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.
It would be cool if they used DPOS and honored the social consensus. We'd all be billionaires.
But they'd release a pretty centralised coin and it would have little anonymity I would suspect.
I do not see the need for bitUSD_2
I don't pretend to understand everything here properly. But it seems that if there was a successful attack on BitUSD1 that drained the reserve fund and created a large amount of unbacked currency that BitUSD1 may go quite far away from a peg that resembles the value of a USD.
If you identified and corrected the cause of the attack you could start BitUSD2, which would start from scratch and be fully backed and therefore trade closer to a USD peg.
-It should be highly unlikely to have not fully backed bitUSD;
-The unbaked/not fully backed bitUSD is not the end of the world;
-The proposed system provides a way to 'eat them up'/remove them over time.
On a different issue:
'fully backed and therefore trade closer to a USD peg.
'
'fully backed' is not the reason the peg holds...fully backed means backed by 2x BTSX.
being backed by even 1 BTSX for 1 Unit of value in bitUSD should be more than enough. (and this only happens in fast and huge drop in BTSX).
On a third issue (Probably the most important):
BM have consistently referred to such bitUSD as unbacked - in reality the bitUSD in existence are not individually backed. So if you have 99 USD backed 100% and you add 1 backed 0 % you actually have 100 bitUSD backed 99%. You do not have some backed and some not. The reason for that is that from holders perspective you do not hold backed or unbacked bitUSD, you just hold one that have the same qualities as the rest of them.
Thanks for the detailed explanation, yes all of that is my understanding too. QuoteYes, you can buy btsx on btc38.com, coinport.com and poloniex.com.
out of these 3, which has the most volume?
I do not see the need for bitUSD_2
I'm glad you're on our side.
me2
for Alt
Sending the market fees (USD) to an insurance fund rather than converting them to XTS and burning them as dividends or paying the funds to delegates would provide a more controlled way of insuring against price volatility.
Over time the network would end up accumulating a large balance of USD that it could hold in reserve. If something happened then this reserve could be drained or even "go negative" for a while. So if you assume a reasonable spread on market orders (buy/sell overlap) then it is very likely the market will have a large and growing balance of USD.
When a short is unable to cover, the network can just give up some of its own USD instead.
So in a major price correction you just have to ask yourself what percent of the USD will be "uncovered", how long will it take the network to accumulate that percent, and how likely is it to occur.
The event is most likely to occur as a result of an "attack" where someone tries to manipulate the price. Increasing the reward for the attack by printing XTS makes the attack more likely. If you can trigger a margin call and insure that your bid is very low then the potential printing is unbounded.
I think having BitUSD "unbacked" after such an event may be better at discouraging the attack. The attackers prize would thus be limited to collecting the margin rather than printing unlimited XTS. The market peg might still hold even with surplus USD floating around until enough fees are collected to take it out of circulation.
So... I am going to propose the following changes:
1) USD fees are never converted to XTS to be burned, they are kept as insurance on black swans
2) If the "current price" is greater than max bid, then we average in max bid. If the current price is less than min ask, then we average in min ask. This has the effect of using the median because you are essentially truncating outliers and limiting the effect a single block can have on the average price.
Someone pointed out that FDIC insurance (printing XTS) may be ok for some bit assets (USD) it would be a major problem for other bit assets (Bit PPC) in the event the BitAsset lost the interest of the market participants. This would result in a major problem where one "stale" bit asset that was still insured would be very insecure.
Also .. thats my understanding ... in bitsharesX you can go long by buying from someone how is short .. but then you own that asset (let it be bitUSD)
so the guy longing bitUSD will never be margin called ... only the guy that went short ..
so if the price is now going down a lot and the guy shorting gets margin called he has to buy bitUSD (or give up his colleteral)
So there will not be a flashcrash because of a margin call.. beause shorters are called .. not longers .. am I correct?
So the "worst case" is that all bids cancel at once and the new "high bid" is 25% of the old high bid (75% fall instantly). All margin positions get called at once and 66% of the USD is purchased back by the collateral. The remaining 33% of the USD is purchased back by issuing new shares. So if you started with 30% of the cap represented by USD then you are looking at a 10% dilution in a "worst case" 75% crash. In practice crashes will be slower, many of the positions will be covered without any dilution and less than 30% of the cap will be represented by USD. So I think what we are looking at here is a whole lot of fear about a "bad event" that you can "hedge against" and is "unlikely" to happen where the potential losses from "dilution" are less than the average daily volatility of Bitcoin.
Yes and my point was that until full trading resumes properly on their main exchanges, like Cryptsy too, we won't have a clear idea of the full scale of the damage/fallout from this imo.
I tend to agree with liondani on this, big picture - That this is kind of blessing in disguise for those NXTers open minded enough to take a look at Bitshares.
NXT trading is open again on BTER. It's not pretty. I feel really bad for them. Their technology should have sunk or swam on its own merits; not die due to a heist. Maybe it'll recover if enough people see this as an opportunity to get in while there's blood in the streets.
I don't think bter is accepting new NXT deposits
I do not think anybody has tried to deposit.
Given the egg on BTER's face it's probably the safest place on the planet to keep your NXT now. I'm sure they have that sh*t locked down.
NXT trading is open again on BTER. It's not pretty
The BTSX Price movement and strength are encouraging. But, dang, I was surprised to see this post from Bytemaster. He and the BTSX developers should try to refrain from commenting on or predicting short-term price movements. It doesn't seem objective and to outsiders it could be viewed as P&D or a conflict of interest.
Interesting thought. Since we have "known" BM for a while we know he's in this for the long haul but newcomers to the technology may be a bit more skeptical. Still, it's hard to resist dreaming about what is to come. I think we all have early retirement fantasies
It's also common sense. Dreaming about retirement and riches is fine and dandy, but if you want to be head or manager of a successful multi-billion $ venture, you gotta seem professional. You gotta be professional.
These are merely my opinions
I like the idea of pay being related to approval rate.
