Author Topic: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time  (Read 9130 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #15 on: June 27, 2016, 06:27:05 am »
I thought of another main problem, which I will add to the OP. It is regarding Smartcoins themselves. Some people perefer to trade real assets. There are projects that will trade the real assets (supernet and b&c exchange).

Bitshares should give DEX participants a choice whether they want to trade Smartcoins, IOUs (open.BTC, meta.BTC, etc), or the actual tokens themselves.

B&C and Supernet have concocted ways to eliminate the need for smartcoins and IOUs, and this is another way Bitshares' lunch may be eaten. However, smartcoins are still useful to provide leveraged trading. The best solution should incorporate both the real assets AND smartcoins. Then let the market decide which is more valuable.

I am not proposing you all agree that these are problems. I am asking that you admit that these are plausible problems, correct them, then let the market decide who is correct.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2016, 06:29:50 am by CoinHoarder »
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

Offline Yao

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • QQ/WeChat(微信):664349247
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: yao
  • GitHub: imYao
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #16 on: June 27, 2016, 07:18:57 am »
OK, I am pretty much done with the OP pending any other thoughts jumping into my head (or feedback from replies).

Coinhoder,

I will give my input.

Bitshares model is pretty stable.......n is innovative by itself......what bitshares have we can call it 3.0, 4.0....whatever......
Too much people looking for problems because a lot ofcoins had huge pumps n Bitshares "only" made 50% in the last few days.....
I follow a lot of data about bitshares n other projects n can safely say bitshares can explode at any time, it will, it has everything needed to make crypto scene shake hard. be patient about ROI.

This reasoning was not developed based on the past 3 days of market indications, but instead from a year and a half of market indications, and two years worth of many discussions/debates with Bitshares' antagonists on Bitcointalk.

No offense, but the lazy mantra of "Bitshares will explode at any time" and "Liquidity will increase with adoption" has been used for two years with no to little effect. It is time to take matters into our own hands, and realize there are issues with Bitshares that we need to fix.

I would argue Bitshares as we know it today is only 8 months old.. when 2.0 came out it was a giant rest button really. Since then refooting to gain liquidity into the network has taken place. Due to some of the changes some has been lost.

I like some of your suggestions. I understand the idea of appealing to crypto folk and it makes sense in certain ways.

You are proposing we hit the rest button again.. but with no real serious innovation to justify it. At present Steem is going through an experiment that may lead to solving the liquidity problems we see in bitshares today. We are not very far from seeing what the results of that experiment yield, and I would rather see that before making any kind of clear cut plans.

I agree that liquidity is needed, and various projects are actively creating ways to produce that. BlockPOS through merchant adoption for example. Peerplays through online tournament wagering. Openledger with ICOO and all the other projects that make up the pyramid of the decentralized conglomerate.. and so on. There are other projects in the making as well that are not publicly discussed that plan to introduce solutions to liquidity as well, like Freedom Ledger. There is the bitCASH wallet, there is Echo... list goes on.

I don't think bastardizing dpos really provides any value aside from making those that invested thousands in mining equipment happy they got another coin to attempt to get their investments back. :) Believe me, I know the feeling.

While going the ICO route sounds like the latest gravy train to get on, I think it would be particularly challenging for Bitshares. Frankly, anybody can do this.. doesn't need the community to do it.. and the market will decide afterwards.. as bytemaster himself said a few months ago.

I think as long as everyone executes and completes the projects they are working on to take to market, you are going to see our liquidity issues reach a tipping point and no longer be an issue. Look at our transaction volume... its slowly but surely increasing. That is the right direction we want to see.. its just a matter of like [member=42425]bitsharesbrazil[/member] already said.. we just got to be a little patient and just keep doing MORE of what we are doing to reach that tipping point.

Also.. from a value proposition perspective as a reboot ICO offering... the optics of doing an ICO for Bitshares right now would go TERRIBLY bad... as a matter of fact.. I am certain it would be the death blow for Bitshares market cap. It has to do with how messaging is currently handled that would inevitable lead the ICO into a very bad place. Again I say though, anybody could do it if the choose too.

