Bitcoins Chaos is an Opportunity?

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Bitcoin bashing and dilution is not going to work this time just like it has never worked in the past.  In fact, it may kill bitshares this time. 

What is really needed is a PM asset for the blocksize limit, so we can assist miners, merchants, devs, stakeholders and other members of the bitcoin community in determining how to proceed and give a rough, market driven estimate of when to expect this debate to be resolved, and we can showcase one of bitshares features at the same time.  Hopefully this functionality will be ready soon. 

For instance, create a PM asset that says, "Will a block greater than 1mb be produced on the bitcoin blockchain by Dec 31 2016?  Yes or no.  Perhaps two PM assets can be created, one ending on June 30 and  one on Dec 31st, or perhaps even quarterly.  This will provide an example of an actual useful application of bitshares technology, vs dumping a bunch of crapcoins on people.

PM on bitcoin.. why not?!

Just do it!! 

[morpheus]

Bitcoin bashing and dilution is not going to work this time just like it has never worked in the past.  In fact, it may kill bitshares this time. 

What is really needed is a PM asset for the blocksize limit, so we can assist miners, merchants, devs, stakeholders and other members of the bitcoin community in determining how to proceed and give a rough, market driven estimate of when to expect this debate to be resolved, and we can showcase one of bitshares features at the same time.  Hopefully this functionality will be ready soon. 

For instance, create a PM asset that says, "Will a block greater than 1mb be produced on the bitcoin blockchain by Dec 31 2016?  Yes or no.  Perhaps two PM assets can be created, one ending on June 30 and  one on Dec 31st, or perhaps even quarterly.  This will provide an example of an actual useful application of bitshares technology, vs dumping a bunch of crapcoins on people.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Lots of great ideas here... plus:

Create EtherShares UIAs for every coin in the top 100 on CMC and sharedrop them on their own respective communities.  Everything from BitcoinUIA to, um, BitBayUIA. 

Create some urgency - all unclaimed EtherShares gradually trickle into a Fee Backed Asset (FBA) which is gradually auctioned to raise development funds.  These start trading immediately, even if you have to wait two years for the unclaimed EtherShares to trickle in.

Sharedropping the top 100 on CMC makes so much sense in offering value.

Wait until you see how much it costs in fees.

[TravelsAsia]

Lots of great ideas here... plus:

Create EtherShares UIAs for every coin in the top 100 on CMC and sharedrop them on their own respective communities.  Everything from BitcoinUIA to, um, BitBayUIA. 

Create some urgency - all unclaimed EtherShares gradually trickle into a Fee Backed Asset (FBA) which is gradually auctioned to raise development funds.  These start trading immediately, even if you have to wait two years for the unclaimed EtherShares to trickle in.

Sharedropping the top 100 on CMC makes so much sense in offering value.

[Stan]

Yeah, we should have done some ponzi or gambling apps like clam did (isn't that what sharedropping on random BTC accounts is?)

Maybe we can.... uh oh..

too late, Ethereum's Elephant coin just took that idea:

http://coremedia.info/index.php/bitcoin-2-0/item/196-elephant-a-new-wave-of-financial-services-powered-by-ethereum

And there's Vitalik leading riding the horse of the apocalypse:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1309597.msg13526128#msg13526128

From the article:

"Although similar financial platforms such as NXT and Bitshares already exist and provide similar functions, Elephant and its powerful Ethereum backend undoubtedly bring something new to the table."
 


It's just too bad that the world has learned the true fact that BitShares is not at all "powerful" like Ethereum is.


What were you saying again Stan concerning forking Ethereum on BTS?
 

I'm going to go trade on Elephant because it pays me the dividends that BTS couldn't.

EtherShares?

Sharedrop:
30% on BTS holders (they deserve it)
3% on Brownies (Dan and most active BTS Actors)
20% on Bitcoin (bitcoiners confidence is shaken, give them the "most epic thing ever" and watch what happens... 1% on Mike Hearn (to give him reason to continue his efforts to use his voice and bring notice to bitcoin's flaws)
2% on Bitcoin Core Devs (to give them a reason to take notice and hodl)
40% Ethereum (make them feel like they are getting the best deal out of the situation...bts humility on this could make a big difference with their general community)
3% on Vitalik (Gives him a reason to keep it in the back of his mind that he owns quite a bit of them in the event that he starts losing money personally or something else happens that shakes his confidence...those ethershares would just be right there in his mind)
1% to whoever gets EtherShares the most press coverage in a 60-day long competition. 

