Author Topic: BitUSD vs CoinoUSD  (Read 7443 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gentso1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 931
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: gentso
They could be the next Liberty Reserve if the US thinks they are.

Except they are run out of the UK :)

You think if the US asked their good friends in the UK to seize some money for them they wouldn't do it?

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Coino reminds me of eGold, which was shut down by the feds. It wasn't bad, but not that exciting either. It also had a far better name than Coino, which sounds like a joke.
Quote
Beavis: I am The Great Coino. I need TP for my Bunghole.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Coino reminds me of eGold, which was shut down by the feds. It wasn't bad, but not that exciting either. It also had a far better name than Coino, which sounds like a joke.

Offline hughmanwho

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
They could be the next Liberty Reserve if the US thinks they are.

Except they are run out of the UK :)

Offline bigcat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
    • View Profile
They could be the next Liberty Reserve if the US thinks they are.

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
How is this CoinoUSD different to a Ripple IOU?
Ripple would be equal to NXT, both provide the infrastructure. Then a backer (Coino...) or a bank that acts as a gateway issues the USD IOU. I don't see a real difference except maybe that it might be easier for banks to plug into the ripple trading network (regarding interface and legal), which is my speculation though...
So in Ripple both, the network and the IOU issuer are centralised.
In NXT the network is decentralised but the IOU issuer still centralised.
I wonder what the next step would be ....
I'd say yes.

Offline Markus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 366
    • View Profile
How is this CoinoUSD different to a Ripple IOU?
Ripple would be equal to NXT, both provide the infrastructure. Then a backer (Coino...) or a bank that acts as a gateway issues the USD IOU. I don't see a real difference except maybe that it might be easier for banks to plug into the ripple trading network (regarding interface and legal), which is my speculation though...
So in Ripple both, the network and the IOU issuer are centralised.
In NXT the network is decentralised but the IOU issuer still centralised.
I wonder what the next step would be ....

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
How is this CoinoUSD different to a Ripple IOU?
Ripple would be equal to NXT, both provide the infrastructure. Then a backer (Coino...) or a bank that acts as a gateway issues the USD IOU. I don't see a real difference except maybe that it might be easier for banks to plug into the ripple trading network (regarding interface and legal), which is my speculation though...

Offline Markus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 366
    • View Profile
How is this CoinoUSD different to a Ripple IOU?

Offline eagleeye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 931
    • View Profile
If NXT CoinoUSD is gaining value, is it because there User Interfaces are easier to use, or are they in the bubble as its new.  We had over like $1 - $3 million in volume when it was released, they are only getting $160k.

Offline jsidhu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1335
    • View Profile
Agreed decentralized version beats centralized version.  And I am very skeptical, I wouldn't touch for a long time to come but I really do hope it works, then nxt can take the idea, tweak it and make it our own ;)

As I understand though, when shorting, you take twice the amount that you are paying for the asset and put up some collateral, right?

So what happens if it the price falls to the point where you don't have the assets to cover the loss?  Is is automatically revoked?

Let's say that the price of BTSX halves, does that mean that all those BitUSD suddenly disappear?  I'm probably misunderstanding how shorting works.
I'm just learning it just like you but from my understanding the collateral doesn't need to be 2x its just 200% to use as a buffer for fees etc where as 100% would be a perfect cover order... in reality anywhere from 115-125% should do the trick in the future when it becomes more liquid...

As a trader, when you go long bitUSD you are basically hedging against a speculation that btsx will not rise, in that you will be able to transfer bitUSD back to btsx but recover a bigger stake in btsx later on once it is lower, purchasing power rises with USD. The short bitUSD is hoping for a rise in btsx such that the value of USD will fall versus btsx, purchasing power rises with BTSX, and the person who goes short bitUSD will be able to close the position and recover more btsx than he/she started with. Essentially it becomes an ecosystem where you don't need to sell your btsx back to btc but you simply hedge/unhedge your position if you are a speculator and you can "sell" for bitUSD if you need to pay a vendor or whatenot in USD once the bitUSD -> USD bridge is set up. I don't see any margin on the trades so I don't think you are force to cover because of a situation with price, until price doubles/halves. Your collateral should be used to offset gains/losses as the order is closed out. I'm not sure what happens when your collateral is not enough to cover the contract (margin call)... I think it auto closes your contract and you have to reenter the market?