I like to hear more ideas on creating liquidity though.. its a good discussion to have.
+5%

BitShares3.0 is bad, BitShares 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, ... is bad too. The price of BTS has already explained everything -- changing MAX SUPPLY of BTS is a very bad idea.
It's terrible to lose trust, especially in the area of the BlockChain, random changes to the maximum supply will allow people to avoid and far away.

We just need to go along with the current direction of BitShares 2.0, we only need to make the use of BitShares 2.0 to build a model of the business model, people will see it.
BTS witness: witness.yao
BTS Proxy: yao

Offline svk

Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #17 on: June 27, 2016, 11:00:59 am »
I appreciate the effort put into the OP, but I have to disagree with most of it. The one thing I do agree with is point 2: the liquidity proposals. I do think some kind of liqudity incentives need to be implemented, but we probably need some more discussion and some concrete proposals by developers able to implement them ([member=18687]abit[/member] ?) before we decide what to do here.

Otherwise, I'm happy to finally see some stability in terms of features for Bitshares, and will not support any kind of 3.0 involving a change in the supply or IPO. We now have Ronny from Openledger stepping up to support development of the GUI, and many other projects taking advantage of the recent stability of BTS, let's not jeopardise that.

I also have no problems whatsoever with DPOS as the consensus model, it's been working very well and there's no point changing it if you ask me. While implementing a queued mining system like Steem has might be possible, I don't really think it's worth the effort. Mining will slowly disappear from crypto if you ask me so we would be adding support for a legacy, wasteful, soon-to-be obsolete system. Keep in mind I'm not saying it will disappear soon here, but over time I think it will become less and less important.
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline Yao

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • QQ/WeChat(微信):664349247
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: yao
  • GitHub: imYao
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #18 on: June 27, 2016, 11:06:28 am »
I appreciate the effort put into the OP, but I have to disagree with most of it. The one thing I do agree with is point 2: the liquidity proposals. I do think some kind of liqudity incentives need to be implemented, but we probably need some more discussion and some concrete proposals by developers able to implement them ([member=18687]abit[/member] ?) before we decide what to do here.

Otherwise, I'm happy to finally see some stability in terms of features for Bitshares, and will not support any kind of 3.0 involving a change in the supply or IPO. We now have Ronny from Openledger stepping up to support development of the GUI, and many other projects taking advantage of the recent stability of BTS, let's not jeopardise that.

I also have no problems whatsoever with DPOS as the consensus model, it's been working very well and there's no point changing it if you ask me. While implementing a queued mining system like Steem has might be possible, I don't really think it's worth the effort. Mining will slowly disappear from crypto if you ask me so we would be adding support for a legacy, wasteful, soon-to-be obsolete system. Keep in mind I'm not saying it will disappear soon here, but over time I think it will become less and less important.
+5%

OpenLedger is a big customer of BitShares 2.0 now, so it is willing to support the development of GUI. Now we just need more big customers like OpenLedger, they will have a variety of needs and to support the development of BitShares. Compared with the way through the project budget (Workers) supports the development of, this can better promote the benign development of BitShares. Reserve funds ( worker budget) should be used in the development of the core.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2016, 11:27:35 am by Yao »
BTS witness: witness.yao
BTS Proxy: yao

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12900
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #19 on: June 27, 2016, 11:26:22 am »
I appreciate the effort put into the OP, but I have to disagree with most of it. The one thing I do agree with is point 2: the liquidity proposals. I do think some kind of liqudity incentives need to be implemented, but we probably need some more discussion and some concrete proposals by developers able to implement them ([member=18687]abit[/member] ?) before we decide what to do here.

Otherwise, I'm happy to finally see some stability in terms of features for Bitshares, and will not support any kind of 3.0 involving a change in the supply or IPO. We now have Ronny from Openledger stepping up to support development of the GUI, and many other projects taking advantage of the recent stability of BTS, let's not jeopardise that.

