BitAssets ... aren't a killer feature

[Thom]

Totally agreed. xeroc also thought similarly as I see it. No disrespect to MeTHoDx, but we MUST stick to the underlying principles and not go off half cocked chasing market share anywhere we see money or interest. So many people don't seem to get WHY crypto has value; so many are preoccupied with convenience.

None taken. I'm just saying that's probably what will happen in the short-term whether we like it or not. Bitcoins best usecases so far have been drugs and day trading. Not saying I like that, but it's the reality of the situation.

I hear you. Spoken with a truly rational tongue. MeTHoDx,  I find your posts to be excellent. I don't have many marketing skills, but I find myself agreeing with your posts 9 times out of 10.

[Method-X]

Totally agreed. xeroc also thought similarly as I see it. No disrespect to MeTHoDx, but we MUST stick to the underlying principles and not go off half cocked chasing market share anywhere we see money or interest. So many people don't seem to get WHY crypto has value; so many are preoccupied with convenience.

None taken. I'm just saying that's probably what will happen in the short-term whether we like it or not. Bitcoins best usecases so far have been drugs and day trading. Not saying I like that, but it's the reality of the situation.

[svk]

The OP is basically arguing against crypto as a concept.

Yes this.

Fiat currencies are an easy to use, centralized system.  If that is what you want, no need for crypto at all, of any form.

Totally agreed. xeroc also thought similarly as I see it. No disrespect to MeTHoDx, but we MUST stick to the underlying principles and not go off half cocked chasing market share anywhere we see money or interest. So many people don't seem to get WHY crypto has value; so many are preoccupied with convenience.

If we build a quality system that solves real problems based on sound principles of freedom and free trade people WILL come DESPITE what the establishment decrees. Granted, we want to capitalize on where the herd is stampeding but let's not forsake long term financial freedom for short term gains. If I start seeing that attitude become more widespread I'll go somewhere else.

I don't think that's gonna happen as long as Larimer has a voice. So far he's not only been steadfast in his "decentralization is our prime directive" montra, but he is also one top notch programmer and spokesman.

 

[Thom]

The OP is basically arguing against crypto as a concept.

Yes this.

Fiat currencies are an easy to use, centralized system.  If that is what you want, no need for crypto at all, of any form.

Totally agreed. xeroc also thought similarly as I see it. No disrespect to MeTHoDx, but we MUST stick to the underlying principles and not go off half cocked chasing market share anywhere we see money or interest. So many people don't seem to get WHY crypto has value; so many are preoccupied with convenience.

If we build a quality system that solves real problems based on sound principles of freedom and free trade people WILL come DESPITE what the establishment decrees. Granted, we want to capitalize on where the herd is stampeding but let's not forsake long term financial freedom for short term gains. If I start seeing that attitude become more widespread I'll go somewhere else.

I don't think that's gonna happen as long as Larimer has a voice. So far he's not only been steadfast in his "decentralization is our prime directive" montra, but he is also one top notch programmer and spokesman.

[oldman]

Bitshares 'killer apps':

- Yield

- Transaction cost

- Transaction time

- Privacy

- Security

- Global accessibility

My thoughts, as an investor.

[Ander]

The OP is basically arguing against crypto as a concept.

Yes this.

Fiat currencies are an easy to use, centralized system.  If that is what you want, no need for crypto at all, of any form.

[Method-X]

Stocks and the like have an advantage being centralized since they can pay dividends anyway. The "killer app" feature of bitAssets is bitUSD. It's cryptocurrency without the volatility downside and it is secure in a verifiable way (and not a ponzi like nubits). BitAssets also provide an incredibly convenient way for local cryptocurrency trade, localbitcoins style (spread/fee will be a lot more transparent for even a noob user)

The OP is basically arguing against crypto as a concept. The reason Bitcoin became so massive is because we all see a financial shitstorm brewing on the horizon. When that happens, crypto will be there to step in and take over.

In the mean time, we still have massive utility for BitUSD.

• Interest on BitUSD
• Blackmarket
• Remittances
• Money laundering

Anything Bitcoin can do, BitUSD can do better.

[Rune]

Stocks and the like have an advantage being centralized since they can pay dividends anyway. The "killer app" feature of bitAssets is bitUSD. It's cryptocurrency without the volatility downside and it is secure in a verifiable way (and not a ponzi like nubits). BitAssets also provide an incredibly convenient way for local cryptocurrency trade, localbitcoins style (spread/fee will be a lot more transparent for even a noob user)

[davidpbrown]

everything said in this threads just translate to: costumers are different and depending on their use-case need to be marketed differently.

or am I wrong here? What's the contribution here?

The arguement I'm putting, is about inevitability and how systems fail.. decentralisation necessarily wins in the long run. If you acknowledge why a product is stronger or a competitor might have an advantage, then there is an option to adapt or reenforce that. Perhaps here then the contribution is that the message of decentralised services is not lost on the market, where OP is suggesting it will be.

[xeroc]

everything said in this threads just translate to: costumers are different and depending on their use-case need to be marketed differently.

or am I wrong here? What's the contribution here?

[davidpbrown]

In the broader market people think, care, and understand less about the problems caused by centralization.

They do until something fails and then they do worry about centralisation.. systemic banking failure because of central risk, is not a problem that people do not get. Doing away with the third party, dealing direct person to person without liability from that third party, is very attractive and only likely to become more so.

