16
中文 (Chinese) / 增发bitusd发放代表工资是否可行？
« on: November 24, 2014, 05:02:50 am »
内盘里应该存在一些自由流动没有时间限制的bitusd，这个办法正好一举两得。希望大家指出弊端！
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.
Pages: 1 [2]
17
General Discussion / About the price,i want to say···
« on: November 20, 2014, 04:12:31 pm »
Cause my english is poor,and i dont have enough time to modify,let me be bluntly.
I am a frequent trader, often "cut chives," I know very well the reasons behind the falling prices. If you need evidence, I can put some transaction records to prove my specialty - the evidence will show that I was a good trader, in most cases are cut chives, only in the bts, I was cut chives up-what a sad story! i call it"Faith pains" or "Cost of true love".
Price decline was due to investors departure,yes,they gone.
Market is a rather special place, filled with rational and irrational. When talking about the market, we should throw away the calculator, not 1 + 1 = 2 so simple. When it comes to the "dilution" will or not affect the price, we should not be holding a calculator, but to fully consider the impact of this matter on investor confidence. Investors leave because 1.btsx become more complex,so complex that is difficult to explain to most people - I mean changes in equity 2.3i dazzling showcase his capability to tamper with the bts - emphasized the "capability",dont tell me there is no damage，please once again throw away your calculator.3i has given many people many reasons to attack bts,no "zuo"(equal to play fire) no die.
Emphasize that: 1.only a simple model can attract investors - investors can easily understand, just like pts and ags.2.Profit model should be simple - invest one time, no need to be concerned about any more.OK,frankly, that means do not arbitrarily change the rules.Remember:trust is hard to built and easy to destroy .
I am very angry, not angry with what 3i had done, but 3i has not yet aware of the problem, still no respect for market rules.
Am i agree with 3i now rules? Yes, if the beginning is so--at least not very bad.
But if PTS was not "POW",part of the BTSX was reserved for the developer and DNS was not born,that will be more porfect.
We must do something to make the situation better, from now on.a test chain? a good product manager? a good economic model for the division?
We need ALL!
1.Take the new asset-publishing rule as a example(on the line suddenly,damn!): auction or pay,which is better? floating charge or a fixed fee,which is better? 12345 letters asset charging rules can be refined? Why not protect these assets previously like BITUSD?
People can low-cost registered a number of BTS account, this is the first mistake; System critical account name was not protected previously, which is the second; after the market is on line, a lot of people lost money, unable to open positions result in burst positions, this is the third.If the farther back then, we can also found that many did not do things, and these things could have been avoided.
A test chain can largely solve this problem.
2.An easy to use wallet is the best publicity, can refer to Apple.
3.Economic model is the most important thing, do not arbitrary change, any change would have damage investor - even if it seems the system is not damaged. You can try several times on the test chain, or take to do mathematical modeling. In short, do not hurry to finish the work, to be stable.
I am a frequent trader, often "cut chives," I know very well the reasons behind the falling prices. If you need evidence, I can put some transaction records to prove my specialty - the evidence will show that I was a good trader, in most cases are cut chives, only in the bts, I was cut chives up-what a sad story! i call it"Faith pains" or "Cost of true love".
Price decline was due to investors departure,yes,they gone.
Market is a rather special place, filled with rational and irrational. When talking about the market, we should throw away the calculator, not 1 + 1 = 2 so simple. When it comes to the "dilution" will or not affect the price, we should not be holding a calculator, but to fully consider the impact of this matter on investor confidence. Investors leave because 1.btsx become more complex,so complex that is difficult to explain to most people - I mean changes in equity 2.3i dazzling showcase his capability to tamper with the bts - emphasized the "capability",dont tell me there is no damage，please once again throw away your calculator.3i has given many people many reasons to attack bts,no "zuo"(equal to play fire) no die.
Emphasize that: 1.only a simple model can attract investors - investors can easily understand, just like pts and ags.2.Profit model should be simple - invest one time, no need to be concerned about any more.OK,frankly, that means do not arbitrarily change the rules.Remember:trust is hard to built and easy to destroy .
I am very angry, not angry with what 3i had done, but 3i has not yet aware of the problem, still no respect for market rules.
Am i agree with 3i now rules? Yes, if the beginning is so--at least not very bad.
