Smart Coins & Forced Settlement

[tonyk]

I will assume you are talking to me [as per the 'mindless'] remark.

you have a very wrong ideas for most of the content of your last post... I have never taken any kind of turn on my take on Nubits
[to be totally honest my take preceded BM's with at least a good few hours]. Nor do I foresee changing my view anytime soon...or ever.

So even if I have never used the word scam, it is simply because I have not seen the evil intent show itself... and so I prefer to call it endless stupidity...idiocy and alike. Anyone caring to check or ask will be fully aware that my disdain for this project is stronger than just about anyone's I have come across.

###
Now on the 'under collateralized speculators' comments. This is indeed the topic, I wish we can open a new thread, where I can help you with your brain washed (mindless) take on things.

[Erlich Bachman]

here, I think you took a wrong turn back there

www.nubits.com

notice they advertise themselves as a "stable value" coin not "face value guaranteed"

tell them we said "hi"

and that not only is bitUSD simply  "stable" but "guaranteed face value" unlike any other coin in the history of the world

but then again, what do greedy under collateralized speculators care of "mindless" world history and the pursuit of the unprecedented

[tonyk]

Personally I find mindless pumps as destructive as mindless complains...but I do realize this a minority take on things.

[Erlich Bachman]

what's the problem?

can't seem to waste enough of BM's time?

bitUSD is a crypto with a solid $1 price floor. it's that simple.

who pays the price (guaranteed liquidity) which allows for this unique store of value to exist?

dumb shorts who try to get away with posting little to no collateral (smart shorts post adequate collateral)

anyone else getting hurt here besides wealthy speculators who can afford such low collateralized gambles?

nope

so why should we have to listen to rich kids cry? can we have a separare forum page for low collateralized shorts who took a gamble trying to get something for nothing (rich quick) and lost?
 
please? I'll donate to fund it, because this wasting of BM's time is getting out of hand Mr. Speculator.

So now that the Transwire's grand opening bitCNY sale has ended, can we please let BM get back to doing productive shit like making our bond market or anon feature and quit bitching about the pigs that get slaughtered?  it happens by definition.

If you want a Nubitz clone, make one and issue it as a UIA, otherwise back to work. Lunch break is over.

bitUSD is simply a private key that allows you to store US dollars on it, and still sleep easy knowing that you can always sell them for face value

what is bitUSD?

face value USD

does any other USD crypto token guarantee "face value"?

no?

well I'm just glad that I live in a world where a face value USD crypto token exists.

bitUSD guarantees face value

Anybody here who wants to give up our first mover advantage on a

GUARANTEED FACE VALUE USD CRYPTO

must be working for the competition. Crybabies please go back to NuBitz and leave the talent alone. They are busy building shit like

the world's first and only FACE VALUE GUARANTEED CRYPTO usd

can we move on now please?

because "Face Value Coin" is not going anywhere. you can compete with it, and I wish you luck, but the cat is now out of th bag, and it aint going back. BTW, have you tried sending bitcoin lately? It's fucking caveman coin. Sorry, but no, we are not going backwards here. FVC is here to stay.

and no shit FVC costs more than a buck to buy. Why? Because it can be sold for "FV guaranteed"

derp

now somebody please delete these crying threads. they are boring and distracting the new business customers who are just now trying out the wallet for the first time. Remember  your first time?

[tonyk]

if the price of gold rockets 50% tomorrow and I want sell it I can't.

At 2% max settlement per day the chances are other gold speculators will take the 2% for themselves leaving every other bitgold holder with a smartcoin pegged to nothing.

Sorry, I do not think I followed your logic.

But yes, it has always been meant as psychological (never used) comfort pillow for the asset holders. Not a main tool for them, to say nothing about speculators wanting to catch the instance they think the price is at its best....all this is my take only, of course.

###############

Another good answer is - of course you can. just like in any other market, you can sell it in the market.

[JonnyB]

We are we changing from 20% max settlement to 2% ?

With a supply of $115000 this means the community can only settle $2300

If I or someone else settles $2300 per day it means nobody else will be able to setlle at all which doesn't seem right.

everyone said CNY feed price was wrong which has been fixed so what's the reason for a 90% drop in daily settlements?

Leave it at 20% where it is.

@bytemaster did you mean to set it at 20% or 2%?

Jonny this dubious, never existing, highly unprofitable business was non existing even in its heyday [do not trust bitcrab, alt or anybody else who was telling you otherwise, or how dangerous it was for the shorts or how much the shorts can lose by it]

and 'yes' the design has always been aiming at about 1% max force settlement per day.

so say I want to speculate on the gold price and buy 1 ounce of bitGOLD because I hear it is a safe pegged asset.

if the price of gold rockets 50% tomorrow and I want sell it I can't.

At 2% max settlement per day the chances are other gold speculators will take the 2% for themselves leaving every other bitgold holder with a smartcoin pegged to nothing.

[tonyk]

We are we changing from 20% max settlement to 2% ?

With a supply of $115000 this means the community can only settle $2300

If I or someone else settles $2300 per day it means nobody else will be able to setlle at all which doesn't seem right.

everyone said CNY feed price was wrong which has been fixed so what's the reason for a 90% drop in daily settlements?

Leave it at 20% where it is.

@bytemaster did you mean to set it at 20% or 2%?

Jonny this dubious, never existing, highly unprofitable business of yours was non existing even in its heyday [do not trust bitcrab, alt or anybody else who was telling you otherwise, or how dangerous it was for the shorts or how much the shorts can lose by it]

and 'yes' the design has always been aiming at about 1% max force settlement per day.

PS
Congrats on achieving 5 min of content on 7 sec of info, btw.

[JonnyB]

We are we changing from 20% max settlement to 2% ?

With a supply of $115000 this means the community can only settle $2300

If I or someone else settles $2300 per day it means nobody else will be able to setlle at all which doesn't seem right.

everyone said CNY feed price was wrong which has been fixed so what's the reason for a 90% drop in daily settlements?

Leave it at 20% where it is.

@bytemaster did you mean to set it at 20% or 2%?

[cube]

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.

[clayop]

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.

[alt]

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?

[tonyk]

We are not so sure about this any more. @roadscape did some analysis of the code:

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)

@bytemaster

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 @bytemaster
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?

[Ander]

We are not so sure about this any more. @roadscape did some analysis of the code:

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)

@bytemaster

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 @bytemaster
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.

[theoretical]

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

[clayop]

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?
@theoretical @bytemaster