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 - ag

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9
106
DPOS is the blood, sweat, toil, and tears that forged bitshares. "Introduce?" No, I wont let myself be introduced.. I won't shake your hand, I won't look you in the eye... if this was the inquisition, you'd be burned at the stake.

107
General Discussion / Re: Why isn't Bitshares joining with BlockNet?
« on: November 17, 2014, 04:58:06 pm »
bitshares is not an "altcoin". that's offensive... so lets not join. but cool project maybe.

108
Oh , I see where you are wrong .
There will not be 101 100% delegates .
By my est , there will only be 10-25 delegates who can have 100% payrate .
More than that , shareholders won't approve .
At this point , it's not even that easy to get all the developers to get a 100% delegate seat .

My calculations assume worst case, yes.

If there comes to a point that 101 delegates successfully vote in with 100% payrate , then it means the value of the system is big enough , the numbers you are talking about will no longer apply .

But the reality is , most of the delegates can only get 3% payrate . The shareholders would be foolish to vote in 101 full paid delegates just to let them dump on the market without making significant value for the system .
+5% good point.

109
DAC PLAY / Re: Official Announcement for BitShares PLAY Allocation
« on: November 16, 2014, 10:47:52 pm »
Quote
Market orders and collateral on market will also be honored too, the allocation to collateral will be divided between long and short according to current price feed.

this means bitUSD is being share-dropped on? unlike, with sharedrop on BTS or PTS, bitUSD can be sold after snapshot for same value it is purchased for. it should be close to zero expense. and also additional benefit 1 bitUSD = 1.5 bitUSD worth of bitshares to be sharedropped on. crowd sale will raise less funds I think if people can just get playshares this way.


110
General Discussion / Re: PLAY Distribution Explanation...Hopefully!
« on: November 12, 2014, 10:44:50 pm »
the issue is not whether hackerfish has any obligation to BTS or not. The issue is a sharedrop on BTS may be detrimental to BTS. depending on the perceived value of PLAY, a snapshot will induce volatility onto the BTS market. Specifically, a large sell-off after the snapshot date.

111
DNS can be on bitshares chain. the problem is in the future what happens? 1 blockchain can only support so much transactions eventually has to raise tx fees. BM proposed this is when a new specialized chains will out-compete bitshares.

SO anyways, if this eventually will happen, it's not bad to start a parallel chain now. put some consideration into how 2 chains with this service can and will eventually co-exist.

Now one crucial point, this chain must not print it's own dollar. don't want it to become a bank have that competition with bitshares. so we have to resolve this. we should realize a market pegged asset, is just a convenience not 100% necessary for dns functions.

but if we want:  make support for transactions with user issued tokens. to encourage bitUSD demand: have people (gateways) take bitUSD deposits on bitshares, then issue bitUSD IOU's on DNS. And correspondingly redeem/destroy those IOU's for bitUSD. have internal market for these IOU's against DNSshares of course. it's kind of cool, if you are a gateway, you earn interest on your deposits. probably we want people with registered name on bitshares, to have that name on DNS. gateway can run with your money at anytime, but for example btc38 would be an automatically trustworthy gateway and others.


112
Quote
Some of his thinking is a little wooly
+5% I'd say it's really woolly.

113
General Discussion / Re: v0.4.21 Nice Cosmetic Changes
« on: October 23, 2014, 06:23:05 pm »
for me there is problems with this interface upgrade. I'm on a mac. I can't scroll through the orders with two fingers on the trackpad, hovering the mouse over the order book. this worked before. now it is shaky, and not responding to well at all. click and drag side bar works fine. anyone notice?

114
General Discussion / Re: Proposed Allocation for Merger
« on: October 21, 2014, 05:18:22 pm »
I still am not convinced why we have the merge DAC's into one. this seems not preferable.

I think I have solution to the bitUSD competing issue, which I think is largest problem. that solution is for DAC's that need a stable medium of exchange to accept user issued bitUSD IOU's as means of payment. as long as we are growing bitshares bitUSD adoption through other DAC's, funding and network effect seems less of issue.

I explained this idea yesterday in two other posts. still would like to know the problem with this. as it stands I don't accept merging DAC's..

