I then saw a very large BitUSD balance (medium 4 figures) that I knew wasn't mine, tested to see with a small amount whether it was withdrawable, sent that amount back to Bter.

How about sending back the 7k BTC balance too ?

Quote from: hpenvy2 on February 15, 2015, 03:34:27 pm

I worry about snapshots.

If they indeed close down, I guess BM and co. can work with them and get the snapshot list. It would be a bit messy, though.

The would need to give their BTS private keys and find  way go migrate the user database including password hashes and 2FA seeds to BM. Sounds complicated.

I think variable coupon rate and fungibility are mutually exclusive and pooling to try to fix that is just asking for abuse.  Interest rate should be fixed and unique at any point in time and decided globally by delegates based on market trend and liquidity. So holding a bitasset would be kind of like holding a structured product made of a fixed rate bond with fixed-to-variable interest swap where the network is counterpart of the swap.

Btw does anyone know where the current peg and interest management behavior are documented. I tried seaching the forum but keep on finding old proposals that where rejected or amended. The wiki is horribly outdated and still has BitSharesX in it...

If both parties have equal amount of collateral tied up you could force them to settle quicker by applying demurrage to the collateral. The longer they wait the less they will get back at the time where they close the bet position. Demurrage rate could be applied in different proportion based on the VWAP of the last price on the market. Since all the honest betters will have settled earlier the VWAP will be difficult to manipulate. For instance, if demurrage rate is 2% per day and the vwap is 0.9, the loser will bear 0.9*2=1.8% demurrage whereas the winner will bear only 0.1*2=0.2% demurrage. In this condition, the loser is better off settling quickly.

Whatever the specific way this is inplemented, the counter-incentive of waiting should always be higher than the incentive of waiting so that the equilibrium will form on (tell the truth,settle early).

I'll take the opportunity of teenagecheese's post Overall Plan and Schedule to broaden and deepen the topic one notch further: BitShares has the ambition of providing a turn-key solution to build fully functioning decentralized autonomous corporations, but the BitShares DAC itself is pretty far from the level of quality and structure an actual corporation should have. Every corporation has got some elementary tools to manage calandar, progress, objectives, organizational tree, meetings and storage of key information such as meeting minutes etc.

Given it's ambitions, shouldn't BitShares start building such intra-net like features in the client? There was once a project named Keyhotee that could have been the right place to start that intra-net like management layer. What happened to that project? Someone suggested using RetroShare as a base to revive this project. Where are the excited conversations about that?

Are you, BitShares shareholders, happy to know that people are getting actively paid by share dilution, but there is currently no structure in place to provide transparency and accountability?

I fully concur to teenagecheese's feeling in the other thread. A few weeks ago I decided to disvest some of my investments and take a stake in BitShares. After following the DAC closely for a few weeks, my overal feeling is that although the technology has a huge potential, there is no mechanism in place to ensure that things are being managed properly. It really feels like I invested in a startup run by some bunch of bright young grads with a great idea but no management skills and no experience of how to manage a corporation. I'll give it some time, but if I still feel in a few quarters that I have no idea what my money is being used for and there is no visible resources put in improving transarency an management, I will probably just move my money somewhere else and wait for BitShares to put their act together and live up to its ambition of being an actual corporation.

I give the guy some credit. He at least understands the power of rivalry marketing.

Quote

I am planning to start a blog here, to give this project some context, and heavily criticize the microeconomics of rivial cryptocoin projects, as most contain (or are based on) the purest nonsense. I hope to take criticism in return!

   http://www.truthcoin.info/

We are starting to reap what we sowed with that "NuBit is a ponzi scheme" blog post.

BitShares Retro would make a nice DAC.

Using money to pay for mining hardware and electricity is burning stake.  Proof of work can be validated easily, while validating direct proof of stake is more difficult.

But you need to work to get the money, so one thing Proof-of-Stake does is to convert Proof-of-Work to a form that can be delegated easily. Yeah, work done is paid by someone who is burning stake, can go on for hours like that .