I also have no problems whatsoever with DPOS as the consensus model, it's been working very well and there's no point changing it if you ask me. While implementing a queued mining system like Steem has might be possible, I don't really think it's worth the effort. Mining will slowly disappear from crypto if you ask me so we would be adding support for a legacy, wasteful, soon-to-be obsolete system. Keep in mind I'm not saying it will disappear soon here, but over time I think it will become less and less important.
+5%

I can see merits from mining when it comes to building a "community" .. In Steem, the whole platform DEPENDS on a community, while in BitShares, the platform depends on business partners, traders and liquidity .. That's why I agree with svk that mining BTS (compromising max supply) makes no sense for BTS.
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline Yao

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • QQ/WeChat(微信):664349247
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: yao
  • GitHub: imYao
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #20 on: June 27, 2016, 11:33:13 am »
I appreciate the effort put into the OP, but I have to disagree with most of it. The one thing I do agree with is point 2: the liquidity proposals. I do think some kind of liqudity incentives need to be implemented, but we probably need some more discussion and some concrete proposals by developers able to implement them ([member=18687]abit[/member] ?) before we decide what to do here.

Otherwise, I'm happy to finally see some stability in terms of features for Bitshares, and will not support any kind of 3.0 involving a change in the supply or IPO. We now have Ronny from Openledger stepping up to support development of the GUI, and many other projects taking advantage of the recent stability of BTS, let's not jeopardise that.

I also have no problems whatsoever with DPOS as the consensus model, it's been working very well and there's no point changing it if you ask me. While implementing a queued mining system like Steem has might be possible, I don't really think it's worth the effort. Mining will slowly disappear from crypto if you ask me so we would be adding support for a legacy, wasteful, soon-to-be obsolete system. Keep in mind I'm not saying it will disappear soon here, but over time I think it will become less and less important.
+5%

I can see merits from mining when it comes to building a "community" .. In Steem, the whole platform DEPENDS on a community, while in BitShares, the platform depends on business partners, traders and liquidity .. That's why I agree with svk that mining BTS (compromising max supply) makes no sense for BTS.
+5%

COMPROMISING MAX SUPPLY? Absolutely not!
BTS witness: witness.yao
BTS Proxy: yao

Offline karnal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1068
    • View Profile
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #21 on: June 27, 2016, 12:19:43 pm »
The only major issue with bitshares right now is volume.

And the complete transparency of the blockchain (lack of privacy).
And a few minor others  :o

Offline lil_jay890

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
    • View Profile
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #22 on: June 27, 2016, 02:16:09 pm »
I agree that liquidity is the most important thing we need to get going in order to increase the BTS toke value... I think it can be done in a less aggressive way than what the OP is suggesting.

We need to focus on forex traders.  This is the demographic that the Dex is geared toward already.  There is a common belief that we need microscopic fee's to entice traders.  That's not true.  Traders demand liquidity and are HAPPY to pay a fee as long as there accounts are secure and there orders are filled immediately.  A fee of .10-.25 per filled trade is so small a trader wouldn't even blink an eye.  [member=32211]Empirical1.2[/member]  has had a few good posts about increasing liquidity.

If we are able to increase liquidity on a few smartcoins then traders will come.  Once the traders start trading, bts will finally be generating a profit.  By generating a profit BTS becomes more like a company and its shares become more attractive.  Speculators enter the system and buy BTS while also trading and dabbling within the system therefore creating more liquidity for smartcoins.  More liquidity means more traders means more fees means more profit means higher BTS price.  It's a circle and can be done without a hardfork.

I do agree with some here, that a hardfork snaphshot that changes the supply would be the death knell for BTS.

Offline karnal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1068
    • View Profile
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #23 on: June 27, 2016, 02:57:42 pm »
I agree that liquidity is the most important thing we need to get going in order to increase the BTS toke value... I think it can be done in a less aggressive way than what the OP is suggesting.

