Under a decentralized poker heads-up scenario, I would imagine that hands could be bound to some sort of contract or lock time. If one player leaves the hand for an extended period of time, the funds would be released to the opponent. However, peers would need to operate via Tor or I2P. Without this additional secure layer, one player could simply DDOS the other if they are heavily invested in a hand they can't win. They could then simply claim the other player left the table.
I would also be interested to know how collusion could be solved in a decentralized setup. Even the large poker sites have not completely solved the issue, and give a false sense of security to some degree.
I could live with pure P2P heads-up NL. However, latency may be an issue with the additional security layer. I love fast HU.
I'd guess that you solve collusion by a) matching people to tables randomly b) requiring people to pay an upfront, nonrefundable fee to enter a table Then you hope that the cost of searching for your buddy's table is higher than the profits from collusion. Hmm... I suppose you set the fee by targeting some mean number of hands before players switch tables. If you fall short of the target, bump up the fee. Of course, if you only have enough players for one table you are shit out of luck. Maybe you bootstrap the system with 1v1 games? BTW Sergio, great project. Very interested to learn about the details. Is there a white paper? |
|
|
|
|
Bitshares is a ponzi scheme. The bitshares company has promised riskfree btc-denominated returns to anyone who hordes "bitBTC."
This is a lie. After I pressed the bitshares 'inventor' for several days, he finally acknowledged that the price of bitBTC could go to zero, wiping out investors.
|
|
|
|
Mate, it's over now. Give it a rest. All your arguments could be made against Bitcoin (as has been said two times now). There is risk, but that risk != ponzi. If you do in fact report this to the SEC, shame on you. What a filthy thing to do. Paints a grim picture of your character.
Misrepresenting a highly risky investment as extremely low risk or risk free is illegal. e.g. recall the coindesk article One bitUSD will always be worth about one USD, say the founders, just as one BitBTC will always be worth around 1 bitcoin.
Recall the CEO's statement Let me be clear, we believe firmly that the floor will always be at or above 1 btc. We have always claimed that and will always believe it.
These have now been acknowledged to be false statements. If anyone happens to lose money all they have to do is dredge up these quotes. US courts will hold these guys liable. |
|
|
|
1) It is theoretically possible for your scenario to occur, and in such a scenario everyone who was Short BitBTC would be entirely wiped out and everyone who was long BitBTC would end up with twice as many BitShares as they started with (assuming they sold). It is even possible for the result of this catastrophic loss of value in BitShares to result in BitBTC being on the books without any corresponding short positions backing it up. Such an event would be terrible for those long BitShares, even worse for those Short BitBTC... but those who are impacted the least would be those who are Long BitBTC... they doubled their BitShare holdings.
Let's put this in simple terms, so that everyone understands. I purchase 1 BTC worth of bitBTC today. I plan to convert this back into BTC exactly one month from today. As long as the next month's price of bitshares in terms of BTC is at least 50% of the current price, I will get my 1 BTC back. However, if next month's price is less than 50% of the current price, I will not be able to recover my initial investment in full. (i.e. I will get back less than 1 BTC) Correct? (please don't tell me that some magic speculator is going to come in and bail me out) |
|
|
|
|
Sounds like a great offer for Mastercoin to me (at the least the immediately available public report).
Should definitely take retep up on that.
I'd just like to point one thing out. Mastercoin plans to issue derivatives. Derivatives are outside the domain of expertise of all the bitcoin gurus (AFAIK). I'd recommend getting a report from an academic expert in economics or finance. An advanced doctoral student should not be too expensive. Maybe look for a candidate who has an undergrad degree in CS. The CVs of doctoral students seeking academic jobs are all online, so you could just send out cold emails to people who look suitable.
|
|
|
|
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=298677.0Bitshares is a ponzi. If something sounds to good to be true (e.g. riskfree interest on your bitcoins), it probably is. Ignore history at your peril. People bought into pirate to the tune of hundreds of thousands of btc. They were warned by many (including myself) that pirate was most definitely a ponzi. Greed and stupidity triumphed as usual. Look forward to watching the same cycle play out with bitshares. For details on how the bithsares ponzi operates, see the linked thread at the top. WARNING: The scam is complicated. You will need an undergrad degree in economics to keep up. If you can't follow the thread, play it safe and don't invest in a 'product' you don't understand. If you can follow the thread, prepare to learn about a complex long con.
|
|
|
|
Am I on the right track here?