But if PTS was not "POW",part of the BTSX was reserved for the developer and DNS was not born,that will be more porfect.
We must do something to make the situation better, from now on.a test chain? a good product manager? a good economic model for the division?
We need ALL!
1.Take the new asset-publishing rule as a example(on the line suddenly,damn!): auction or pay,which is better? floating charge or a fixed fee,which is better? 12345 letters asset charging rules can be refined? Why not protect these assets previously like BITUSD?
People can low-cost registered a number of BTS account, this is the first mistake; System critical account name was not protected previously, which is the second; after the market is on line, a lot of people lost money, unable to open positions result in burst positions, this is the third.If the farther back then, we can also found that many did not do things, and these things could have been avoided.
A test chain can largely solve this problem.
2.An easy to use wallet is the best publicity, can refer to Apple.
3.Economic model is the most important thing, do not arbitrary change, any change would have damage investor - even if it seems the system is not damaged. You can try several times on the test chain, or take to do mathematical modeling. In short, do not hurry to finish the work, to be stable.
19
General Discussion / Hey,BM,do we really need dilution to pay for developers ? Let's calculate !
« on: November 02, 2014, 03:41:03 pm »
Translated from：https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10902.msg143596#msg143596
I think one thing need to be stressed at this point is that as a DAC , delegates are essentially company employees , the coder and other contributors are also considered as company employees ,The company pays their employee from profit , and then give dividend to the shareholders , there is nothing wrong with that . We need to calculate if without dilution , can the employees still get paid ?
According to the current model , 10 seconds per block , a delegate will have 6*60*24*30/101=2566 blocks.
Now the average transaction fee per block is 2 BTSX , assuming the trading volumes will be multiple by 5 times , and the price reaches 0.0819 USD , the transaction fee limits to 0.2 BTSX , then the monthly income for a delegate would be 2566*2*5*2*0.0819 USD = 4203 USD .One delegate is enough to support a developer , and the whole system can at least supports 50 developers (the rest of the incomes goes to the regular delegate).
This task can be easily accomplished by :
1. Do not simply merge into one simple BTSX , but merge DNS VOTE PTS etc. as assets .
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10303.msg135260#msg135260
2. Simplify the short rules of the inner-market , in the meantime optimize the GUI of the wallet and make it comfortable , so there will be a substantial amount of trading volume going into the inner-market , for it's lower cost and more safety .
3.Set up a changer ，at the very least we should connect the inner-market with the outside exchanges , that can be done by a user issue asset . I heard some exchanges are trying to do that ，that would be awesome .
It will be ok if the transaction fee rise up to 0.2 BTSX , the cost is still very low comparing to the other exchanges .
If the two key point mentioned before can be accomplished , plus if Bytemaster can release less crazy ideas , or at least all the new ideas should be related to new technologies and business models instead of interest reapportion ,it would not be difficult for the price rise up to 0.0819 USD . Honor the rules of the market , never try to violate it .
About the rules of the market , I want to stress three points :
1. Trust is hard to built and easy to destroy . From my personal experience , I though the way 3I operates were consistently fair , they have ultimate control over the BTS system , and yet they've never let us down on interest allocation before , even exceeded our expectations . We know that comes with a high price----All the BTSX are allocated and the interest of the developers can not be guaranteed . After all these hard work , 3I finally gained trust ,and yet still got a negative image for a merger plan . The reason for this would be : Anything that tries to adjust the status quo is gonna effect someone's interest , and the ones who's interest were effected can not fight back . The issue with dilution fits my case even better , we mentioned before BTSX is a profiting system , and the advantage of deflation was even advertise majorly . Do not violate the rules of the market , do not calculate the lost and gain of the system , the most important thing should be gaining the trust . Trust is a complicated evaluating process , and the conclusion is simple --- Do you worth our trust or not ? Most of the outside participants do not have the patience to do the evaluation , you have to make this process as simple as possible , do not violate your promises .
2. Do not feel it's ok because my particular interest hasn't been violated , personal interest can only be satisfied by the maximum interest for the whole .
3. Never take away someone's private property , regardless how he got it in the first place .
ps：Im a very early investor，i paid 500btsx for this translation，please consider carefully.im really seriously.