We need to focus on forex traders.  This is the demographic that the Dex is geared toward already.  There is a common belief that we need microscopic fee's to entice traders.  That's not true.  Traders demand liquidity and are HAPPY to pay a fee as long as there accounts are secure and there orders are filled immediately.  A fee of .10-.25 per filled trade is so small a trader wouldn't even blink an eye.  [member=32211]Empirical1.2[/member]  has had a few good posts about increasing liquidity.

If we are able to increase liquidity on a few smartcoins then traders will come.  Once the traders start trading, bts will finally be generating a profit.  By generating a profit BTS becomes more like a company and its shares become more attractive.  Speculators enter the system and buy BTS while also trading and dabbling within the system therefore creating more liquidity for smartcoins.  More liquidity means more traders means more fees means more profit means higher BTS price.  It's a circle and can be done without a hardfork.

I do agree with some here, that a hardfork snaphshot that changes the supply would be the death knell for BTS.

One hundred percent.

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #24 on: June 27, 2016, 03:04:50 pm »
I agree that liquidity is the most important thing we need to get going in order to increase the BTS toke value... I think it can be done in a less aggressive way than what the OP is suggesting.

We need to focus on forex traders.  This is the demographic that the Dex is geared toward already.  There is a common belief that we need microscopic fee's to entice traders.  That's not true.  Traders demand liquidity and are HAPPY to pay a fee as long as there accounts are secure and there orders are filled immediately.  A fee of .10-.25 per filled trade is so small a trader wouldn't even blink an eye.  [member=32211]Empirical1.2[/member]  has had a few good posts about increasing liquidity.

If we are able to increase liquidity on a few smartcoins then traders will come.  Once the traders start trading, bts will finally be generating a profit.  By generating a profit BTS becomes more like a company and its shares become more attractive.  Speculators enter the system and buy BTS while also trading and dabbling within the system therefore creating more liquidity for smartcoins.  More liquidity means more traders means more fees means more profit means higher BTS price.  It's a circle and can be done without a hardfork.

I do agree with some here, that a hardfork snaphshot that changes the supply would be the death knell for BTS.

Which posts by em1.2 about liquidity in particular did you think were best?

What do you propose would be the most attractive value proposition to forex traders?
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline yvv

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #25 on: June 27, 2016, 03:37:00 pm »
Forking bitshares now would be a suicide for bitshares-2,3,4... Those who dream to get rich fast due to skyrocketing of BTS token just made a bad investment.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2016, 03:38:41 pm by yvv »

Offline pc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1526
    • View Profile
    • Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko?
  • BitShares: cyrano
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #26 on: June 27, 2016, 04:26:30 pm »
I appreciate the effort put into the OP, but I have to disagree with most of it.

+1

IMO DPOS is one of the biggest strengths of BitShares, since it provides a provable level of security for near zero cost. I could hardly care less if "the crypto community" (whoever that may be) disagrees.

Liquidity is our main problem, yes, but so far I haven't seen a convincing solution.

3b is a good idea.
Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko? ISBN 978-3-8442-6568-2 http://bitcoin.quisquis.de

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #27 on: June 27, 2016, 05:28:37 pm »
Again, the first step is admitting you have a problem. That is the hardest hurdle. I can see most of you cannot admit/realize that these are all huge problems Bitshares faces. I see a lot of groupthink, which is unfortunate for the future of Bitshares. Don't shoot me- I am the messenger. Unlike most of you, I spend 98% of my time in the greater cryptocurrency community- not sequestered in Bitsharesland and Steemitland. I have conversed and debated with many people that do not use Bitshares over the past 2 years, mainly on the Bitcointalk forums (where I have 3.3k+ posts.) These issues always come up as being the reason why people don't like or use Bitshares. Say what you will about how your strategy is working and liquidity will improve (I would refer you to the scoreboard... the value of the BTS token). Say what you will about dPoS (the antagonists will continue to write Bitshares off because of it). Say what you will about OpenLedger solving all of Bitshares problems (but remember the whole point of a DEX is to eliminate trusted third parties and IOUs). Say what you will about Smartcoins (some people will always prefer to hold/trade the tokens of the real assets).

