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.
Being Processed since 1 days 13 hours is this the longest BTS transaction in history ?
price now fallen 180 sats.
frustrated is not the word here
Perhaps something like a decentralized alternative to threaded discussion forums, e.g. Reddit self posts (though limited to STEEMIT_MAX_COMMENT_DEPTH == 6 nested comments, which I guess is a reasonable number),
except with the distinguishing feature of economic rewards for good comments ("What do you mean internet karma points don't have to be worthless?").
Though perhaps that could backfire as well: redditors take karma too seriously as it is even though it currently provide no economic value whatsoever. But it would be fun to see how economic incentives modify social behavior online.
Steemit is a social media platform where everyone gets paid for creating and curating content.
Continuing the discussion from BitLaw - Polycentric Law in Crypto-Space (part 2)1:
It deserves it's own thread.
I just met the founder of https://followmyvote.com/15
These guys are legitimate. It is really beautiful piece of technology. They want to release it in July-ish to get ready for the 2016 election cycle. The reason being that they want to expose the voting fraud. One could use their software, and gov software and compare of the two. The non-anarchist will soon realize how corrupted the system is. That is their goal.
Riverhead says it's possible for exchanges to issue an BTS IOU...
It's possible, but not practical. Each exchange would have to buy a massive stake in BTS just to do this; to fund their IOUs which they have to convert from user's bitcoin deposits. This is a huge undertaking for them and a big risk; IMO, they just won't do it.
It'd be rather peculiar if centralized exchanges ended up with, rather than BTS IOU, a token pegged to the value of BTS called... I don't know... bitBTS!
bitBTS - transferable, but without any of the benefits of BTS (voting power, enabling free transactions, sharedrop target etc.)...
When a user wants to withdraw this to get the equivalent to their BTS account it wouldnt be possible because there can't be transfers according to the OP. They need to go to the orderbook first and as such there is no guarantee you can get them.
There would be no transfers of BTS, but there could be transfers of a BitShares smartcoin such as bitBTS.
and how would users claim them for the original? they wouldn't. Would they peg it to the original bts? Otherwise since they would have more volume they would be the ones setting the price, which wouldn't even make sense. Might as well call it any other name.
and how would users claim them for the original? they wouldn't.Correct. I wasn't meaning for them to be able to.
Would they peg it to the original bts?bitBTS would be a BitShares asset pegged to (and backed by) tonyk's non-transferable BTS.
Riverhead says it's possible for exchanges to issue an BTS IOU...
It's possible, but not practical. Each exchange would have to buy a massive stake in BTS just to do this; to fund their IOUs which they have to convert from user's bitcoin deposits. This is a huge undertaking for them and a big risk; IMO, they just won't do it.
It'd be rather peculiar if centralized exchanges ended up with, rather than BTS IOU, a token pegged to the value of BTS called... I don't know... bitBTS!
bitBTS - transferable, but without any of the benefits of BTS (voting power, enabling free transactions, sharedrop target etc.)...
When a user wants to withdraw this to get the equivalent to their BTS account it wouldnt be possible because there can't be transfers according to the OP. They need to go to the orderbook first and as such there is no guarantee you can get them.
Riverhead says it's possible for exchanges to issue an BTS IOU...
It's possible, but not practical. Each exchange would have to buy a massive stake in BTS just to do this; to fund their IOUs which they have to convert from user's bitcoin deposits. This is a huge undertaking for them and a big risk; IMO, they just won't do it.
The answer also depends on what you consider the main benefits of the new approach. If you find that what it does for the bitAssets is the main benefit, why first wait on inferior version of bitAsset to take off before implementing the superior?
I think the point is that it's too risky at the moment to make such a change to Bitshares. And a new chain would be DOA (that means dead on arrival, tony). So right now we should concentrate on getting BitAssets moving in the right direction, taking liquidity measures that can be taken now, giving the entire system a chance to become more robust with a lively internal market for BTS, and a much more active DEX in general. Then we'll be in a better position to create your perfect peg and take BitAssets to the next level. You have to learn to crawl before you can learn to walk!
