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 - Brent.Allsop

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
121
General Discussion / Re: Failure to peg currencies to USD?
« on: September 03, 2014, 07:26:47 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on September 03, 2014, 06:09:17 pm
Quote from: Brent.Allsop on September 03, 2014, 06:06:12 pm
Nobody has answered my questions:  "Who holds the signing authority of "insurance funds", and "When are they paid out, who decides when and how much?"

No one has signing authority on them.  They are destroyed when a short runs out of collateral proportional to how much it "overran".

Thanks for this answer, and I apologize for my ignorance and not fully understanding yet.  It sounds like this insurance is collected as a percentage of transactions or something? Then paid out in extreme circumstances?  But, if nobody can spend these funds being collected, what is the difference between when they are collected, and when they are 'burned' to cover a very large flash crash or maybe some kind of attack, that wiped a lot of people's equity out causing a significant number of people to "overrun" in huge ways?





122
General Discussion / Re: Failure to peg currencies to USD?
« on: September 03, 2014, 06:06:12 pm »
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on September 03, 2014, 05:22:39 pm
Quote from: Brent.Allsop on September 03, 2014, 05:14:30 pm
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on September 03, 2014, 04:53:45 pm
Quote from: Brent.Allsop on September 03, 2014, 04:36:32 pm
Quote from: emski on September 03, 2014, 04:23:52 pm
In this form it will either work as intended or trade will stop. It is an experiment after all.

But there is a middle ground, right?

We are attempting to get people to do what is required, by changing the prices and fees.  In other words, if things go bad, or demand for BitUSD goes way up, the cost of getting people to cover longs and shorts, and provide enough capital to cover their positions, could become so inefficient, that nobody will want to participate at the required levels?

No everything works pretty well. There's risk of flash crash in BTSX but there's an insurance fund in place.

- There's also a risk of a sudden upwards revaluation of say gold that could be difficult to deal with.
- There's the risk without a market maker in times of low liquidity or demand you may be forced to sell for less than BitAsset is worth.
- There's a risk of bug or other problem with BTSX.

All of these are risks, risks can be offset by offering interest to BitAsset holders to compensate, hence why 99% of my posts will be about interest from now till it's introduced.

Who holds the signing authority of the "insurance funds", and when do they pay out, or who makes the decision?

Also, if BitUSD started to threaten to become a new world reserve, perhaps the US, possibly in concert with other fiat currency countries, could attack it by severely manipulating or readjusting the value of the USD?  If we had to make huge dramatic decisions, that were very controversial, could the be made in time, to defend against such?

If it's still being done the way I read a few weeks ago then my understanding is the insurance fund kicks in automatically if there's not enough collateral and if that runs out the system can even temporarily dilute BitAssets and then cover the dilution with fees over time. It's very impressive.

As for manipulating the value. The feeds are supplied by trusted intelligent delegates so it would be hard and in time the feeds may not even be needed. I think the real risk is that currencies are officially devalued overnight but that wouldn't hurt BTSX I don't think that much because we would have even more collateral backing it.

As for stopping it. You can probably stop BTSX in the next 3 months still but the capability is there to do this and Ethereum are doing their own kind of twist I think so ultimately you can't stop people storing value in this way.

Nobody has answered my questions:  "Who holds the signing authority of "insurance funds", and "When are they paid out, who decides when and how much?"



123
General Discussion / Re: Failure to peg currencies to USD?
« on: September 03, 2014, 05:54:29 pm »
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on September 03, 2014, 05:33:09 pm
Quote from: Brent.Allsop on September 03, 2014, 05:27:43 pm
Quote from: GaltReport on September 03, 2014, 05:14:45 pm
American's "Hoarding" money: http://www.cnbc.com/id/101963821

This seems like a clueless report to me.  Certainly there are a lot more people (and most importantly, governments like China and large international companies) hoarding USD more than just Americans.

China and friends are doing the opposite of hoarding.
They are all rapidly signing agreements that bypass the dollar and buying gold too.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OgNb83Y0CoY

Oh, Youtube,  now there is a trustworthy source.

Evin if china changes directions significantly in their hoarding, the value of their currency will go through the roof without the hoarding intervention, devastating their manufacturing economy, right?

And even if they were changing directions, to some degree, I bet the hoarding in other countries would still be immense.  Do you know how many people in South Africa and in other 3rd world countries "hoard" $100 bills?





124
General Discussion / Re: Failure to peg currencies to USD?
« on: September 03, 2014, 05:27:43 pm »
Quote from: GaltReport on September 03, 2014, 05:14:45 pm
American's "Hoarding" money: http://www.cnbc.com/id/101963821

This seems like a clueless report to me.  Certainly there are a lot more people (and most importantly, governments like China and large international companies) hoarding USD more than just Americans.


