Author Topic: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement  (Read 11016 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bitcrab

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1903
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcrab
  • GitHub: bitcrab
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #60 on: December 02, 2015, 05:21:49 am »

it's my fault not to pay enough attention to the force settlement feature in 2.0, you have the opportunity because transwiser kept on selling BitCNY at 1 CNY to the market in past.

the force settlement feature bring additional risks to the shorter, the result is that BitCNY will worth more than 1 CNY, with a variable premium.

merchant/customers need a cryptocurrency that has fixed value,  they just need a simple value transfer media, nothing more, to calculate/check/split the premium need to pay more time/energy/management cost, a BitCNY with variable premium added to 1 CNY is not what the really need.

BitCNY has been a good payment media for merchant/customers,  there have been merchant(BTC38), customers(btc38 users), acceptance dealer(transwiser), now the introduction of the force settle make all the above have no space to stay and only speculators will enjoy.

market need speculators, but if there are only speculators in the market, speculators will find no chance to make profit.

 +5%

I agree with you and I'm glad to see that it worked well as a payment media for merchants/customers in China.  I don't think it's much different here.  That's precisely how I envision bitCash to work.   

very different, one important principle for the design of a currency system is to balance the responsibility, power, and benefit of each role in the market. you can check the design of DAI for reference, there are also force settlement there, but the rule is that the user who request force settlement will pay penalty according to the collateral ratio of the  short position that will be settled, the higher the collateral ratio, the higher the penalty.

this rule make a better balance. and shorter can enter to the market without many worry, and it is possible to peg.

the current rule in BTS2.0 do too much good to bitcny holders, but do bad to shorters, the balance is destroyed.

to peg is also important, what merchant/customers need is a payment media with fixed value, security and convenience, in bts1.0, transwiser can help BitCNY to realize this, but now, there's no chance for transwiser to do the same.


 
Email´╝Ü[email protected]

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12915
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #61 on: December 02, 2015, 09:41:39 am »
[member=4465]alt[/member] X% force settle per day is independent with each asset

When I talk about prices I always think in FIAT prices.  So USD per BTS or USD per BitUSD.  I know this is the opposite of how many in crypto think in terms of their favorite token.

Few understand the whole system.  Many have discussed it, understood it, and since forgot it.   We have to "re-learn" many times unless you live/breath it full time.

http://cryptofresh.com/a/CNY

Max force settle vol   2000

Does 2000 mean 2% or 20%?

2%

We are not so sure about this any more. [member=21903]roadscape[/member] did some analysis of the code:

Quote
generally all percent figures in graphene are based on this:
#define GRAPHENE_100_PERCENT 10000
so if the max_force_settlement_vol is 2,000 that would suggest 20%

also I see this:
#define GRAPHENE_DEFAULT_FORCE_SETTLEMENT_MAX_VOLUME (20* GRAPHENE_1_PERCENT)
[member=5]bytemaster[/member]
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline merivercap

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
    • BitCash
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #62 on: December 02, 2015, 10:22:31 am »

it's my fault not to pay enough attention to the force settlement feature in 2.0, you have the opportunity because transwiser kept on selling BitCNY at 1 CNY to the market in past.

the force settlement feature bring additional risks to the shorter, the result is that BitCNY will worth more than 1 CNY, with a variable premium.

merchant/customers need a cryptocurrency that has fixed value,  they just need a simple value transfer media, nothing more, to calculate/check/split the premium need to pay more time/energy/management cost, a BitCNY with variable premium added to 1 CNY is not what the really need.

BitCNY has been a good payment media for merchant/customers,  there have been merchant(BTC38), customers(btc38 users), acceptance dealer(transwiser), now the introduction of the force settle make all the above have no space to stay and only speculators will enjoy.

market need speculators, but if there are only speculators in the market, speculators will find no chance to make profit.

 +5%

I agree with you and I'm glad to see that it worked well as a payment media for merchants/customers in China.  I don't think it's much different here.  That's precisely how I envision bitCash to work.   

very different, one important principle for the design of a currency system is to balance the responsibility, power, and benefit of each role in the market. you can check the design of DAI for reference, there are also force settlement there, but the rule is that the user who request force settlement will pay penalty according to the collateral ratio of the  short position that will be settled, the higher the collateral ratio, the higher the penalty.

this rule make a better balance. and shorter can enter to the market without many worry, and it is possible to peg.

the current rule in BTS2.0 do too much good to bitcny holders, but do bad to shorters, the balance is destroyed.

to peg is also important, what merchant/customers need is a payment media with fixed value, security and convenience, in bts1.0, transwiser can help BitCNY to realize this, but now, there's no chance for transwiser to do the same.

