Stabilized Bitcoin using eMunie economics - page 5.

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: CIYAM on February 09, 2016, 12:56:27 PM

Quote from: Fuserleer on February 09, 2016, 12:51:28 PM

You don't need many, you need just one of them to discover the solution.

Well - again - if you have done that then please give that solution to every major government in the world and collect your Nobel award (otherwise I guess we should blame you for the next GFC).

Sensing some animosity here to be honest.

I'm here because I'd like comments on the idea as a whole, positive and negative, things that could maybe be improved, structured reasoning why it might not work (despite the test data results that suggests the contrary).

Not just a "It won't work" and "GTFO and collect your award if you're so smart"

No one knows if it will work or not, no one has tried it before, so perhaps it should be given a little more thought before putting it in the "not Bitcoin, not Blockchain" trashcan

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Fuserleer on February 09, 2016, 12:51:28 PM

You don't need many, you need just one of them to discover the solution.

Well - again - if you have done that then please give that solution to every major government in the world and collect your Nobel award (otherwise I guess we should blame you for the next GFC).

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Peachy on February 09, 2016, 12:51:48 PM

Not exactly relevant to the discussion of our economics model as there is no autonomous entity within these exchanges serving to smooth out the volatility.

Huh?

You don't think that it is software that decides to stop the trading?
(the software might get its orders from the government but I am pretty certain that the actual decision to stop the trading is done by software)

Peachy

full member

Activity: 179

Merit: 100

As for China's RMB, they really didn't start allowing it to quasi-float vs. the $ till around 2011.

http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/advchart/frames/frames.asp?show=&insttype=Currency&symb=usdcny&x=37&y=9&time=20&startdate=1%2F4%2F1999&enddate=2%2F9%2F2016&freq=3&compidx=aaaaa%3A0&comptemptext=&comp=none&ma=5&maval=9&uf=0&lf=268435456&lf2=2&lf3=4&type=4&style=320&size=4&timeFrameToggle=false&compareToToggle=false&indicatorsToggle=false&chartStyleToggle=false&state=11

The issue with them attempting (and failing) to control a soft landing in the stock market is a different matter than their capital controls they use in an attempt to protect their stock exchanges.

These stock market operations are similar to those used by many US exchanges as well http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=CircuitBreaker. Not exactly relevant to the discussion of our economics model as there is no autonomous entity within these exchanges serving to smooth out the volatility.

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: CIYAM on February 09, 2016, 12:46:31 PM

Quote from: Fuserleer on February 09, 2016, 12:43:10 PM

My problem is discovering a method that limits manipulative opportunities while still allowing the market to speak as a whole...and I believe the above does so.

We'll see - there are very many talented minds in China that have failed to be able to stop this "slow train-wreck" which you seem to think your system will solve.

Why not offer your services to them (am sure they'd pay you a few billion RMB if you could solve their financial woes with it)?

You don't need many, you need just one of them to discover the solution.

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: franky1 on February 09, 2016, 12:46:11 PM

creating supply.. hmm
so this is not bitcoin at all and nothing to do with making bitcoin stable, and more so to control volatility of an altcoin you create.
ok got it.

so when there is demand, you create new supply.. ok well your altcoin is now not deflationary but just another fiat emulator. and has lost its purpose as a competitor to bitcoin.

though maybe using some technologies of blockchain i presume, it wont be a replacement of bitcoin, but more so aimed at updating the fiat system

im sure a government may adopt your EMU coins as a national currency(maybe). where supply is no longer created via credit agreements, but instead the demand the population.

Well if you re-read the original post, you'll see that I did not run the simulation with the elastic supply enabled, but with the emission algorithm as defined by Satoshi

So in fact this test was a very close simulation of attempting Bitcoin stability as the supply is not modified in any way other than diverting some of it to fund the buffer, and the overall emission follows Bitcoin exactly.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Fuserleer on February 09, 2016, 12:43:10 PM

My problem is discovering a method that limits manipulative opportunities while still allowing the market to speak as a whole...and I believe the above does so.

We'll see - there are very many talented minds in China that have failed to be able to stop this "slow train-wreck" which you seem to think your system will solve.

Why not offer your services to them (am sure they'd pay you a few billion RMB if you could solve their financial woes with it)?

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4410

Merit: 4766

creating supply.. hmm
so this is not bitcoin at all and nothing to do with making bitcoin stable, and more so to control volatility of an altcoin you create.
ok got it.

so when there is demand, you create new supply.. ok well your altcoin is now not deflationary but just another fiat emulator. and has lost its purpose as a competitor to bitcoin.

though maybe using some technologies of blockchain i presume, it wont be a replacement of bitcoin, but more so aimed at updating the fiat system

im sure a government may adopt your EMU coins as a national currency(maybe). where supply is no longer created via credit agreements, but instead the demand the population.

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: CIYAM on February 09, 2016, 12:38:57 PM

Quote from: Fuserleer on February 09, 2016, 12:37:32 PM

But you don't know immediately if its a train wreck, or some whale trying to dump the price for his own gain.

When it is the government that is shutting down the trading day after day (and trying to buy enough to stop the drops) then you know it isn't just a whale (they would have executed such a whale here most likely).

We are facing "the real deal" in terms of another economic crisis about to hit us.

Well thats China's problem not mine

My problem is discovering a method that limits manipulative opportunities while still allowing the market to speak as a whole...and I believe the above does so.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Fuserleer on February 09, 2016, 12:37:32 PM

But you don't know immediately if its a train wreck, or some whale trying to dump the price for his own gain.