Quote
you can have bitUSD gateways on the vote and dns chains. In the simplest form, just a user with bitshares and vote/DNS account which take bitUSD deposits on the bitshares blockchain, and issue bitUSD IOU's (essentially user issued tokens) on the second blockchain. these IOU's just facilitate exchange on the specific DAC. for instance with the music DAC these IOU's are used to buy artist coin or with DNS domains. the person receiving these IOU's will want to redeem them immediately with the gateway for interest bearing bitUSD.

Quote
It's the same concept of bitstamp taking dollar deposits and issuing IOUS on the ripple ledger. this is transferring the dollar from the bank ledger to ripple ledger. A bitshares/peertrack gateway would take deposits in bitshares bitUSD, issue IOUS on peertracks and correspondingly redeem / destroy those IOUS.


115
General Discussion / Re: Summary of recent events / merger proposal
« on: October 20, 2014, 10:00:06 pm »
I would like to have bitshares DAC, vote DAC, and dns DAC, on separate block chain. the problem is: dns and vote need a stable unit of value for users to transact in and that if they decide to issue a bitUSD against their own collateral then that puts them as direct competitors with bitshares.

As alternative you can have bitUSD gateways on the vote and dns chains. In the simplest form, just a user with bitshares and vote/DNS account which take bitUSD deposits on the bitshares blockchain, and issue bitUSD IOU's (essentially user issued tokens) on the second blockchain. these IOU's just facilitate exchange on the specific DAC. for instance with the music DAC these IOU's are used to buy artist coin or with DNS domains. the person receiving these IOU's will want to redeem them immediately with the gateway for interest bearing bitUSD.

Another way to think of these IOU'S, is how bitcoin is used with silkroad. no one likes to hold bitcoin, just have to use it as payment within silkroad. same with bitUSD IOU's. bitUSD IOU's are risky and give no interest. just facilitate transactions in DAC, but rather redeem for bitUSD.




116
General Discussion / Re: Proposal to Resolve a Million Issues at Once
« on: October 20, 2014, 05:46:51 pm »
from my point of view peertracks wants to uproot bitshares as bank. It seems unwieldy for them to embark on the path of creating a new bitUSD backed by their own company stock, unless, they think they can leave bitshares bitUSD behind in the dust. for them to beat bitshares bitUSD, the first step is to have a well capitalized stock so that many bitUSD can be shorted. And second to have superior incentive to buy their bitUSD. peertracks looks capable to meet both these criteria.

has it been considered for a DAC like music or vote or DNS, which may want to have a dollar token for unit of exchange, instead to printing new bitUSD against their newbie stock, to instead accept payment in user-issued bitUSD IOUS?

It's the same concept of bitstamp taking dollar deposits and issuing IOUS on the ripple ledger. this is transferring the dollar from the bank ledger to ripple ledger. A bitUSD/peertrack gateway would take deposits in bitshares bitUSD, issue IOUS on peertracks and correspondingly redeem / destroy those IOUS.

any BitUSD on a separate chain is a competing currency with bitshares bitUSD.  we need to convince DACS to user our bitUSD not to create their own.

117
one problem I had, is if you pay off a small amount of a legacy short position, the new call price logic kicks in, and it may even trigger a margin call on the entire order.

last night, the feed was at 42 BitUSD / BTSX, I had a legacy short with call price at 45 BitUSD, I payed off 1.7 BitUSD. unintuitively the call price recalibrates  below 42 BitUSD, and it was forced to cover.






118
pretty cool that bitsharesX is the first decentralized autonomous bank/exchange in existence. Dan should have a good time. he created something amazing.

119
for some reason.. running the experiment with an actual commodity i.e BitGLD seems riskier.. but It would be great to have BitGLD as soon as possible. since gold is down 50 dollars this week, some in the crypto community must see this as a buying opportunity and it would be nice to have a liquid virtual gold market. Right now the IOU's on ripple have very little volume. RippleSingapore since january has only issued 52 XAU total. and Gold Bullion International since july: 12 XAU.

120
Funny thing: I want to give up 2 out of 101 profitable spots and noone cares .. maybe I should kindly ask BM to move his votes over to a (non-init) standby delegate ..
 

 while you do that please suggest #36 delegate.adam or #56 delegate2.adam for kicking. 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9