Quote from: lil_jay890 on April 12, 2017, 12:56:07 pm

Quote from: logart on April 12, 2017, 05:34:19 am

If any DEV seeing this, please we need this feature, If we want mass adoption in our DEX we need to have enough liquidity for all stable fiat assets, we will never see mass adoption if we rely only on users to create BITusd or BitCNY .

In fact, I'm proposing that the BTS blockchain automatically creates and pays an equal or fixed amount of value diversified in all Bit-assets. Not just in BitUSD. That way there will be liquidity distributed among all the Bit-assets too, we want liquidity in BitGold, BitSilver, BitEUR, BitUSD, bitCNY, Bitbtc. Witnesses and workers should like the idea too because they are incentivized in diversified assets and they know that diversification is the best and recommended way to store the value of money. And if in the future the more bit-assets are added to DEX like BitCHF or BitMXN,  etc the more diversification they will get

Bitshares is really appealing for traders but traders search two main things when choosing a broker liquidity and leverage. Leverage is also important for traders in Forex because Forex currencies only move less than a cent sometimes so there's logically the need of leverage to make a profit. 100-500X leverage is needed in forex. 3-10X is only needed in cryptos because they are far more volatile.

While I agree that in order to attract traders, you need to offer leverage, I don't believe this should be offered "on chain".

In the current forex market, it's the brokers that are offering the traders leverage.  Leverage is actually a tool that they exploit to make money since they know 90% of traders who use high leverage end up blowing up their accounts. The brokers  that allow 100x leverage don't pass the clients orders to the actual market, they take the opposite side of the trade and pocket any spreads or commissions as well as all the clients cash when they blow up from over leveraging.  It's a business plan that has worked for decades.

Bitshares is not designed to act as a broker and offer leverage. Not only are the mechanics to process the leveraged trade not present, but the risk management protocol would also need to be developed. All brokers have the possibility of blowing up in extreme market conditions, and I don't believe bts should be taking those risks. Bitshares needs to continue to act as an exchange like the nasdaq, and hopefully start making money off of fees.  Let third parties come in and offer leverage off chain.

Check out bitAssets dude, they do offer you leverage right "on chain", with no broker. Yes, short position with 1.75 collateral gives you 1.33x leverage, do your math. This 1.33x can be easily increased to at least what poloniex offers by bringing MCR down to 1.4.

Quote from: lil_jay890 on March 28, 2017, 05:58:54 pm

Quote from: Permie on March 28, 2017, 05:19:16 pm

Quote from: mf-tzo on March 28, 2017, 02:51:30 pm

@Thom more importantly I want to stress the lack of marketing. And also that for some reason everyone hates BTS.. Try to say BTS to the moon in Polo troll box twice and you are banned..On the other hand everyone else scream all the time moon for ETH,DASH and everything else they want to promote and no one is banned.. Polo admins hate bts..

Poloniex, a centralized exchange that rakes in profit for a few, hates a decentralized exchange that could steal the money out of their pockets.
Do they hate it because the DEX is a threat to their business?
Or do they hate it because they are mal-informed and just think its one more shitcoin

If the centralized exchanges wanted, they could destroy BTS in a second.  They control enough BTS to vote in whoever they want.  One of the GIANT flaws in bts that almost everyone around here sweeps under the rug or chooses to ignore...  Just another reason DEX adoption has been tepid.

Even if Poloniex colluded with other exchanges, their votes would still be outnumbered by the top few proxies alone, not to mention including individual voters.  So yeah, no, that's yet another bogus theory from the king of FUD.  Oh wait, now you'll spin that exactly the opposite and say the voting power of proxies is a weakness of Bitshares.  Which of course is ridiculous as well.   But facts have never stopped you.  So why would they now?

@lil_jay890 I seriously doubt that the reason bts price is low is due to the ICOs.. The true reasons bts price is low are the following IMHO:

1) People keep a lot of bts in external exchnages
2) People do not follow @bitcrab example in locking their bts and short sell bitassets. When bts was first launched we had bitusd $1 mil in existence and bts was worth between $0.03 - $0.05 (that is x8-x10 of current price).. The drop happened after the great idea of the merger and the huge reduction of bitassets supply because whales rushed to dump their holdings
3) Serious lack of marketing. We do not even spend a few dollars from the reserve pool to advertise bts in coinmarketcap at least..
4) Whenever the price is slightly up, most people rush to dump their bts holdings..
5) People have forgotten the vision of bts. Luckily a lot of people still believe in bts so we need to remind to others what bts can do to change our lives.