125
General Discussion / Re: Failure to peg currencies to USD?
« on: September 03, 2014, 05:14:30 pm »
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on September 03, 2014, 04:53:45 pm
Quote from: Brent.Allsop on September 03, 2014, 04:36:32 pm
Quote from: emski on September 03, 2014, 04:23:52 pm
In this form it will either work as intended or trade will stop. It is an experiment after all.

But there is a middle ground, right?

We are attempting to get people to do what is required, by changing the prices and fees.  In other words, if things go bad, or demand for BitUSD goes way up, the cost of getting people to cover longs and shorts, and provide enough capital to cover their positions, could become so inefficient, that nobody will want to participate at the required levels?

No everything works pretty well. There's risk of flash crash in BTSX but there's an insurance fund in place.

- There's also a risk of a sudden upwards revaluation of say gold that could be difficult to deal with.
- There's the risk without a market maker in times of low liquidity or demand you may be forced to sell for less than BitAsset is worth.
- There's a risk of bug or other problem with BTSX.

All of these are risks, risks can be offset by offering interest to BitAsset holders to compensate, hence why 99% of my posts will be about interest from now till it's introduced.

Who holds the signing authority of the "insurance funds", and when do they pay out, or who makes the decision?

Also, if BitUSD started to threaten to become a new world reserve, perhaps the US, possibly in concert with other fiat currency countries, could attack it by severely manipulating or readjusting the value of the USD?  If we had to make huge dramatic decisions, that were very controversial, could a difficult decision like this be made in time, to defend against such?






126
General Discussion / Re: Failure to peg currencies to USD?
« on: September 03, 2014, 05:00:48 pm »
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on September 03, 2014, 04:42:42 pm
There's an option to introduce a market maker with relatively little risk that guarantees a price within 10% of the peg. Agent86 and others feel that is not needed and independent market makers will step in to provide this service at a much tighter range is my understanding.

So is "relatively little risk" intended to inspire confidence?  Certainly nothing near the confidence people have in the Federal Reserve.



127
General Discussion / Re: Failure to peg currencies to USD?
« on: September 03, 2014, 04:36:32 pm »
Quote from: emski on September 03, 2014, 04:23:52 pm
In this form it will either work as intended or trade will stop. It is an experiment after all.

But there is a middle ground, right?

We are attempting to get people to do what is required, by changing the prices and fees.  In other words, if things go bad, or demand for BitUSD goes way up, the cost of getting people to cover longs and shorts, and provide enough capital to cover their positions, could become so inefficient, that nobody will want to participate at the required levels?


128
General Discussion / Failure to peg currencies to USD?
« on: September 03, 2014, 04:16:39 pm »
Other countries, such as China, have tried to peg currencies to the USD for some time.  The only way they do this, is by purchasing, and holding in reserve, huge amounts of USD.

This community seems to think they will be able to achieve a peg of BitUSD to the USD, with nothing other than a few hard defined mathematical formula to determine prices, fees, and so on.

Can someone explain to me how and why BitUSD will work, with no "government" controlling things, while it seems to me nothing like this has ever worked before, without huge expenses, and a very powerful government making centrally controlled decisions, in the past?


129
General Discussion / Re: When will BTSX be able to buy you a CAR?
« on: September 03, 2014, 02:41:50 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on September 03, 2014, 06:49:16 am
you will almost surely NEVER be able to by a car from btsx .. more likely from bitUSD, or bitEUR ...

You are at least thinking further ahead than most.  But I still think you are missing what the future will be.

While shopping, you will tell your phone/computer what you want to price things in, in the near term it may be BitUSD.  But you phone will decide what to actually pay with.  It will be tied in with AI financial advisers, and it will sell whatever is the best for you, at that moment, find a conversion system, possibly though something like the Ripple network.  All the taxes, and everything, will be included and recorded in the deal.  An AI networked system will also include coupons, offers to try, and all that also.

But I don't think BitUSD will be used for very long.  I predict there will soon be a stable crypto currency that performs much better than USD or any other fiat currency.  The USD will continue to inflate (i.e. huge tax on the holders of such), while this new one will do a much better job at recording the value of things over the long term.  Anyone got a good name for this one, how about:

* BitStable
* Bit_no_inflation

What does everyone else predict?  How would the value of such be maintained/determined?  I think something like a canonization process will operate somewhat like the federal reserve.  But unlike the federal reserve, who's mandate is to fight inflation AND maximize job growth, BitStable managers will only be worried about no inflation and stable prices.









130
General Discussion / Re: Was TITAN a bad idea (terribly timed feature)?
« on: September 01, 2014, 11:40:00 am »
Quote from: aloha on September 01, 2014, 11:12:11 am
Quote from: liondani on September 01, 2014, 10:59:42 am
TITAN is great...
But it would be awesome if somebody could choose some accounts to work without it somehow with a button for example right to the account...
So the user could choose which account are "hidden" and which not ...

2 in 1...

Sorry but I think that is terrible idea.  You can imagine that in the future government could force payment gateways to only deal with BTSX account which are not using TITAN.


