http://www.reddit.com/r/peercoin/comments/29ifpl/the_nubits_twitter_page_is_starting_to_drop_hints/

The teaser from the twitter: http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-volatility-problem-may-soon-solved/
The next big thing
Sometime, hopefully soon, some person or company is going to figure out how to securitize the holding risks of bitcoin and guarantee the underlying purchasing power of consumer and merchant bitcoin deposits.
I’m not talking about ‘instant conversion’ tools offered by companies like BitPay and Coinbase, but rather products that allow depositors to safely and securely hold bitcoins that won’t fluctuate wildly in price. Ideally, depositors wouldn’t even know it, but they would be using this innovation to offload price volatility onto professional speculators with a higher risk tolerance.
In the process, bitcoin could begin acting like a currency for those who wish to use it as a unit of account for payments, while still preserving its properties as a high-beta investment. It’s a simple idea with a complex solution and a potentially lucrative payout.
Someone is bound to crack the problem eventually.

"code-complete and passing initial testing"

well fuck me. Gotta keep pushing

Help me reason through these incentives.

There are two critical parameters at play, let's call them R (above 0) and D (between 0 and 1).

The rules for an auction are:
1) The initial required bid is 0.
2) Your required_bid is equal to (previous_bid + (R*(previous_bid - previous_required_bid))
3) When you place a bid, (D*(your_bid - previous_bid)) goes to dividends and (previous+bid + (1 - D)*(your_bid - previous_bid)) goes to previous bidder.


An example: suppose R = 1 and D = 0.5

Brand new auction.
I bid 100. My required bid was 0, so the next person must bid 200.   (100 goes to dividends as there is no previous bidder)
Next person bids 210. His required bid was 200, so next required bid is 220.  (Previous bidder gets 150, 50 goes to dividends)
Next person bids 300. His required bid was 220, so next required bid is 380.  (Previous bidder gets  255, 45 goes to dividends).


Thoughts:
*  R needs to be high enough to realistically motivate people to bid as high as they would be willing to pay right form the start. I'm thinking this might happen even with a value less than 1.
*  D needs to be low enough to motivate people to call people out on low bids, but high enough to make outbidding yourself not worth it (extra price buffer more worthwhile than money you save from your own kickback).

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uIwdeliEOK5EKWYKJh_tMr2aoiZHZDjBiNs0NZaotd0/edit

lots of repeats and non-actionable items, but worth throwing up here

Cass is our only skilled graphic designer and is seriously overworked.
As part of our new public education task force we need someone who has proven skills at making infographics and illustrations to accompany written explanations.

Will pay 5% referral bonus for anyone we end up contracting with. Out of my own pocket if I3 does not approve it.

We have been given control over some PTS spending and I think we can organize a good attempt at fixing the problem areas listed in the title.

To kick off this effort, I've been given clearance to award 35 PTS a piece to some members of the community for their hard work and initiative. Please PM your PTS addresses to Stan if you are on this list.

Empirical1, for this awesome thread and followup discussion: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=5076.0

fuznuts, for fighting to get the mumble hangouts organized.

xeroc, for the writeups on the github wiki: https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/wiki

CLains, for the managing micro-bounty initiative

Agent86, for keeping up the argument against me and BM until we upgraded the DPOS voting mechanism to the better solution

merockstar, for reviving my six-week-old plea to get some good writeups of educational material

alt, for all the help in our dry runs, and in other places

liondali, because I keep getting recommendations to include him

... and a few more unawarded, because I'm *sure* I can't remember everyone off the top of my head. PM me for nominations.


Next up, a serious all-hands-on-deck PTS-incentivized effort to fix some of these problem points. Suggestions are welcome, I've got a game plan cooked up on which I can execute on given dan/stan's blessings, but this is not a one-man effort.

Seems like people like having one "main" chain. Once XT is upgraded we can call it "BitShares X" for everyone to be able to rally around, since having a family of chains called "bitshares X" is apparently too abstract to handle. This one will have a small number of BitAssets and also normal user-issued assets.

Of course there will still be a family of chains as was always the plan, and I guess we can call it "The BTS X family". "BitShares X" won't trade altcoins or fiat (besides USD), those will be "XC" "XF", etc. All snapshots from bitshares X with 100% initial allocation.

Would this add or remove confusion?

Some recent posts by BM have caused a bit of panic. I just talked to him and we came up with a clearer game plan which I think this will make everyone happy.


Explain like I'm 5 version:   XT is now what most people probably think BitShares X is. Buy XT, have decentralized exchange. No dilution.


1) BitShares XT will launch without market functionality but will be upgraded to a full-featured BitShares X DAC. It will have a small number of BitAssets, probably USD, GLD, and BTC.

2) BitShares XT will be 50/50 with no dilution for delegate pay.

3) BitShares XT will be the snapshot target for *all* subsequent BitShares X DACs. These won't appear until long after everyone understands BTS X.

For example, BitShares XCC might trade cryptocurrency, XFC might trade fiat currency, XCM might trade commodities, etc.
These will all share *some* BitAssets and have cross-chain trading. This was how it was described in the whitepaper back in fall 2013. What a lot of people think of as "the one BitShares X" is actually a collection of X chains that have cross-chain trading of shared bitassets. The idea is that once you have BitUSD it doesn't matter which chain is backing it.

4) I3 will focus almost exclusively on XT for a long time. Anyone who launches the subsequent chains will honor XT and pull upgrades to XT onto their chains.

Notice that:
* There was never a plan to have one monolithic "BitShares X" chain, not even back in november. Heck, there's even a sticky at the top of this forum that describes this: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2940.0
* It was always the case that any chain could be forked with different parameters at any time. Now that XT will be a real bts X chain with bitassets, this is no different from BM having said "hey, our clones would probably do better if they dilute their shares to pay the delegates".