Quote from: emailtooaj on March 15, 2016, 04:34:53 pm

Damn, never thought syscoin would trade higher than BTS lol
That should get some motivation

What do you mean?  Our market cap is more than 5X theirs.

I was referring to per coin price. Yea our cap is larger, but sys always stayed around the 200 satoshi, 700-800 with last week's pump. Now its broke 1400. .

IMO,  along with some SmartCoins there should be a mix of "ACTIVE" UIA's (such as META, OPENPOS, Sharebits...etc etc etc.) but most of the weight (80+% or so) should be towards SmartCoins. 
I just think it'd be a good way to "indirectly expose" potential new users to other facets of the BitShares Eco-System.

Great work @fox !!!  +5 +5

Quote from: Rune on March 06, 2016, 11:45:58 am

Quote from: xeroc on March 06, 2016, 10:08:31 am

@bts communit, please join up the Maker Slack as well:
https://slack.makerdao.com/

Let's welcome the MakerDAO community!

Yes, lots of people are having various technical and UX issues, it would be great if some bitshares community members could hang around in #newbie and #trading where most of the issues get posted.

I got same same warning and didn't proceed.

Quote from: emailtooaj on March 03, 2016, 12:43:03 am

I've been thinking some on this subject and had a thought maybe worth discussing?
What if we introduced "forging" on client side wallets that was designed to randomly pass the multi sig keys to users (using user cpu when their wallet is open, in a stealth way) and not witnesses?
So the witnesses run the nods/chain but only active/online user wallets control the keys for the BTC wallet?
Would this be possible?

To implement the so called side-chain feature, we need to make sure: when a user requested a withdrawal of SIDE.BTC (or whatever name), the key holders are online and aware of the request, and sign a transfer transaction in bitcoin network accordingly. How to make sure a random node is always online?

Not sure I understand what you mean by "random node"? BTC random node, Witness or Wallet?

Some have mentioned that person A who deposits the real BTC should hold one of the keys, so if person A ends up selling/transferring their SIDE.BTC to person B or value got trade in the exchange, then  if person B wanted to withdraw real BTC back out of Dex, then obviously person A is not around to sign with their key if they have to be active/online. 
The other issue with witnesses having full control of the keys (though trustworthy) can collude to wreak havoc as other have mentioned earlier.
So my thought process was, what if witnesses just ran/update the BTC node and published transfers with out seeing the actual keys? If this is even possible, don't know?
If that could be done then a typical transfer would go something like this...

- Person A deposits BTC to the Dex BTC deposit address with their user name in memo field...
- Witnesses see that Tx in the linked BTC wallet and credits the username (from the memo field) the corresponding SIDE.BTC,  1:1 after 6 confirmations on the BTC network (btw, I personally like DeX.BTC)....
- Person A can now use the DeX.BTC to trade, transfer or create UIA within the Dex...
- If Person B ends up getting Person A's  DeX.BTC and wants to withdraw back into BTC, then Person B creates a withdraw request
- Witnesses see withdraw request
- Witnesses broadcast to any "open/active" BTS wallets to request mutisig keys
- online Client wallets start to  "forge/mine"  for the BTC mutisig keys
- Winning "forgers" sign off for the BTC Tx (and possibly get paid a "mining" reward) and give Witnesses the thumbs up to transfer
- Witnesses then broadcast Tx from Dex BTC wallet to Person B BTC wallet.

or something to that effect..lol

If 10 multisig keys, or more are needed then I'd assume it would be safe to say there will be 10 or more active wallets online when the withdraw Tx was broadcast. Especially if users can earn money by keeping active wallets online and help "forge/mine" the keys... there could easily be 100's or thousands of up and running wallets at any given point in time.
BTS network already runs enough witnesses (if there needs to be more than 10 online at same time) so that shouldn't be an issue either.

To incentive witnesses to run BTC nodes, those that do run them, could get a tx fee of the withdrawals to the BTC network.
I wouldn't advise any fees charged for BTC deposits into the Dex.

