Published on Forbes at 10.14am New York, check it out

[kenCode]

For my part, I will now directly buy BTS with EUR rather than EUR-BTC-BTS. And I will tell my eurofriends to do the same.

 

[karnal]

For my part, I will now directly buy BTS with EUR rather than EUR-BTC-BTS. And I will tell my eurofriends to do the same.

[kenCode]

Just for laughs: how about a little NXT vs BTS trading war on CCEDK ?

 

[openledger]

First sentence has typo:

With the global economy having spent over US$500 billion spent last year on fees for remittances (i.e.

Double spent

ty 

Well, I would say journalist is not that wrong here, it says spent twice, but you have to get the meaning here, first it is the global economy having spent the amount, and then comes what it has been spent on, you understand?

hmm i still think it'd read much better with one spent. I get what you're saying and in that scenario it's just missing a coma and it'd read well then ie:

With the global economy having spent over US$500 billion, spent last year on fees for...


Great article though - nice work CCEDK!

[mdj]

First sentence has typo:

With the global economy having spent over US$500 billion spent last year on fees for remittances (i.e.

Double spent

Well, I would say journalist is not that wrong here, it says spent twice, but you have to get the meaning here, first it is the global economy having spent the amount, and then comes what it has been spent on, you understand?

hmm i still think it'd read much better with one spent. I get what you're saying and in that scenario it's just missing a coma and it'd read well then ie:

With the global economy having spent over US$500 billion, spent last year on fees for...


Great article though - nice work CCEDK!

[openledger]

First sentence has typo:

With the global economy having spent over US$500 billion spent last year on fees for remittances (i.e.

Double spent

Well, I would say journalist is not that wrong here, it says spent twice, but you have to get the meaning here, first it is the global economy having spent the amount, and then comes what it has been spent on, you understand?

[mdj]

First sentence has typo:

With the global economy having spent over US$500 billion spent last year on fees for remittances (i.e.

Double spent

[cylonmaker2053]

I don't know what route ccedk will go .. but in the end you can have
ccedk.doge, ccedk.dash, ccedk.* and so on as IOUs and let people trade cced.btc : bitUSD directly in the DEX not having any of your funds in CCEDK (except maybe for the IOU, but that's the same thing as with classical centralized exchanges) ..

very cool, and i look forward to seeing how they implement an integration.

[xeroc]

I don't know what route ccedk will go .. but in the end you can have
ccedk.doge, ccedk.dash, ccedk.* and so on as IOUs and let people trade cced.btc : bitUSD directly in the DEX not having any of your funds in CCEDK (except maybe for the IOU, but that's the same thing as with classical centralized exchanges) ..

[cylonmaker2053]

sorry i'm having a tough time conceptualizing this...

ccedk is currently a centralized exchange with customer accounts and funds. this includes fiat and a wide variety of crypto. the bitshares blockchain has nothing to do with any of this other infrastructure, but you're saying that for Bitshares network stuff, like BTS, bitUSD, bitEUR, etc. ccedk will migrate all client funds to our blockchain and keep no keys on their system? even if so, the non-Bitshares stuff on ccedk is still vulnerable to hacking or otherwise losing keys or funds.

what happens when clients sell BTS for BTC on ccedk? the funds migrate over to their ccedk hosted account from our blockchain?

does ccedk integration into 2.0 mean they'll have direct access to our wallets? say i place a trade for BTS to bitUSD via ccedk (not sure why i would do that vs. directly on the DAX?), does that mean ccedk will access the BTS in my wallet, execute the trade on my behalf, and then deposit the bitUSD back into my wallet?

2.0 integration sounds awesome, just not sure i fully understand the details, or if the details are being misconstrued too optimistically in the community?

You may want to read:
http://v1.bitshares.org/resources/gateways
[/quote]

thx...so, ccedk would be a BTS gateway? i think i understand the high level visions in that doc, just not sure how it'd translate into reality for an exchange with customer accounts denominated in multiple currencies and assets that aren't part of our blockchain?

the reason i'm probing a bit is if i end up opening a local gateway here in South Carolina where we go from USD-bitUSD; i really don't want to hold any customer funds, so i'm very interested in learning how to set something up as a purely decentralized process operating directly off the blockchain.

[xeroc]

awesome! i'd like to learn more about ccedk is being implemented. for instance, how is this possible?

“You won’t have to worry about our exchange being hacked or whether it is honest or solvent.”

i thought the exchange still hosts customer accounts and holds funds?

ha .. seems you haven't read through all the technology in bitshares2.0:
https://bitshares.org/technology/recurring-and-scheduled-payments/

This allows you to give permission to someone else (on-chain) to withdraw up to a predefined amount of funds (in a certain asset) in a given period of time.
You can pretty much compare this feature with a debit card that has a daily/monthly limit!!

In the end, the exchange does not need to hold ANY of your funds .. it's basically just "translating" credit cards commands into bitshares network commands ..

This IS a killer feature!

very cool, but i'm not sure that's the basis for ccedk, is it? they still operate an exchange and host funded client accounts on their servers. that's what i meant by the security issue. are they planning to migrate away from that structure somehow by plugging into 2.0? i thought 2.0 integration just enabled access to our DAX.