I think one thing need to be stressed at this point is that as a DAC , delegates are essentially company employees , the coder and other contributors are also considered as company employees ,The company pays their employee from profit , and then give dividend to the shareholders , there is nothing wrong with that . We need to calculate if without dilution , can the employees still get paid ?
According to the current model , 10 seconds per block , a delegate will have 6*60*24*30/101=2566 blocks.
Now the average transaction fee per block is 2 BTSX , assuming the trading volumes will be multiple by 5 times , and the price reaches 0.0819 USD , the transaction fee limits to 0.2 BTSX , then the monthly income for a delegate would be 2566*2*5*2*0.0819 USD = 4203 USD .One delegate is enough to support a developer , and the whole system can at least supports 50 developers (the rest of the incomes goes to the regular delegate).
This task can be easily accomplished by :
1. Do not simply merge into one simple BTSX , but merge DNS VOTE PTS etc. as assets .
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10303.msg135260#msg135260
2. Simplify the short rules of the inner-market , in the meantime optimize the GUI of the wallet and make it comfortable , so there will be a substantial amount of trading volume going into the inner-market , for it's lower cost and more safety .
3.Set up a changer ，at the very least we should connect the inner-market with the outside exchanges , that can be done by a user issue asset . I heard some exchanges are trying to do that ，that would be awesome .
It will be ok if the transaction fee rise up to 0.2 BTSX , the cost is still very low comparing to the other exchanges .
If the two key point mentioned before can be accomplished , plus if Bytemaster can release less crazy ideas , or at least all the new ideas should be related to new technologies and business models instead of interest reapportion ,it would not be difficult for the price rise up to 0.0819 USD . Honor the rules of the market , never try to violate it .
About the rules of the market , I want to stress three points :
1. Trust is hard to built and easy to destroy . From my personal experience , I though the way 3I operates were consistently fair , they have ultimate control over the BTS system , and yet they've never let us down on interest allocation before , even exceeded our expectations . We know that comes with a high price----All the BTSX are allocated and the interest of the developers can not be guaranteed . After all these hard work , 3I finally gained trust ,and yet still got a negative image for a merger plan . The reason for this would be : Anything that tries to adjust the status quo is gonna effect someone's interest , and the ones who's interest were effected can not fight back . The issue with dilution fits my case even better , we mentioned before BTSX is a profiting system , and the advantage of deflation was even advertise majorly . Do not violate the rules of the market , do not calculate the lost and gain of the system , the most important thing should be gaining the trust . Trust is a complicated evaluating process , and the conclusion is simple --- Do you worth our trust or not ? Most of the outside participants do not have the patience to do the evaluation , you have to make this process as simple as possible , do not violate your promises .