The "ecosystem" needs players to accept the "long" and "short" contracts for bitUSD -> btsx and btsx -> bitUSD so that as swings happen people can get in and get out without major spread issues. Once the bugs are ironed out of the wallet code/toolkit API then we should see it in action and I hope we can get bitUSD<->USD happening fairly easily as that will the bring the ability to enter into a DAC without going thru the hoops of acquiring bitcoins. Ofcourse out of 1000 people only a small % of people get into bitcoin because of the amount of work it involves to be able to buy it.. although its becoming easier with ATM's and localbitcoin etc however a conversion from USD to bitUSD once we have enough volume would pretty much trump any of those options as a viable way to get into the crypto game and directly into our "ecosystem" :)

As far as comparing a central system with a decentralized system i think the later wins almost every time (except as a system starts out and there isn't enough volume, where a market maker would have been able to cover orders in a central system).. however the potential for a decentralized system is far higher than a central system because that is where we are headed with blockchain technology and what it was designed for. The other competitor "counterparty" and all of its derivatives (viacoin) tries to add services onto the blockchain which Satoshi openly came out and said that its a bad idea... not going to go into that one.

Speaking of which, where is the protocol spec on btsx? drltc still going ahead with it?
« Last Edit: September 06, 2014, 12:02:13 am by jsidhu »
Hired by blockchain | Developer
delegate: dev.sidhujag

Offline hughmanwho

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
Agreed decentralized version beats centralized version.  And I am very skeptical, I wouldn't touch for a long time to come but I really do hope it works, then nxt can take the idea, tweak it and make it our own ;)

As I understand though, when shorting, you take twice the amount that you are paying for the asset and put up some collateral, right?

So what happens if it the price falls to the point where you don't have the assets to cover the loss?  Is is automatically revoked?

Let's say that the price of BTSX halves, does that mean that all those BitUSD suddenly disappear?  I'm probably misunderstanding how shorting works.

Offline Riverhead

Who would of guessed Mt. Gox was a house of cards until it collapsed. I think people are still waiting to see if they'll get anything back.

Offline Method-X

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1131
  • VIRAL
    • View Profile
    • Learn to code
  • BitShares: methodx
Unless tgey run with you dollars and leave you behind with coinos and no buyers ;)

It is indeed a risk of centralization.  But odds of that happening are low.

And if it happens we can always start up a fakeUSD asset that we claim is worth a dollar even though it's not backed up anything and use it to refund the customers their money. Maybe we can bring future fakeUSD assets into creation by shorting... ;)

Seriously I hope BitUSD is successful, I just don't see it though.  Maybe if you hide the details from people so they think that BitUSD actually is backed by USD..

Also, they are in the process of getting some kind of financial license in the UK to make sure everything is legal.

This seems very much like the attempts that preceded bitcoin. They all failed because they were centralized, hence bitcoin was born. If anything, this concept is a step backwards.

Offline Gentso1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 931
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: gentso
Unless tgey run with you dollars and leave you behind with coinos and no buyers ;)

It is indeed a risk of centralization.  But odds of that happening are low.

And if it happens we can always start up a fakeUSD asset that we claim is worth a dollar even though it's not backed up anything and use it to refund the customers their money. Maybe we can bring future fakeUSD assets into creation by shorting... ;)

Seriously I hope BitUSD is successful, I just don't see it though.  Maybe if you hide the details from people so they think that BitUSD actually is backed by USD..

Also, they are in the process of getting some kind of financial license in the UK to make sure everything is legal.
No one is claiming bitUSD is backed by USD. It is backed by btsx.


To get  BTSX you put USD, the value of all the BTSX out there right now it is 63 millions USD so bitUSD it is backed by USD.
You don't take into account the value  of the platform and it's utility. I buy silver with USD but is it backed by it, well kinda sorta not really. Silver has a standalone value on it's on, jewelry,manufacturing  etc. Purchasing one item with another is a backing of sort but it is also the utility of the item itself that gives value.
btsx has $ value and it utility value, of being a share of a useful platform.In the end game its value should be drawn for the second half of that statement and not the first.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2014, 07:44:21 pm by Gentso1 »