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 - ronpaulmoneyman

Pages: [1] 2
1
General Discussion / Re: User Issued Asset Market Fees
« on: January 28, 2015, 05:07:47 am »
Quote from: arhag on January 28, 2015, 01:07:21 am
Quote from: ronpaulmoneyman on January 27, 2015, 11:38:10 pm
I get that an exchange can use a UIA in BTS's DEX, but what is the mechanism that they tie that UIA to something of value?

The value of UIAs is based on trust in the issuer. UIA holders are exposed to counterparty risk with respect to the issuer who is backing their value.

Quote from: ronpaulmoneyman on January 27, 2015, 11:38:10 pm
The part that is not clear to me is where is the collateral stored?  How do we know that the UIA can be redeemed?

The collateral/reserve in the case of the UIA is stored off of the BitShares blockchain. If this is a UIA that is an IOU for some cryptocurrency, then the reserve will likely be stored in that cryptocurrencies' native blockchain (likely controlled through keys held by the UIA issuer). If the UIA is an IOU for fiat, then the reserve will likely be fiat held in their traditional bank accounts. Note that they do not have to have full 100% reserve backing their IOUs but customers should demand that they do (also it should at least be more transparent to check on the blockchains in the case of cryptocurrency IOUs). The UIA may also have no real reserves and just be a promise to pay back the UIA holders in the future with something of value. Again, you are trusting the UIA issuer who is backing the value of the UIA and there is no guarantee that you can redeem the full value promised. You just have to trust that they actually will pay it back to maintain their reputation and continue their business model (and also their jurisdiction will likely consider it a security and therefore they will have a legal obligation to make their customer's whole if possible).

The UIAs are interesting because we want gateways to use them as a way of getting fiat into and out of the BitShares system. The companies we would typically be targeting to act as gateways are exchanges that have already enabled bank transfers of fiat into and out of their existing system. These exchanges are used to making their money through percentage fees on each trade, so their revenue scales with the volume of trading of their assets. We are asking them to not focus on the exchange features (order books, matching bids and asks) and instead only focus on the fiat gateway portion. Some exchanges may not be comfortable with such a huge change in their business model. This new feature now allows these exchanges to use their same business model to make money except BitShares does all their order book work for them and also stores the cryptocurrency assets so that liability isn't on the exchange anymore.

Ok, so there is nothing here I am missing. My thought was would it somehow might be possible to issue UIA's on RPM's blockchain which then go to the gateway and thus not force people to risk their deposit. Without other transactions that don't exist this would do nothing more than add an extra gateway. So these gateway programs will always have a certain level of centralized risk, there is no way to avoid it ?

My question boils down to "Can a gateway be made that never exposes a person to risk ?". It seems any cross chain transaction utilizing a off chain gateway will force the gateway runner to hold the balances of both sides.

2
General Discussion / Re: User Issued Asset Market Fees
« on: January 27, 2015, 11:38:10 pm »

Is there documentation that explains the range of features involved with these features?

I get that an exchange can use a UIA in BTS's DEX, but what is the mechanism that they tie that UIA to something of value?  Are there transactions where I can create an Asset and have it pegged to BTS. 

The part that is not clear to me is where is the collateral stored?  How do we know that the UIA can be redeemed?  Is there a quality in-depth example including the RPC calls that would walk through this process?  Can Bytemaster make such a document for his blog?  (Maybe it has been written?)

You will get adoption be either cold-contacting exchanges or by writing something quality that explains a typical usecase of how an exchange would create these assets. This serves as documentation which will help people implement things, but it can also be written in such a way to be spread on Social Media. I believe Bitshares.tv may have covered this but thats not my preferred media for technical things. There is no doubt there are others like me. (ie future potential partners of Bitshares)

3
General Discussion / Re: [MetaExchange] dev-metaexchange.monsterer development diary
« on: January 27, 2015, 09:46:56 pm »

I probably won't fork this and will just hack something up in python using mysql but the cross chain trading is far from being implemented. I have used C# in the past but python has value to me to learn.

4
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD atomic cross chain trading
« on: January 27, 2015, 09:12:57 pm »

These nLock transactions that have timeouts. There is a potential attack there because they require constant overhead they could bloat up the Delegates. I mean obviously programmers can write code to mitigate it or limit the number of these transactions but they're not like regular transactions. It is O(n^2) vs O(n) to validate these types of transactions.

