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 - bitcrab

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 127
76
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Poll] BAIP6: BTS-DEX economic model
« on: June 02, 2020, 10:40:34 am »
Mark ATM:

1.14.260   Poll-BAIP6-Implement BTS-DEX economic model               488,278,404
1.14.236   BAIP-Threshold                                                               488,269,458

77
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Poll] BAIP6: BTS-DEX economic model
« on: June 01, 2020, 05:45:30 am »
Mark ATM:

1.14.260   Poll-BAIP6-Implement BTS-DEX economic model                483,504,455
1.14.236   BAIP-Threshold                                                              483,019,167
1.14.261   Poll-BAIP6-Do Not Implement BTS-DEX economic model     136,235,999

78
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Poll] BAIP6: BTS-DEX economic model
« on: May 30, 2020, 04:28:49 am »
Mark at this moment:

1.14.260   Poll-BAIP6-Implement BTS-DEX economic model                  471,277,721
1.14.236   BAIP-Threshold                                                                  466,678,583
1.14.261   Poll-BAIP6-Do Not Implement BTS-DEX economic model     136,354,157

79
一些需要继续考虑的事情:
一是跟旧方案相比,新方案的收益率大概怎样?
旧方案的收益期望值大致如下:

重贴一下大赛的个交易对的最大日收益期望值:

BTS/主流币交易对:假设一整天挂1%以内的买单保持不变,且未触及奖励上限,则日收益率为 (7500*0.7*0.53/1000000)= 0.278%
挂卖单同样情况则收益率为(7500*0.3*0.53/1000000)= 0.12%

主流币/bitAsset各交易对的收益与价格相关:

BTC/bitAsset:最大期望日收益率为 7500*0.5*0.53*(BTS的BTC价格)/2, 取今日价格0.00000238,则为 0.236%
ETH/bitAsset:最大期望日收益率为 7500*0.5*0.53*(BTS的ETH价格)/100, 取今日价格0.00009214,则为 0.183%
EOS/bitAsset:最大期望日收益率为 7500*0.5*0.53*(BTS的EOS价格)/5000, 取今日价格0.00648,则为 0.258%

USDT/bitAsset:最大期望日收益率为 7500*0.5*0.53*(BTS的USDT价格)/25000, 取今日价格0.017,则为 0.135%

目前bitCNY和bitUSD都还处于锁定喂价贬值状态,bitEUR比较适合挂单挖矿。

再计算一下新方案的最大收益期望值:

BTS/主流币交易对组:假设一整天挂1%以内的买单保持不变,交易对交易量达标(25万BTS以上)且深度没超过目标深度,则日收益率为 (2000*0.7*0.53/200000)= 0.371%
挂卖单同样情况则收益率为(2000*0.3*0.53/1000000)= 0.21%

BTS/bitAssets组:假设一整天挂1%以内的买单保持不变,交易对交易量达标(62.5万BTS以上)且深度没超过目标深度,而且总奖励没有因为交易对间的竞争被调低,则日收益率为 (10000*0.53/1000000)= 0.53%

这个最大期望值很高,但实际中很难达到,因为该组总奖励2万,由四个交易对分,单个交易对分到1万的概率并不是很大,更可能是5000或者多一点,因此这个期望收益率高概率是要减半的。
而且对于BTS/bitCNY这样的交易对,因为竞争关系,深度超过目标深度的概率也很大,也会导致收益率走低。
所以对收益率高的问题不必太担心,等跑了一段时间再迭代参数就好。

主流币/bitAssets组:
假设一整天挂1%以内的买单保持不变,交易对交易量达标(10万BTS以上)且深度没超过目标深度,则买卖单日收益率均为 (2000*0.5*0.53/200000)= 0.265%
此组目前一共16个交易对,变数较多。


80
Why you care about marketing fee so much ?


To push other gateways to be gone ?

You are pushing legal worker of digital lucifer which is the biggest crap ?

First i thought you have no clue what you are supporting but later seeing digital lucifer in action i understood why you are supporting him.

He already started demanding from gateways papers and if they won't deliver till may to kick them out of bitshares.

Is that your plan ?Supporting his crap so you stay as sole gateway on bitshares in hope more and more users will use only your gateway ?

That's why you conficed CN-Vote to vote for it even big part was against it and at foreigners side not a single supporter you can find other than beneficiants ?

What is the purpose of market fee sharing when at the other side you are working hard on it to kick all other gateways out of bitshares?

I reject this MM as it sole purpose is to push a private business GDEX with community funds and nothing else.

I do not have any idea of kicking other gateways out of bitshares.
but in the MM contest updated rules, the market fee sharing is what gateways pay for the MM service, rudex and xbtsx rejected to participate the MM contest, maybe partly because of this.
no relation with what Digital Lucifer is doing.


