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 - Helikopterben

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
76
General Discussion / Re: Slap whoever is currently working on graphene in the head
« on: September 11, 2015, 05:27:50 pm »
It really depends on your user base.  Bitshares will most likely have a diverse set of users who will require many different types of interfaces.  Eventually, part of the target audience are guys like this:



The initial screen for tradars and investors may be a bit more advanced, such as the initial screen for poloniex (which has gained quite a bit of market share lately), td ameritrade, or any of the other leading online trading interfaces. 

However, I largely agree that initially the interface should be simple with advanced features just a click away.  As the system develops, more interfaces can be developed, catering to the casual user who just wants to send and receive bts to the sophisticated trader who utilizes many of the advanced trading functions available on advanced trading platforms today.

77
General Discussion / Re: Bitgold as investment
« on: September 09, 2015, 09:51:09 pm »
Quote from: devlux on September 09, 2015, 09:33:08 pm
I think if  what you say were actually the case we would see more action in those markets.
The fact that no one is buying/selling in the markets and the total market cap of each asset is on a downward trajectory kinda means those theories are wrong.

If people really believe in bitAssets as an asset rather than a gamble, then they should be trying to make markets. 
Right now you can't buy anything without paying MASSIVE premiums that make it very unattractive.

BitSilver is about the only exception to this rule, which is very interesting because silver is WAY under priced in general.  The XAG/USD rate will probably double by this time next year if the fed so much as breaks wind in the general direction of an interest rate raise.

I'd be willing to build an on/off ramp between physical XAG & bitSilver (technical side of things).  If anyone knows any coin shops or legit metals dealers that would like a direct integration let me know.  But they have to be willing to take it at spot +- 3% 1bitSilver for 1ozXAG

You do realize that the current iteration of bitshares won't exist in 2 to 3 months.  That is most likely why no one is trading in those markets.  That and the fact that the client is buggy and some market rules are flawed.  I would wait until 2.0 comes out to make a genuine assessment of market conditions.  Even then, I would expect some issues to crop up along the way.  It may be a while before fully functioning markets develop because the system just needs time to develop.  If you have any assets in the current system they will be transferred to the new one.

78
Technical Support / Re: What differentiates Privatized BitAssets from Nubits?
« on: September 09, 2015, 09:31:53 pm »
Quote from: monsterer on September 09, 2015, 08:48:50 pm
Quote from: Helikopterben on September 09, 2015, 08:45:25 pm
So if it's not in a testing phase, then it must be production right?  Again, why replace a production network?

Why do car manufacturers keep releasing new versions of the same models? The previous versions were not test cars, were they?

If only mechanics could successfully drive previous versions, then yes they were test cars.  Let's just agree to disagree.

79
General Discussion / Re: Bitgold as investment
« on: September 09, 2015, 09:20:11 pm »
You should always be able to redeem 1 bitgold for 1 ounce of physical gold, minus fees and expenses such as shipping costs.  In the future, on and off ramps will provide an easier way to do this.  The peg is based on the global flow of information about price.  Your risk is systemic failure of bitshares, but not third party risk.

IMO, once bitshares becomes a solid and sound protocol, then bitgold will be a BETTER investment than physical gold as far as security is concerned.  I cant encrypt physical gold.  I cant store a backup of physical gold in multiple geographic locations.  I cant create a brain wallet for physical gold.  I cant use multi-sig or equivalent with physical gold.  I can dig a hole in the ground and put physical gold in it or hide it in my house somewhere and hope nobody finds it.  I could put physical gold in a safe and hope nobody breaks into it, but those storage methods are potentially not as secure IMO... otherwise I have to trust a third party, which is probably less secure than digging a hole in the ground. 

80
Technical Support / Re: What differentiates Privatized BitAssets from Nubits?
« on: September 09, 2015, 08:45:25 pm »
Quote from: monsterer on September 09, 2015, 08:31:30 pm
Quote from: Helikopterben on September 09, 2015, 08:29:21 pm
Ethereum frontier - today's volume 3x bitshares, market cap 9x bitshares.  If it's CLI only and for devs only, then I would consider it a  test network.  I suppose it depends on your definition of a test network... at most beta, probably alpha.