I agree with you.  There was just some miscommunication.  In my previous comment I just meant  'I don't think there's much difference here [in the US compared to China.]'
BitCash - http://www.bitcash.org 
Beta: bitCash Wallet / p2p Gateway: (https://m.bitcash.org)
Beta: bitCash Trade (https://trade.bitcash.org)

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #63 on: December 02, 2015, 12:11:19 pm »
We are not so sure about this any more. [member=21903]roadscape[/member] did some analysis of the code:

Quote
generally all percent figures in graphene are based on this:
#define GRAPHENE_100_PERCENT 10000
so if the max_force_settlement_vol is 2,000 that would suggest 20%

also I see this:
#define GRAPHENE_DEFAULT_FORCE_SETTLEMENT_MAX_VOLUME (20* GRAPHENE_1_PERCENT)
[member=5]bytemaster[/member]
I ask for correct this parameter to 2% before reenable setltement
because if we enable settlement with parameter 20%, it's enough to attrack an attack.
the commitee don't agree me without your command [member=5]bytemaster[/member]
please give an input

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12915
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #64 on: December 02, 2015, 12:38:09 pm »
the commitee don't agree me without your command [member=5]bytemaster[/member]
It's not about a command ... it's about knowing for certainty if it is 2% or 20% .. if it really was 20% .. then most would definitely agree with you!
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #65 on: December 02, 2015, 01:00:45 pm »
Now if only tinyGiantCancer has used his influence on the committee to change/stop a real problem like this [or SQP] instead of using it to defend his business interest on a none issue...



and yes I do believe in some particular days more than 2% of bitCNY were settled.


NOOOOOOOOOOOO it was stopped for something else...re-enable it right now! deal with this 'new' issue after that!
« Last Edit: December 02, 2015, 01:02:47 pm by tonyk »
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #66 on: December 02, 2015, 01:12:36 pm »
the commitee don't agree me without your command [member=5]bytemaster[/member]
It's not about a command ... it's about knowing for certainty if it is 2% or 20% .. if it really was 20% .. then most would definitely agree with you!
sorry, maybe it's my misunderstand

Offline theoretical

Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #67 on: December 02, 2015, 05:44:45 pm »

According to the code:

Code: [Select]
/** percentage fields are fixed point with a denominator of 10,000 */                                                                                                                                                                       
#define GRAPHENE_100_PERCENT                                    10000                                                                                                                                                                       
#define GRAPHENE_1_PERCENT                                      (GRAPHENE_100_PERCENT/100)   

Before launch I went through every place in the witness_node where percentages are used and standardized most of them to use GRAPHENE_100_PERCENT.  I just now checked the code which handles the max force settlement, and it definitely uses these constants.  So 2000 definitely represents 20%.

You can see that it is currently set to 2000 for BitUSD (and I don't doubt for the other assets as well):

Code: [Select]
>>> get_asset USD
{
   ...
   "issuer": "1.2.0"
...
  "bitasset_data_id": "2.4.21"
}
>>> get_object 2.4.21
{
...
      "maximum_force_settlement_volume": 2000,
...
}

I can state with certainty that it is currently 20%.  It is possible to change with a committee proposal of asset_update_operation.

Great care should be taken on any such proposal to ensure the issuer permissions and flags have the same values as before.
BTS- theoretical / PTS- PZxpdC8RqWsdU3pVJeobZY7JFKVPfNpy5z / BTC- 1NfGejohzoVGffAD1CnCRgo9vApjCU2viY / the delegate formerly known as drltc / Nothing said on these forums is intended to be legally binding / All opinions are my own unless otherwise noted / Take action due to my posts at your own risk

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #68 on: December 02, 2015, 07:25:26 pm »

According to the code:

Code: [Select]
/** percentage fields are fixed point with a denominator of 10,000 */                                                                                                                                                                       
#define GRAPHENE_100_PERCENT                                    10000                                                                                                                                                                       
#define GRAPHENE_1_PERCENT                                      (GRAPHENE_100_PERCENT/100)   

Before launch I went through every place in the witness_node where percentages are used and standardized most of them to use GRAPHENE_100_PERCENT.  I just now checked the code which handles the max force settlement, and it definitely uses these constants.  So 2000 definitely represents 20%.

