Quote from: BTSdac on September 11, 2014, 08:09:04 am

Quote from: bytemaster on September 10, 2014, 03:44:51 pm

I strongly support having   CHAIN-BitUSD on every chain out there including DNS.  It is a HUGE value add that allows people to hedge without leaving the chain and facilitates cross-chain trading by eliminating the bid/ask spread.  You just trade it a par value.

It is no more confusing than having GoxUSD and BitstampUSD and BTC38_USD.   It is a core feature that all DACs should have.

GoxUSD only use in Mt.Gox,  BitstampUSD only use in Bitstamp,  also we cannot use BTC38_USD to buy btc in  Bitstamp.

I suggest you let him sleep over it.
His first responses are not always the best, but his final decisions are usually rivaled by NOONE.

my 2*10^-5 BTSX.

Hope so, because like @BTSdac said, GoxUSD and BitstampUSD and BTC38_USD is used in every centerlized exchange only, you will never use it outside so no relation to confuse customers or not...   It's defenitely not a good sample unless we think(or make, hardcoded?) the BitUSD(like Music's BitUSD) in each DAC will be used in that DAC only..... I could really  imagine how that works..

Get your brains problem solving guys!

We REQUIRE a volatility free currency for our NON CRYPTO NERD customers. People shopping for that new Arctic Monkeys album and NOT there to day trade crypto-currency. This can't be stressed enough.

Our solution so far is: the BitUSD.

If anyone has any other proposition, one that would reach our goal of customer satisfaction / good user experience, then spit it out.

If you know of a way to take BTSX's BitUSD and allow our shoppers to pay artists on the BitShares Music Blockchain with it, then we are all ears.

So far the only solution to the volatility problem is a BitUSD, whatever it's collateralized with. Let me know what solutions you guys come up with.

I believe everyone on this thread know about the needs for volatility free currency for Bitshares Music and its customers. All the discussion is based on trying to have a solution for Bitshares Music with BitUSD to meet this demand. Just want to let community know(or, at least, discuss) that we need to keep BitUSD collateralized by BTSX only. I'm glad that it's clear you focus on the core value of Music blockchain and customers demand, don't really care about where BitUSD is from. I'm with you since the Music market is real big and the value of Bitshares Music should be based on it instead of collateralizing notes to issue BitUSD.

Regarding tech feasibility for taking BTSX's BitUSD and allowing shoppers to pay artists on the BitShares Music Blockchain, to my knowledge of crypto blockchains, I do believe it's viable and the real question is how efficient compare to have Music's BitUSD and what does them mean to the big picture - Bitshares DACs ecosphere(it's important not for BTSX only, but also for every DACs including Music). That's why I said we need to think/list pros/cons for different proposals. Frankly, I'm not a programmer so I do not know the details of crypto tech, but we have a very strong community to come up with insights and good ideas to work it out.

PS: No offense. All I want to do is to support community/ecosphere building up and development, again not just for BTSX but also for Bitshares Music. In the other hand, I think you need to watch your words("brains problem"?!), otherwise I would worry about public relationship of peertrack.com

Quote from: biophil on September 08, 2014, 12:54:56 pm

Quote from: cob on September 08, 2014, 04:33:38 am

Quote from: trader on September 07, 2014, 09:56:38 pm

According to http://peertracks.com/faq.html artistcoins can be bought using BitUSD.

BitUSD is on a different blockchain than Bitshares Music, so can someone explain the link between them? Do I open my BTSX wallet and send BitUSD to peertracks, and then it credits me with snoop dog coins?

Also, is peertracks.com basically an easy to use frontend to Bitshares Music, so that users dont need to download the wallet or know anything about crypto?

People funding their accounts would do so in BitUSD collateralized by Notes (the Units of the Music DAC) So they really are shopping for music using Notes.. 1USD worth of Notes all packaged into what we know as a BitUSD.

