stellar seems to use mysql db for their hot data which would be synced up with the backend... seems different.. although not sure if storing tx's in mysql db is the right way to go for scalability issues.

To clarify, I'm impressed with the whitepaper, not the implementation.

To get back on topic here... I think in the short term there is actually an opportunity here for a whale to come in and take out the bidders of BitUSD.

Let's say someone having 100BTC laying around comes in and buys BTS at market, but does in small chunks of like 5 BTC, so as not to spook it. Then instantly goes and shorts BTS for BitUSD. Suddenly there is a demand for BTS and price keeps moving up, while they keep buying BTS and shorting BitUSD. Then at some point they cover what they originally put in $-wise, keep the rest as BTS free ride.

No, this is not a client side feature, because you are not guaranteed both orders will execute as an atomic operation at the same time, and on top of that you will create more overhead on the blockchain, than is needed.

I actually had this idea, that the blockchain itself could host the source code, or at least hashes of it / trackers to bittorrent. i.e. the same way delegates get elected, developers can get elected, and then the software would only accept binaries signed by the currently elected dev team.

Could you elaborate on on your analysis of stellar's consensus model?

Can't find the comparison, but basically, it's an instant confirmation based on quorums. In a way I view DPOS as a very special case of what Stellar has done.

https://www.stellar.org/learn/explainers/

And they also have big plans for decentralized exchanges, developers, API, etc. That said I don't know whether the exact implementation has centralized elements or not. Needless to say their whitepaper is a game changer and will change the landscape of crypto.

That said - BitShares could at some point implement their protocol - it is after all open source. At the very least an integration might be very beneficial.

Let me call out the elephant in the room - there is no solid demand for BitUSD (or other Bit assets for that matter).

Market cap of all Bit assets is under $500K. So with 2.5B BTS in existence, what is a fair price do you think to support $500K in collateral?

Yes, I am taking out of the equation the speculation, because the reality is - the product is there, for some reason there is no adoption. Whether it's marketing, or the defects in the software, or both.

Now I know $500K in BitUSD is laughable if product was free of defects and there was really effective marketing (although I'd rather see defects addressed before marketing goes in). But reality is that this is what BTS is really worth. Ok, let's double it because of collateral. Technically at the moment BTS as market cap, if we take out the speculations is worth $1M.

I think it's great though, because it is creating market dynamics - speculators still try to short, and then they have to re-buy the BitUSD they shorted every 30 days. All the way down to $1M market cap. Once that happens, everything will reverse. BitUSD holders will scramble to sell. A healthy market has these extremes.

And then again - there will always be speculation, so clearly speculators are comfortable with BTS being around 24x the market cap of all bit assets. But I wouldn't be surprised if we dip down to 5x may be even 3x before recovery.

Finally - I think Stellar is showing a far superior implementation of distributed consensus, so even if BTS delivers on amazing product + marketing, it may still be outpaced by other solutions.

One thing that could help, although is still not a 100% safe is if the binaries were signed. i.e. when there is an update, the current binary could verify that the new one hasn't been tampered with.

In the folder "Library/Application Support/BitShares" there is a subfolder called "chains" ... remove just that one!!

Why there isn't a command to do that is beyond me. It's like a mandatory step for every upgrade.