Really not ?So you are talking with digital lucifer often on wechat supporting his legal worker and pushing it at cn-vote where he is attacking gateway owners acting like the new owner of bitshares demanding papers from all gateways as he had any authority to do it calling them animals and telling them that he is going to kick them out of bitshares as legal and brand owner and you don't know anything about it ?

Funny cause when you saw i read your messages on wechat you kicked me out to be unable to keep reading your talk with digital lucifer how people are idiots who don't like KYC or that people who are against it are criminals hiding behind anonymous names and that DL will get all their Data and clean the shit.

You don't know anything about it when you talk staff like that with him in a closed wechat group ?And still you are supporting it ?
Looks for me like a clear agenda behind it.
I have talked with Digital Lucifer in wechat, but mainly on core worker.
his legal worker is not approved yet, and I support the worker only means I support him to do the relevant work, not means I support that he had any authority as you described.
I had kicked you out of any wechat group? if that had happen that should because sometime you are not committee member anymore so I kicked you out of a committee group, just that, not as you described.

81
Why you care about marketing fee so much ?


To push other gateways to be gone ?

You are pushing legal worker of digital lucifer which is the biggest crap ?

First i thought you have no clue what you are supporting but later seeing digital lucifer in action i understood why you are supporting him.

He already started demanding from gateways papers and if they won't deliver till may to kick them out of bitshares.

Is that your plan ?Supporting his crap so you stay as sole gateway on bitshares in hope more and more users will use only your gateway ?

That's why you conficed CN-Vote to vote for it even big part was against it and at foreigners side not a single supporter you can find other than beneficiants ?

What is the purpose of market fee sharing when at the other side you are working hard on it to kick all other gateways out of bitshares?

I reject this MM as it sole purpose is to push a private business GDEX with community funds and nothing else.

I do not have any idea of kicking other gateways out of bitshares.
but in the MM contest updated rules, the market fee sharing is what gateways pay for the MM service, rudex and xbtsx rejected to participate the MM contest, maybe partly because of this.
no relation with what Digital Lucifer is doing.

82
This discussion is useless and more important outdated.
You are hitting a dead horse.


We need non custodial wallets.Everything else will come from itself once you give people what they demand.

Real price feed and security for bitassets owner would be the next step to get back attention to bitassets.

You however want based on the chat logs centralization,full AML and KYC,worst country location for bitshares company slovenia/thailand and stick to gateways (your own business)which lost majority of trust from members.

Once you have these done update dexbot for mirrored offers and create a team like every other big exchange is doing it to tap liquidity from other big exchanges to their own.
A nice example is poloniex on BTS/BTC.
They basicly have no own liquidity but you always have 2-4 BTC buy and sell orders near price.Once somebody sells or buys something poloniex redistributes instantly the order through multiple exchanges.

not only one way work, if you believe your way work well, just try it.
custodial wallet is good, it's possible that sometime in the future the MM logic be put on chain.

83
keep shouting and biting if you enjoy, no time to reply that.

84
Yes, Chinese pushed the de-peg of bitassets, but without the great support of Thule, your friend, it shouldn't have been done.
it was your and bitcrab idea no one to blame besides you two

even now I don't think it's wrong to apply BSIP76, de-peg of bitCNY and bitUSD is much better than death spiral leading BTS price to 0.

we need some robust thing to resist the death spiral, BAIP2 may be what we need. I still prefer to keep the feed price rule unchanged before the BTS price be stable above the threshold, what I think need to do first is to find a chance to lower the bitUSD-feed price threshold to be equal with that of bitCNY.

we can let bitEUR and bitRUBLE there without BAIP76 or BAIP2 and let users choose which to use, as their supply is much lower than that of bitCNY there will be little chance to trigger death spiral.

85

We already paying blockchain fees, so this double taxation looks more like a tribute for the existing businesses this is not acceptable.

I told you and I repeat you not once that taxation is a worse idea that pops up in your head, a community that for the year couldn't imagine/invent anything smarter/better than bring/build taxation in blockchain for a few existing small businesses on top of it are going in a rekt direction


Chinese community, mark my words, with such ideas for the bitshares upgrade you will roll OUT from top-100 till the end of the year No foreigners, no businesses, no money, just some scammed/broken bitassets, empty markets and "workers" dumping the coin. The bright future for the chain, isn't it?

anyone do not like to pay further fees, easy to understand.

what is ongoing is the core prelude worker, subsequent core worker is on plan.

China community would like to communicate with members/communities from other countries, I am sure that BTS will stay in top-80 at the end of this year, we'll try to make it return to top-50.