No, of course not. The miners can only enforce margin calls on bitBTC they own. They cannot enforce margin call's on other people's bitBTC. That would be confiscation. Reread the thread if you are unclear on this. BitBTC cannot be removed from your wallet and replaced with bitshares without your consent. Therefore, unless 1) The savers sell off their bitBTC to miners and 2) The miners decide to enforce margin calls, the 100,000 bitBTC remain outstanding even if the currencies market cap is just a few pennies. Once this is happens there is no backing left to reclaim. All you have are bitBTC c/o your trust in God and the Bank of Zimbabwe. The whole thing becomes dies permanently. The early miners of bitshares are laughing all the way to the bank (which is full of BTC and USD; late game only marks hold bitshares, bitBTC, or bit*). |
|
|
|
Why an altcoin and not a pitch to add a layer onto bitcoin itself? Seems like someone like Gavin would find something like this important enough to implement into bitcoin... but of course I don't speak for him. Have you approached anyone or made a thread in the Development/technical discussion forum?
Why is a decentralized exchange better seperated from the protocol?
You cannot add this directly into bitcoin. You might be able to do it as an overlay protocol like mastercoin. That would require a redsign of the voting scheme. The development and technical discussion forum is not friendly to innovation unless it can happen within the (restrictive) confines of the bitcoin protocol. |
|
|
|
There is no expiry date for BitShares as a financial instrument as you didn't specify the cut-off date for dividend. If you want to continue down this path you have to introduce obligatory and enforceable settlement for BitShares in certain moments. Derivatives always have expiry date! On the expiry date they have to be marked-to-market and arising profit/loss for transacting parties settled.
They cannot allow this because then you need to confiscate the bitBTC from 'savers' and leave them holding bitshares. Forced settlement would ruin the whole ponzi. Not going to happen. |
|
|
|
|
Let's go through another concrete example describing exactly what will happen to bitshares in the future. The example shows that 1) bitshares is a simple ponzi 2) bitshares is nothing at all like bitcoin
1) Suppose that bitshares experiences a bubble just like bitcoin's first bubble. At the peak of the bubble, the market cap of bitshars reaches 1 million in terms of bitcoins. (Recall that the market cap is just the bitcoin denominated price of a bitshare × the total quantity of bitshares in existence)
2) Suppose also that bitshares has issued 100,000 bitBTC at the peak of the bubble. At the peak of the bubble, this is fine. Bithshare's market cap is sufficient to back these 10 times over.
3) Recall that bitBTC cannot be involuntarily confiscated once they are issued. So if the price of bitshares drops the BTC denominated debt (100,000 bitBTC) do not just disappear. Instead bitshares just falls deeper in debt.
4) Suppose that bitshares market cap drops to 1/15 of its bubble peak (as in the 1st btc bubble). This leaves a bitshares market cap of 66 thousand BTC. But wait a minute, bitshares has 100, 000 units of bitBTC outstanding. Liabilities exceed assets. The system is bankrupt.
Let's ask some questions:
1) The bitshares creators tell us that a bitBTC will never fall below 1 BTC. Apperently some kind of price "floor" exists at this level. But ask yourself, would you pay face value for a bitBTC when the bithsares backing them trade for at most worth 0.66 BTC (and in all probability an order of magnitude less)
2) What about bithsares themselves? How much would you pay for a bitshare in this context? Bitshares are effectively equity. If the creditors holding bitBTC are to be repaid, bitshares will have to appreciate by 50% before the equity holders go into the black again. We do not normally see shares in bankrupt companies trading above 0 unless a gov't bailout is expected.
