How do the OPEN.X assets work?

[bitsharesbrazil]

if we could have more projects here like peerplays using the system as a tech n using dex to issue their assest it would be a good way to get more  n traction....... I dont know if bitshares graphene is the best system for every project to build over it but would be a great thing be a mother plataform to build thing n issue their assets n trade their assets without thirdy party risk like centrilised exchanges.

probably Im dreamimng too much.......

[cylonmaker2053]

Also, why doesn't the STEEM or MUSE networks, themselves, issue their tokens directly on our DEX? Why go through a third-party OPEN.X issuer? Even if STEEM or MUSE issued their own UIAs on our network with some sort of automatic conversion to their actual tokens, that'd reduce the third party risk and buyers here would just be exposed to direct network value risk for whatever blockchain projects they buy into.

@Bitmaster any plans for STEEM or MUSE to directly issue their own UIAs on our DEX?

[cylonmaker2053]

Great convo, guys, and i like the four points you laid out @dannotestein ...i actually think we have one of the better platforms for implementing robust shorting with no (or really, minimal) counterparty risk. Getting a feed-based smartcoin for some of the most heavily traded cryptocurrencies is an excellent value proposition for our network. We're already doing it for BTC and could easily add ETH, XRP, LTC, NXT, XMR, etc. when conditions indicate it's sensible. What might be even more interesting to traders is a BTC/USD pair (not bitUSD) instead of the BTC/BTS pair we have now. A good trader could easily hedge the BTS exposure of the current pair, but it might just be easier to advertise as a direct USD pair.

[bitsharesbrazil]

Danno, at same time I agree n disagree with you.

I agree,
4) make more coins born in graphene bitshares blockchain, it is pretty great we have peerplays, muse here.....if we could patner with more projects to born here with support that is pretty good way to grow this is pretty much make a decentrilised ecosystem grow from bottom to top, a plataform for projetcs n a exchange for them, decentrilised, top tech. Is there a lot projetcs borning everiday in crypto space, huge market.

I Disagree
2) In my opinion our partnership with openledger is a bless, they are promoting our tech, our bts, they are making it happen for them n for us......open.assets is the way the world works right now......you dont cut it because so you are out of game.....we have to join togheter n grow togheter try to bring transparency for open.assets....good volume for them, better for us, better for our tech, I know bad things can happen but we have to educate people about it

Sidechains I do not understand fully but it only makes sense if it can improve our game, but in a decentrilised way, if we are talking about multisig we could partner with supernet to bring a new player, a new option to people, but Im not sure that is the point but I would be glad to hear more about this.

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with me on 2) about, as I read your message as supporting OPEN. asset coins as a viable trading methodology. I'm a big supporter of 2) for now (on a very technical level, too, as BlockTrades implements and supports the OpenLedger gateways for Ronny). I actually think it's the best solution we can afford now for many coins. But I think we should try 1) for coins we don't have time to support with a full gateway.

Just to clarify what I'm calling a sidechain, it's a truly "trustless" method of sending coins in and out between two different blockchains without requiring any custodian(s). But implementing this isn't a small undertaking, and in the current state of crypto, it would have to be done on a coin-by-coin basis.

Understood n agreed

Smatcoins for me is the easy way to go, for example for eth......it is simple it brings a lot value to bts n use.......but of course people have to accept it n use it n trade it n they just need bts for that, if a bigggggg guy come n start trading 300bitbtc, 100000 bitusd 1000biteth n bring volume people will not care since they know its safer than normal exchange

Its like a said about tether....tether can be a huge problem in the future because people are accepting trust in a honk kong co giving their kyc docs.......crazy, but if most people do that they will keeping doing that
Probably bts, dex, smatcoins cfd need a huge fraud, one more time, or a big player, so we can increase our market share in faster rates

[dannotestein]

Danno, at same time I agree n disagree with you.

I agree,
4) make more coins born in graphene bitshares blockchain, it is pretty great we have peerplays, muse here.....if we could patner with more projects to born here with support that is pretty good way to grow this is pretty much make a decentrilised ecosystem grow from bottom to top, a plataform for projetcs n a exchange for them, decentrilised, top tech. Is there a lot projetcs borning everiday in crypto space, huge market.

I Disagree
2) In my opinion our partnership with openledger is a bless, they are promoting our tech, our bts, they are making it happen for them n for us......open.assets is the way the world works right now......you dont cut it because so you are out of game.....we have to join togheter n grow togheter try to bring transparency for open.assets....good volume for them, better for us, better for our tech, I know bad things can happen but we have to educate people about it

Sidechains I do not understand fully but it only makes sense if it can improve our game, but in a decentrilised way, if we are talking about multisig we could partner with supernet to bring a new player, a new option to people, but Im not sure that is the point but I would be glad to hear more about this.

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with me on 2) about, as I read your message as supporting OPEN. asset coins as a viable trading methodology. I'm a big supporter of 2) for now (on a very technical level, too, as BlockTrades implements and supports the OpenLedger gateways for Ronny). I actually think it's the best solution we can afford now for many coins. But I think we should try 1) for coins we don't have time to support with a full gateway.

Just to clarify what I'm calling a sidechain, it's a truly "trustless" method of sending coins in and out between two different blockchains without requiring any custodian(s). But implementing this isn't a small undertaking, and in the current state of crypto, it would have to be done on a coin-by-coin basis.

[bitsharesbrazil]

Danno, at same time I agree n disagree with you.

I agree,
4) make more coins born in graphene bitshares blockchain, it is pretty great we have peerplays, muse here.....if we could patner with more projects to born here with support that is pretty good way to grow this is pretty much make a decentrilised ecosystem grow from bottom to top, a plataform for projetcs n a exchange for them, decentrilised, top tech. Is there a lot projetcs borning everiday in crypto space, huge market.

