Topic: BTSX+BitUSD vs NuShares+NuBits - which will win the USD peg war? (Read 15802 times)

Okay that's pretty damned interesting.

So make that two pegged currencies that have failed, one that has recovered, and one that seems to have a proposal that might result in a recovery. But what I currently understand of steem dollars is they are a rather 'soft' peg, depending both on witnesses and relative volatility levels.

Nubits seems to have the 'hardest' peg of the distributed systems, but seems to be brittle if stressed too much. BitUSD looks to be in the middle.

https://steemit.com/steemit/@dantheman/boost-steem-value-by-backing-steem-dollar

From coinmarketcap, sept 20, 2016:
 Steem Dollars (SBD)
$0.904956 (5.09%)

bitUSD (BITUSD)
$0.982400 (-3.66%)

NuBits (USNBT)
$1.00 (0.57%)

Can you please explain how 'steem dollars' are a pegged currency at a 10% discount to the currency they are supposed to be pegged at? I don't get it.

BitUSD and NuBits have what I consider reasonable pegs. It remains to be seen if Nubits can keep their peg, but they are the only one I know of that had a failure and recovered.

@hozer

Since it has been trade-able, SBD has performed much better as stable / US dollar pegged cryptocurrency than Nubits. It also has wayyy more volume and market depth. $135k in volume vs $5k in volume... It also pays decent interest which is cool

I am not sure if you are trolling, but SBD should at the very least be brought up in any reasonably objective conversation regarding market pegged assets.

Sort of. There was an "official" rename from SBD to SMD to SD. Then all the exchanges listed it as SBD so almost everyone is calling it that now.

How is the steem dollar (SBD) even remotely relevant? If you want to compare the two, even with the recent (last 6 hours?) free-fall of Nubits prices it's still a pretty good peg to dollars compared to SBD. bitUSD, on the other hand seems to be holding and recovering from BTC price swings pretty well, even if it does have a larger spread that Nubits used to when it was working.

There was a rename some time ago, It's called SD now.

That is cool. I am rooting for them to succeed. I think the idea could work, but it was poorly managed. They spent way too much cash on share buy backs. If they had all the cash they spent doing that on hand, the peg might of never been lost in the first place. Hindsight is of course 20/20.

There is also a new competitor- the Steem Dollar (SBD). http://www.steemdollar.com/

Nubits is back to $0.88 on bittrex and $0.79 on poloniex, so it looks to me like a recovery is in progress.

You never know if something works until you test it to failure, so this makes for a vote of confidence for Nubits and it's community if the recovery continues.

bitUSD is pegged n working  strong collateralized, I think that is the secret, collateralized n decentrilized

you cannot compare bitBTC bitUSD bitGOLD to tether, because when you use tether you a putting trust in a 3rd party service, you dont own your funds


we cannot say that bitUSD won, because of low liquidity, but if we would have a winner right now it would be it.


I choose to support bitshares mainly because of smartcoins, people talk a lot about inovating all the time mulsig escrow, sidechain, etc.... but I cannot
believe that a btc investor would rather lock btc in multisig or sidechain instead to support bts, print more collateralized bitusd n bring more value to project that he wants to support, certainly as a btc n bts holder my preference is convert what I want in bts instead lock it in a gateway, sidechain n create it virtualy into another chain.....thats why cfd is used

bitshares has a awesome product, just need to make people use it, like people use tether even knowing that thether can ask your id n can run away n never look back

I agree, Tether should not be in the same conversation as bitUSD or Nubits, as a centralized entity is the only thing that is holding its peg. It is no different from mtgoxUSD, poloniexUSD, or btceUSD.

The Nubits peg has been broken for at least 12 days now. It is currently at $0.258 instead of the $1.00 like it is supposed to be. It is unclear to me if they will ever regain the peg. Their main developer, the pseudonymous "Jordan Lee" has gone MIA. He was last seen on the Nubits forums 9 days ago. That doesn't exactly inspire confidence, but the Nubits/B&C Exchange community is scrambling to replace him and remedy the situation. We shall see if those efforts are successful... this thread breaks down the Nubits peg failure pretty well, and the ensuing drama that has unfolded: https://discuss.nubits.com/t/withdrawn-make-firing-and-replacing-incompetent-liquidity-providers-our-top-priority/4036

At least, maybe now the Nubits camp can concede that Bitshares' bitUSD is a better solution to the same problem. It is still going strong since before September of 2014, and it is currently valued at $1.01

The main downside with bitUSD is the lack of liquidity due to low adoption- which is unfortunate. The Bitshares community has been discussing ways to increase/incentivize liquidity, so hopefully that will help.

