Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Introduction to BitShares - Video  (Read 6880 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bytemaster

Introduction to BitShares - Video
« on: November 03, 2013, 07:15:19 PM »

This is a youtube video I produced that describes BitShares. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BV55IrZi7g
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Winslow Strong

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2013, 09:19:50 PM »
I don't understand the mechanism by which bitUSD would track the exchange rate of paperUSD/BTS.

Let's compare it to an ETF.  There, the value of the ETF tracks the value of the basket of equity/commodities or whatever else it is composed of.  Speculators rationally buy the ETF when its price is below the price of the basket, because the shares of the ETF itself could be redeemed for the actual underlying basket (modulo large size and fees).  Hence, the price of the ETF tracks the price of the basket due to arbitrage opportunities being available when there's a substantial disagreement between the two.   

But it doesn't seem that bitUSD are redeemable for paper USD.  So why would the market rationally buy bitUSD when its value (in BTS) is less than that of BTS/PaperUSD?   
PgmorTEHxRm5H8PHmN5fjni4ZZ2cGFDDCa

Offline ruletheworld

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 162
    • View Profile
    • BTC Geek
Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #2 on: November 11, 2013, 03:30:11 AM »
I don't understand the mechanism by which bitUSD would track the exchange rate of paperUSD/BTS.

Let's compare it to an ETF.  There, the value of the ETF tracks the value of the basket of equity/commodities or whatever else it is composed of.  Speculators rationally buy the ETF when its price is below the price of the basket, because the shares of the ETF itself could be redeemed for the actual underlying basket (modulo large size and fees).  Hence, the price of the ETF tracks the price of the basket due to arbitrage opportunities being available when there's a substantial disagreement between the two.   

But it doesn't seem that bitUSD are redeemable for paper USD.  So why would the market rationally buy bitUSD when its value (in BTS) is less than that of BTS/PaperUSD?

The idea is, people will bid whatever they think it's worth, and that price will track the 'true' price of USD. There is no physical USD being exchanged or stored, but a number of people trading on the platform will maintain that price. It's just like a prediction marketplace where equilibrium will bring it to the 'true' price. Of course, if for some reason, everyone believed that bitUSD should instead track bitCENT, then it will, but it would be unlikely.

Or perhaps Dan has a better explanation of all of this!
PTS: PYRqARWMGQ1PeZvjJM6iWJxf2ouwYcueHF
BTC: 1NeRoAKp137GTDUEBaonbu5BUGPN17Xw5n
http://btcgeek.com

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2809
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BTS: Stan
Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #3 on: November 11, 2013, 04:49:32 AM »
Couldn't have said it more succinctly myself.
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline Winslow Strong

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #4 on: November 11, 2013, 11:45:24 AM »
I don't understand the mechanism by which bitUSD would track the exchange rate of paperUSD/BTS.

Let's compare it to an ETF.  There, the value of the ETF tracks the value of the basket of equity/commodities or whatever else it is composed of.  Speculators rationally buy the ETF when its price is below the price of the basket, because the shares of the ETF itself could be redeemed for the actual underlying basket (modulo large size and fees).  Hence, the price of the ETF tracks the price of the basket due to arbitrage opportunities being available when there's a substantial disagreement between the two.   

But it doesn't seem that bitUSD are redeemable for paper USD.  So why would the market rationally buy bitUSD when its value (in BTS) is less than that of BTS/PaperUSD?

The idea is, people will bid whatever they think it's worth, and that price will track the 'true' price of USD. There is no physical USD being exchanged or stored, but a number of people trading on the platform will maintain that price. It's just like a prediction marketplace where equilibrium will bring it to the 'true' price. Of course, if for some reason, everyone believed that bitUSD should instead track bitCENT, then it will, but it would be unlikely.

Sorry, maybe I wasn't being clear enough. For the price to track the true USD price, its necessary that buyers would have incentive to buy when the price dips sufficiently below the true USD price.  What is that incentive? 

In a prediction market, the incentive is that eventually the share matures and is paid out, so there's a terminal value.  Similarly in futures markets.  With ETFs, there's no terminal date, but if the price of the ETF dips too low, theres an arbitrage opportunity for people to buy shares of the ETF and exchange it for a basket of the underlying.