You can see that it is currently set to 2000 for BitUSD (and I don't doubt for the other assets as well):

Code: [Select]
>>> get_asset USD
{
   ...
   "issuer": "1.2.0"
...
  "bitasset_data_id": "2.4.21"
}
>>> get_object 2.4.21
{
...
      "maximum_force_settlement_volume": 2000,
...
}

I can state with certainty that it is currently 20%.  It is possible to change with a committee proposal of asset_update_operation.

Great care should be taken on any such proposal to ensure the issuer permissions and flags have the same values as before.

Thanks for confirming and clarifying.
If it's not intentionally designed, can Devs make a proposal (to the originally intended one, say 2%?) at the earliest convenience?
[member=3002]theoretical[/member] [member=5]bytemaster[/member]
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline theoretical

Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #69 on: December 02, 2015, 09:57:13 pm »
BTS- theoretical / PTS- PZxpdC8RqWsdU3pVJeobZY7JFKVPfNpy5z / BTC- 1NfGejohzoVGffAD1CnCRgo9vApjCU2viY / the delegate formerly known as drltc / Nothing said on these forums is intended to be legally binding / All opinions are my own unless otherwise noted / Take action due to my posts at your own risk

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3506
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Ander
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #70 on: December 02, 2015, 10:08:28 pm »
We are not so sure about this any more. [member=21903]roadscape[/member] did some analysis of the code:

Quote
generally all percent figures in graphene are based on this:
#define GRAPHENE_100_PERCENT 10000
so if the max_force_settlement_vol is 2,000 that would suggest 20%

also I see this:
#define GRAPHENE_DEFAULT_FORCE_SETTLEMENT_MAX_VOLUME (20* GRAPHENE_1_PERCENT)
[member=5]bytemaster[/member]
I ask for correct this parameter to 2% before reenable setltement
because if we enable settlement with parameter 20%, it's enough to attrack an attack.
the commitee don't agree me without your command [member=5]bytemaster[/member]
please give an input

It was always supposed to be 2% in the first place not 20%  There is a lot less opportunity to abuse the system if you an only force cover 2% of it a day.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #71 on: December 02, 2015, 10:24:09 pm »
We are not so sure about this any more. [member=21903]roadscape[/member] did some analysis of the code:

Quote
generally all percent figures in graphene are based on this:
#define GRAPHENE_100_PERCENT 10000
so if the max_force_settlement_vol is 2,000 that would suggest 20%

also I see this:
#define GRAPHENE_DEFAULT_FORCE_SETTLEMENT_MAX_VOLUME (20* GRAPHENE_1_PERCENT)
[member=5]bytemaster[/member]
I ask for correct this parameter to 2% before reenable setltement
because if we enable settlement with parameter 20%, it's enough to attrack an attack.
the commitee don't agree me without your command [member=5]bytemaster[/member]
please give an input

It was always supposed to be 2% in the first place not 20%  There is a lot less opportunity to abuse the system if you an only force cover 2% of it a day.

How is using one of the features of the system abusing it?

It was 'wrong feeds' before,  and now  is what?
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #72 on: December 02, 2015, 11:23:33 pm »

Created 1.10.21, documented how I created it:  https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/wiki/Howto-propose-committee-actions

thanks, I think we  need to change this for all asset right?
do we must do it one by one?

Offline clayop

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2033
    • View Profile
    • Bitshares Korea
  • BitShares: clayop
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #73 on: December 02, 2015, 11:33:01 pm »

Created 1.10.21, documented how I created it:  https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/wiki/Howto-propose-committee-actions

thanks, I think we  need to change this for all asset right?
do we must do it one by one?

I have the same opinion. We have to update all smartcoins, especially USD.
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline cube

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
  • Bit by bit, we will get there!
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcube
Re: Smart Coins & Forced Settlement
« Reply #74 on: December 03, 2015, 02:17:10 am »

Created 1.10.21, documented how I created it:  https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/wiki/Howto-propose-committee-actions

thanks, I think we  need to change this for all asset right?
do we must do it one by one?

I have the same opinion. We have to update all smartcoins, especially USD.

Voted.

I wonder if there is  a way to make a proposal to update all the bitassets at one go, rather than one bitasset at a time.
ID: bitcube
bitcube is a dedicated witness and committe member. Please vote for bitcube.