Lots of great ideas here... plus:

Create EtherShares UIAs for every coin in the top 100 on CMC and sharedrop them on their own respective communities.  Everything from BitcoinUIA to, um, BitBayUIA. 

Create some urgency - all unclaimed EtherShares gradually trickle into a Fee Backed Asset (FBA) which is gradually auctioned to raise development funds.  These start trading immediately, even if you have to wait two years for the unclaimed EtherShares to trickle in.

[fuzzy]

Yeah, we should have done some ponzi or gambling apps like clam did (isn't that what sharedropping on random BTC accounts is?)

Maybe we can.... uh oh..

too late, Ethereum's Elephant coin just took that idea:

http://coremedia.info/index.php/bitcoin-2-0/item/196-elephant-a-new-wave-of-financial-services-powered-by-ethereum

And there's Vitalik leading riding the horse of the apocalypse:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1309597.msg13526128#msg13526128

From the article:

"Although similar financial platforms such as NXT and Bitshares already exist and provide similar functions, Elephant and its powerful Ethereum backend undoubtedly bring something new to the table."
 


It's just too bad that the world has learned the true fact that BitShares is not at all "powerful" like Ethereum is.


What were you saying again Stan concerning forking Ethereum on BTS?
 

I'm going to go trade on Elephant because it pays me the dividends that BTS couldn't.

EtherShares?

Sharedrop:
30% on BTS holders (they deserve it)
3% on Brownies (Dan and most active BTS Actors)
20% on Bitcoin (bitcoiners confidence is shaken, give them the "most epic thing ever" and watch what happens... 1% on Mike Hearn (to give him reason to continue his efforts to use his voice and bring notice to bitcoin's flaws)
2% on Bitcoin Core Devs (to give them a reason to take notice and hodl)
40% Ethereum (make them feel like they are getting the best deal out of the situation...bts humility on this could make a big difference with their general community)
3% on Vitalik (Gives him a reason to keep it in the back of his mind that he owns quite a bit of them in the event that he starts losing money personally or something else happens that shakes his confidence...those ethershares would just be right there in his mind)
1% to whoever gets EtherShares the most press coverage in a 60-day long competition. 

[Empirical1.2]

Well if they really care about the fact Bitcoin isn't stable then our USP is a strong one. That could give us an advantage over any other coin. They're just another one. bitassets aren't. They allow to bet without the price volatility of btc.

But yeah I guess it's just a matter of reaching out to those services and see how it goes

True.

[Akado]

Well if they really care about the fact Bitcoin isn't stable then our USP is a strong one. That could give us an advantage over any other coin. They're just another one. bitassets aren't. They allow to bet without the price volatility of btc.

But yeah I guess it's just a matter of reaching out to those services and see how it goes

[Empirical1.2]

The problems raised by the chinese was regarding dice being implemented in our chain directly. If some service was to add bitAssets I don't see any problem with it. They can gamble with bitassets the same way they already can with bitcoin so that argument isn't really valid I think..

What do you think would be the best option? Sites using bitassets or uias? bitassets need 200% collateral to be created... but since casinos usually pool user's funds and it's like they're playing against each other I think the collateral isn't really an issue here.

This could be one of the best things to happen to BitShares (in theory). It's been proven gambling plays a hue factor in a coins liquidity. Plus it adds to the utility our asset would have and the peg could become better.

The beauty of being on BTS + Smartcoins is that you have no/low risk of hit and runs, seizures, theft which are the problems that plague BTC gambling sites as well as being provably fair & stable. Also Ethereum, including Vitalik himself I believe has written gambling related smart contracts to bring some of those blockchain benefits to gambling, so that's where we're headed anyway.

In terms of UIAs/Smartcoins. I'd like to have a collateral backed smartcoin  but explore ways that the collateral could be made lower and the peg would still hold. (I recently mentioned directing trading fees to the collateral pool and perhaps there's some elements of parking we could take from NuBits too.)

UIA's don't have the same decentralized advantages. So a third party site may as well using an existing option like Tether or even NuBits vs. a UIA issued on BTS.

