Bolstering DEX Liquidity (previously my rant/opinion on Bitshares' DEX)

[JonnyB]

@CoinHoarder

"B&C will allow the exchange of real assets"

How does it allow the exchange of real assets?

[xeroc]

@all the others: please stop blaming CNX for trying to be a competitive and profitable company. If they don't make their money they will disappear and the consequence of that will be that Dan has to work for Google or someone even worse!!

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

I suggest we start with shamelessly admitting that Nushares/Nubits/B&C Exchange have a quality (albeit different) solution to the same problem, and that merging those solutions into Bitshares so they can exist in harmony with SmartCoins is advantageous for both shareholders and "customers". From there, let Bitshares' users/customers decide which implementations they prefer. I think we would still have an advantage if we can get both solutions (SmartCoins and Nushares' and B&Cs' implementations) working harmoniously. An advantage in exposure, market cap, and utility due to all our other features. Let's make sure we secure the decentralized exchange market before branching off too much.

Sounds all good to me! As you said, screw the shareholders.. just do it.

So you seem to have an interest in this and have a vision for it. So what practical steps do you propose to take next?

Is this something outside the realm of something you can execute yourself?

If so, do you need someone to work with you to plan and execute?

Please keep going.. this was a great post.. it just needs to keep on moving towards it's logical conclusion.

[Xypher]

Really well written points by someone that does give a fuck about long term viability and profit.
Can't possibly agree more with you. Here's what I'd mentioned a few days back personally

I'm the only one that think this is bad idea?

Nope. I feel outnumbered here too.

What are the difference between future fees or vested dilution? Help me?

1 - Future fees are not known, probably a lot more.

2 - Future fees causes political issues, for instance, the community could decide that the stealth should be the default transfer method and charge more for non stealth transactions, the people or group of people holding stealth BTA would say NO!.

3 - Future fees complicate things, create systemic risks with some people or group owning some network features.

I really think we should be united as BTS as all interests of all participants. And always clear of any form of future debt beside vesting. And knowing all workers cost on advance.

Very elegantly said. I don't see the point of even having a blockchain if we're just going to sell out every incoming feature to those willing to put cash on the table. That's how the centralized financial system currently works and I'm here because I favor a paradigm change.

To someone of communist mindset this FBA is offensive.

I'm not a communist and I find the FBA proposition offensive.

We've seen how capitalism works with regulations, checks and balances, and we're seeing how it works when you let investors and businesses control everything. I favor the former, but believe this is a step towards the later.

inb4 patronizing posts telling me to sell and leave if I don't like: I've already adjusted my holdings and I'm spending less time at these forums. "this is 'murca and if you don't like it you can GIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT OUT!"  It's sad that the most promising prospect for change that I've ever seen is opting to go this route. It really bothers me. Sorry for having an opinion and expressing it.

Really important point here.
Going to speak on a personal basis - and am sorry if the following post offends anyone. I don't intend to piss people off, just want to share my honest opinion.


1. We have the groundwork for an amazing crypto here. A vibrant community, decentralized decision making via committees (although voting is not clear to me) and most importantly, insanely quick transactions that can scale to the needs of a global user base.

2. We do have something that's almost close to a decentralized form of governance with the committee system in place, but there's literally no documentation whatsoever nor a means for a person that's not a dev to really partake in it. In addition, its not sensitive to the needs of a global user base. For instance, there's no way we can have a committee with representations from key markets like China or a major demographic like gamers.

3. The FBA system is incredible - from the pov of someone that's about to raise funds. Yes, I can "theoretically" pledge my "theoretical" tx fees from the future to users here and "theoretically" raise funds. I use theoretically, because hey.. we haven't had a successful fund raise yet. In terms of legality, i don't know how different this is from a UIA, where I can simply say "I'll pledge my ref to the backers of the project" , or we can go the route of traditional VC's and say, I pledge x percent to the backers . Again, the legality of this is largely in murky waters because its not clear yet. From the eyes of an average consumer, this is a very innovative way to raise funds, but from what I know of banking..organizations repeatedly find ways to raise funds via multiple complicated systems when there's no actual economic growth going on. Remember subprime mortgage and the tech stock crash of 2000's? This is what it truly reminds me of.

4. Worker proposals are cool. Agreed. But beyond CNX and a few others that have been involved with the community for years we have neither attracted talent nor had individuals putting forward proposals. From my experience, I find worker proposals a zero sum game because it takes time to raise funds that way and in most cases given the declining markets of BTS (currently) - associated risks are way too high when we take exchange rates into consideration.