It sounds to me like you're saying there is no such mechanism for bitUSD.  Then you are just relying on putting this idea out there that the prices should track, and hoping that others believe that others believe that others believe. . . that it should.  Without some type of redeemability, I don't see how anyone could believe this will actually work.
PgmorTEHxRm5H8PHmN5fjni4ZZ2cGFDDCa

Offline ruletheworld

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 162
    • View Profile
    • BTC Geek
Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #5 on: November 12, 2013, 01:23:16 AM »
I don't understand the mechanism by which bitUSD would track the exchange rate of paperUSD/BTS.

Let's compare it to an ETF.  There, the value of the ETF tracks the value of the basket of equity/commodities or whatever else it is composed of.  Speculators rationally buy the ETF when its price is below the price of the basket, because the shares of the ETF itself could be redeemed for the actual underlying basket (modulo large size and fees).  Hence, the price of the ETF tracks the price of the basket due to arbitrage opportunities being available when there's a substantial disagreement between the two.   

But it doesn't seem that bitUSD are redeemable for paper USD.  So why would the market rationally buy bitUSD when its value (in BTS) is less than that of BTS/PaperUSD?

The idea is, people will bid whatever they think it's worth, and that price will track the 'true' price of USD. There is no physical USD being exchanged or stored, but a number of people trading on the platform will maintain that price. It's just like a prediction marketplace where equilibrium will bring it to the 'true' price. Of course, if for some reason, everyone believed that bitUSD should instead track bitCENT, then it will, but it would be unlikely.

Sorry, maybe I wasn't being clear enough. For the price to track the true USD price, its necessary that buyers would have incentive to buy when the price dips sufficiently below the true USD price.  What is that incentive? 

In a prediction market, the incentive is that eventually the share matures and is paid out, so there's a terminal value.  Similarly in futures markets.  With ETFs, there's no terminal date, but if the price of the ETF dips too low, theres an arbitrage opportunity for people to buy shares of the ETF and exchange it for a basket of the underlying.

It sounds to me like you're saying there is no such mechanism for bitUSD.  Then you are just relying on putting this idea out there that the prices should track, and hoping that others believe that others believe that others believe. . . that it should.  Without some type of redeemability, I don't see how anyone could believe this will actually work.

Here's how it would work out in this situation: Traders will see that bitUSD is undervalued, and therefore will go long bitUSD, waiting for the price to increase. Once it does, they will exit that position and get back their bitshares, but at a profit (i.e. more bitshares than they started off with) because of the increase in price. Similar situation will occur on the short side.

The mechanism is a little more tricky than ETFs that you mention above. The reason traders will go long bitUSD in the above situation is because they think the consensus will bring back the price to its 'true' value. When everyone thinks the same, the price indeed will be the true value. If there are (as it probably would be in the initial day or two, for instance) say just 4 players in the market, the equilibrium price will be harder to maintain. With more players looking for such opportunities, the system will track the true prices of things it represents. Or at least that's the hope.
PTS: PYRqARWMGQ1PeZvjJM6iWJxf2ouwYcueHF
BTC: 1NeRoAKp137GTDUEBaonbu5BUGPN17Xw5n
http://btcgeek.com

Offline bytemaster

Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #6 on: November 12, 2013, 06:22:13 AM »
I don't understand the mechanism by which bitUSD would track the exchange rate of paperUSD/BTS.

Let's compare it to an ETF.  There, the value of the ETF tracks the value of the basket of equity/commodities or whatever else it is composed of.  Speculators rationally buy the ETF when its price is below the price of the basket, because the shares of the ETF itself could be redeemed for the actual underlying basket (modulo large size and fees).  Hence, the price of the ETF tracks the price of the basket due to arbitrage opportunities being available when there's a substantial disagreement between the two.   

But it doesn't seem that bitUSD are redeemable for paper USD.  So why would the market rationally buy bitUSD when its value (in BTS) is less than that of BTS/PaperUSD?

The idea is, people will bid whatever they think it's worth, and that price will track the 'true' price of USD. There is no physical USD being exchanged or stored, but a number of people trading on the platform will maintain that price. It's just like a prediction marketplace where equilibrium will bring it to the 'true' price. Of course, if for some reason, everyone believed that bitUSD should instead track bitCENT, then it will, but it would be unlikely.