5
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD atomic cross chain trading
« on: January 25, 2015, 10:06:19 pm »

So this means this isn't about to happen anytime soon?  It would need to be enabled in devshares but there is no secondary chain to trade with. However Monsterer suggested I use this as it would be better but I'm not seeing it.

Is the code in toolkit branch to be enabled?

So how about I enable it in RPM then get it released and you guys enable it in Devshares? Then Devshares can have their price valued in RPMs! Katie bar the door! 

Or should i go back to running a gateway. <grin>  It seems preferable to exchanges at this point.


6
General Discussion / Re: [Video] Help testing new features in DevShares
« on: January 25, 2015, 08:39:32 pm »
Yes you people need to write the code to do that!

DVS:DVSUIA gateway!

Unfortunately I'll likely end up doing it first but fellers remember, "we're all on the same team ! (sorta)"

Github to the moon!

7
General Discussion / Re: [MetaExchange] dev-metaexchange.monsterer development diary
« on: January 25, 2015, 07:10:17 am »

Nice work you've done here. I was curious how difficult it would be to make an asset<->asset gateway.  The reason is this would let lesser DPOS chains do price discovery and use the BTS DEX as a market without having to try to find a reasonable crypto-exchange.

So all your use-cases understandably have BTC on one side of the equation.  I would basically like to remove that and put an asset on both sides. Do you forsee difficulty in doing this?  Is there any documentation on getting your work fired up and running so I could modify a working version of it? I plan on setting up some tests with devshares <-> BTS. I'd rather just get this working before I release my chain so it can be liquid and tradeable instantly.  Whether we go with version .6 or .5 or later..

8
General Discussion / Re: My problem with BitAssets... lack of price discovery
« on: January 24, 2015, 07:46:51 am »
Quote from: toast on January 23, 2015, 04:42:24 pm
If you have enough gateways you can use UIA USD vs BTS to price bitUSD. Delegates still have to write a script to filter this information to get good price information.

What do you mean "If you have enough gateways" ?

Otherwise -

My current plan is get a script setup between 2 wallets and just do a centralized cross chain trading. Since this is my coin it seems somewhat reasonable to trust me in the early days of the coin. People always have the option to not enter this market but if I was to screw it up I'd be shooting myself in the foot.

This actually solves a lot of problems at once. It gives a reason for a coin that will need too common updates to be brought into existence earlier. We're informally waiting for version 1.0 but that may not be the final answer. Regardless this lets us become liquid and do price discovery early on and avoid these questions. It also lets us co-promote BitShares DEX.

All that is needed is an asset to asset gateway bridge. I assume everyone has only written a btc-bitBTC bridge which would be easy enough to change up. I do this and I have price discovery on a liquid coin !

From there we can try to add the coin to centralized exchanges.

9
General Discussion / Re: My problem with BitAssets... lack of price discovery
« on: January 23, 2015, 11:56:24 am »

That is my question can you use monsterer's gateway to do price discovery? Or will it rely on prices being set in other markets and then have a percentage based fee?

I don't mind my coin being on some podunk exchange but I do not want to force my users to use said centralized podunk exchange.

10
General Discussion / Re: Please Consider Voting for fuzzy.beyondbitcoin
« on: January 23, 2015, 08:57:46 am »

That person asked about the money.

It isn't about spending the money to support others.

It is whether the inflation funds should pay for every bit of your free time or force you to be in some exclusive contract. A real greedy asshole might say "Well Fuzzy if you aren't spending all your time on BTS then you deserve nothing from the blockchain. It doesn't matter all the time you have selflessly donated!" Just ignore them. Those are the types of people that have chased me off from wanting to have the RPM community on this board and went with the PTS board instead. Long live PTS!

While the core developers never display this attitude there is a very vocal minority on here that does. I deeply hope you are not too swayed by them. Luckily it appears you have what it takes to rise above that stupid bullshit and realize that realistically none of these other chains are a direct threat to BitShares.  Pushing PTS off has done nothing but result in a bit of brain drain as PC and Cube both seem to be very competent.

11
General Discussion / My problem with BitAssets... lack of price discovery
« on: January 23, 2015, 08:44:16 am »

So I am releasing a coin named RonPaulMoney. You can read about it elsewhere but it is largely a BitShares clone with a few small changes.

The problem is that all price discovery is done on centralized exchanges. There are no planned features that lead to decentralized price discovery, correct?  Price discovery is needed to launch any bitAsset.