I Disagree
2) In my opinion our partnership with openledger is a bless, they are promoting our tech, our bts, they are making it happen for them n for us......open.assets is the way the world works right now......you dont cut it because so you are out of game.....we have to join togheter n grow togheter try to bring transparency for open.assets....good volume for them, better for us, better for our tech, I know bad things can happen but we have to educate people about it

Sidechains I do not understand fully but it only makes sense if it can improve our game, but in a decentrilised way, if we are talking about multisig we could partner with supernet to bring a new player, a new option to people, but Im not sure that is the point but I would be glad to hear more about this.

[dannotestein]

I know of at least four ways we can create tradeable assets on BitShares, and I think all have their place in the future (some now):

1) Smartcoins that allow speculative trading based on feeds with no gateways in or out. These can be used for coins where gateways are difficult to implement for technical or regulatory reasons (everyone knows the regulatory challenges associated with fiat gateways, for example). If witnesses are willing to provide feeds and we have an active committee willing to approve them, we could rapidly enable smartcoin trading for any number of crypto assets. Of course, we may still be faced with the same issue finding people willing to short smartcoins into existence as we have with fiat smartcoins, but I think we might find quite a few people willing to short very speculative crypto coins. I've certainly seen a few I would short.

2) 3rd party-backed UIAs like the OPEN. assets. To support real trading, these need to have gateways associated with them, so there is additional work required to support them. They also bear the risk of the backer being robbed or even an insider embezzling the funds, so it's important we vet them before promoting them.

3) For coins with larger deposit amounts, a multi-sig backed coin can potentially offer additional security versus 2. This is technically feasible, but there's a lot more overhead in supporting these coins, so I think it's only appropriate for assets that represent substantial amounts of money. And doing the first such coin will require a lot of work to create the mechanics for it.

4) The "holy grail" is a true sidechain coin, that allows coins to move from one blockchain to another. This requires a huge amount of work, and in some cases, political agreement between the chains involved. At the current time, I only see this as being appropriate for very top tier coins in terms of trading potential (e.g. Bitcoin, Ethereum, and graphene-based blockchains at the moment).

We're doing 2) today. I think we should experiment with choosing some "hot" coins with non-standard wallet technology that makes gateway implementation a pain for 1). And once I've got some time, I would like to put development effort into 4) for btc and/or ethereum, depending on the state of things when we get there. I'd actually prefer going after 4) before 3), since I think the cost/benefit ratio favors 4).

[bitsharesbrazil]

Thanks a lot guys for the explanations. The OPEN.X UIA concept is awesome, i hope to see it expand as other exchanges come on board like CCEDK is doing as a gateway. I applaud @ccedk for taking on this role and offering the UIAs. The next step should be some sort of escrow service and/or smart contract to lock up collateral against OPEN.X assets to eliminate the counterparty risk of the exchange(s) going under or losing funds.

I dont understand the tech but I think It would be a kind of multisig, right? I really cant see how it could be much different than supernet, I dont know if there is a way to make something completely decentrilised,  what bitshares have with open.asset n bitassets is pretty good......if we had 100000 volume in smartcoins we wouldnt talk about it anymore questioning ourselves why we are not there yet.... People are putting their trust in tether without nothing to back it, only trus it self, that is the point if smarcoins are wide accept they are simple widely accepted with a plus collateral guarantee.

The money needed n what can accomplished can make such such a difference for bts have more volume n awareness n more investors? I cant see so much improving over what we have, but I open to change my mind.

[cylonmaker2053]

Thanks a lot guys for the explanations. The OPEN.X UIA concept is awesome, i hope to see it expand as other exchanges come on board like CCEDK is doing as a gateway. I applaud @ccedk for taking on this role and offering the UIAs. The next step should be some sort of escrow service and/or smart contract to lock up collateral against OPEN.X assets to eliminate the counterparty risk of the exchange(s) going under or losing funds.

[dannotestein]

cool, even with OPEN.STEEM? coinmarketcap doesn't show STEEM trading on CCEDK

OPEN.STEEM is listed here on CMC, although not all associated markets are shown:
http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/steem/#markets
OPEN.STEEM are the 3 OpenLedger listings.
But better data is available here:
http://www.cryptofresh.com/a/OPEN.STEEM

[bitsharesbrazil]

cool, even with OPEN.STEEM? coinmarketcap doesn't show STEEM trading on CCEDK

I didnt deal with open.steem, but it should work 

I can GUARANTEE that open.btc n bitAssets works perfectly......just amazing, very low fee for trade dont need to go anywhere to trade, no KYC.... No signup, no fear of being stolen.... Im delighted  I hope we can.increase liquidity in bitasset n create much more of this...

[cylonmaker2053]

cool, even with OPEN.STEEM? coinmarketcap doesn't show STEEM trading on CCEDK

[bitsharesbrazil]

Yes it works 
I use open.btc to start.....deposit at the adress at my page in openleder n it is credited fast in your account n you can trade....
Do it with a small amount first...you will see it works like a charm

[yvv]

CCEDK guarantees that they exchange their OPEN.x tokens 1:1 against respective coins. If you trust them, you should not worry.

[cylonmaker2053]

I'm interested in trading some of these OPEN.X assets, but not sure how they work? For instance, do I have a 1-to-1 ownership claim on a STEEM, MUSE, or BTC for each OPEN.X token I buy? And if so, how? Who guarantees that trade across networks, from the OPEN.X token on the Bitshares network to the respective blockchain?