Sorry, maybe I wasn't being clear enough. For the price to track the true USD price, its necessary that buyers would have incentive to buy when the price dips sufficiently below the true USD price.  What is that incentive? 

In a prediction market, the incentive is that eventually the share matures and is paid out, so there's a terminal value.  Similarly in futures markets.  With ETFs, there's no terminal date, but if the price of the ETF dips too low, theres an arbitrage opportunity for people to buy shares of the ETF and exchange it for a basket of the underlying.

It sounds to me like you're saying there is no such mechanism for bitUSD.  Then you are just relying on putting this idea out there that the prices should track, and hoping that others believe that others believe that others believe. . . that it should.  Without some type of redeemability, I don't see how anyone could believe this will actually work.


When the value of BitUSD falls below a dollar, SHORTS COVER.   When it goes above a dollar new shorts enter the market.   Margin calls force shorts to cover. 
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Winslow Strong

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #7 on: November 12, 2013, 10:20:02 AM »
When the value of BitUSD falls below a dollar, SHORTS COVER.   When it goes above a dollar new shorts enter the market.   Margin calls force shorts to cover.

Now I'm really confused.  First of all, I thought bitUSD was a price that we hope will track the price of 1 USD denominated in BTS. That's what it seems like from the video anyway, and would be in keeping with std exchange rate nomenclature.  If that's true, then the person on the short end profits from BitUSD falling, so there wouldn't be any margin call in that scenario. 

I think that margin calls unnecessarily complicate this discussion.  Supposing the penalty for a margin call is sufficiently high that nearly all traders keep sufficient margin nearly all the time, then we can ignore them (the calls, but not of course the need to maintain posted margin).

Another thing about your response that confuses me is that it implies the margin requirements depend on the BTS/USD rate, not merely the price of BitUSD.  In that case, the BTS/USD rate must be embedded in the blockchain from some reliable source.  Is this the case, or are margins requirements calculated completely based on the movements of bitUSD itself without reference to BTS/USD?

Regardless of your answer to the above, there is no issue whatsoever with margin when the short side is in profitable territory.  My question remains: what incentive do longs have to enter, and support the price of BitUSD if they find that it's trading more cheaply than BTS/USD?  The only answer that has been provided is that participants believe that participants believe that. . . the price will track. 

This would be an extreme reliance on herd behavior, and is not whatsoever analogous to a prediction market.  In prediction markets, there is a maturity date where it's decided who was right and wrong and the winning party receives payment.  The incentive to be correct is the expectation of future payment upon correctness.  That expectation is based on the type of social contract that Invictus discusses in their literature on protoshares redemption for DAC shares.  It's clearly in the interest of any well-established company sponsoring the prediction market to honor that social contract, so there exists a good incentive structure. 

In the case of BitUSD, the expectation is merely based on the predicted future behavior of the herd.  Anyone who has studied a bit of financial history knows that that can seem to work well for years, until it fails spectacularly.  The collapse of Long Term Capital Management would be a good case study to review.  And what's more, the positions that LTCM held did have terminal values that were highly likely to be (and ended up being) very profitable. There was huge incentive for other players in the market to snatch these up at discounted values.  However, there was even larger incentive for them to drive prices against LTCM forcing a liquidation at even more favorable prices.  And this all occurred with respect to assets that had terminal payouts.  You've proposed assets without such.

What makes you think that expectation alone will be sufficient to make the price track?  Has this been tried somewhere before in financial markets?
PgmorTEHxRm5H8PHmN5fjni4ZZ2cGFDDCa

Offline bytemaster

Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #8 on: November 12, 2013, 05:07:53 PM »
Ok, those who own BitUSD are earning dividends at 2x the rate of those who own BTS. 
Those who are Short BitUSD are paying interest at 2x the value of BTS.

Shorts MUST buy back at some point if they ever want to use their collateral for anything else.   The only price at which someone holding BitUSD would be willing to sell is the BTS/USD exchange rate.   Otherwise, they sell the BitUSD to someone who wants a high yield investment backed by BTS.

So you apply game theory between the longs and the shorts.   The longs will hold out for a fair price, and it costs the shorts a lot of money to 'let it ride'.  Also, for someone who is short to maximize the return on their investment they need to cover, take a profit, and re-short at the new price.   As the value of BitUSD falls the collateral backing it goes from 2x to 3x to 10x to 100x... and thus the interest rate earned by those who hold BitUSD rises and the opportunity cost for the short also rises. 

