This is definetly a good news. A huge good news.

Now merchants know how to make their comptability, Wall Steet knows how to deal with taxation.

Remember what happened after the FinCEN guidance... Removing incertitudes is good.

Quote from: BldSwtTrs on March 23, 2014, 02:33:13 pm

How Bitshares is the perfect store of value?

With a market cap of several dozen of millions it will be a lot more volatile than Bitcoin.

Because it's not just an alt coin. This is the problem we have to deal with. A lot of people don't understand what Bitshares is and why it's a great store of value.

Bitshares is not just the BTS. It's BitUSD, it's BitBTC, it's BitGLD, it's a bunch of commodities which you can go long on, or short. You can short BTS or BitBTC. If the price of BTS is volatile you can save your wealth as BitUSD where it's not volatile. If it's going down compared to BTC then you can buy BitBTC in the Bitshares client itself.

Of course if you don't understand any of this stuff this is going to be the problem. Someone is going to need to blog about their trading experiences, we are going to need technical analysis.

For something like Bitcoin technical analysis doesn't work so well but I think for something like Bitshares technical analysis will play far greater role.

The initial market cap and volatility are irrelevant. What matters is what instruments you use in response. If you don't do anything then all the volatility early on is going to effect you because you're not actively using the instruments it provides to protect yourself.

But volatilily is good. Volatility effect only people with short term horizons or people who for some reasons need a stable unit of account.
When you hedge against volatily you are also hedging against winning money. Basically hedging volatility is for pussies (and portfolio manager, but maybe it's the same thing).
Early adopters of Bitshares won't care about volatility because they will be here for big profits.

I calculated 27m$ (6.8$ per BTS).

I took 0.016BTC as value lost per PTS after the snapshot. At BTC=570$ it give 9.12$ lost per PTS.

1 PTS is 1.33 BTS so 9.12 / 1.33 = 6.8$ per BTS

But who knows.

BitShares does for business what bitcoin does for money is cool, but it has flaws.  Bitcoin is inherently flawed as money, and I don't think we want to imply that.   Let's have a small bounty to propose new motto. Thoughts?

Bitcoin isn't inherently flawed as money. Money distribution via POW is a feature of its success, not a bug.

And I don't think insisting on how bad Bitcoin supposedly is will be very welcome by the crypto community.

Bitcoin is awesome, Bitshares too.

I voted 2$.
I am enough exposed to BTS, more will unbalanced my cryptoportofolio, so for buying some new one I must be sure that I will made a profit.
And while I am quite confident BTS will trade above 2$ when they will be liquid I am not sure at all BTS will trade above 5$.

Here's what we have said:

We can't stop someone from releasing a proto-coin that maps to AGS and we can't stop the market from honoring that proto-coin instead of AGS if it chooses.  We couldn't initiate or support that ourselves without altering the value proposition on which people have been relying.  Possible exception discussed but not acted upon:  is there a way to give PTS holders a matching benefit to maintain the value proposition?

But we have also suggested that honoring a proto-family that has already honored AGS is equivalent because the AGS holders started out with shares in that family and will still have them unless they sold those rights to someone else.

Thus, the natural, gradual process of liquefaction is when new proto-coin families of DACs spin off.   BitShares X effectively liquified its portion of AGS for holders on February 28th since they can sell their stake in future DACs in that family.  If BitShares Lotto winds up serving as the prototype for a family of honorable gaming DACs then more of AGS would essentially become liquid at that time.  So eventually AGS could become mostly liquid through the sum of all proto-coin children it spawns.

If the industry eventually agrees that all the major market sectors had been spanned by previous proto-coin family spin-offs, perhaps it would make sense to just define a "Miscellaneous" family that would effectively liquify everything else at that time.  Perhaps someday someone will.

But by then, will anybody really care?

As far as "uncertainty about AGS", the only uncertainty is whether or when it might incrementally become more liquid - which should hardly be a deterrent.   

Thanks for that clarification.

Nobody is buying this.

Thanks God. In my view it's bordeline scam.

I would very feel bad for people who buy something at ten time the market price. But I guess nobody has the same ethics.

I think that would be an interesting way to differenciate from the concurrence and hammering the paradigm shift, plus that make logical sense.