86

the "tax" can be considered as the fee for utilizing the DEX infrastructure
We already paying blockchain fees for utilizing the DEX infrastructure, so it is just double taxation for the businesses, It obvious that you don't care about some private tokens like "ZALUPA", you couldn't get any profit from this

Who will manage the taxation fund?
Who will get money for the management of this fund?

It is a rhetorical question because everyone in the community knows that it will be your or members associated with you, so tell me more about how you were against this bsip 

Community well remember the SPRING thing or committee-cnytrader operations, do you have the same brilliant plans for taxation funds?

after the launching of 4.0, the BSIP86 parameter will be determined by voting, I agree that the community need be careful/conservative on this, if finally the voting decided to set the rate to 0, market fee will not be shared.

however in my view, it's good that gateway pay some further fee and the platform provide some further public service, GDEX has bought MM service from providers, it's expensive and not so satisfactory, the MM contest actually provide good service and is potential to be better, when MM contest helps GDEX, GDEX will contribute to community with better depth, more active trading and also more system income, the rules will be continuously updated to make it more easy for voters to estimate how it works well enough.

 

87
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Poll] BAIP6: BTS-DEX economic model
« on: May 27, 2020, 06:26:25 am »
voted against

would be better to focus on getting real price feed back which would automaticly increase the trading on bitassets and non custodial trading.

These are 2 problems, and I still prefer to do adjustment on price feed when the price is stablized above the threshold. otherwise there will be repeated hurting and endless debate.

Quote
gateway need to pay 20% of the market fee of the listed gateway assets pairs to committee assigned account, the reward to pairs with the gateway asset will stop if more than 1K BTS fee are not paid.
Are now voters going to decide how much gateways need to pay ?
approving the proposal means approving the parameters inside it, changes to key parameters need voting, there are descriptions inside the proposal.

88
General Discussion / Re: MARKET FEE SHARING AND BSIP 86
« on: May 26, 2020, 07:34:53 am »
perhaps it will be better to set 2 independent parameters for BSIP86, one global parameter which is controlled by committee, the other is a asset parameter which is controlled by asset owners, committee can maintain the global parameter conservatively, in some scenario asset owner can set the asset parameter, and the sum of the 2 is the final "market fee sharing rate", this provide the possibility that different UIA own different market fee sharing rate if scenario request.

89
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: [Poll] BAIP6: BTS-DEX economic model
« on: May 26, 2020, 01:40:39 am »
So basically it's just the money for the gdex MM/fees from a reserve pool. Rejected

it's designed for all qualified gateways.

90

Can you tell us more about double tax? And who will pay? - All gateways that work on Bitshares, including your gateway. All payment systems such as PalmPay? As well as coins that are issued to Bitshares as an asset that management their business, for example, Evraz or CloudCoin (the original cloudcoin is not a blockchain, but they have an asset in Bitshares).

What opportunities will appear in the Bitshares after the introduction of a double tax?

What are the benefits of gateways that work on Bitshares?
XBTS make ads for Bitshares, do services and games in which we add BTS, etc.

For all the time that we have been working for Bitshares, and this is 2 years, the system has not had any advertising campaigns. Several conferences were held, but did they give a result? At the same time, the cost of these conferences was very high.

As you remember, last year there was a wave of mass closure of exchanges for various reasons, this greatly affected the reputation of Bitshares and those exchanges that continued to work well.

The increase in the cost of creating an asset, especially in times of crisis, complicates the listing process and makes it more expensive, which significantly reduces the opportunities for new projects. Many choose Waves dex as an alternative or go to other exchanges.

Based on the concept of the work of the workers, there is a question:
Why do Bitshares still lack a beautiful adaptive interface? The interface  has been paid, and done, why is it unavailable? Maybe it’s worth considering the option of returning funds from workers who did not fulfill what they promised?
And why were the worker proposal completed if the work was not completed?

Now you want to introduce an additional tax on the gateways that work and bring profit to the system. Each gateway has its own vision of development, gateways are not slaves of the blockchain. Gateways are partners of the blockchain.

Alternative solution:
Why waste time updating the core and introducing taxation if there is a solution for everyone. Raise the fee in the network to 5 BTS per action and the network profit will be 5 times higher.

If you decide to only tax the gateways, then the gateways should be in the witnesses, the gateways will return the BTS back to the blockchain and continue to develop.

It is not "only tax gateways", BSIP86 will "tax" all UIAs, and it is not "I decide", BSIP86 is the result of a long discussion, as a gateway founder at first I am against this idea, but step by step I accept the idea from abit and some other people, I become agree that charging a percent fee from UIA market fee will be good to build a great ecosystem.  the "tax" can be considered as the fee for utilizing the DEX infrastructure.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 127