As a result there is constant pressure for shorts to cover and and re-short at the new price.  The only way for them to cover is to convince the longs to give up their higher yield and thus agree to a price near BTS/USD.

Now the longs cannot hold out for ever either because at any time new shorts can enter the market if the longs try to push up the price by holding BitUSD off the market.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Winslow Strong

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #9 on: November 12, 2013, 09:13:37 PM »
Thanks for the response bytemaster;  I know you're busy today. 
Just to be clear on where I'm coming from, I think bitshares and DACs in general are very cool ideas, and want them to succeed.  I have much to say about what you've written, but can't reply until I get one thing straightened out.

Is the margin requirement based on the price of bitUSD or BTS/USD? 

E.g. bitUSD is .99 whereas BTS/USD is 1.00.  Is margin 1.98 or 2?

The latter would be more favorable for tracking, but since USD are not endogenous to the bitshares block chain, that info would need to be fed into the blockchain by a trusted source.  So the cost would be a bit of centralization, but it might be worth it.

Thanks.
PgmorTEHxRm5H8PHmN5fjni4ZZ2cGFDDCa

Offline bytemaster

Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #10 on: November 12, 2013, 09:17:08 PM »
Thanks for the response bytemaster;  I know you're busy today. 
Just to be clear on where I'm coming from, I think bitshares and DACs in general are very cool ideas, and want them to succeed.  I have much to say about what you've written, but can't reply until I get one thing straightened out.

Is the margin requirement based on the price of bitUSD or BTS/USD? 

E.g. bitUSD is .99 whereas BTS/USD is 1.00.  Is margin 1.98 or 2?

The latter would be more favorable for tracking, but since USD are not endogenous to the bitshares block chain, that info would need to be fed into the blockchain by a trusted source.  So the cost would be a bit of centralization, but it might be worth it.

Thanks.

It tracks for the same reason a prediction market can track arbitrary ideas simply by specifying a name.   BitUSD Short margin requirements are based upon the highest unaccepted bid to buy BitUSD for BTS.   This price indicates that the entire market agrees the value of BitUSD is higher than that bid and so anyone with insufficient margin at that bid price is forced to buy into it to cover their position.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Winslow Strong

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #11 on: November 13, 2013, 12:09:51 PM »
Thanks again for your reply, bytemaster, during this busy time. In response to your previous points:

BitUSD Short margin requirements are based upon the highest unaccepted bid to buy BitUSD for BTS.

Shorts MUST buy back at some point if they ever want to use their collateral for anything else.   

So you apply game theory between the longs and the shorts.   The longs will hold out for a fair price, and it costs the shorts a lot of money to 'let it ride'.  Also, for someone who is short to maximize the return on their investment they need to cover, take a profit, and re-short at the new price.   As the value of BitUSD falls the collateral backing it goes from 2x to 3x to 10x to 100x... and thus the interest rate earned by those who hold BitUSD rises and the opportunity cost for the short also rises. 

As a result there is constant pressure for shorts to cover and and re-short at the new price.  The only way for them to cover is to convince the longs to give up their higher yield and thus agree to a price near BTS/USD.

Now the longs cannot hold out for ever either because at any time new shorts can enter the market if the longs try to push up the price by holding BitUSD off the market.

1.) So you're saying that you won't allow shorts to reduce their margin positions even if/when the bitUSD price has moved very much into the money for the shorts? 

This seems silly, as the shorts can still effectively reduce their margin by covering their previous position and initiating fresh positions at their desired level of exposure with new 2x margin, which would be lower than the previous 2x margin. It forces the shorts to needlessly make extra transactions to achieve the same position they could have had by just reducing their margin. Forcing shorts to cover in this way won't cause net long demand, hence won't cause the price to rise.


2.) Fungibility: If you don't allow shorts to reduce their margin when their positions are in the money, then the bitUSD contracts lose fungibility.  This is because the margin requirement of each would be contractually coded in at the time of creation, and would depend on the bitUSD price at that time.  I doubt that this is really the way you intend for things to operate.


