46
General Discussion / Re: New Stealth Transfer Worker ($1000)
« on: December 17, 2015, 02:34:57 am »
Zero coin is overrated.
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.
47
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: GUI development worker - svk
« on: December 15, 2015, 11:46:13 pm »
Great!
48
Random Discussion / Re: What if bytemaster's right ...
« on: December 15, 2015, 11:10:11 pm »
I don't think bytemaster only considers his happiness. He views everyone as part of himself and supports non violence. Clearly these are signs that his philosophy is often misrepresented.
49
General Discussion / Re: Mutual Aid Societies
« on: December 15, 2015, 12:32:34 am »
The exchange is maturing nicely and will continue to improve.
This idea is unique and has no competition. It could drive a lot to bts.
This idea is unique and has no competition. It could drive a lot to bts.
50
Random Discussion / Re: What if bytemaster's right ...
« on: December 13, 2015, 09:02:35 pm »
Then you don't understand his position. He thinks he is just a reflection of you. A sockpupet in your universe.
51
General Discussion / Re: Market Maker Incentivization Worker Proposal ($300)
« on: December 11, 2015, 03:43:30 am »
This feature is for issuers first and privatized bitassets
52
General Discussion / Re: Market Maker Incentivization Worker Proposal ($300)
« on: December 11, 2015, 03:42:35 am »
Bts holders are not giving up fees due uia issuers
53
General Discussion / Re: Upcoming hard fork (adding maker/taker flag, etc)
« on: December 06, 2015, 03:30:02 pm »
Market fees are already percent based.
54
General Discussion / Re: Help me Identify the Top 10 most harmful laws!
« on: December 05, 2015, 03:55:07 pm »
Just don't register to vote and you never get called in the first place.
55
General Discussion / Re: Graphene GUI testing and feedback
« on: December 05, 2015, 03:50:35 pm »
Is your wallet unlocked?
56
General Discussion / Re: Problematic Market fee structure on the UIA/BTS Market
« on: December 05, 2015, 02:24:35 pm »
For every seller there is a buyer which means you get your fee.
57
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: witness, please add 2% for settlement price
« on: December 02, 2015, 02:53:48 pm »
Changing feed Params is like a country revaluing its currency. Bad idea. Instant 2% loss to everyone who was playing by the rules.
58
General Discussion / Re: Liquidity has a Price -> Adding Maker / Taker
« on: December 01, 2015, 05:35:45 pm »
Two options: wait for the market to naturally grow to stop complaining or provide funds to incentivize the Martin's to grow to accelerate things.
Being afraid to spend money to make money is the biggest thing that can hold us back.
The only thing we need to do is make sure he spend money in the right place failure to spend money is a surefire way to die
Being afraid to spend money to make money is the biggest thing that can hold us back.
The only thing we need to do is make sure he spend money in the right place failure to spend money is a surefire way to die
59
General Discussion / Re: Committee Proposal: Urgent call for help by the Chinese Community
« on: November 30, 2015, 02:26:46 pm »
This whole debate is getting out of hand. As soon as you start throwing out terms like "flaw" it presupposes one correct interpretation. Let's step back and ask some questions:
What is the precision by which we actually know the value of bitshares? Based on the daily flux in price and spreads/volume I would say the valuation has a margin of error of at least 10%.
Any price movements within +\- 10% are noise. It is pure gambling. Anyone with a couple million BTS could move the price by that much in an instant.
Regardless of the market rules, the price feed should be allowed to be off by several percent without breaking the whole system.
The parties involved who trade under the assumption that a price feed can be more accurate have unrealistic expectations.
You cannot peg against such volatile asset unless you control the market and play market maker with a large amount of capital on both sides of the trade.
It sucks to be surprised by a misunderstanding of the market.
Claiming there is no documentation is also bull. Forced settlement rules have been documented on bitshares.org since June under the first feature page linked directly from the home page. It wasn't hidden in this forum. Just because you claim there isn't proper docs doesn't make it so.
So who is to blame for building a business on smart coins and not even reading bitshares.org which has been translated to multiple languages?
What is the precision by which we actually know the value of bitshares? Based on the daily flux in price and spreads/volume I would say the valuation has a margin of error of at least 10%.
Any price movements within +\- 10% are noise. It is pure gambling. Anyone with a couple million BTS could move the price by that much in an instant.
Regardless of the market rules, the price feed should be allowed to be off by several percent without breaking the whole system.
The parties involved who trade under the assumption that a price feed can be more accurate have unrealistic expectations.
You cannot peg against such volatile asset unless you control the market and play market maker with a large amount of capital on both sides of the trade.
It sucks to be surprised by a misunderstanding of the market.
Claiming there is no documentation is also bull. Forced settlement rules have been documented on bitshares.org since June under the first feature page linked directly from the home page. It wasn't hidden in this forum. Just because you claim there isn't proper docs doesn't make it so.
So who is to blame for building a business on smart coins and not even reading bitshares.org which has been translated to multiple languages?
60
General Discussion / Re: Philosophy Discussion: Privacy vs. Openness
« on: November 29, 2015, 01:42:11 pm »
Transparency needs an information threshold. The easier it is to unearth information the more value will be placed on technology that protects information. This privacy tech would be adopted by everyone.
The conclusion is that the for every action there is a reaction. Push people into transparency and watch demand for real privacy increase.
We need privacy by technology not by laws.
The conclusion is that the for every action there is a reaction. Push people into transparency and watch demand for real privacy increase.
We need privacy by technology not by laws.