3) Assuming the gov't doesn't bailout bitshares, how is it that the market cap of bitshares could still be as high as 66 thousand BTC? What does this tell us? The value of a bitshare will keep dropping. Sending the system further and further underwater. It will not stop until it hits 0.
Who profits from the ponzi? Anyone who mined bitshares and got out before the bubble burst.
How is the scheme different from other bubbles; why call it a ponzi? The bubble is driven by purchasers of bitBTC from marks hoping for high returns and trusting in the creators' claims that a bitBTC is a completely safe investment. This makes the scheme not just a bubble, but a ponzi. It is no different from pirate ensuring his victims that he will never default, while luring them in with high returns.
What about the prediction market? A sideshow. The bitBTC come out of the prediction market as some kind of by product. The prediction market never needs to generate any value for the ponzi to work. All it has to do is spit out bitBTC to bait in naive, greedy people. If the prediction market does generate massive value, bitBTC still goes to 0. The prediction market is just irrelevant.
Why does the SEC need to get involved? 1) Because this is a predatory scheme designed to rob stupid people. 2) Because the scheme will inflict massive damage on cryptocurrency's reputation. Better to put a stop to it early, then wait for people to lose huge amounts in a cryptocurrency ponzi. Can you imagine how bad the press will be if the protocol itself runs the ponzi? The average Joe already believes cryptocurrency = ponzi. Proving him correct in one instance will not help matters.
|
|
|
|
Hey how do I report this to the SEC anyway? Anyone with experience in this area care to point me in the right direction?
What we have would have to be considered a financial instrument under the law... Right, I'm sure you are following Pirate's trial closely... |
|
|
|
Let me be clear, we believe firmly that the floor will be at or above 1 btc. We have always claimed that and always will believe it.
Either this is one of the worst scams in the world or it's not one. Could you honestly tell me how to scam people. I'm just at a loss here.
Don't worry you're doing a fine job. |
|
|
|
Let me be clear, we believe firmly that the floor will be at or above 1 btc. We have always claimed that and always will believe it.
I'm sorry, which version of the bible are you using? Mine doesn't say anything about the price of bitBTC. You should submit a resume to the Chinese ministry of railways. Next time they bury people alive to hide the number of deaths in an accident, they could put you up there to explain your eternal beliefs to the press. Chinese media was especially skeptical of the rescue efforts, particularly the burial of trains. In a press conference, the spokesman of the Railway Ministry, Wang Yongping, said that the burial was for facilitating the rescue work. The answer prompted heckling and gasps of disbelief from the journalists assembled. Wang then said to the press, "whether or not you believe [this explanation], I believe it." ("至于你信不信，我反正信了.")[60] This phrase eventually became an internet meme. When asked why a little girl was found after the rescue work had been announced finished, Wang said, "This was a miracle. We did find a living girl in the work thereafter. That was what happened." ("这是一个奇迹。我们确实在后面的工作当中发现了一个活着的女孩，事情就是这个样子。")
|
|
|
|
What I'm more concerned about is how I can own the whole world and my neighbour can own the whole world at the same time? This matter might cause some confusion. Do you have some theoretical physics story to go along with the prediction market? That might help to smooth things over. Neither one of you own the whole world... because 2x the whole world would have to be held as collateral to back a long position in the whole world... unfortunately, BitShares are part of the world and thus such a concept is entirely impossible. I can say this... the value of BitShares must always be 1.5 to 2.5 x the value of all BitAssets in existence. This is easy to prove because the creation of a BitAsset requires equal value from two parties and thus 2x the value of that asset held as collateral. Given this constraint, no value is ever created or destroyed in our system aside from the increasing value of BitShares themselves due to their utility. This is like Bitcoin rising in value relative to other things. Apparently, you are not familiar with the economics that goes along with violating the so-called no ponzi assumption. I can own the whole world and my neighbour can own it too. That is why we impose this assumption in the first place. Without it everything turns into complete nonsense. |
|
|
|
|
Hey how do I report this to the SEC anyway? Anyone with experience in this area care to point me in the right direction?
|
|
|
|
In case you haven't cottoned on to the fact that these guys are quite ready to lie when it suits them, read the thread and find my solicitation of $300k. Or maybe you assholes could help out and post it here? The fabrications are just an attempt to draw the spotlight away from their own criminal conspiracy. Don't worry, said spotlight is not going anywhere. |
|
|
|
I can always trade 1 bitBTC for about 1 BTC on average It's an unstable equilibrium so no. The dividend rate will have an effect on the price which has yet to be determined and one of the reasons why we are running a TestNet. I disagree that the price will monotonically decrease to zero as you have claimed and you really don't seem to understand that markets have two sides. But this is why we test things before we release them.