Ok, those who own BitUSD are earning dividends at 2x the rate of those who own BTS. 
Those who are Short BitUSD are paying interest at 2x the value of BTS.

The only price at which someone holding BitUSD would be willing to sell is the BTS/USD exchange rate. Otherwise, they sell the BitUSD to someone who wants a high yield investment backed by BTS.

These dividends will scale down as margin scales down as shorts reduce their margin, which they will do even if you force them to cover their initial position and reenter a new one to do so. Since the margin requirements are based on the bitUSD price and not the BTS/USD exchange rate, then the goodness of the deal for the longs doesn't depend on the deviation of bitUSD from BTS/USD, so this is not a mechanism that keeps the prices tracking.

Furthermore, in panics yield-incentives typically are surpassed by fear of near/intermediate term price losses. Interest only accumulates linearly in time, whereas prices can change arbitrarily quickly. LTCMs positions had crazy yields at the market prices before they had to liquidate.  Still, buyers didn't enter and didn't cause their illiquid bonds to converge to the values of similar liquid ones.  Whereas in the setup you describe. . .

1.) Yields (dividends) won't effectively increase as bitUSD price drops, because shorts will reduce their margins - by exiting and reentering if you force this upon them.

2.) There's no terminal payout, so no implied yield (price appreciation) as there is for e.g. bonds.
 
I still see no incentive whatsoever for any market agent to buy and sell in such a way that e.g. the price of bitUSD will track the BTS/USD rate, other than the belief that it is common knowledge that they "should."  I still see this as a far fragiler incentive structure that has existed in many instances in financial history where instruments that were expected to track/converge had huge deviations and didn't.  On the plus side, I'll point out that your system requires far higher margin than is typical in financial markets, which should reduce the pro-cyclical feedback that occurs in financial panics.  Reducing this feedback is not, however, the same thing as incentivizing convergence.

I'm open to hearing new arguments or learning where I've misunderstood how the proposed system would work.
PgmorTEHxRm5H8PHmN5fjni4ZZ2cGFDDCa

Offline bytemaster

Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #12 on: November 13, 2013, 02:47:29 PM »
Quote
1.) So you're saying that you won't allow shorts to reduce their margin positions even if/when the bitUSD price has moved very much into the money for the shorts? 

This seems silly, as the shorts can still effectively reduce their margin by covering their previous position and initiating fresh positions at their desired level of exposure with new 2x margin, which would be lower than the previous 2x margin. It forces the shorts to needlessly make extra transactions to achieve the same position they could have had by just reducing their margin. Forcing shorts to cover in this way won't cause net long demand, hence won't cause the price to rise.


2.) Fungibility: If you don't allow shorts to reduce their margin when their positions are in the money, then the bitUSD contracts lose fungibility.  This is because the margin requirement of each would be contractually coded in at the time of creation, and would depend on the bitUSD price at that time.  I doubt that this is really the way you intend for things to operate.

This is just an implementation detail.  Point 1 is how they would do it.   Selling a short position cannot be readily fungible because every short is at a different price.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline bytemaster

Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #13 on: November 13, 2013, 02:55:36 PM »
Quote
These dividends will scale down as margin scales down as shorts reduce their margin, which they will do even if you force them to cover their initial position and reenter a new one to do so. Since the margin requirements are based on the bitUSD price and not the BTS/USD exchange rate, then the goodness of the deal for the longs doesn't depend on the deviation of bitUSD from BTS/USD, so this is not a mechanism that keeps the prices tracking.

Furthermore, in panics yield-incentives typically are surpassed by fear of near/intermediate term price losses. Interest only accumulates linearly in time, whereas prices can change arbitrarily quickly. LTCMs positions had crazy yields at the market prices before they had to liquidate.  Still, buyers didn't enter and didn't cause their illiquid bonds to converge to the values of similar liquid ones.  Whereas in the setup you describe. . .

1.) Yields (dividends) won't effectively increase as bitUSD price drops, because shorts will reduce their margins - by exiting and reentering if you force this upon them.

2.) There's no terminal payout, so no implied yield (price appreciation) as there is for e.g. bonds.
 