When it is the government that is shutting down the trading day after day (and trying to buy enough to stop the drops) then you know it isn't just a whale (they would have executed such a whale here most likely).

We are facing "the real deal" in terms of another economic crisis about to hit us.

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: CIYAM on February 09, 2016, 12:35:14 PM

Quote from: Fuserleer on February 09, 2016, 12:32:03 PM

Another issue that faces traditional monetary systems is that the feedback loop is full of delays. By the time the controlling authority has all the information about what the economy is doing and makes a decision on what the best course of action is, the economy is already doing something totally different.

In a system such as this, there isn't that large delay, its to the minute (or even second) information on economic behavior, thus the reaction to it will be more relevant and be more efficient.

It's hard to say - the way China has been trying to handle their share market melt down is to shut it down nearly every other day (and that isn't working if you hadn't noticed).

I would agree that there is little point in "delaying things" as you just end up with a "train-wreck in slow motion".

But you don't know immediately if its a train wreck, or some whale trying to dump the price for his own gain.

If its a whale, and you can out play him, then isn't that better for the currency and everyone as a whole?

After a period of time, it'll become apparent if its a colluded play, or the real deal and at that point the best action can be taken.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Fuserleer on February 09, 2016, 12:32:03 PM

Another issue that faces traditional monetary systems is that the feedback loop is full of delays. By the time the controlling authority has all the information about what the economy is doing and makes a decision on what the best course of action is, the economy is already doing something totally different.

In a system such as this, there isn't that large delay, its to the minute (or even second) information on economic behavior, thus the reaction to it will be more relevant and be more efficient.

It's hard to say - the way China has been trying to handle their share market melt down is to shut it down nearly every other day (and that isn't working if you hadn't noticed).

I would agree that there is little point in "delaying things" as you just end up with a "train-wreck in slow motion" (which is exactly what we are seeing in regards to the Chinese stock market).

But overall if the sentiment is overwhelmingly negative there is really nothing you can do to stop the downward trend.

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: CIYAM on February 09, 2016, 12:26:14 PM

My point is that governments such as China have tried and are failing to stop their stocks from falling (despite injecting billions of RMB per day).

No amount of manipulation will work - if it did we would never have had the GFC nor what is coming (which I think is going to be worse).

If you really have something that works better than all the other professionals in the world that do this stuff can come up with you truly deserve a Nobel prize.

And as I've stated, it's not the intention to stop the price from falling indefinitely if that is really what the market wants, that would rightly be a ridiculous objective.

But smoothing out the short term, in a controlled (not manipulated) manner is most certainly desirable IMO. Or does everyone want speculative, manipulated crypto-currencies behaving more like commodities, that will never see mass market use because of the resulting massive volatility?

Another issue that faces traditional monetary systems is that the feedback loop is full of delays. By the time the controlling authority has all the information about what the economy is doing and makes a decision on what the best course of action is, the economy is already doing something totally different.

In a system such as this, there isn't that large delay, its to the minute (or even second) information on economic behavior, thus the reaction to it will be more relevant and be more efficient.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

My point is that governments such as China have tried and are failing to stop their stocks from falling (despite injecting billions of RMB per day).

No amount of manipulation will work - if it did we would never have had the GFC nor what is coming (which I think is going to be worse).

If you really have something that works better than all the other professionals in the world that do this stuff can come up with you truly deserve a Nobel prize.

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: CIYAM on February 09, 2016, 12:08:10 PM

So - the point that I am making is that you are assuming that there will be demand.

But - there may not be at all (in which case your modelling isn't really very relevant IMO).

I'm not sure how the level of demand has any bearing on the functioning of the stability mechanics as explained.

If demand is dropping then the price is allowed to drop with it, if its dropping too fast, then the buffer resources are used to prop it up a little in an attempt to ride it out. If demand continues to drop and the price with it, the buffer will cease intervening and allow the market to set the price unhindered.

If there is little or no demand, that price may well be zero, and it would not be prevented.

Its designed to iron out the short term bumps, if the long term trend is down, then down the price will go!

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

So - the point that I am making is that you are assuming that there will be demand.

But - there may not be at all (in which case your modelling isn't really very relevant IMO).

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: CIYAM on February 09, 2016, 12:05:01 PM

Quote from: Fuserleer on February 09, 2016, 12:04:15 PM

New supply is created because there is a shortage of supply due to increasing demand.

So actually they do have value.

So if there is no demand then no new supply is created?

Correct?

(this kind of circular logic is exactly what BitShares uses)

Yes correct.

Heh, I don't think its unique to Bitshares, this is standard supply/demand market mechanics which can and is applied to anything and everything daily and has been around for centuries!

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Fuserleer on February 09, 2016, 12:04:15 PM

New supply is created because there is a shortage of supply due to increasing demand.

So actually they do have value.

So if there is no demand then no new supply is created?

Correct?

(this kind of circular logic is exactly what BitShares uses)

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: CIYAM on February 09, 2016, 12:03:13 PM

That seems to imply that these new funds actually "have a value" but why do they?

(if no-one wants to buy them then their value would be nothing)

New supply is created because there is a shortage of supply due to increasing demand.

So actually they do have value.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

That seems to imply that these new funds actually "have a value" but why do they?

(if no-one wants to buy them then their value would be nothing)

Topic: Stabilized Bitcoin using eMunie economics - page 5. (Read 4317 times)