bitshares are not direct competitor and can work together in a great way.

If you want the ideals of current banking system, ripple is the best implementation.

If you want the ideals of bitcoin, bitshares will be (I hope) the best implementation

I agree.   Perhaps we can use Ripple to enable easy onramps into BTS from USD, CNY, and other currencies.  This would be very useful.

It would be very useful for a BTS gateway inside ripple to be launched and for a BTS inbound / outbound bridge to be created similar to BTC ... This is much easier than it appears, but it requires a competent BTS gateway operator.  RL recently released gatewayd as a starting package for such. See https://github.com/ripple/gatewayd

Of all the crypto networks, it seems clear that Ripple has the biggest lead in linking to the banking system.  As such the other networks would do well to encourage the development of Ripple bridges.  That's the best way to tap bank liquidity.  And it's the way that liquidity in one becomes liquidity in all.

Since we have not received anything I can post that we have not received anything.

Seeking legal advice early was a wise move.

Sounds like a frightful mess.

The starting point is for BitShares to try to build a few native gateways for BTS and fiat to move funds in an out of its network.  The big problem will not be technical but with compliance.  Gateways need banking relationships because they are businesses.  And banks will be very reluctant to serve a gateway that can move funds into an anonymous network like BitShares.  No Ripple gateway will want to lose its banker by acting as a BitShares gateway.

So the next alternative will be to build an automatic gateway BTSX gateway to move BTSX into the Ripple Network where it can be traded for USD.  How might you do that?  It's not too difficult.  Just copy btc2ripple.com.  They did it for Bitcoin and it works great.  Now you will have a cash in/out mechanism.  I'd suggest automating the entire process and make it trustless (almost) by using a Codius contract.  Codius is another open source Ripple project.

With an automatic gateway between BitShares and Ripple you'll find that liquidity in one is liquidity in both.

Quote from: celticwarrior72 on August 23, 2014, 05:18:23 am

Quote from: bytemaster on August 23, 2014, 05:06:08 am

There is no "issuer" other than the "network" and yes all BitUSD is fungible.

OK.  So right now, funds flow into and out of the blockchain via some bitcoin broker/exchange in a relatively cumbersome manner as follows: Fiat->BTC->BTSX->BitUSD.  In an ideal world there would be a simpler process of Fiat->BitUSD.  Have you given any thoughts to how this simpler process might get implemented?

Right now localbitcoins suffers from trying to match Bid/Ask + Location... with BitUSD all you have to do is match location.   Much easier.

The BitUSD seller will still charge a 'commission' which could be construed as a bid or ask, but I get your point.  Of course bank->BitUSD would be the most efficient, but there'll be a ton of KYC and AML compliance issues to overcome first.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions.

Quote from: celticwarrior72 on August 23, 2014, 04:50:12 am

Quote from: bytemaster on August 23, 2014, 04:38:24 am

Quote from: celticwarrior72 on August 23, 2014, 03:41:42 am

2) What is the mechanism by which that BTSX will be marked to market to that there is always sufficient collateral to support the asset?

   There is a live market (bid/ask) that continuously determines the price and settlement.  The average price is used to trigger margin calls while while there is still 150% backing.

Two more questions:

1) Where does that 'live market' come from?  Is it purely from bids and offers from market participants, or will the blockchain have some integrated bot to provide continuous liquidity of some sort?
2) Say I'm the holder of 1000 BitUSD that has been collateralized by 100,000 BTSX, can you describe what happens if the price of BTSX drops from 100:1 to 1000:1?

Bids and asks purely from market participants.   Many participants will run bots serving as a market maker. 
If the price falls by 90% over a week then the market should clear slowly as margin calls are gradually executed and people cover.   A short squeeze is possible. 
If there is insufficient collateral, then fees collected by the network prior to the crash will cover any losses.... if prior fees are not enough, then future fees will be used and the BitUSD will only be partially backed.

So the holder of a particular BitAsset may be left with uncollateralized assets during periods of high volatility.  They can then hope that collateral is recovered over time through network fees.

Can anyone sell these standardized BitAssets and will they be considered fungible regardless of the issuer?

Further questions:

1) So issuance of any BitAsset is collateralized by some quantity of BTSX?
2) What is the mechanism by which that BTSX will be marked to market to that there is always sufficient collateral to support the asset?
3) Why not use the real-world asset as collateral and negate the mark-to-market problem? (this is what Ripple gateways do)

Quote from: celticwarrior72 on August 22, 2014, 08:48:35 pm

For a myriad of reasons purchasing your own currency with investor money does not seem wise.

There are no investors and it isn't "our currency".   If there were investors then this would be the moral equivalent of a "share buy back" which is what any company with cash on its balance sheet should do when their "shares" are undervalued, especially if they can liquidate them in the future.

And you've gotten sound legal opinion on this approach from a suitable securities attorney?  That's a yes or no question.