Especially for any big players, who have time to consider what they want relative to any burn from traditional options they have experienced before, might well see decentralisation as necessary factor.. but those options have to exist and be viable for them to jump; so, intermediate steps might be useful for that.

[CoinHoarder]

Please "up vote" my comment on the Coindesk article. 

http://www.coindesk.com/new-fund-gives-traders-blue-chip-stock-exposure-bitcoin/

Most countries allow REGULATED trading.of derivatives. This service will last until the day it doesn't. That day will be the day that whatever jurisdiction is applicable to this website shuts it down and likely confiscates/ties up the funds in a lengthy court process. Also.. there is counterparty risk involved with trusted third parties in that you need to trust this service to not steal your money or misuse customer funds (for instance commingling them with operating funds or some sort of quasi ponzi scheme.)

BitsharesX is a better solution for derivatives as each derivative is collateralized by 300% of the derivatives value by the BTSX token. Furthermore, it is a decentralized autonomous company so you do not have to worry about trusting a third party and the counterparty risk that comes with that, nor do you have to worry about a government shutting it down as it exists fully on a peer to peer network powered by a block chain and a decentralized exchange.

[santaclause102]

I hate to break it to you but the greater market does not care about centralized vs decentralized.  They will go to whomever has the best utility and user experience.

It is right that people don't care as long as it works but:
 
There are two valuable attributes of blockchain technology:

a) Holding the private keys (you can do this with USD on Ripple (or am I wrong here?)) = funds can't be seized even with a centralized issuer except if they are seized for all (lack of collateral or state intervention).

b) No (direct) counterparty risk. This can not be done with ripple or any other system where a centralized issuer is backing the value of the token. And this is where the value of BitUSD comes from. Having a counterparty risk is highly costly: Any institution that holds funds for customers has high regulatory costs. Centralized solutions are therefore not per se cheaper for the customer.

I guess that customers would either trust a relatively young and unkown company that does audits (costly) and has a 100% reserve or big known banks that offer this service. The latter case it would likely be backed by a fractional reserve which is unlikely to be sustainable either individually (for a specific bank) or systemically.

So BitUSD has unique characteristics and will be very useful besides these centralized options.

you and davepbrown have good points regarding decentralization and I agree with you.  However, my point is that to be successful BTSX needs to attract the broader market, not just elements of the crypto-market.  In the broader market people think, care, and understand less about the problems caused by centralization.  Maybe just 1% of the market cares (I'm thinking the US market. In places like Argentina maybe more)..  To them centralization is a given.  They have no idea about its drawbacks and don't care about alternatives.   They will only be educated when the looming crisis finally hits the preverbal brick will. Currently, they do not care.   Therefore my argument is that this feature can not be listed as one that will give us much a leg up on the competitors like the one mentioned above.  At least not in the current environment.    That said, I'm sure that with the current crypto crowd this feature is indispensable, but the way I see it we are seeking to expand that demographic considerably.

I agree with everything you said except this

Therefore my argument is that this feature can not be listed as one that will give us much a leg up on the competitors like the one mentioned above.

The structural difference in products will have significant effects if marketing is done right.

Two things to add: Marketing has not even begun. And I would say that the average dude will get aware of counterparty risks and such if the financial crisis effects everyone.

[James212]

I hate to break it to you but the greater market does not care about centralized vs decentralized.  They will go to whomever has the best utility and user experience.

It is right that people don't care as long as it works but:
 
There are two valuable attributes of blockchain technology:

a) Holding the private keys (you can do this with USD on Ripple (or am I wrong here?)) = funds can't be seized even with a centralized issuer except if they are seized for all (lack of collateral or state intervention).

b) No (direct) counterparty risk. This can not be done with ripple or any other system where a centralized issuer is backing the value of the token. And this is where the value of BitUSD comes from. Having a counterparty risk is highly costly: Any institution that holds funds for customers has high regulatory costs. Centralized solutions are therefore not per se cheaper for the customer.

I guess that customers would either trust a relatively young and unkown company that does audits (costly) and has a 100% reserve or big known banks that offer this service. The latter case it would likely be backed by a fractional reserve which is unlikely to be sustainable either individually (for a specific bank) or systemically.

So BitUSD has unique characteristics and will be very useful besides these centralized options.

you and davepbrown have good points regarding decentralization and I agree with you.  However, my point is that to be successful BTSX needs to attract the broader market, not just elements of the crypto-market.  In the broader market people think, care, and understand less about the problems caused by centralization.  Maybe just 1% of the market cares (I'm thinking the US market. In places like Argentina maybe more)..  To them centralization is a given.  They have no idea about its drawbacks and don't care about alternatives.   They will only be educated when the looming crisis finally hits the preverbal brick will. Currently, they do not care.   Therefore my argument is that this feature can not be listed as one that will give us much a leg up on the competitors like the one mentioned above.  At least not in the current environment.    That said, I'm sure that with the current crypto crowd this feature is indispensable, but the way I see it we are seeking to expand that demographic considerably.   

[xeroc]

E-Gold 2.0? The SEC will shut it down just like MtGox was shut down and Litecoinglobal.

There is a reason why everyone pushed to create decentralized exchanges. Newbies typically don't learn from history and have to experience it for themselves.

That's why scammers always gonna scam .. unfortunately ..