16
General Discussion / Re: Is there a BitUSD/USD graph?
« on: August 30, 2014, 06:15:46 pm »
Thanks yes between the two I think I have a good idea of the range now.
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.
17
General Discussion / Re: Is there a BitUSD/USD graph?
« on: August 30, 2014, 05:45:08 pm »https://bter.com/trade/BITUSD_USD
But that's not on the blockchain. I wouldn't trust graphics from the blockchain itself yet, because trading has been on/off.
Thanks. I saw the bter graph, but the volumes were so small, I wasn't sure if that was a close enough approximation of the trading on the blockchain but it does give me the general idea.
18
General Discussion / Is there a BitUSD/USD graph?
« on: August 30, 2014, 05:11:06 pm »
I've heard BitUSD has been trading at a 5-15% discount.
Does anybody have a graph of BitUSD/USD since trading started?
I'm interested in starting to trade when the market starts again and it would be interesting to see how the discount has lined up relative to the BTSX price graph since trading started.
Does anybody have a graph of BitUSD/USD since trading started?
I'm interested in starting to trade when the market starts again and it would be interesting to see how the discount has lined up relative to the BTSX price graph since trading started.
19
General Discussion / Re: BitSharesX Wallet Bugs Poll
« on: August 30, 2014, 02:57:49 pm »
0.49a actually worked very well for me when I deleted everything else first and let it sync up before trying to import a back up.
Only one small transaction from the back-up listed as 'uknown' but otherwise 0.49a worked fine
Only one small transaction from the back-up listed as 'uknown' but otherwise 0.49a worked fine
20
General Discussion / Re: * GENERAL WARNING *
« on: August 30, 2014, 12:12:16 am »
I kind of suggested BitShares do something like this very clearly before BitAssets launch. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=7032.msg93752#msg93752
I think people should do their due diligence but putting a general warning up for people new to BitAssets AFTER it has a major 50% correction is like someone falling off a cliff and putting a general warning about cliffs at the bottom... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqQ99s4Ywnw
I think people should do their due diligence but putting a general warning up for people new to BitAssets AFTER it has a major 50% correction is like someone falling off a cliff and putting a general warning about cliffs at the bottom...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqQ99s4Ywnw21
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD Market Maker - Proposal for Discussion
« on: August 29, 2014, 09:59:49 pm »There is no such thing as a decentralized feed... the data fed to the "decentralized" feeds are from centralized sources, and there is a smallish group of people that publish the said "decentralized" feeds. There are two weak links in that chain and it is not decentralized... call is pseudo-decentralized if you must, but it is not ideal and not decentralized in the sense of the true meaning of the word.I respectfully disagree... maybe it doesn't feel ideal to you right now or doesn't seem "decentralized enough." But at the end of the day I think it's the right way to do it and I think people will trust it.
On top of there being not enough market depth and liquidity, bitUSD has another underlying factor that is stopping it from reaching parity, and changing the way the decentralized exchange functions will not fix it. That underlying issue is that there is simply not much demand for bitUSD. I would venture to say that a deflationary asset (gold/bitcoin?) with the exact same market system as bitUSD would be closer to its actual value, because then people have more of a reason to want to purchase it rather than hold onto their BTSX.
I think we as a community need to get together and organize projects that will increase the utility of bitUSD, because at the moment you can only buy or sell it and nothing else. I think most people in the Bitshares ecosystem are bullish on BitsharesX, so the demand is just not there. We need to get organized, brainstorm about the best use cases for bitUSD, and then raise funds and build those uses for it. I think things like gateways which would allow bitUSD to be spent anywhere Bitcoin is accepted is a good start, perhaps a multi-pool that pays out in bitUSD, things like this will increase the demand and thus keep bitUSD closer to its real life counterpart.
It is not the market system that is broken, the demand is just not there right now. We need to work on that as a community.
I think it will make the peg really work and that is what makes bitAssets useful. I also think the bond market I recently proposed could be a big deal for bitAssets.
I like the separate bond market, I think this what I was trying earlier to explain (badly) here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=7208.msg96447#msg96447 without the bond market that options trading is being done by shorting below the peg, inadvertently damaging the peg and as a result BTSX.
