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 - ul

Pages: [1]
1
The market will already take the locked up fees in the robot account into account as if the total XTS supply was lower. Destroying/creating and locking up / reallocating are the same thing when it comes to shares of a whole. Are you just saying one is less likely to cause problems because of exclusively psychological factors?

No. There's a little difference even considering the equivalence of destroying/creating and locking up/reallocating. Let's just use destroying and creating instead of the other two to make it more clear.

When margin call occurs, all the collateral bts is used to buy enough BitUSD to cover the short position. The current solution is that if the collateral is not enough, some bts will be created to buy BitUSD to make a total cover. 

The other solution is equivalent to that if the collateral is not enough, some BitUSD will be created directly to make a total cover. There's no more market transactions to do such a cover. That will lead to a less influence on the market.

2
If we have a company account, the margin call is very easy:
transfer all short position and backup to the company account.

these short position will be cover with the bitasset in the account.

And I think It's very cool when you give the BTS  such a robot account.
margin call executed because price of bitusd rise up.
In this situation, we still use backup xfs to buy bitusd with any price, even create new xfs.
I think it's not ok for price stable.
Maybe there huge danger to the whole network.

I think transfer the short position and backup xfs to the robot account is more simple.

Yes. If the price suffers from a sharp fluctuation, we can expect the emergence of a large amount of uncovered short positions. According to the lastest strategy by bm, enough bts will be created by the system to buy adequate BitUSD to cover the short position (regardless whatever high price of the bitUSD) . Then the price of BitUSD will be pushed even higher and that will help to further exacerbate the market fluctuation. It's a positive feedback progress.

So I think maybe we can just ignore the issue and just leave the unbacked BitUSD in circulation. The total amount of BitUSD and BTS(collateral) need not have some fixed relationship. All these changes will ultimately be reflected by the effective market.

Also, Alt's idea about the market robot is also very interesting. The main difference of the special account and bm's solution is that the BitUSD which is used to cover the uncovered short position is not bought from the market, but took out from the former transaction fees. I'd like to prefer Alt's idea once taken into account the solution's influence on the market.

3
中文 (Chinese) / Re: BitsharesX是如何入场的?
« on: February 18, 2014, 04:30:19 am »
如果没有兑换平台,一开始有BTS的人自己玩,玩去来的bitUSD干嘛用啊?虚拟交易用BTS就可以了,用不着bitUSD。

4
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 修改强制平仓算法
« on: February 17, 2014, 03:58:11 pm »
嗯,这样挺好,没有无抵押的asset很完美,不过单边市会形成很多各价位的系统买单,会造成流通bts减少,而且不知道会不会加剧市场的波动?

5
中文 (Chinese) / Re: 保证金问题
« on: February 17, 2014, 09:23:49 am »
md,这你也看的出来?我这两天想了想,感觉好多问题想不清楚啊

6
中文 (Chinese) / Re: BitsharesX是如何入场的?
« on: February 17, 2014, 09:19:09 am »
不是吧?那X是干吗的?它需要依靠其他中心化交易?那X的价值是?

7
中文 (Chinese) / 保证金问题
« on: February 17, 2014, 09:15:54 am »
根据我的理解,如果做空者卖1bts的bitAsset,抵押他和买家的各一个bts,也就是两倍保证金。问题是这个保证金是固定2倍,而跟你账号里有多少bts无关,也就是说只要做空后,bts贬值固定比例就会爆仓,做空者无法用仓位控制来容忍市场波动。在这种情况下,会有人愿意做空吗?如果没人做空,则所有的bitAsset都不存在,系统run不起来啊

8
中文 (Chinese) / BitsharesX是如何入场的?
« on: February 17, 2014, 08:21:01 am »
目前我看到的介绍都是说如何产生bitUSD(or bit CNY,...)以及bitUSD如何与BTS进行交易,以及理论上1bitUSD = 1USD,但是关键问题是假设我手头有1 USD,我去哪里换成1个bitUSD? 也就是说这个网络形成后,中国大妈们如何入场?X系统应该管不了这事吧,那谁管?难道是另外有一个bitUSD与USD的交易中心?应该不可能,那X系统就失去意义了。我想了半天也没想明白,哪位高人给指点指点。

Pages: [1]