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 - jcrubino

Pages: [1] 2 3
I hate to say it, but this is basically Etherium that you're describing here. The problem that they'll have with their privatised instrument classes is that none of them are 'official' so will have exactly the same class of trust and adoption problems that any product/business has getting set up, on top of the existing problems that the blockchain itself has in getting established, making this path a slow burn, so to speak.

Additionally, a critical question is how well can the blockchain + network scale to multiple privatized assets, I assume popular ones will get copied.

As with creating a startup, the Bitshares DAC should maintain a laser focus on creating products that fit the customer needs.  At first glance it might appear that there is a larger market that is made up of devs and promoters but trading continues to be the largest single use for cryptocurrencies.  Big business is now invested in Bitcoin and creating siloed applications with it (Overstock, Nasdaq, etc).  Will creating a business made to sell to developers / promoters create a better value than creating a blockchain with focused features available to those not part of the mainstream offerings in this domain?  I do not know myself, and I remain skeptical of privatized assets to some extent.  A blockchain like Bitshares cannot have a failwhale moment should blockchain applications become used en mass due to popularity of a corporate offering.  A fail on a small chain could be its downfall, and event not needed when blockchain applications are being built to preserve peoples confidence in the face of other public market troubles (China, Greece).

Technical Support / Re: Address and Network Protocol
« on: May 09, 2015, 04:46:46 am »
If there is something I can do to help get this shipped let me know.

Technical Support / Re: Address and Network Protocol
« on: May 09, 2015, 03:22:21 am »
Thanks for the info

Looking forward to it

Technical Support / Address and Network Protocol
« on: May 08, 2015, 10:23:57 pm »
Is there an address and network lib protocol and reference lib like vbuterin's pybitcointools?

Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Paid Workers Proposal for Review
« on: May 04, 2015, 04:12:14 am »
I think 3 years is a more equitable term to decide if the business project is viable for the devs and the community.

This is the make or break term for normal businesses and I believe the cryptocoin space might be more accelerated in terms of market validation of product. 

General Discussion / Privatized Assets
« on: May 04, 2015, 04:06:59 am »
What is the timeline for a definitive answer and implementation of PA should they be passed as standard on the platform?

On a tangential note, I was invited to speak at the Prague Bitcoin conference.
I declined as its a one day event and I had no plans to be in Prague or Europe for that matter.

Any Euro Bitshares members plan on attending and interested in pitching Bitshares and the index?

I am glad you asked because its tormenting....

Lots of options but unreasonable to ask delegates to post a feed for each...

Strict Market Cap but less Exposure to alt assets or capped weighted market caps to even exposure?
Price Weighted but bitcoin still outpowers the rest?
Drop Bitcoin all togeather or keep Bitcoin in as collateral against mongering?
Short Bitcoin, creating a long short type of index?
This could be very interesting...

I think price weighted is warranted but a capped market caps provide better exposure.
Up to the community to decide, if Privatized Assets do not go through.
(If privatized assets do go through, could the yield be kept by Bitshares as an underwriter fee?)

How does the Bitshares community want to represent the industry markets in an index?
Should we engage industry and exchanges for feedback on this?
Is there a way to incentivize other blockchains to support an index on Bitshares?

I heard that producing new altcoins was like giving fireworks or dynamite to kids, my hope is the index is at least like handing out ice cream on a hot day.

Reference data client for using Coinmarketcap + a Kimono API that updates every 15 min

Coingekko comming soon

General Discussion / Re: Privatizing BitAssets
« on: April 20, 2015, 10:13:56 pm »
Publishing a feed is perfectly fine (Yahoo, Google, and a dozen other companies do this... it is public information).

The summary for the privatized bitAssets proposal is:
         Privatized public feeds that create new public assets
         White-listed publishers but not private white-labeled assets

Is this correct?

General Discussion / Re: Gavin's thoughts on mining
« on: April 19, 2015, 07:09:43 pm »
Im watching a meetup with Gavin Andresen, and hes saying stuff thats making me scratch my head:

On the positive side, Mike Hearn did talk about moving away from Proof of Work.

General Discussion / Re: Privatizing BitAssets
« on: April 19, 2015, 05:14:07 am »
Privatized assets still could be gamed.

I would like to know if there is a reason a large exchange could not: release an asset, buy both sides, sell as an etf on their exchange market  as a "special fund".  The exchange would not even have to market it as Bitshares, and Bitshares might receive a 1500 + 500 payout every year they do this while the Exchange keeps the both sides of the contract in balance based on their exchange data.  They would only have to come up with a spv wallet (not even bitshares related, just for for bean counting) if they were to make the fund available off the exchange and most users would not know the difference between the special fund coin and the Bitshares issued asset.

If this type of plan is successfully implemented Bitshares would be missing out on a whole lot of fees after such a fund reached a total of $1,000,000 in trades at a 0.2% fee never mind the prudent profits from front running the "smart contract".

General Discussion / Re: Privatizing BitAssets
« on: April 19, 2015, 01:30:27 am »
Markets exist because it is possible to arbitrate information asymmetry between players. without information asymmetry there cannot be arbitration. Communities which are able to keep information siloed off from the rest of the market can profit from that (e.g. Singapore elite), but open communities cannot. So far DACs can not keep secrets, hence no information asymmetry - no profit beyond technical utility value.

For any DAC to become a real company you need a board of directors which keeps information asymmetry up. I personally lean heavily towards using prediction markets for appointing a board of directors for DACs.

However, if you want the shareholders to decide on everything, then information asymmetry is practically impossible.

I am concerned that allowing for privatized assets you are lessening information asymetry between the Bitshares community and other blockchains with similar goals, who to date are not doing as well in a relative comparison by trade volume.  Some here feel wary of Bitshares current performance but when compared to other similar platforms it is doing just fine on the markets.  Other blockchains and the current UIA list look like exchanges for spam in comparison.

Bytemaster uses at least ten metaphors to help explain BitShares to any unfortunate person caught in an elevator with him.

Thanks Stan, I think that summed it up well.  The metaphor must change with the floor he passing through.

Pages: [1] 2 3