2. Do not feel it's ok because my particular interest hasn't been violated , personal interest can only be satisfied by the maximum interest for the whole .
3. Never take away someone's private property , regardless how he got it in the first place .
ps：Im a very early investor，i paid 500btsx for this translation，please consider carefully.im really seriously.
20
中文 (Chinese) / 需不需要增发，我来算个帐。
« on: November 02, 2014, 01:19:22 pm »
我觉得需要明确一点，作为一个无人自治公司，受托人就相当于公司雇员，代码贡献者和其他贡献者当然也算作公司雇员，公司的盈利先给雇员发工资，然后再股东分红，无可厚非。我们要计算一下如果不增发的话，能不能满足雇员工资的支出。
按照现有的模式：每10秒一个块，一个代表一个月有：6*60*12*30/100=1296个块
现在每个块平均2个btsx
假设交易活跃5倍，价格到5毛，交易费每个块限制在0.2左右，那么每个月每个代表将有 1296*2*5*2*0.5=12960rmb
一个代表应该可以养活一个开发人员，整个系统最少也可以养活50个开发人员（剩余的给一般受托人）。
交易活跃5倍很容易达到。
1.不要并购成一个大的btsx，而是采用内建资产的方式合并，将dns vote pts等资产内置到x中。
2.内盘的short规则也尽量简化，同时尽快优化钱包界面，让人用着舒服，那么在交易网站上的交易量很大一部分就转移到内盘来了，因为内盘成本更低而且更加安全！
3.做好兑换商，最差也要把内盘外盘连接起来，发行个资产就可以做到。欣闻有交易所已经有意如此，很好。内置时代和云币的资产，把内外盘连接好，这样就接近完美了。
交易费的提高到0.2btsx还好，成本依然非常的低，远远低于交易平台。
价格到五毛也不难，前两点做到后，再加上BM少发表crazy idea，或者说，所有的新主意只能基于新的技术和商业模式，而不是利益的重新分配。要尊敬市场规范，永远不要触犯它。
关于市场规范我想提醒两点：
1.信任的建立非常困难，摧毁它却很容易。从我个人的角度讲，我觉得3i的做法一贯比较厚道，他拥有对bts系统无可争议的控制力，但在利益分配上一直没有让我们失望，甚至超出了预期。我们知道这个代价非常大---btsx全部分完了，研发人员的利益难以保证。付出了这么多的努力，终于迎来了信任，却在一个合并事项上产生了很大的负面影响。原因就是：任何改变利益格局的事情都会导致有利益受损者，同时，基于现在的情况，利益受损者无力反抗。
对股份的增发更是如此，我们最初提及的是个盈利的系统，通缩甚至被作为优点宣扬过。
不要触犯市场规则，不要计算系统的得失，最重要的是信任的得失。
信任是个复杂的判断过程，但结论却很简单，值得信任或者不值得相信。绝大部分外部参与者没有耐心做这个价值判断，你要做的是尽量让这个过程简单一些，不要违反你的承诺。
2.不要因为自己的利益没有受损就沾沾自喜，bts的利益最大化才符合个体的根本利益。
打土豪分田地的思维要不得。如果国家有一天规定，所有贪官的贪得人民币不能被承认（如果技术上可以做到的话），你猜结果会怎样？人民币会立刻剧烈贬值。
按照现有的模式：每10秒一个块，一个代表一个月有：6*60*12*30/100=1296个块
现在每个块平均2个btsx
假设交易活跃5倍，价格到5毛，交易费每个块限制在0.2左右，那么每个月每个代表将有 1296*2*5*2*0.5=12960rmb
一个代表应该可以养活一个开发人员，整个系统最少也可以养活50个开发人员（剩余的给一般受托人）。
交易活跃5倍很容易达到。
1.不要并购成一个大的btsx，而是采用内建资产的方式合并，将dns vote pts等资产内置到x中。
2.内盘的short规则也尽量简化，同时尽快优化钱包界面，让人用着舒服，那么在交易网站上的交易量很大一部分就转移到内盘来了，因为内盘成本更低而且更加安全！
3.做好兑换商，最差也要把内盘外盘连接起来，发行个资产就可以做到。欣闻有交易所已经有意如此，很好。内置时代和云币的资产，把内外盘连接好，这样就接近完美了。
交易费的提高到0.2btsx还好，成本依然非常的低，远远低于交易平台。
价格到五毛也不难，前两点做到后，再加上BM少发表crazy idea，或者说，所有的新主意只能基于新的技术和商业模式，而不是利益的重新分配。要尊敬市场规范，永远不要触犯它。
关于市场规范我想提醒两点：
1.信任的建立非常困难，摧毁它却很容易。从我个人的角度讲，我觉得3i的做法一贯比较厚道，他拥有对bts系统无可争议的控制力，但在利益分配上一直没有让我们失望，甚至超出了预期。我们知道这个代价非常大---btsx全部分完了，研发人员的利益难以保证。付出了这么多的努力，终于迎来了信任，却在一个合并事项上产生了很大的负面影响。原因就是：任何改变利益格局的事情都会导致有利益受损者，同时，基于现在的情况，利益受损者无力反抗。
对股份的增发更是如此，我们最初提及的是个盈利的系统，通缩甚至被作为优点宣扬过。
不要触犯市场规则，不要计算系统的得失，最重要的是信任的得失。
信任是个复杂的判断过程，但结论却很简单，值得信任或者不值得相信。绝大部分外部参与者没有耐心做这个价值判断，你要做的是尽量让这个过程简单一些，不要违反你的承诺。
2.不要因为自己的利益没有受损就沾沾自喜，bts的利益最大化才符合个体的根本利益。
打土豪分田地的思维要不得。如果国家有一天规定，所有贪官的贪得人民币不能被承认（如果技术上可以做到的话），你猜结果会怎样？人民币会立刻剧烈贬值。
21
KeyID / toast，What is the distribution rules of DNS?