Like I said, this may not work... pie in the sky thought/scheme, but maybe will spark some other creative ideas to make BTC deposits possible.








 

Sidechain should be implemented first, before Bond market.

Bond market is feature which will be used by tiny fraction of bitshares users. Sidechain is something which could actually bring thousands of new users which will not have to worry any longer about security of traiding their REAL bitcoins on exchange.

With 100% bitcoin collateral, this will instantly boost all BTC:XYZ markets.

Moreover... there are other exchanges which has bondmarkers. There are none exchange/cryptocurrency which has such feature like sidechain. This should be our top priority which will move Bitshares to all frontpages of services about bitcoin.

This^^^ times One billion trillion!
We really need to get our think tanks together and collaborate on this. 
If we can't get viable fiat gateways to integrate and carry Bitshares, then we must build our own decentralized vault and what better start than one which holds BTC! 

 

In short, SmartCoins is fiats doppelganger, created and financially backed by its creators, us the people.
SmartCoins hail as the ultimate currency whos unique ability and soul purpose is to readily serve all global citizens from the smallest townships and magnified to a global scale, quickly processing through our trust-free and secure block chain protocol; which can easily adapt, adjust and harmonize only by the will of it's people; devoid of influence from any Banks, Governments or anyone who plots to unjustly steal wealth from any of our participants or its ledger; cementing its monetary value from the very same securities our system rewards but most importantly... the sociable faith of everyday users.

Quote from: emailtooaj on February 21, 2016, 04:47:12 pm

I've read through this whole post, and unless I've missed or over read something;  I'm still not seeing how Bts value is derived in this situation.  Which is the foundation to the whole system.  Essentially your  putting the BTS genie back in the bottle and claiming it to be non transferable, thus it can only be accumulated via the sale of a bit asset, that's backed by BTS.
So in other words, by locking up bts in this way there is no external metric to value BTS.  Yes you can argue the fact that metric is derived from a bitUSD purchase from an external exchange, but how do I know (as an outsider) that if I buy this bitUSD I'm getting the correct value of BTS as backing collateral?
Here's another way to view this...
Let's say Google wants to create Googledollar, and the Google dollar is backed by it's companies share (let's say 20 shares to create its Google dollar).
Then one day a potential Google dollar buyer comes along...
"Hey, I'd like to purchase your Google dollar"...
Google says... "cool, that'll be $1USD for every Google dollar and each Google dollar is backed by 20 Google shares"
Buyer says... "ok, so your company shares are worth 5 cents each?"
Google... "yes they are"
Buyer... "ok, so where did you get that figure from?"
Google... "from the exchange"
Buyer..."hmm, ok. I've never seen your stock on the NYSE?"
Google.... "yes, you're correct. Our stock is only exchanged on our servers located upstairs and we don't allow or shares to be traded elsewhere."
Buyer... "ok, so how can you claim your company stock is worth 5 cents each if it's not being publicly traded, just because you says so due to activate on your internal servers?"

Do you see where I'm getting at?
Tbh, I've thought about this type of set up in the past (locking up BTS in the DeX) but it always boiled down to "what give BTS value?" to justify it as collateral.

So in some way, shape or form... BTS needs to be able to establish its own price, through out side forces, too be justified as collateral backing... Which this system relies on for any of its bit assets.

So if anyone could help me understand any missing  components that I'm not taking into consideration I'd appreciate it!

why does it have to be outside exchange to consider the price valid? Do you think trading on the dex the price is somehow manipulated, not real or what.

And money being backed by companies shares with minimum of 1.75 value beats the hell out of money backed by nothing... nothing other than government debt that is..

PS
 But do not trust me on that, wait for tbone to confirm first that this is not totally idiotic!!!

That's my point.
1.75 value of what? Company shares. O.k. What proof can you show me that the company share is worth anything at all?
I'm not trying to poo poo the ideas here, they are all great. But this is one very big component that hasn't been discussed. Like I said, this is the whole foundation to the whole system. Until this one fact can be determined without a shadow of a doubt, then it's a moot point.