With BitShares it fell into place but it interestingly creates a problem for other chains who would not have the political pull that a coin like Bitshares has. While I'm sure I can find some small exchange to do this after I pay them or otherwise, I would rather not put my users through the risk of some shit exchange. (Although I have not contacted BTER yet, need to have the coin released first) So what gives my coin value can't even exist _until_ it the coin is on an exchange!

Does the BTC-bitBTC gateway I see mentioned do price discovery?

Would there be a way to peg RPM to BTS by issuing a user issued asset and then have a dex using a centralized exchanger (me) who doles out an asset when people transfer their RPM to me?

Once we have a live blockchain we could use a gateway? So when my RPM wallet receives 100 RPM then they receive 100 units of a UIA which is then traded in BTS?

Much like NEMStakes but we have RPMStakes?

Is that my best bet short of a decent exchange or 2?

12
Technical Support / Re: Does codebase support reserved names in the asset space?
« on: January 12, 2015, 10:17:13 pm »
Quote from: vikram on January 06, 2015, 08:27:17 pm
Quote from: rpcddev on January 06, 2015, 07:09:48 am
Our chain will have 2 market-pegged assets. Silver and Gold.

Maybe I am not understanding--are you starting with only silver and gold or allowing ONLY silver and gold?

If it is the latter then just don't allow creation of market pegged assets during validation. If it is the former then, yes, you need to change the validation rules to reflect the restrictions that you want.

You are understanding. My mind is far from made up and the high level concept is not even clear to myself although I had a break through.

Currently, no MPAs except Silver and Gold.  So that means I have to create them myself once chain is live?  The other user-issued assets I want to protect via a long list of reserved anti-camping names. It might just be a long regular expression like 'bitUSD|bitEURO|bitDollar'.  Since this code would rarely be called a huge simple regexp would be fine.

So my new concept will be to create a 3rd class of asset that doesn't exist on the blockchain.  An example would be the RonPaulDollar which actually is just a representation of the MPA of Gold/Silver. So in effect we have "Gold backed dollars". The price feeds will be what enforces this.  I am confused about the use of both gold vs silver. Do we have "RonPaulSilverDollar" along with "RonPaulGoldDollar"?  I can't really merge both and let one person decide which asset is actually being tranferred. I'm trying to picture how to interface the 2 while maintaining the capability of both. The idea is that RPC calls are added that enable this. So it is nothing more than a layer of RPC calls that do the conversions. So you can only have Gold and Silver, but the amounts can be displayed in dollars or CNY or what have you. Perhaps I default populate the memo with something like "$120.30 in Silver".

So that is the current idea at the highest conceptual level. I almost want to just have either silver or gold, but people too often have a strong preference of one over the other.

I'm actually quite taken by this idea. It isn't in the realm of too much work and has a lot of value. badass imo. It will take some work on the GUI. Chinese can have their gold backed CNY, Europeans can go EURO.
 

13
General Discussion / Re: Rand Paul Coin wants to use DPoS
« on: January 06, 2015, 07:16:27 am »
Update - community has setup official home at

http://pts.cubeconnex.com/index.php?board=16.0


14
Technical Support / Does codebase support reserved names in the asset space?
« on: January 06, 2015, 07:09:48 am »

One mistake I would like to avoid is people camping on assets that are similar to legitimate assets. I also don't want people creating bitGLD or bitGold or bitUSD because it does no one in the Bitshares community any good. Our chain will have 2 market-pegged assets. Silver and Gold.

The code could be kludged up with a big regexp test on registration but I wanted to make sure nothing like this existed? This is something that needs to be correct before the live chain.

15
General Discussion / Request For Comment !
« on: December 31, 2014, 07:56:47 am »

What is the consensus on giving this coin its own subforum here? Perhaps one level lower than the top level.

We can have lots of discussions here or just keep it to basic threads. The Bitcointalk thread alone had over 30k views. Who gets more business from whom? IIRC RPCD ANN has more views than the I3/Bitshares announcement on Bitcointalk. Could there be a cross pollination network effect?

Googling this coin I can't help but thank Fuznuts for doing wonderful things as soon as he caught wind of my project.

Secondly, who wants to run a Delegate?  Who would not mind running a Delegate once we are stable but doesn't want to be involved in testnets?

There is an issue with Delegates on Bitcointalk. Giving away funds to testnet participants would fall under the giveaway rules on bitcointalk and have my thread locked!  >:(

Pages: [1] 2

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 23 queries.