Their trading engine will be the Bitshares blockchain on the backend. So they won't hold any of their client's keys, eliminating the risk of being hacked and losing client's funds.

sorry i'm having a tough time conceptualizing this...

ccedk is currently a centralized exchange with customer accounts and funds. this includes fiat and a wide variety of crypto. the bitshares blockchain has nothing to do with any of this other infrastructure, but you're saying that for Bitshares network stuff, like BTS, bitUSD, bitEUR, etc. ccedk will migrate all client funds to our blockchain and keep no keys on their system? even if so, the non-Bitshares stuff on ccedk is still vulnerable to hacking or otherwise losing keys or funds.

what happens when clients sell BTS for BTC on ccedk? the funds migrate over to their ccedk hosted account from our blockchain?

does ccedk integration into 2.0 mean they'll have direct access to our wallets? say i place a trade for BTS to bitUSD via ccedk (not sure why i would do that vs. directly on the DAX?), does that mean ccedk will access the BTS in my wallet, execute the trade on my behalf, and then deposit the bitUSD back into my wallet?

2.0 integration sounds awesome, just not sure i fully understand the details, or if the details are being misconstrued too optimistically in the community?

You may want to read:
http://v1.bitshares.org/resources/gateways

[Chuckone]

Have you checked this thread?

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,16982.0.html

Hopefully it answers at least some of your questions. I would like to be of more help, but I try to avoid answering questions I'm not 100% sure to know the answer. It appears their whole order book will be on the Bitshares blockchain and transactions will happen on the blockchain also. As for the other coins, I cannot answer with certainty how it will be managed. Maybe a more involved or knowledgeable forum member could help filling the blanks?

[cylonmaker2053]

awesome! i'd like to learn more about ccedk is being implemented. for instance, how is this possible?

“You won’t have to worry about our exchange being hacked or whether it is honest or solvent.”

i thought the exchange still hosts customer accounts and holds funds?

ha .. seems you haven't read through all the technology in bitshares2.0:
https://bitshares.org/technology/recurring-and-scheduled-payments/

This allows you to give permission to someone else (on-chain) to withdraw up to a predefined amount of funds (in a certain asset) in a given period of time.
You can pretty much compare this feature with a debit card that has a daily/monthly limit!!

In the end, the exchange does not need to hold ANY of your funds .. it's basically just "translating" credit cards commands into bitshares network commands ..

This IS a killer feature!

very cool, but i'm not sure that's the basis for ccedk, is it? they still operate an exchange and host funded client accounts on their servers. that's what i meant by the security issue. are they planning to migrate away from that structure somehow by plugging into 2.0? i thought 2.0 integration just enabled access to our DAX.

Their trading engine will be the Bitshares blockchain on the backend. So they won't hold any of their client's keys, eliminating the risk of being hacked and losing client's funds.

sorry i'm having a tough time conceptualizing this...

ccedk is currently a centralized exchange with customer accounts and funds. this includes fiat and a wide variety of crypto. the bitshares blockchain has nothing to do with any of this other infrastructure, but you're saying that for Bitshares network stuff, like BTS, bitUSD, bitEUR, etc. ccedk will migrate all client funds to our blockchain and keep no keys on their system? even if so, the non-Bitshares stuff on ccedk is still vulnerable to hacking or otherwise losing keys or funds.

what happens when clients sell BTS for BTC on ccedk? the funds migrate over to their ccedk hosted account from our blockchain?

does ccedk integration into 2.0 mean they'll have direct access to our wallets? say i place a trade for BTS to bitUSD via ccedk (not sure why i would do that vs. directly on the DAX?), does that mean ccedk will access the BTS in my wallet, execute the trade on my behalf, and then deposit the bitUSD back into my wallet?

2.0 integration sounds awesome, just not sure i fully understand the details, or if the details are being misconstrued too optimistically in the community?

[Chuckone]

awesome! i'd like to learn more about ccedk is being implemented. for instance, how is this possible?

“You won’t have to worry about our exchange being hacked or whether it is honest or solvent.”

i thought the exchange still hosts customer accounts and holds funds?

ha .. seems you haven't read through all the technology in bitshares2.0:
https://bitshares.org/technology/recurring-and-scheduled-payments/

This allows you to give permission to someone else (on-chain) to withdraw up to a predefined amount of funds (in a certain asset) in a given period of time.
You can pretty much compare this feature with a debit card that has a daily/monthly limit!!

In the end, the exchange does not need to hold ANY of your funds .. it's basically just "translating" credit cards commands into bitshares network commands ..

This IS a killer feature!

very cool, but i'm not sure that's the basis for ccedk, is it? they still operate an exchange and host funded client accounts on their servers. that's what i meant by the security issue. are they planning to migrate away from that structure somehow by plugging into 2.0? i thought 2.0 integration just enabled access to our DAX.

Their trading engine will be the Bitshares blockchain on the backend. So they won't hold any of their client's keys, eliminating the risk of being hacked and losing client's funds.

[cylonmaker2053]

awesome! i'd like to learn more about ccedk is being implemented. for instance, how is this possible?

“You won’t have to worry about our exchange being hacked or whether it is honest or solvent.”

i thought the exchange still hosts customer accounts and holds funds?

ha .. seems you haven't read through all the technology in bitshares2.0:
https://bitshares.org/technology/recurring-and-scheduled-payments/

This allows you to give permission to someone else (on-chain) to withdraw up to a predefined amount of funds (in a certain asset) in a given period of time.
You can pretty much compare this feature with a debit card that has a daily/monthly limit!!

In the end, the exchange does not need to hold ANY of your funds .. it's basically just "translating" credit cards commands into bitshares network commands ..

This IS a killer feature!

very cool, but i'm not sure that's the basis for ccedk, is it? they still operate an exchange and host funded client accounts on their servers. that's what i meant by the security issue. are they planning to migrate away from that structure somehow by plugging into 2.0? i thought 2.0 integration just enabled access to our DAX.