I still see no incentive whatsoever for any market agent to buy and sell in such a way that e.g. the price of bitUSD will track the BTS/USD rate, other than the belief that it is common knowledge that they "should."  I still see this as a far fragiler incentive structure that has existed in many instances in financial history where instruments that were expected to track/converge had huge deviations and didn't.  On the plus side, I'll point out that your system requires far higher margin than is typical in financial markets, which should reduce the pro-cyclical feedback that occurs in financial panics.  Reducing this feedback is not, however, the same thing as incentivizing convergence.

I'm open to hearing new arguments or learning where I've misunderstood how the proposed system would work.

I could debate the tracking issue to great extent, but I think the ultimate proof will be when we launch the test network.  If my theory is wrong, then all that is needed to 'make it work', is an external price feed.   I base my 'price tracking' on the behavior of prediction markets that also have no ties to the real world and yet can track arbitrary ideas or concepts.   I can see that you are putting a lot of effort into understanding how it could work, and I encourage you to keep thinking it through until the key insight that you are missing hits.

Here is my challenge to you, role play longs and shorts against one another and see if you can manipulate the price without one side digging in.  Keep in mid that longs are competing against other longs and shorts against other shorts.   Then define the direction the market will move and why.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Winslow Strong

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: Introduction to BitShares - Video
« Reply #14 on: November 14, 2013, 11:57:37 AM »
I appreciate your time in replying, again.

I could debate the tracking issue to great extent, but I think the ultimate proof will be when we launch the test network.

Indeed, it will be an interesting experiment.  However, BitShares, and by association Invictus, risk losing some credibility if it fails, so it's worthwhile to think it through carefully first.  I can tell that you are quite confident, although I'm still unable to fathom why from this conversation. 

If my theory is wrong, then all that is needed to 'make it work', is an external price feed.   

I don't agree.  I think this would help substantially, since it would give the yield incentive that you mentioned earlier.  However, as I pointed out, yield incentives are never sufficient to overcome fear of near-term losses in turbulent financial times.  That issue is further exacerbated by the fact that there is no guaranteed convergence of BitUSD at any terminal horizon (as there would be for bonds or futures), because there is no terminal horizon.  With typical financial derivatives, a buyer knows an upper bound on how much time he will have to bear price deviations before convergence.  With BitUSD, there is no such upper bound.

I base my 'price tracking' on the behavior of prediction markets that also have no ties to the real world and yet can track arbitrary ideas or concepts. 

Can you provide an example of what you mean?  The prediction markets that I'm familiar with have a terminal payout.  Do you know of ones that successfully track without a terminal payout?

Here is my challenge to you, role play longs and shorts against one another and see if you can manipulate the price without one side digging in.  Keep in mid that longs are competing against other longs and shorts against other shorts.   Then define the direction the market will move and why.
I'm not quite sure what you mean "longs are competing against other longs."  If I'm long, I'd very much like to see an increase in demand for new longs, as this pushes up the price, making my position more profitable. 

Furthermore, my argument isn't based on game theory, and game theory is superfluous in analyzing my argument.  If BitShares is successful, the market will be big, and typical players will be small.  This means they have negligible ability to manipulate the price.  (Of course in practice there are often big players that can manipulate prices at certain points.  That poses further vulnerabilities for BitShares, but my argument doesn't rely on price manipulation).  I'm only assuming agents will act out of their self-interest and/or emotions.  Crazy price fluctuations do not necessitate price manipulators.  They sometimes occur endogenously (black Monday, 1987), and sometimes are triggered by exogenous events such as the Japanese Tsunami and subsequent Fukushima fallout.  When abnormally large deviations in bitUSD vs BTS/USD occur, this creates some level of fear that tracking is failing.  When participants know that the only reason to believe tracking will succeed is if others believe that tracking will succeed, then this fear alone is sufficient to cause tracking to fail.  It has been so many many times in financial history, with assets that gave market participants more incentive to cause them to track than bitUSD vs BTS/USD gives. 

The main mitigating factor that I see with respect to my argument is that your margin requirements are much much higher than is typical in financial markets, so that should result in reduced feedback effects from selling inducing more selling due to solvency pressure.  As I said above though, reducing this feedback is not equivalent to incentivizing convergence.  When (not if) large deviations occur, it's essential that the market have high incentive to reverse the deviation if tracking is to occur.  I just haven't seen what that incentive might be.
PgmorTEHxRm5H8PHmN5fjni4ZZ2cGFDDCa

 

Google+