22
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD Market Maker - Proposal for Discussion
« on: August 29, 2014, 09:51:24 pm »have you ever played blackjack? when bets are down, cards are dealt, dealer can't say: OOps, there is a slight rule change, 22 beats 21:)
They are not changing the the rules...
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=7231.0QuoteBottom line, we are going with the most market-based solution first and have fall backs to feed based solutions if they prove necessary
Keeping the peg is the aim, not the rules, the rules are hardcoded into the market engine.
I agree - 'keeping the peg is the aim, not the rules' - therefore if we can make the peg better with different rules, then the rules will be adjusted to help the peg.
You should trade with the expectation we will get very close to the peg imo.
(Edit: Because those were 'the rules' that the initial rules could be changed because keeping the peg is the ultimate outcome.)
23
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD Market Maker - Proposal for Discussion
« on: August 29, 2014, 09:22:57 pm »have you ever played blackjack? when bets are down, cards are dealt, dealer can't say: OOps, there is a slight rule change, 22 beats 21:)
They are not changing the the rules...
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=7231.0
Quote
Bottom line, we are going with the most market-based solution first and have fall backs to feed based solutions if they prove necessary
24
General Discussion / Re: Promoting a DPOS upgrade to Bitcoin?
« on: August 29, 2014, 08:27:39 pm »Why promote an upgrade of Bitcoin like https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=537973506349416&set=vb.408134445999990&type=2&theater ?
Disadvantages: Bitcoin is a competitor. Bitcoin's network effect hand mindshare could leave Bitshares(x) in the sand.
Advantage: It would increase the credibility of Bitshares (and it's team) and people would start to ask whether they want to trust the chain who came up with the system or the Bitcoin team who just begins to understand it/the code.
What do you think?
My response would be the same as when I thought Ethereum was considering DPOS and some dude want to drop an Ethereum clone called æthereum onto a 100% Bitcoin snapshot...
Quote
I have looked at airdrops before and it's pretty unanimous so far that it just crushes the price and doesn't create user adoption. So I thought the Ethereum airdrop planned here was fine, just futile. Considering the proportion of miners involved in Bitcoin and the number of POW fanboys, trying to bootstrap an ethereum clone based on DPOS onto Bitcoin seemed even more implausible. I think it would just be free advertising for the real Ethereum. Just my opinion, you're entitled to yours.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563925.msg8405434#msg8405434
25
General Discussion / Re: Good idea, but bad executor, BTSX is dying
« on: August 29, 2014, 07:52:07 pm »After downloaded 0.4.9a, no connection bug comes again, just like 0.4.9 and 0.4.8............From 0.1.0 to 0.4.9a, after tons of update, 3I could not even produce a stable WIN wallet that can connect to network, what a joke！ I am very disappointed at the dev team. The drop of price tells everything. Yes, there is some method to resolve it, but I am not a programmer or geek, nor I have time to play with it. I dump, I leave, byebye.
This is valuable feedback on user sentiment/experience and should not be taken lightly.
Yes, there is a core group here that understands the tech is beta and we are all amazed at how well the peg has held up.
But we cannot ignore that BTSX is in the wild, has climbed up the leader board and is now visible to a much wider audience.
These concerns have merit and we should be more sympathetic to users that are frustrated - they have cause to be.
So let's acknowledge rather than dismiss.
I think BitAssets are amazing. I think I can count the people I trust on one hand, yet I can honestly say I have 100% trust in BM to act with integrity and for a poker player that's saying a lot. I also believe he and the team can adapt and evolve as necessary. Basically I believe 'If BM is for us, who can be against us?'
However a lot of people have just been exposed to BitAssets, BitShares and the team behind it for the first time in the last few weeks and perhaps it wasn't marketed as beta as clearly as it should have been and was short term oversold relative to where it was imo. So I empathize with them especially as a non technical user.
My only disappointment though is I didn't sell a bit high so I could buy even more low...
The OP registered in January.
That's a fair point...