« on: October 09, 2014, 12:42:01 pm »
According to my understand
50% have been distributed, 10% toast 20%ags 20%pts.22.5%（not sure） of the total will be distributed in the first year,of which 99% will be burned up, the delegates will get 22.5%*1%=0.225%. So if I have 100dns, hold, after a year it will be: 100* (50+22.5） /（50+0.225）=144.35
am i right？
50% have been distributed, 10% toast 20%ags 20%pts.22.5%（not sure） of the total will be distributed in the first year,of which 99% will be burned up, the delegates will get 22.5%*1%=0.225%. So if I have 100dns, hold, after a year it will be: 100* (50+22.5） /（50+0.225）=144.35
am i right？
23
中文 (Chinese) / 我为什么支持一票一投
« on: August 06, 2014, 02:57:11 am »
alt作为技术大神，中文社区的骄傲，从一个简单的点，得出了投票该有的规则，我也赞同这种思维方式，不过我有不同的结论，抛砖引玉，仅供参考。
alt设想的投票场景充满了安静祥和的气氛，就像我小时候班级投票选举课代表差不多（好吧，剧透一点，我们是一人5票^-^），因为席位很多（5个），必须保证选出的人也足够多，不然就会出现某个人（alt从小就是学霸吧^-^）票数遥遥领先，其他人少得可怜的尴尬局面发生。
可惜我们后来到了罪恶的成人世界，不再那么图样图森破了，课代表荣誉多一点，受托人利益多一点（只多一点？）。我更正alt的一点，股东大会只是做出通过或者不通过的决定，很少要投票选出多个代表（这时候可以参照课代表），投票到了一定比例就可以。alt更应该拿董事会举例。董事会的成员是按照股份或者协议来派遣的，一般占据多少股份就能派出同比例的董事。
为什么拿董事会来举例子呢？因为董事会更像受托人之间的利益博弈。在我看来，受托人就是整个系统的雇佣兵，掌管记账权，领取军饷，并且由于受托人之间的竞争来提高系统的性能和健壮度。也就是说，投票制度的根本关系的是受托人之间的利益分配，对雇佣兵权的争斗不会影响系统决策，不会造成执行力下降，因为那仅仅是兵权（@log，^-^)。
-----投票权仅仅关乎分红权
为什么反对一票多投？因为一票多投是力量倍增器啊有没有！有人提出所有股东都放大了相同的倍数就没问题了，事实是这样吗？假设一个大户有30%的股份（我才不说是3i呢），他有足够的动力把票数都施展出来，投足101个席位，当然，大户都是很仁慈的，就算他投80个席位吧，那他所握有的票数就是80倍的扩大，而对于一个散户来说，投票率没那么高，同时，投出的受托人人数也没那么多，像我就只投了十几个受托人（包括我们的alt大神，baozi），综合下来，散户和中户就算集合起来，总体的票数扩大不会超过5倍，那么，大户和小胡的差距是多少倍？16倍。这就是为什么一票多投是力量倍增器的原因--本来小小的差距，瞬间被放大到遥不可及。
-----所有股东的利益都应该被同比例的对待
力量倍增之后为什么就不可以？因为他侵害了小股东的利益啊，甚至，不只是小股东，哪怕是里本来稍微接近的股东都被他甩开了。这就造成，一个第一的大户可以随便控制所有的代表，可以随意分配军饷。利益间的博弈就这样展开了。大部分代表都在抱粗腿，大户们开始联合，正像@熊熊说的，散户的利益不会被重视，军阀混战正式展开，系统集中度越来越高。目测会超过pow的矿池占比···