This is just the type of evidence the SEC needs to put you away. Can't wait to see the internal e-mails. Now you tell me that you are still testing, you claim to not be sure, you think maybe it is an "unstable equilibrium." But when doing reports for the press for the eyes of naive investors you say this: http://www.coindesk.com/bitshares-p2p-trading-platform-to-offer-dividends-on-bitcoins/“If you own BitBTC you can earn dividends on your bitcoins,” said Larimer. “If you have a thousand bitcoins and you convert them to BitBTC, and then you hold it for six months, then you convert the BitBTC plus the dividends you received back to bitcoins, you’ll end up with more bitcoins than you started with.”
One BitUSD will always be worth around one dollar, say the founders, just as one BitBTC will be worth around one bitcoin.
You have been a very naughty boy. |
|
|
|
I purchase 1 bitBTC. I earn bitshares as my share of txn fees. I reinvest these txn fees to buy more bitBTC. Eventually, I have 100 million bitBTC. I earned all these from my share of txn fees you see.
I take these to a market trading bitBTC / BTC pairs. Something about longs and shorts, a prediction market, and other such nonsense ensures that I can always trade 1 bitBTC for about 1 BTC on average.
So now I make my trades and I have my 100 million BTC.
Okay, where do I sign up?
Ok, this is a fair point of confusion that many people will have... so let me address it. There are 100 million BitBTC backed by 150 to 250 million BTC worth of BitShares which means for this situation to occur, BitShares must have a market cap at least 10 x that of Bitcoin or these positions could never have been created. Each of these BitBTC would be paying a non-0 amount of BitShares as dividends and therefore the market value of a BitBTC will be greater than a BTC so if you enter the market attempting to sell 100 million BitBTC for actual BTC you would cause the BitBTC/BTC price to sag and create HUGE arbitrage opportunities for people to purchase your BitBTC 'cheap' with BTC and then sell them for BitShares. So now that I have explained the market dynamics, admitted that an idiot could attempt to manipulate the price of BitBTC/BTC by selling at a loss, and shown that 100 million BitBTC cannot be created from thin air, but requires 200 million BTC worth of value to be backing it do you see the difference? Oh, I wouldn't worry about the market cap. After all you have a created a risk free system allowing anyone and everyone who invests (or their descendents) to achieve world domination. You will have plenty of bitshares to create 100 million bitBTC with. What I'm more concerned about is how I can own the whole world and my neighbour can own the whole world at the same time? This matter might cause some confusion. Do you have some theoretical physics story to go along with the prediction market? That might help to smooth things over. |
|
|
|
|
I purchase 1 bitBTC. I earn bitshares as my share of txn fees. I reinvest these txn fees to buy more bitBTC. Eventually, I have 100 million bitBTC. I earned all these from my share of txn fees you see.
I take these to a market trading bitBTC / BTC pairs. Something about longs and shorts, a prediction market, and other such nonsense ensures that I can always trade 1 bitBTC for about 1 BTC on average.
So now I make my trades and I have my 100 million BTC.
Okay, where do I sign up? We really gotta promote this thing hard!!!
Not sure which of these is the better marketing slogan:
(A completely risk free system to turn 1 BTC into 100 million BTC)
(A completely risk free system to turn 1 BTC into ownership of every single asset in the world. They will have to reintroduce slavery, so you will have new stuff to purchase.)
|
|
|
|
|
If yes, please follow the debate on bitshares. It could benefit from more informed particiption.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