5. It is sad that CNX would focus on what an individual would offer them to build instead of having the collective requirements of us as a community needs. I am by no means blaming CNX here, but pointing the fact that our ecosystem may not be as vibrant as it should be. We have collectively failed to attract talent, infuse capital and build an ecosystem where we don't have to depend solely on CNX to build the things we need.  The reason for this being
(i) complexity of understanding the system
(ii) lack of documentation
(iii) on-going politics and underlying personal motivations and agendas

6. If we are to see a change in the way things are, we'll need
(i) - effective forms of governance and decision making.
CNX has laid the groundwork with the committee system but I am yet to see how its effective

(ii) Effective means of fund raising and backing projects
-How come only a handful of projects have fund raised with UIA's ? Nxt's ecosystem is a very good example of this.
SecureAE is an extremely efficient system in handling such user cases (although I've experienced bugs)

(iii) Open towards International Communities
Solely releasing PR in 15 languages won't do the job. We'll need to understand user cases and local markets efficiently to penetrate markets. Resource persons from each demographic need to be bought on board, paid if need be - and learned from to create better products.

(iv) Empower entrepreneurs
As an entrepreneur, I can attest the fact that yes, this ecosystem is very confusing. We need to put individuals that are reliable, trustworthy and capable to help onboard businesses and nurture businesses within the ecosystem. Why don't we have a community backed accelerator of sorts. Pooled funds to invest into x number of startups for y amount of equity. Performance tracked every quarter. This will be largely capitalistic in nature, but its something we should look into. I am happy to dedicate time into something of this nature if we are up for it.

FBA isn't about capitalism vs socialism. Its about our combined failure to create redundant systems that are non reliant solely on CNX to define the future of what a decentralized currency that works almost at the speeds of NASDAQ can be.

My .32 bts, because as mentioned earlier... I can't send you guys 2 and 30 bts would now go to the network.
-Xypher

[clayop]

 

IMHO, we had to complete exchange features first, such as BSIP 4 and market making bots, then dive into stealth transfer feature.

[CoinHoarder]

Everyone has been so negative around here lately, so it sucks I need to write this post but I would like to give my candid opinion on a few matters. I was recently called a "brown noser"... that is hilarious because that is and never has been the case as yet again evidenced by this post. I just prefer we all talk to each other decently while still allowing people to freely dissent. I do not like the direction the project is heading. I have been investing because I still believe in the underlying technology and Bytemaster, but there are apparent risks ahead of us and I feel less certain about the future of Bitshares than ever before.

Bitshares needs to start thinking about its customers every now and then rather than making all decisions purely based on its shareholders (more than half of which seemed OK with the stealth proposal as it is regardless.) That is a sure fire way to put a company out of business. Being that it is so early in the game, Bitshares needs to cater more to the consumer/customer rather than just to shareholders. IMO- the price has been falling forever, at this point screw the shareholders. The only chance of righting the ship is to cater to customers/consumers and grow the Bitshares brand before we are crushed by the competition.

Nushares/B&C Exchange is behind us as far as volume and market cap, but I think they are really gaining steam. They are positioning themselves to completely take over the original target market of Bitshares (a decentralized exchange.) B&C will allow the exchange of real assets (not derivatives), and Nubits is way more liquid than BitAssets. We technically have the better solution, but because of that better solution we have no liquidity, and because there's no liquidity no one uses it, and without anyone using bitassets Bitshares tokens will eventually end up useless.

Maybe Bytemaster already realizes this and is trying to pivot the direction of Bitshares (regarding stealth transactions and mutual aid societies). To pivot is certainly one option. A second option would be to simply copy Nushare's implementation and let Bitshares' customers choose in between the technologies by using the free market and letting it work itself out over time (IMO the second option should have been taken a year ago, but of course hindsight is 20/20.) Many cryptocurrencies borrow ideas from other cryptocurrencies, there is nothing to be ashamed about that... that is how opensourced ecosystems operate.

Dilute my shares as much as you want AND create as many FBAs as you need. Bitshares needs to stay ahead in this race or else it will quickly be left behind. Shareholders, be prepared to dilute like crazy and give up future profit sources in the short term in order to have a chance to not be crushed by the competition. Otherwise, we can all just wait to be crushed by the competition. Owning 1% of a billion dollar company is better than 99% of a million dollar company, and 1 million users spending 1 BTS on fees per transaction spend more on fees 1 thousand users spending 999 BTS on fees per transaction.

Short term greed (in the case of shareholders continually raising fees) and pride (in the case of dismissing Nushares' and B&C Exchanges' implementations) will kill this company like it has many companies before it. Stealth transfers and Mutual Aid Societies (although they will help) will not save this project. Both of those projects certainly need to be completed, but still more work needs to be done and I don't think many shareholders realize that.

I suggest we start with shamelessly admitting that Nushares/Nubits/B&C Exchange have a quality (albeit different) solution to the same problem, and that merging those solutions into Bitshares so they can exist in harmony with SmartCoins is advantageous for both shareholders and "customers". From there, let Bitshares' users/customers decide which implementations they prefer. I think we would still have an advantage if we can get both solutions (SmartCoins and Nushares' and B&Cs' implementations) working harmoniously. An advantage in exposure, market cap, and utility due to all our other features. Let's make sure we secure the decentralized exchange market before branching off too much.