一票一投可以很好的解决这个问题，受托人们专心拉票和提高，大户会考虑均匀的分配自己的投票权，以保证尽可能多的受托人胜出。系统更加的分散和去中心化（我这是在挑起争论吗？^-^咱们开帖再辩），更加的多样性（有人走基层路线，有人走大嘴路线，有人是社区义工，有人是理论大师，有人是推广狂人，有人是辩论大师）来吸引各自的群体。
-----系统的参差多态才是和谐的根本
有人说3i作为大股东，不会致系统生死于不顾。其实，我们可以这么想，苏联是个邪恶的存在(苏联和俄罗斯傻傻分不清楚)，但如果只有美国有原子弹，这个世界肯定不太妙···如果投票制度的设计能够让我们不再盲信任何一方，那该有多好，你说那该有多好···
-----权力的制衡相当重要
有人提出，如果占有1%的股份的受托人作恶但是占着位子不走怎么办？系统太分散会不会导致设备难以得到提高？首先提出一点，投票制度仅仅关乎分红权，至于系统的功能设计，那是另一个方面了。这个需要alt大神们的思考，我等门外汉不参与了。比如设备性能不达标不让进，技术指标落后（丢包率）不让进，即使股份够了。如果暂时无法做到，这样也远远强于让一个10%权利的人来控制所有的代表，他要是作恶，哼哼···。要说到动力问题：一票一投会让票更有价值，1%的代表如果不好好运营，肯定不如托管来的省心省力。10%的人不作恶，1%也不会作恶。
---让天使的归天使，撒旦的归撒旦。口渴的问题不能靠吃饭来解决（本句话神原创&&&￥%……&*）
alt设想的投票场景充满了安静祥和的气氛，就像我小时候班级投票选举课代表差不多（好吧，剧透一点，我们是一人5票^-^），因为席位很多（5个），必须保证选出的人也足够多，不然就会出现某个人（alt从小就是学霸吧^-^）票数遥遥领先，其他人少得可怜的尴尬局面发生。
可惜我们后来到了罪恶的成人世界，不再那么图样图森破了，课代表荣誉多一点，受托人利益多一点（只多一点？）。我更正alt的一点，股东大会只是做出通过或者不通过的决定，很少要投票选出多个代表（这时候可以参照课代表），投票到了一定比例就可以。alt更应该拿董事会举例。董事会的成员是按照股份或者协议来派遣的，一般占据多少股份就能派出同比例的董事。
为什么拿董事会来举例子呢？因为董事会更像受托人之间的利益博弈。在我看来，受托人就是整个系统的雇佣兵，掌管记账权，领取军饷，并且由于受托人之间的竞争来提高系统的性能和健壮度。也就是说，投票制度的根本关系的是受托人之间的利益分配，对雇佣兵权的争斗不会影响系统决策，不会造成执行力下降，因为那仅仅是兵权（@log，^-^)。
-----投票权仅仅关乎分红权
为什么反对一票多投？因为一票多投是力量倍增器啊有没有！有人提出所有股东都放大了相同的倍数就没问题了，事实是这样吗？假设一个大户有30%的股份（我才不说是3i呢），他有足够的动力把票数都施展出来，投足101个席位，当然，大户都是很仁慈的，就算他投80个席位吧，那他所握有的票数就是80倍的扩大，而对于一个散户来说，投票率没那么高，同时，投出的受托人人数也没那么多，像我就只投了十几个受托人（包括我们的alt大神，baozi），综合下来，散户和中户就算集合起来，总体的票数扩大不会超过5倍，那么，大户和小胡的差距是多少倍？16倍。这就是为什么一票多投是力量倍增器的原因--本来小小的差距，瞬间被放大到遥不可及。
-----所有股东的利益都应该被同比例的对待
力量倍增之后为什么就不可以？因为他侵害了小股东的利益啊，甚至，不只是小股东，哪怕是里本来稍微接近的股东都被他甩开了。这就造成，一个第一的大户可以随便控制所有的代表，可以随意分配军饷。利益间的博弈就这样展开了。大部分代表都在抱粗腿，大户们开始联合，正像@熊熊说的，散户的利益不会被重视，军阀混战正式展开，系统集中度越来越高。目测会超过pow的矿池占比···
一票一投可以很好的解决这个问题，受托人们专心拉票和提高，大户会考虑均匀的分配自己的投票权，以保证尽可能多的受托人胜出。系统更加的分散和去中心化（我这是在挑起争论吗？^-^咱们开帖再辩），更加的多样性（有人走基层路线，有人走大嘴路线，有人是社区义工，有人是理论大师，有人是推广狂人，有人是辩论大师）来吸引各自的群体。
-----系统的参差多态才是和谐的根本