But I believe atm that's not possible. Funds cannot be taken if they stay on your wallet. Atm you'd probably need to deposit funds on the Dice's pool to be used as bank roll. Then you withdraw. For that you'd need a decentralized Dice. I was talking about current dice sites using our smartcoins.

I believe this could be done in a reasonably easy way.. Though I'm not 100% how they work but a dice site uses users funds as bank roll so you have your biteur or bitusd or bitcnny and send it to the dice's deposit address. It adds to the pool. Then you can play with it. It's up to the site to limit the maximum bet and payout according to how much funds the bank roll has and they all already do that.

I think unlike exchanges, this is way more simple for dice site's and could be achieved. The purpose here would not have your funds safe but bring utility to smartcoins solving the chicken and egg problem.

  Yes getting a third party dice site to accept Smartcoins would add Smartcoin utility, though I'm not sure if it would add that much value as the USP isn't that compelling/unique.

electrons.io had considered being involved in funding and creating one https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20614.msg265900.html#msg265900

You could also consider approaching an existing dice site, but they usually like to see evidence of existing demand via many people voting to have it added etc.

[Akado]

The problems raised by the chinese was regarding dice being implemented in our chain directly. If some service was to add bitAssets I don't see any problem with it. They can gamble with bitassets the same way they already can with bitcoin so that argument isn't really valid I think..

What do you think would be the best option? Sites using bitassets or uias? bitassets need 200% collateral to be created... but since casinos usually pool user's funds and it's like they're playing against each other I think the collateral isn't really an issue here.

This could be one of the best things to happen to BitShares (in theory). It's been proven gambling plays a hue factor in a coins liquidity. Plus it adds to the utility our asset would have and the peg could become better.

The beauty of being on BTS + Smartcoins is that you have no/low risk of hit and runs, seizures, theft which are the problems that plague BTC gambling sites as well as being provably fair & stable. Also Ethereum, including Vitalik himself I believe has written gambling related smart contracts to bring some of those blockchain benefits to gambling, so that's where we're headed anyway.

In terms of UIAs/Smartcoins. I'd like to have a collateral backed smartcoin  but explore ways that the collateral could be made lower and the peg would still hold. (I recently mentioned directing trading fees to the collateral pool and perhaps there's some elements of parking we could take from NuBits too.)

UIA's don't have the same decentralized advantages. So a third party site may as well using an existing option like Tether or even NuBits vs. a UIA issued on BTS.

But I believe atm that's not possible. Funds cannot be taken if they stay on your wallet. Atm you'd probably need to deposit funds on the Dice's pool to be used as bank roll. Then you withdraw. For that you'd need a decentralized Dice. I was talking about current dice sites using our smartcoins.

I believe this could be done in a reasonably easy way.. Though I'm not 100% how they work but a dice site uses users funds as bank roll so you have your biteur or bitusd or bitcnny and send it to the dice's deposit address. It adds to the pool. Then you can play with it. It's up to the site to limit the maximum bet and payout according to how much funds the bank roll has and they all already do that.

I think unlike exchanges, this is way more simple for dice site's and could be achieved. The purpose here would not have your funds safe but bring utility to smartcoins solving the chicken and egg problem.

[Empirical1.2]

The problems raised by the chinese was regarding dice being implemented in our chain directly. If some service was to add bitAssets I don't see any problem with it. They can gamble with bitassets the same way they already can with bitcoin so that argument isn't really valid I think..

What do you think would be the best option? Sites using bitassets or uias? bitassets need 200% collateral to be created... but since casinos usually pool user's funds and it's like they're playing against each other I think the collateral isn't really an issue here.

This could be one of the best things to happen to BitShares (in theory). It's been proven gambling plays a hue factor in a coins liquidity. Plus it adds to the utility our asset would have and the peg could become better.

The beauty of being on BTS + Smartcoins is that you have no/low risk of hit and runs, seizures, theft which are the problems that plague BTC gambling sites as well as being provably fair & stable. Also Ethereum, including Vitalik himself I believe has written gambling related smart contracts to bring some of those blockchain benefits to gambling, so that's where we're headed anyway.

In terms of UIAs/Smartcoins. I'd like to have a collateral backed smartcoin  but explore ways that the collateral could be made lower and the peg would still hold. (I recently mentioned directing trading fees to the collateral pool and perhaps there's some elements of parking we could take from NuBits too.)