Quote from: mr-whitekey on March 26, 2017, 04:27:24 pm

Quote from: lil_jay890 on March 26, 2017, 04:11:20 pm

I will reiterate my point that the ICO's that are being done on bitshares are seriously retarding any ability for bts to gain traction to the upside.  They put so much sell pressure on bts and suck so much liquidity out of the system.  There simply isn't enough liquidity being provided by a few dozen traders running bots to support multiple 7 figure ICO's.  I know there is no way to change it now, but until BTS can regulate the amount of ICO's it allows, this sell pressure will be constant.

Had not considered that. Thanks.


Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Could you explain this in simple terms?
Do you mean that ICO investors are cashing-out of the ecosystem constantly?

Quote from: santaclause102 on January 18, 2017, 10:33:16 pm

Sorry, but your explanation lacks an independent first reason that is not the same reason BTS would go down without the UIA tokens as well.

Lets try this again...

1. A third party creates a UIA in the BTS Ecosystem.... Lets call it SCAM.UIA
2. Third party promotes SCAM.UIA, saying it the key to decentralized, deregulated, liberty for all, fortunes
3. In order to get in on this wonderful investment, you need to send DOLLLARS or BITCOIN to this third party
4. The third party then sends you a whole bunch of shiny new SCAM.UIA tokens

So lets review what has happened so far.  The scammer has created a token out of thin air and sold it to you for real currency or bitcoin.  You are hoping that he will take that money and create something wonderfully profitable and then distribute the money back to you via buy back or dividends.

Unfortunately....

5.  Once the SCAM.UIA tokens are distributed, all the investors are locked into the BTS ecosystem.
6.  All these investors have lots of initial "paper" wealth. But SCAM.UIA's trading book is extremely thin.
7.  Some of the original SCAM.UIA buyers wanted to sell on the first pop, but the books are too thin
8.  The books are too thin because there is not enough BTS holders, who were not involved in SCAM.UIA's ICO, willing to buy SCAM.UIA on the open market
9.  Original investors start selling SCAM.UIA because there was no initial pop and barely any buy orders on the books.
10.  All of a sudden the trading book for SCAM.UIA is loaded with sells with hardly any buy orders.
11.  This leads to steady sell pressure on SCAM.UIA.  Many of these investors who are selling SCAM.UIA have no interest of being in the BTS ecosystem, holding BTS, or using the DEX.
12.  What are these uninterested investors who just received BTS for their SCAM.UIA going to do??? That's right! SELL THEIR NEWLY ACQUIRED BTS!
13.  What do they sell it for??? bitcoin, ethereum, or fiat.
14.  What does selling BTS for fiat do to the price of BTS?? Causes it to decline.

These 14 steps have happened with the majority of the UIA's issued on the BTS platform.  Unless a UIA creator starts making a profit and buys back bts on the open market with his fiat profit, he has in essence taken energy out of the system.  The UIA creators, especially the big ones that raise a ton of money, put an incredible amount of stress on the tiny amount of traders who use the DEX.  If the UIA is going to stay profitable the DEX traders need to provide buy support.  Problem is there is not enough traders with excess capital to provide this support.     

Quote from: Thom on March 24, 2017, 04:54:43 pm

Let's not let this opportunity slip away!

Well duh.
 
We're just now starting to test transactions and create the first API. Remember how many months it has taken us just to write all the crypto? Remember the months it has taken us on the "trustless setup" algo? Remember the months it has taken us to develop the C-IPFS implementation for the automated Stealth backups?
 
In a few months when Stealth has been thoroughly tested by us, AND all of the components above, AND by the public, then we can think about advertising. Until that time, guess what? Like we used to say in the military, hurry up and wait. I'm not going to rush Stealth at all. At, all.
 
If you want me to stop posting weekly updates on our progress so that you feel better, I will.