If you take away the ability for people to choose, they will just move up a layer, and refuse to use that entire type of crypto currency which uses anything like Titan.


It will always come back to hurt you when you do anything to destroy something someone else wants.  It will always come back by someone else trying to destroy what you want, one way or another.  The only way is to find out what everyone wants, and find creative ways to get all of it for everyone.  Only then, will it not come back to byte you, by someone else trying to destroy what you want.




131
General Discussion / Re: Was TITAN a bad idea (terribly timed feature)?
« on: September 01, 2014, 11:28:08 am »
Quote from: liondani on September 01, 2014, 10:59:42 am
TITAN is great...
But it would be awesome if somebody could choose some accounts to work without it somehow with a button for example right to the account...
So the user could choose which account are "hidden" and which not ...

2 in 1...

 +5%

132
General Discussion / Re: Could 0.00011 BTSX/BTC be the highest price we will ever see?
« on: August 29, 2014, 02:56:11 pm »

Ether's Genesis block sale ends Tue Sep 2.

There are probably people selling BitsharesX, at a significant profit, and moving it into there, hopping to repeat.

And, at least some people are moving Bitshares into the newly available BitUSD, hoping to be able to move the equity back, once it Bottoms.

So my assumption is that things are just re-adjusting, accordingly, getting ready for the next move up as more equity continues to come in.  Things take time, and they never go straight up.

Brent Allsop


133
General Discussion / Re: Submit Questions for 29 AUG 2014 "Dev Voice Hangout" @ 3PM EST At this Link:
« on: August 29, 2014, 02:32:26 am »
Quote from: xeroc on August 28, 2014, 08:19:26 pm
Won't be able to make it this time .. have fun though

Dang, Even If I tipped with with a few hundred btsx? ;)


I'm interested in knowing how many top holders of BitsharesX hold 51% of all BitsharesX, who are they?  Who is the top holder...?  Or any information along these lines, if it is OK to ask this.




134
General Discussion / Re: How can the rules of BitshareX change?
« on: August 28, 2014, 07:47:33 pm »
Quote from: kokojie on August 28, 2014, 07:41:45 pm
You don't decide what goes on in Bitcoin development neither, why treat BTSX differently? Bitcoin transaction fee has changed at least 5 times in the past, I didn't get to vote on any of those changes. It's because the community mostly trust the Dev team to make good decisions, if you can't trust the Devs to make good decisions, you should either stay away from the eco-system or if you like the concept too much, just fork it and start your own eco-system.

In my opinion, this attitude is what is holding the entire Crypto Currency  market  back.  If everyone can have some ability to have some say on all decisions being made, and if power isn't centralized in some beurocratic bottle necked "dev team", the first community that can do all that will take over the world, and make a LOT of money by co-operating the best, in about a year.

We need to find some way so large institutuions can feel like they can join, and play a part, without fearing that the 'dev team' will not be able to listen to what they want/need in order for them to get on board.





135
General Discussion / Re: How can the rules of BitshareX change?
« on: August 28, 2014, 07:33:47 pm »
Thank you szert for asking a question about what I believe is the most important issue for the long term viability of any crypto currency community: Governance, or how are critical existential decisions made?

Etherium is going the way of Bitcoin, and forming a legally unrelated non profit organization / beurocracy which is another reason I don't like Ether as a long term investment.  Bitcoin also has quite a significant, slow, and hard burocratic way to get changes proposed and eventually into the system.  It is obviously easier for someone to just fork Bitcoin, rather than trying to fight that battle.  And of course all the alt coins springing up, because of this, is what is really holding crypto currencies back.

The educated minority expert consensus is clearly that dPOS/no mining is vastly superior to the proof of work algorithms and mining used in Bitcoin and Either.  But the minority consensus usually can't change the direction of the ignorant sheepish herd / beurocracy, and Bitcoin community, at least, is obviously headed for the all the lemmings jumping off the cliff and losing LOTS of money.


Whichever comunity manages to best solve this problem, and out compete all the competing crypto currencies, by co-operating and merging together, and enabling everyone to want to join and co-operate, rather that splitting, forking, and competing to the death.


As far as I can tell Dan Laramer, or THE bytemaster has ultimate authority.  And I trust him more than anyone else in the world, so that is a good thing.  He is way outperforming the Bitcoin and Either beuracracies.  But, even THE bytemaster makes mistakes and I think we can do WAY better through modern amplification of the wisdom of the crowd systems like those being developed at Canonizer.com.

Did you notice how ripple made the tactical decision to increase the supply of ripple, and thereby easily retake the very valuable #3 spot on coin market cap away from us?  Will the BitsharesX comjinity be able to make changes like that, if such should be necessary?  We certainly should have the ability to do things like that, on a dime, without any beuracracy to fight with.  All things like that are possible, the experts making the decision easily knowing how many people will be on board with any such decisions, and why, with modern amplification of the wisdom of the crowd system like those being developed at Canonizer.com.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Page created in 0.22 seconds with 23 queries.