有人说3i作为大股东，不会致系统生死于不顾。其实，我们可以这么想，苏联是个邪恶的存在(苏联和俄罗斯傻傻分不清楚)，但如果只有美国有原子弹，这个世界肯定不太妙···如果投票制度的设计能够让我们不再盲信任何一方，那该有多好，你说那该有多好···
-----权力的制衡相当重要
有人提出，如果占有1%的股份的受托人作恶但是占着位子不走怎么办？系统太分散会不会导致设备难以得到提高？首先提出一点，投票制度仅仅关乎分红权，至于系统的功能设计，那是另一个方面了。这个需要alt大神们的思考，我等门外汉不参与了。比如设备性能不达标不让进，技术指标落后（丢包率）不让进，即使股份够了。如果暂时无法做到，这样也远远强于让一个10%权利的人来控制所有的代表，他要是作恶，哼哼···。要说到动力问题：一票一投会让票更有价值，1%的代表如果不好好运营，肯定不如托管来的省心省力。10%的人不作恶，1%也不会作恶。
---让天使的归天使，撒旦的归撒旦。口渴的问题不能靠吃饭来解决（本句话神原创&&&￥%……&*）
24
中文 (Chinese) / 关于锚定-i have a crazy idea！really
« on: July 24, 2014, 06:57:25 am »
之前的测试已经表明，锚定是很容易被击穿的，如果为此设定过高的抵押倍数，就会抑制市场活跃度；而对高价单征收过高的费用（bm之前说过过高的报价单将以其报价成交，买价和卖价之间的费用将被销毁）-熟悉期货市场的人都知道，这似乎不符合市场交易的常理。更关键的是，这两种副作用颇大的方式都不能防止做空获利。系统一直会笼罩在风险之中。
我认为可以采取一种预埋btu和btsx的方式来保持系统的安全性。预埋的意思是，系统存在一定量或者无限量的btsx和bitu（由算法设定），但并不显示，只有在需要的时候才会显现出来。以做空击穿bitu为例，系统预埋的bitu平时不参与交易，也不会体现在市场深度里，当交易波动剧烈触发了某一个规则，bitu则会代替交易者的委单成交，也就是说，系统的bitu会排在交易者之前。这样成交后就会出现一个问题：这些预埋的bitu是没有抵押的。这个问题不大，因为：第一，没有没有抵押的bitu既然价值不大，也就没有人要购买更多，成交量不会太多，既然击穿市场深度无利可图，那么就没人去做，也做不到。第二：没有抵押的bitu会在市场方向变化的时候优先成交掉，相当于系统多出了的biu又重新回归于隐藏状态。这样设定的话，系统交易会在一定宽度的轨道内高低涨跌，一旦偏离轨道，就会被拉回。当然，轨道也是会上下波动的，并不是两条水平线。
这仅仅是个设想，如果这个思路可行，更多的细节就可以被讨论。比如：每笔交易都要检测市场深度吗？市场深度被吃掉多少时预埋的bitu或者btsx才会参与交易？可不可以引入交易斜率来控制？
[/URL][/img]
http://v2.freep.cn/3tb_140724205523np6v512293.jpg
我认为可以采取一种预埋btu和btsx的方式来保持系统的安全性。预埋的意思是，系统存在一定量或者无限量的btsx和bitu（由算法设定），但并不显示，只有在需要的时候才会显现出来。以做空击穿bitu为例，系统预埋的bitu平时不参与交易，也不会体现在市场深度里，当交易波动剧烈触发了某一个规则，bitu则会代替交易者的委单成交，也就是说，系统的bitu会排在交易者之前。这样成交后就会出现一个问题：这些预埋的bitu是没有抵押的。这个问题不大，因为：第一，没有没有抵押的bitu既然价值不大，也就没有人要购买更多，成交量不会太多，既然击穿市场深度无利可图，那么就没人去做，也做不到。第二：没有抵押的bitu会在市场方向变化的时候优先成交掉，相当于系统多出了的biu又重新回归于隐藏状态。这样设定的话，系统交易会在一定宽度的轨道内高低涨跌，一旦偏离轨道，就会被拉回。当然，轨道也是会上下波动的，并不是两条水平线。
这仅仅是个设想，如果这个思路可行，更多的细节就可以被讨论。比如：每笔交易都要检测市场深度吗？市场深度被吃掉多少时预埋的bitu或者btsx才会参与交易？可不可以引入交易斜率来控制？
[/URL][/img]http://v2.freep.cn/3tb_140724205523np6v512293.jpg
Pages: 1 [2]