I am having "deja vu". I gave a similar talk to the Litecoin cryptocurrency community in 2014. At the time, they were #2 on coinmarketcap and at the top of the alt coin food chain. Their problem was that Litecoin lacked any innovation compared to most other newer cryptocurrencies. It was, and still is to this day, being propped up by its network effect. I begged and pleaded that they break rank with Bitcoin (stop copying it code line for code line) and branch out on its own innovative path. Then, Ethereum came along and surpassed Litecoin by a wide margin and it is now valued at over a billion dollars. I knew innovation would eventually win out, as relying on network effects can only get you so far. Two years later, my prediction is starting to take place and Litecoin has reverted to the #4 cryptocurrency on coinmarketcap. Is the same thing going to happen with Bitshares? If it does, then maybe people will start to listen to me when I give "the talk" to a 3rd cryptocurrency community... whoever that may be in the future. lol  :P

Q: What is Bitshares positioning itself to be?
A: A decentralized cryptocurrency exchange.

Q: Who uses cryptocurrency exchanges?
A: The cryptocurrency community.

In order for a cryptocurrency exchange to be successful, it must have the general support of the cryptocurrency community. At this time, Bitshares does not have the general support of the cryptocurrency community. Maybe you all have spent too much time sequestered in this community to realize this, but dPoW is a big reason why a lot of cryptocurrency users have written off Bitshares. It always comes up when anyone mentions Bitshares on Bitcointalk. PoS is considered as being less secure than PoW, and for good reasons (of which I don't care to diving into.) Implementing a PoW hybrid would be a way to appease these types of people in the cryptocurrency community that have written Bitshares off based solely on the fact it is secured by dPoS.

You guys also don't seem to get the need for drastic liquidity measures. It is a chicken and egg problem if you continue down the same road, and therefore sufficient liquidity/depth will never be reached. Where Bitshares is headed is a dead end, and someone will come along and eat Bitshares' lunch. That is guaranteed.

Another reason people don't like the DEX are the inherent weaknesses with Smartcoins, and maybe you guys don't get that either? Reliance on trusted third parties is not the solution (open ledger, meta exchange, etc), as the point of a DEX is to eliminate trusted third parties. Supernet and B&C Exchange will trade the REAL assets... not smartcoins and not open ledger IOUs. Maybe you all fail to see how this is a huge advantage when it comes to competition against DEXs? open.BTC, meta.BTC, etc, should be a means to an end, not the solution as you guys are hoping it will be. IOUs will always be IOUs, and suffer the inherent shortcomings that all IOUs do.

Then, of course, there is the huge dislike of Larimer & Co. throughout the greater cryptocurrency community.
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #28 on: June 27, 2016, 05:44:15 pm »
Maybe you all have spent too much time sequestered in this community to realize this, but dPoW is a big reason why a lot of cryptocurrency users have written off Bitshares.

I realize it, but they are wrong. If they are ignorant about the benefits of DPoS over PoW, then we can try to educate them. But if they refuse to listen to reason (which so far seems to be the case), then that's unfortunate. We have created the internal combustion engine, and you are asking us to go back to horse and buggy because that is what some of the people in the cryptocurrency crowd are comfortable with. I refuse.

My hope is some of them wake up after fully realizing that even Ethereum is switching from PoW to PoS and that it isn't going to be some security disaster.

Offline bitsharesbrazil

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
Re: Bitshares 3.0 - It Is Time
« Reply #29 on: June 27, 2016, 06:06:58 pm »
Be patient coinhoarder, people will tell whatever they want when things dont go their way......or when they decide to sell at a loss......remeber that btc was dead when mtgox vanished?
More services like openledger in dex all around world is a good things, imagine bitfinex.btc, not bad it would increase our atmosphere around dex n it would have a network effect over smartasset n we could bring more transparency for exchange.assets n less costs involved, they dont need to pay fully for development n can share with other costs, virtuous cycle, they can have a bridge btween them making everything decentrilized n interconnected.
bitcointalk ANN https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1084460.0
chat, post, promote it!!!!!!!! Stan help to improve OP!