26
General Discussion / Re: Good idea, but bad executor, BTSX is dying
« on: August 29, 2014, 07:43:35 pm »After downloaded 0.4.9a, no connection bug comes again, just like 0.4.9 and 0.4.8............From 0.1.0 to 0.4.9a, after tons of update, 3I could not even produce a stable WIN wallet that can connect to network, what a joke！ I am very disappointed at the dev team. The drop of price tells everything. Yes, there is some method to resolve it, but I am not a programmer or geek, nor I have time to play with it. I dump, I leave, byebye.
This is valuable feedback on user sentiment/experience and should not be taken lightly.
Yes, there is a core group here that understands the tech is beta and we are all amazed at how well the peg has held up.
But we cannot ignore that BTSX is in the wild, has climbed up the leader board and is now visible to a much wider audience.
These concerns have merit and we should be more sympathetic to users that are frustrated - they have cause to be.
So let's acknowledge rather than dismiss.
I was surprised at the 'shut the f*** up' reply. I think BitAssets are amazing. I think I can count the people I trust on one hand, yet I can honestly say I have 100% trust in BM to act with integrity and for a poker player that's saying a lot. I also believe he and the team can adapt and evolve as necessary. Basically I believe 'If BM is for us, who can be against us?'
However a lot of people have just been exposed to BitAssets, BitShares and the team behind it for the first time in the last few weeks and perhaps it wasn't marketed as beta as clearly as it should have been and was short term oversold relative to where it was imo. So I empathize with them especially as a non technical user.
My only disappointment though is I didn't sell a bit high so I could buy even more low...
27
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD Market Maker - Proposal for Discussion
« on: August 29, 2014, 07:29:15 pm »Will launching BitGLD now be bad for BitUSD?
I think BitBTC in particular will peg closer to parity with the 'we will ultimately achieve close to parity' mandate. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=7718.msg102819#msg102819 As a result it should help BitUSD.
I'm sure long term there is a lot of demand for BitGold, but as gold is the ultimate safe haven and BTSX is not robust/decentralised yet, I imagine genuine BitGLD long demand short term would be limited.
Given how much CNY demand BTSX has, I don't know how much BitCNY demand there will be short term, that is the one that interests me the most.
28
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD Market Maker - Proposal for Discussion
« on: August 29, 2014, 07:06:56 pm »I am personally not participating in the market until the wallet is stable and the trading platform is released; there are probably a lot of folks in the same boat.
I am in that boat.
However the better BTSX does in general, the more long term BTSX bulls there will be in general, not so?
the more BTSX bulls there are, the more the $ will be shorted on average below the peg. (Because bulls will pay a premium to increase their BTSX exposure) not so?
As a result if the market believes BTSX will be a good investment in the next 12 months vs. the dollar then BitUSD will peg too far below the dollar, therefore BTSX won't be a good investment in the next 12 months...
This is messed up.
As I understand it atm, we need to separate the bulls into an options market or make them pay a premium near parity vs. allowing them to continue shorting below the peg ASAP.
I would like to implement that without the market maker and see the results.
29
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD Market Maker - Proposal for Discussion
« on: August 29, 2014, 06:42:42 pm »we have longs and shorts of BitUSD in the market already established position, you should avoid changing the rules in the middle of the game, let the game plays itself out, if doesn't work, then start over, it will not be the end of the world. It's only fair.
The game has been played since the beginning with the knowledge that the goal was to peg as close to parity as possible and that other options would be implemented as needed, so this is all within market expectations and benefits shareholders imo.
I advocated strongly that BitAssets should have been marketed more clearly as 'beta' than they were at launch, not doing so has resulted in Bitassets being oversold initially relative to where the code really was, but that's a separate issue.
30
General Discussion / Re: How convenient for Ripple....
« on: August 29, 2014, 06:32:54 pm »Am I missing something ... if we are talking about gateways isn't that the first step to centralization. Why would we want gateways if we want a decentralized network?
In the early days of BitAssets before retailers and third parties find value in dealing with BitAsset holders directly we need to give them maximum utility.
The way to do that is gateways of some sort. At the moment the conversion cost is circa 2%, as a result all else being equal a BitUSD can't really be worth more than $0.98 to the USD atm even with the proposed changes https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=7953.0
So the gateways are useful in the short term if they can make conversion cheaper and easier or else we ask shorts (who are BTSX bulls) to bear the cost on behalf of BitUSD holders in some way, this is my preferred approach.