Your definition of test network is broken.

A test network contains coins which *have no value*.

So if it's not in a testing phase, then it must be production right?  Again, why replace a production network?

81
Technical Support / Re: What differentiates Privatized BitAssets from Nubits?
« on: September 09, 2015, 08:29:21 pm »
Quote from: monsterer on September 09, 2015, 08:07:03 pm
Quote from: Helikopterben on September 09, 2015, 07:48:13 pm
Then why is it being replaced?  Production networks don't get replaced.

Iteration?

The original client was horribly broken and the only way to fix it was to change the protocol so much a new chain was required?

...Show me any actual test network which is listed on multiple exchanges and has a daily trade volume in the top 10 in the world?

Ethereum frontier - today's volume 3x bitshares, market cap 9x bitshares.  If it's CLI only and for devs only, then I would consider it a  test network.  I suppose it depends on your definition of a test network... at most you may could call it beta, but probably alpha.

Edit:  maidsafe

82
Technical Support / Re: What differentiates Privatized BitAssets from Nubits?
« on: September 09, 2015, 07:48:13 pm »
Quote from: monsterer on September 09, 2015, 12:29:51 pm
Quote from: Helikopterben on September 09, 2015, 12:05:44 pm
Perhaps I shouldn't call it a test network because all assets are real assets that will be transferred over to 2.0, but for functionality purposes, bitshares 1.0 has become the first test network.  The point is that you shouldn't compare liquidity on a network that no one really uses any more and won't exist in 2-3 months with a network that is fully functional.

To call bitshares 1.0 a test network is frankly absurd. No one else believes that.

Then why is it being replaced?  Production networks don't get replaced.

83
Technical Support / Re: What differentiates Privatized BitAssets from Nubits?
« on: September 09, 2015, 12:05:44 pm »
Quote from: Randomaniac on September 09, 2015, 10:28:13 am
Quote from: Helikopterben on September 09, 2015, 03:09:29 am
You do realize you are talking about a test network that won't even be operational in a couple months?

Maybe I understand this totally wrong...
Just to be clear: are you saying there's not testnet available at the moment? Only the production network?

Perhaps I shouldn't call it a test network because all assets are real assets that will be transferred over to 2.0, but for functionality purposes, bitshares 1.0 has become the first test network.  The point is that you shouldn't compare liquidity on a network that no one really uses any more and won't exist in 2-3 months with a network that is fully functional. 

84
Technical Support / Re: What differentiates Privatized BitAssets from Nubits?
« on: September 09, 2015, 03:09:29 am »
Quote from: Nagalim on September 08, 2015, 09:21:09 pm
That's the reason you guys don't have liquidity or trade volume: you think liquidity is its own reward.  Why should I put my money up as a bitusd sell order and make pennies if I'm lucky when I could put my money up as nbt buy or sell (whatever currency there's a pool for) and make a fixed amount per day?

If you're happy with how liquid your markets are and your daily trade volume, this proposal is worthless.  If you kinda wish people could buy bitUSD easily for less than a 40% markup, maybe you should consider decentralized liquidity services like nupond.

If it's so profitable to provide liquidity for bitAssets why is none doing it?

You do realize you are talking about a test network that won't even be operational in a couple months?

85
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares Questions?
« on: September 08, 2015, 04:39:54 pm »
Quote from: BossYamasaki on September 08, 2015, 03:15:33 am
I'm not sure if bitshares decentralized asset exchange is going to be the first fully decentralized (OTC) market allowing crypto-traders to trade FX or CFDs but is it possible for fully decentralized FX trading or CFD trading to exist with or on the bitshares asset exchange? Is this the point of bitshares?