I believe Tether is backed by centralized reserves. So though you can access it on the blockchain, if their fiat reserves were seized/confiscated by a government or other they'd have a problem. (Whoever has access to the Tether funds could also possibly run away with the money at some point.)

BitUSD is decentralized, it and the backing for it exists on the BTS blockchain so .gov can't seize/confiscate your BitUSD or the collateral that backs it.

what about tether that seems to be at 1 dollar for months on end?

Looks like BitUSD won? 

Isn't bitbay doing this too? I thought they were the original peggers.

Maybe I posted this in the wrong forum. Who knows?

Which is the most painless way to hedge bitcoin to USD today with cryptocurrency? Which has won, or, is seemingly winning?

Other alternatives?

This is a time bomb you describe here, if some and not all of nubits are backed by "real" money then this means that some nubits are indeed backed by thin air and this number of nubits will continue to rise with time because of interest rates, for how long do you expect people to continue to support a broken system? afaik we are trying to go away from "fractional reserve".

Also don't compare bitcoin to nubits.
You are forgetting that bitcoin is not pegged to a specific price and its value is determined by supply and demand, the problem with nubits is its "peg" to 1 dollar. 

What do you think would happen if you could try to "peg" bitcoin to a specific price like 500$ with the mechanisms used in nubits? my guess is that you would be forced to create millions and millions of coins when the demand is high, (like when it was at $1000+ in the past) and create even more coins when the demand drops like when it did some weeks ago. Demand is high? you create more coins!! Demand is low? you create even more coins!! What will happen to all those accumulated coins? you will have to find more suckers to sell them or you will be forced to pay even greater interest rates and thus create even more nubits in an already low demand market, rinse and repeat. My example may not be that good but I believe it helps to see the big picture.

AFAIK bitcoin developers are not anonymous any more. In my books anonymity is a lack of belief in your project, If you really believe in your project you say who you are and what you are trying to do, as simple as that.

Hmmm...now I'm wondering why we even have this thread.  I've learned that NuBits and bitUSD are not competitors, as clearly stated by Bytemaster at 16:30 of the Beyond Bitcoin discussion linked in post 46 above (link reproduced here):

https://soundcloud.com/beyond-bitcoin-hangouts/beyond-bitcoin-community-dev-hangout-2014-9-26

The "thin air" issue also warrants a closer look.  NuBits are granted by shareholders to custodians.  The custodians then sell them on the exchanges, which means real money is coming into the system.  The proceeds are used to maintain the peg, pay dividends, fund developmental projects, and compensate the custodians.  It is similar to a fractional reserve bank -- all the cash that comes into the system is not available for redemption.  If all existing NuBits were to be cashed in at the same time, the peg would break and the system would fail.  The developers acknowledge that the Nu network cannot function in perpetuity, but this doesn't imply that it is useless and fundamentally flawed.

I don't think a fractional reserve system meets the definition of a ponzi scheme.  Admittedly, it's a subjective interpretation and a Google search will reveal good arguments on both sides.  Banks operate on fractional reserves yet have facilitated stable commerce for centuries.

Note that the Bitcoin network produces 25 coins -- out of thin air -- every 10 minutes and nobody seems to complain.  The original developer was also anonymous -- a criticism I've seen thrown at Nubits recently.

Sorry to hear about backlash from BTS/BitUSD - obviously you couldn't expect anything else from hardcore BTS zealots.

Unfortunately the truth is that the NuBits economic model requires a constant influx of capital. There needs to be some algorithmic / quantitative and on-chain ruleset that dictates how and when nubits is bought back and destroyed for it to have "guaranteed" value, which NuShare holders are not provided.

NuBits is nothing more than "centralized / non-gov-backed USD" with a private third party holding the value necessary to give NuUSD backing. This is not "morally" bad! It's only "technically" / "trust-systems" bad - you have to trust Jordan and co.

It's a sort-of legitiate money backing scheme, but I'm not sure it really captures the spirit of what cryptoheads are looking for: trustless systems which don't rely on centralized entities.l