Can you elaborate a little on this? Does this mean that Bitshares Music will have its own bitUSD? So after Music launches we'll have two independent markets that are creating bitUSD?

Yes and this will enable cross chain trading.

To issue "BitUSD" backed by "notes" (as collateral) on Bitshares Music blockchain(or any other DACs besides BTSX) is a BAD idea:

1. The fundamental basis for BitUSD market peg is the community consensus that BitUSD could be used/accepted as fiat USD by massive merchants, market, public. The blockchain inside market mechanism is a tool to kick off the loop and a place to reflect the community consensus from beginning. BTSX has almost proved that the blockchain inside mechanism works but need much more time to grow up to achieve the real/solid market peg. So even if btsx backed BitUSD works well, does not mean that "notes" backed "BitUSD" could work since "notes" backed "BitUSD" is a new thing to market and will have little market depth in internal market and no merchants acceptance except for peertracks.com

2. If other DACs have their own "BitUSD", what's the value/meaning of BTSX? Other DACs have same internal BitAssets market and even additional function like Music/DNS/Play.

3. This another "BitUSD"("notes" backed "BitUSD") will confuse merchants/public and make them concern about that if BitUSD is fungible or not. We could imagine that people will question about the difference between two(or more) kinds of "BitUSD" and how difficultly we try to "educate" them that all of these "BitUSD" could peg to fiat USD and they have equal value which is not exactly true since they are backed by different collateral and blockchains.

4. Due to item 2&3 above, the additional "BitUSD" will debase the value of BTSX and the whole Bitshares DACs ecosphere and even the concept of BitAssets.

5. If every Bitshares DAC has its own "BitUSD" will increase the complexity of its system, which brings unnecessary risk and mislead the development direction from the realy core fucntion.

I believe it's much better if we make all BitUSD fungible from BTSX only.

I think it should be still viable for atomic cross chain trading, maybe it will "lose" some operation efficiency compare to the two or more "BitUSD" scenario, but it do make sense from big picture.

Even if it's not viable or low efficiency base on typic atomic cross chain trading tech, but could we think about something like the concept of Bitcoin "sidechain"?

We need to evaluate the pros/cons of all options in details.

I don't really worry about someone just forks BTSX w/ additional functions(or just completely same) if we do not cooperate w/ them. They have no chance to beat BTSX since the real market peg needs time and resouce to grow up the system and BTSX is much mature than any latecomers. We could offer them options, use BTSX's "BitUSD" by atomic cross chain trading or sidechain, or no cooperation/support from BTSX.

In short, I do think the BTS community should take it very seriously before any real implementation.

Thanks.

我申请上海的Meetup，有没有愿意一起出力的社区同学

我愿同往！我在上海，愿尽一份力！

now.dacwin
future.dacwin
upgraded to 0.4.10 already

feed price for bitusd, bitcny, bitbtc available now!

It will enforce bitusd pegged to usd for sure, but we still have the issue that people do not have incentive to hold bitusd especially when btsx goes up on the external market. At that time, u would never have the opportunity to get cheap bitusd even if u know bitusd would go down soon, and everyone will sell bitusd to system at 90% and no one want to buy it at 100%, then the market frozen. That means the pegging mechanism can not really work, it's just enforced to work. yes, “cheap bitusd” is bad, we need to avoid it, but the better way is to  provide incentive for holding bitusd in all the situation. In summay, i believe this would work in short term but could not resolve the issue fundamentally. we need to provide incentive like Gulu's proposal about market driven interest in another thread for mid term before the acceptance of bitusd by massive merchants will provide the incentive to hold and use bitusd in long term finally.

Update:

now.dacwin
future.dacwin

blocks produced - 1185 / 1195
stability rate - 100% / 100%
Upgraded to 0.4.9 both

Droped out of first 101 today, pls vote us back to continue our perfect(100%) performance.

Thanks.

u r so lucky to know about bts so early, im about 3 months later than u...

but for sure we all r lucky to know it and invest/get  into it now already