IMO no man-made system can be fully decentralized.  I like to think of it on a scale of 0 to 100, with 0 being fully centralized and 100 being fully decentralized.  Nothing is a 0 and nothing is 100.  All financial systems fall somewhere in between including fiat currencies such as the dollar or euro.  The real question we should ask is, "is it sufficiently decentralized?"  Actually, I would take it a step further and ask, "Is it sufficiently secure?"  because cryptography provides a large portion of security but is not directly tied to decentralization.  The end result should be a system where users cannot get their assets stolen or transactions censored, either directly or through inflation of the base asset.  For example, when your brokerage will not allow 500:1 leverage, that is a direct result of censorship, meaning the system you are using is not sufficiently secure.  Also, when the fed starts another round of QE, that is inflation of the base asset which is also not sufficiently secure. 

Right now, only bitcoin and related 1.0 technologies are sufficiently secure.  Nxt may be the only technology that can be considered 2.0 and sufficiently secure, depending on your perspective.  Bitshares, ripple, stellar, and ethereum are not sufficiently secure at this point, but plan to be in the future.  The main difference is that only bitshares will offer sufficiently secure assets (bitassets which are pegged to the value of physical world assets) other than the native currency. 

This is still very much a work in progress.  I am guessing that in less than 5 years you will be able to do this:



in a sufficiently secure environment powered by bitshares... at a fraction of the fees... using 500:1 leverage... trading corn, wheat, copper, usd, jpy, chk, ect, ect, ect.  At least that is the plan.


disclaimer:  This is still and experiment.  No guarantees.

86
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: September 05, 2015, 08:55:00 pm »
Quote from: Ander on September 05, 2015, 08:17:49 pm
What if btc38 really is in fractional reserve, and is buying on polo to try and get themselves out of it. ;)

Just another form of a short squeeze... unless they don't have the money to buy and cover.  Don't leave money on exchanges.  It's dangerous.

87
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: September 02, 2015, 08:59:07 pm »
Quote from: lil_jay890 on September 02, 2015, 06:05:28 pm
Quote from: EstefanTT on September 02, 2015, 05:56:40 pm
Quote from: Ander on September 01, 2015, 06:31:52 pm
Quote from: Tuck Fheman on September 01, 2015, 06:16:54 pm
Quote from: Ander on September 01, 2015, 06:08:21 pm
Now I need some good newmine FUD to hold it down until then. :P

I don't think that's possible at this point. We'll be moving up soonTM.

Two more weeks, come on!

(Or is it just reverse psychology? If I root for BTS to stay down, will it finally rise?)

That's getting very ugly for you Ander. Check the walls on poloniex, the bottom is "happenning" ! Sellers are running away and buyers are piling up ...
I guess this is are the very last time you can buy so low.

"This is the very last time you can buy so low" has been said every week for over a year and it continues to make new lows...  Bts has eaten bottom pickers alive.  Don't be surprised to see 5 or 6 million market cap.



I think we are pretty much looking at a bottom here.  I wouldn't be surprised to see 2000 sat next week.  Daily macd just turned green.  If it does drop to 5 or 6 million market cap, then I will buy more, assuming nothing has changed fundamentally.  Somebody has to mop up all these cheap bts  ;D. 

Pro tip:  always keep some cash on hand in case prices get even cheaper.  NEVER go all in.

88
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: September 01, 2015, 01:50:38 pm »
Quote from: Tuck Fheman on September 01, 2015, 04:26:24 am
Quote from: Helikopterben on August 31, 2015, 03:43:46 am
In hindsight, bitshares should have done the same with their first release.

Quote from: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=7962.0
So this *GENERAL WARNING* is placed here as a caution to all:

BitShares is an industry under development.
You have a chance to participate in that development.

Its products are highly experimental, immature, and full of bugs.
They have been made available so early adopters can help test them.
They are likely to break on you at the worst possible time.
You should not trust them.
You should double check everything they do.
You should experiment with very small amounts before doing anything big.
You should not do anything big.
You should realize that what worked yesterday should be double-checked today.

We could wait until it is perfect before letting you participate.
But by then the rewards you might get would be reduced by as much as the risks.

That's why the disclaimer you accepted before you could first launch the software warned that the software comes with no guarantees to be good for anything at all.


