Quote from: fussyhands on October 07, 2014, 12:46:48 PM
Take a look at this news:

http://www.coindesk.com/new-fund-gives-traders-blue-chip-stock-exposure-bitcoin/

As I've said in previous threads:  BitAssets are just not a killer feature of BitShares.

Centralized versions, like the one in the article above, will be just as easy to use, and the truth is that the vast majority of people do not care about their accounts being decentralized.  That's only really important to libertarian cryptonerds, who are a tiny fraction of the population.

To make progress Bitshares needs a killer app.  BitAssets are not it.  They are a massive distraction.

E-Gold 2.0? The SEC will shut it down just like MtGox was shut down and Litecoinglobal.

There is a reason why everyone pushed to create decentralized exchanges. Newbies typically don't learn from history and have to experience it for themselves.

Quote from: fussyhands on October 07, 2014, 12:46:48 PM
Take a look at this news:

http://www.coindesk.com/new-fund-gives-traders-blue-chip-stock-exposure-bitcoin/

As I've said in previous threads:  BitAssets are just not a killer feature of BitShares.

Centralized versions, like the one in the article above, will be just as easy to use, and the truth is that the vast majority of people do not care about their accounts being decentralized.  That's only really important to libertarian cryptonerds, who are a tiny fraction of the population.

To make progress Bitshares needs a killer app.  BitAssets are not it.  They are a massive distraction.

Quote from: aaaxn on October 07, 2014, 02:10:03 PM

Quote from: Gonzo on October 07, 2014, 01:02:07 PM
I don't think you're considering the 5 to 15% returns that BitAssets get in a mature system?

There is no way that asset will yield this much if btsx matures. For example if bitUSD is mature and one can freely convert USD<>bitUSD any yield difference between USD and bitUSD will be arbitraged away.

You cannot arb yield difference.  That is like claiming the interest rate at two banks will be arb away.

Quote from: James212 on October 07, 2014, 02:05:09 PM
I hate to break it to you but the greater market does not care about centralized vs decentralized.  They will go to whomever has the best utility and user experience.   

The market's opinion is one factor but perhaps is short sighted and matters less in the long run.. in the longer term it's more whether the option is properly robust. Decentralized services have an advantage because they are decentralized; not simply because people like decentralized. Equally first mover advantage is a systemic reality.

Obviously, it is important to consider opinion of market and also whether we are making the most and pushing every opportunity but the systemic aspects are distinct from that. Some options make the mistake of only being fullproof and forget the market but then come good.. MasterCoin springs to mind.. other's are foolproof and attract a good following.. BitShares is impressive for doing both well and diversity in solid offerings that attract different audiences - peertracks is especially exciting for this.

Quote from: James212 on October 07, 2014, 02:05:09 PM
I hate to break it to you but the greater market does not care about centralized vs decentralized.  They will go to whomever has the best utility and user experience.

It is right that people don't care as long as it works but:

There are two valuable attributes of blockchain technology:

a) Holding the private keys (you can do this with USD on Ripple (or am I wrong here?)) = funds can't be seized even with a centralized issuer except if they are seized for all (lack of collateral or state intervention).

b) No (direct) counterparty risk. This can not be done with ripple or any other system where a centralized issuer is backing the value of the token. And this is where the value of BitUSD comes from. Having a counterparty risk is highly costly: Any institution that holds funds for customers has high regulatory costs. Centralized solutions are therefore not per se cheaper for the customer.

I guess that customers would either trust a relatively young and unkown company that does audits (costly) and has a 100% reserve or big known banks that offer this service. The latter case it would likely be backed by a fractional reserve which is unlikely to be sustainable either individually (for a specific bank) or systemically.

So BitUSD has unique characteristics and will be very useful besides these centralized options. 

Quote from: aaaxn on October 07, 2014, 02:10:03 PM

Quote from: Gonzo on October 07, 2014, 01:02:07 PM
I don't think you're considering the 5 to 15% returns that BitAssets get in a mature system?

There is no way that asset will yield this much if btsx matures. For example if bitUSD is mature and one can freely convert USD<>bitUSD any yield difference between USD and bitUSD will be arbitraged away.

I'm pretty sure the yield is why most of us are here........


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote from: Gonzo on October 07, 2014, 01:02:07 PM
I don't think you're considering the 5 to 15% returns that BitAssets get in a mature system?

There is no way that asset will yield this much if btsx matures. For example if bitUSD is mature and one can freely convert USD<>bitUSD any yield difference between USD and bitUSD will be arbitraged away.

Quote from: davidpbrown on October 07, 2014, 01:09:41 PM
,
[\quote] decentralised is one step forward from centralized services

I hate to break it to you but the greater market does not care about centralized vs decentralized.  They will go to whomever has the best utility and user experience.

,

QuoteBitShares has a good foot forward where others haven't even woken up to the opportunity

.

Agreed.  But I think Fussy's question/point is: Are we making proper use of this first mover advantage?  It will not last forever. 

   

Quote from: xeroc on October 07, 2014, 01:40:13 PM
IOUs != bitAssets .. period!

≠ = !=
wasnt aware of that convenstion :)

IOUs != bitAssets .. period!

There's room enough for multiple players and it's to be expected the more robust of those will do well. Noone likes monopolies; competition is useful motivation to keep on top and remember that others could always do equally well or better. However, if I was to place a bet, decentralised is one step forward from centralized services. Also, at this stage anything that draws players in to the market is to be welcomed. Equally, there's no point in knocking BTC at this stage.. get people in and then let the best offerings resolve themselves over time. BitShares has a good foot forward where others haven't even woken up to the opportunity.

I don't think you're considering the 5 to 15% returns that BitAssets get in a mature system?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Take a look at this news:

http://www.coindesk.com/new-fund-gives-traders-blue-chip-stock-exposure-bitcoin/

As I've said in previous threads:  BitAssets are just not a killer feature of BitShares.

Centralized versions, like the one in the article above, will be just as easy to use, and the truth is that the vast majority of people do not care about their accounts being decentralized.  That's only really important to libertarian cryptonerds, who are a tiny fraction of the population.

To make progress Bitshares needs a killer app.  BitAssets are not it.  They are a massive distraction.