Here ya go Doc! I said I would get around to it.. im at work now so I was able to look into this post.. its your thread so I've highlighted your remarks in bold followed by my response.
Bitsharesx is an eco system... that allows you to create assets, some are backed by a peg and some are not.. freely traded. The ones backed by a peg (costing about 300k btsx right now)
what do you mean by this? is this a 1x fee or something?Yes one time fee, intentionally high so as to not dilute the marketplace with needless assets which will not be used. Pegged assets are bitGLD/bitSLV/bitUSD/bitEUR/bigGBP etc to encourage outside money from outside of the crypto sphere.
are meant to be tracked via a feed fed in through the delegates, which gets itself around security issues of POS (Delegate-POS is the algo name). Which Larimer/Buterin seem to agree is the best one moving forward away from POW.
still amazing to me Buterin raised all that BTC yet doesn't even have this fundamental strategy resolved yetI think he's a smart guy and is taking the time to do it right and
designing for testability.
Another one is bitBTC which tracks BTC... so you can go to and from BTC to BTSX.. same way as going from USD to BTSX and back.. however BTC <--> BTSX. The idea is that many businesses can use bitUSD to offer services to customers and be able to transfer these bitUSD across the chain quickly and efficiently without having to pay fees , and use the built-in bitshares privacy features for annonymous transactions etc etc you get the picture...
There are 101 oracles (and more lining up as backups incase of some going down) doing this feeding and yet it is a more decentralized model than bitcoin (in the way of large concentrated mining pools).
i'll disagree with this. just b/c there might be larger #'s of delegates doesn't mean they're more decentralized. many could be owned by same individual. i don't believe voting necessarily solves this either b/c it sounds like that could be gamed.There are costs to voting, thus it wouldn't be economical to try to "game" the system. Like I said there are safegaurds to avoid unscrupulous voting delegates, and as soon as they are detected they will be voted out faster than a mining pool can be "told" to stop doing what its doing.
These oracles or delegates get paid to sign blocks as a job. Because of this there is incentive to provide this service.. as it is profitable to do so at these prices.
of course there is incentive. no work needs to be done. just get the votes from either your buddies or already vested interests in the POS system then get paid to simply sign blocks. sounds like centralization to me even worse than Bitcoin mining. btw, i think there's a chance we've seen the last time a miner gets to 50% of the network hashrate as we're getting commoditization of hardware with 10x lower prices to the small miner. this is good and could reverse the swing of the pendulum back towards increasing decentralization as a result. the other evidence this is happening is the hashrate is leveling off and we could be stuck at 14nm ASICS for a few years. that's a good thing.You make logical assumptions and try to extrapolate direction of the bitcoin mining cult in a similar way to my argument that DPOS is just as decentralized if not more decentralized than POW
.
this is an insider club from the outset In order to become a delegate you must set up a delegate as yourself and get voted to become an official bitshares delegate.. people have to beleive in you and there is an in-chain voting mechanism used to figure out who are qualified to become delegates based on popularity of votes (there are obvious safe-gaurds to avoid people from getting them selves voted in easier).
so how can this be successful in the long run? there is a tremendous incentive to own several delegate nodes. insider club=ponzi scheme.Anyone can join the insider-club to become a delegate and you will be voted in if others get voted out... so essentially creating a backlog of delegates ready to go on moments notice. Once you are a delegate you are part of the "in" and you want to hold your positions thus you do your best not to get voted out.
It is meant to work in conjuction of a currency as bitUSD is doing.. and bitBTC... it is not meant to work as a currency itself as the chain is used for mor ethan just a tx ledger for payments (breaking satoshi's golden rule)... however if thought about in another way that it works in partership with bit coin.. in that bitcoin may be used as a currency and bitshares may be used to issue assets/stocks/companies that operate within clearly defined rules without corruption then it makes sense on where to draw lines between bitcoin and bitshares... and IMO it is aptly named in that regard.. bitshares for share issuance and bitcoin for coin transactions and spending.
can u explain how the btcx interface with the BTC blockchain? is it using the 40 byte op_return and for what purpose?I believe it creates new OP codes in script for transactions similar to XCP and other altcoins like SYSCOIN do to create new services (you should read the code) I only took a few moments to peak at the code didn't even read the script or tx signing, just saw different OP's assigned during transaction creation and inferred that it must be doing what I think it's doing... however the code is pretty much rewritten, wallet implementation, web UI, CLI is all new. I think it's important to draw the distinction between using blockchain technology and altcoin. An Altcoin is following the footstep of bitcoin in code, it will try to keep up to date with bitcoin and leverage bitcoin services going forward while a non altcoin which may borrow blockchain technology to create new concepts isn't an altcoin at all. I think as people become more aware... and the smart community reps invited to speak with government officials in legislation meetings allude to that there should be a fundamental separation between these 2 concepts and when discussing Bitcoin people like Andreas speak about blockchain technologies and what they can do for you instead of bitcoin specifically. This is a system that utilizes blockchain technology for concept other than what bitcoin was intended for. I also posit going forward that some altcoins will benefit greatly from being just that an altcoin while other "non" alt-coins will suffer from not being able to keep up with bitcoin source base and all of its derivatives ie: BitCore and the likes.
You might ask why would I transfer my BTC to bitBTC? Well the incentive is that you get paid interest by holding, through a decentralized solution. If you hold atleast a few months then it is in the range of 10-15% per year right now.. better than any bank.
since eventually the original BTC needs to be paid back along with BTC interest, how does the system continue long term as BTC doesn't inflate?It is an open market, you can buy and sell decentralized on the bitBTC/BTC exchange... you find a buyer of bitBTC if you are selling BTC and vice versa. bitBTC is just as deflationary as BTC it is a 1:1 correlation. Someone has to pay the interest for you to gain it. The interest rate varies depending on shorting going on the exchange etc.. thus at some point interest will dry up for this pair.
It is the only true form of interest payment for bitcoins because you hold your keys.. while all other solutions cause you to send BTC to someone else thus the keys controlling your coins change... in this method you hold your bitBTC keys the same way you hold your BTC keys and essentially earn interest over time... the interest is accumulated fees that people who "short" bitUSD and other assets pay.. you can go long and short bitUSD and other assets just like any other market... market makers and arb bots do this to make money off the spreads and liquidity.. and the holders of the assets win by collecting fees.
holding bitBTC privkeys is not the same as holding BTC privkeys. be careful.You hold both keys, and to transfer between them you must use the decentralized exchange. At no point does anyone ever read your private keys other than you. You transfer via public keys obviously and/or exchange transactions.
Other fees that are paid are used to burn coins to reduce the total overall supply so anyone holding anything in btsx will become more valuable over time.
at the very best then it sounds like someone would just want to hold btsx as its supply will be decreasing. the whole thing sounds dicey to me. none of these overlays will take off until Bitcoin itself is solidified and accepted as a bonafide currency/money.Recently there is discussion to be able to infuse capital using community consensus to fund further growth.. something not possible in anything else done. With the new voting mechanism being developed you will be able to vote on new changes that will need funding (not rely on generous developers) but to find quality engineers from outside this field, to work on next generation technologies to help bitshares grow. If community deems it is acceptable the capital is infused into BTS (previously BTSX) and thus the entire ecosystem enjoys the benefit of the new technology to be developed.