Yeah @Stan why didn't you warn us?!  :P

Good point

edit:  but I was mostly referring to the release of ags and pts, which was much earlier than that post

89
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: August 31, 2015, 01:15:40 pm »
Quote from: montpelerin on August 31, 2015, 05:36:40 am
I really think perceptions and community expectations and changes are playing a lot more into what you are saying than what was originally promised. I may be completely wrong, as I give Ethereum about 5% the amount of attention I give Bitshares, but during their fundraiser, did they claim that average users would have to stay far, far away from their first official release? What was their original promise?  What did they deliver?  How the heck is that Marketing 101? I would suggest that their developer names, personal networking and community environment has a lot more to do with the massive forgiveness I've seen regarding that release.

Again, perceptions.

I remember the ethereum camp saying things such as "the initial stages will have many bugs and problems, if there is ever an initial release at all."  - not exact quotes, and the bitshares camp saying things such as "there will be many separate blockchains for many different functions and if you buy pts, then you get a stake in all of it."  That obviously never happened.  Maybe i just perceive ethereum as being much more conservative and realistic in their approach and I could really care less about PR, but other people might care. 

Anyway, i am much more heavily invested in bts because I think the tech and vision is simply better at solving many of the greatest financial problems that have plagued mankind for centuries, and that is very exciting to be a part of.

90
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares price discussion
« on: August 31, 2015, 03:43:46 am »
Quote from: montpelerin on August 30, 2015, 07:00:27 pm
Quote from: Ander on August 30, 2015, 06:21:50 pm
Quote from: montpelerin on August 30, 2015, 05:38:55 pm
Pro tip: If any software developer promises delivery in 2 months, expect 4. 8 months? Expect 16.
Add extra cushion for degree of difficulty.


I agree, but the TS dev eam shouldve maybe tried to be a bit more realistic with their announcements.  They suffer from planning fallacy pretty bad it seems. 
Ethereum managed to be only like 6 months late, but Bitshares is closer to a year late on promises now. :P

Still, it just shows you how hard what we are doing is, and how difficult it will be for anyone else to copy it and compete.

This depends on your perception, I believe.

Project coordinators dream about having software developers with the work ethic, foresight and ability to continuously re-examine the current status of their product half as good as this team has demonstrated. What you don't want is developers without ambition, because that is all you're asking for with a more "realistic" and longer estimated development time.

This is the part of the calculation that must be done on the investor end (this is also the part that newmine is using to abuse those with less experience).

As far as I am concerned, and as someone who has been around everyday since the beginning (this is not meant to be said as holier-than-thou, merely that I have been around from the original promises to today - everyday), BTSX launch + immediate repairs = delivered product. What we are seeing with 2.0 is an extra and improved build on the original which has been had for mere scraps of dilution.

Whatever promises each investing individual were most valuing and counting on are also not clear - the fact that they are not set in stone is one of the most positive aspects of Bitshares and bytemaster's leadership. Bitshares has swerved and pivoted when new information became available. This development has been a continuous evolution, if bytemaster had been so hard headed as to stick to the initial day 1 plans, it's very possible this project would be all but dead and everybody's investment would be much closer to zero.

As far as I am concerned, Ethereum has not yet launched.

Can you imagine the backlash bytemaster and team would have received merely suggesting an "official" launch without a GUI?

As investors, do we really think this next iteration will be the final version?  I have my doubts.  I have a feeling MPA's will be difficult to get right, but eventually the correct formula will be found.  Bitshares has been rebooted twice now.  First with the "merger" and now with 2.0.  I could foresee another reboot being necessary if this next version doesn't go exactly according to plan, but at least the dev team is willing to take on that task if necessary and not just try to patch things up if it doesn't work.

Ethereum has done a better job at underpromising and overdelivering, marketing 101.  They basically have told average users to stay far, far away with the frontier release.  In hindsight, bitshares should have done the same with their first release.  Realistically, both projects are probably near the same stage of development.  Ethereum has said it would be another year before a fairly stable user version is available.  I would expect bitshares to follow the same trajectory.  In 5 years we should have stable platforms for which to conduct all things finance, but it is just unrealistic to expect it anytime soon.  Who knows, maybe 2.0 will overdeliver, but it will be hard to overcome the hype yet again.

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

Page created in 0.199 seconds with 23 queries.