UIA's don't have the same decentralized advantages. So a third party site may as well using an existing option like Tether or even NuBits vs. a UIA issued on BTS. 

[Akado]

The problems raised by the chinese was regarding dice being implemented in our chain directly. If some service was to add bitAssets I don't see any problem with it. They can gamble with bitassets the same way they already can with bitcoin so that argument isn't really valid I think..

What do you think would be the best option? Sites using bitassets or uias? bitassets need 200% collateral to be created... but since casinos usually pool user's funds and it's like they're playing against each other I think the collateral isn't really an issue here.

This could be one of the best things to happen to BitShares (in theory). It's been proven gambling plays a hue factor in a coins liquidity. Plus it adds to the utility our asset would have and the peg could become better.

[Empirical1.2]

bitAssets would be ideal for this! With CCEDK's bridge couldn't someone just get bitEUR for example on their favourite dice site too? That would be a major combo.

  I would prefer a dice site on BTS because of the advantages of decentralization to the consumer, but It's particularly appealing to third party gambling sites too because they don't like being exposed to volatility risk.

It's also a pre-requisite if you want to do sports betting because betting on a future event with a small edge and having to worry about BTC volatility is a nightmare.

If you google gambling + volatility + Bitcoin, you'll see plenty of articles describing the same problem.

The first and primary reason for legitimate online casinos not accepting Bitcoins is that Bitcoin fails to meet the criteria of a viable currency due to its volatility.According to a recent report by Goldman Sachs, Bitcoin's volatility rate is at around 108.1% in comparison to most major currencies which float below the 5% mark. That is quite a considerable difference and one can clearly see the risk of holding a currency that may be worth proportionally more or less from one day to the next.

http://www.royalcasinoguide.com/bitcoin-gambling.php

Unfortunately gambling solutions are one of the riskiest for software developers to work on apparently and it may also have implications in the Chinese market, if BTS goes down that road.

However as I've mentioned previously, gambling transactions accounted for up to 50% of BTC volume in the bootstrapping phase up until late 2013 and I think it can do the same for BTS. Once those businesses bootstrap & prove the efficacy of stable smartcoins, then other merchants will follow.

Of course there's also work to be done on Smartcoins to make them more liquid and perhaps even reduce the amount of collateral needed from the short side.

[Akado]

bitAssets would be ideal for this! With CCEDK's bridge couldn't someone just get bitEUR for example on their favourite dice site too? That would be a major combo.

[Empirical1.2]

A 1:1 Bitcoin sharedrop isn't a bad idea but not because you can buy it cheap from dumpers but because there will be very few dumpers.

A new coin with less than $10 million CAP would mean that for every $100 worth of Bitcoin you have, you have <$0.16 of this new coin. So it wouldn't be worth their while to claim.

So you get the PR benefit of a 1:1 mapping but with very little supply on the market until it reaches a MUCH higher valuation.

Noshit, where did this guy come from, and why has nobody been listening to him.

Of course the positive PR benefit overcomes any negative FUD over time.  How do we know?  Because it has been proven (not theoretically, but experimentally).

To be honest, I'm actually a big critic in general of sharedrops/free money because of the price suppressive effects.

BTC is the exception for the reason I mentioned.

Clamcoin did an even more half assed arbitrary sharedrop on BTC/DOGE/LTC, and with zero development (pure 1.0 Peercoin POS fork with no 2.0 anything) and wound up being in the top 25 cryptocurrencies on the planet ($1.5 million dollar community today, and all you can do with clams is send them).

Clamcoin actually had a low market CAP of <$20 000 until mid November 2014.

On December 6th, 2014, it was announced that popular dice site, just-dice would be re-opening and using CLAM.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=884732.0

https://just-dice.com/   (I think it does about $100 000 turnover a day, with $1000 profit atm accepting CLAM)

From mid November (insider knowledge) to Mid December, Clam grew by 3000% and reached 0.005 BTC, twice the value vs. BTC it has today.

So Clam's modest CAP had little to do with the sharedrop imo but was all about the utility of being added to just-dice.

It's also subsequently been added to a few other, mostly gambling related services, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=623147.0 (see their merchants and services section )

I have long been an advocate for introducing dice to BTS, even using just-dice as a case study/example https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20614.0.html