Why does no one use the BitShares Exchange DEX?

[SwedishGirl]

The interface is a bit clunky and not that intuitive. Also when all the volume is already on Polo, you don't have a lot of reasons to use other exchanges. For example I may only use Bittrex for trading coins that are not available on Polo.

[1714947013]

1714947013

[1714947013]

1714947013

[1714947013]

1714947013

[Rick M]

The interface I got used to it, but it lcks liquidity n advanced trading tool.....but is pretty good n safe allinone....a stable project with more than 3 years that keep improving everyday.

[teiva]

The interface is a bit clunky and not that intuitive. Also when all the volume is already on Polo, you don't have a lot of reasons to use other exchanges. For example I may only use Bittrex for trading coins that are not available on Polo.

Well why i wouldn't trade with Polo (although i admit that they have a very friendly User interface compared to btc-e for example) is because it may as well be the next Cryptsy ?

[iamnotback]

MP nixes DEX for real-time trading:

http://trilema.com/2013/why-i-nixed-p2p-colored-coins-and-all-that-jazz/


He implies that if we prove him wrong, then he can just take the value for himself.

But if the system is truly decentralized, he can't take the value and no one can.

Who is correct? MP or the future of DEX?

I'll say something about this with code.

[Rick M]

MP nixes DEX for real-time trading:

http://trilema.com/2013/why-i-nixed-p2p-colored-coins-and-all-that-jazz/


He implies that if we prove him wrong, then he can just take the value for himself.

But if the system is truly decentralized, he can't take the value and no one can.

Who is correct? MP or the future of DEX?

I'll say something about this with code.

certanly he never touched openledger.info, a 5yold kid can play with it, its useful, no logins gateways n smartscoins all togheter, no 3rd party software, no kyc, your wallet, your exchange, your vault, allinone, you dont need anything installed at your computer n still have 100% control of your funds, if you turn off your computer your orders stay there (n its not centrlized!), you dont need scrow! (n its decentrilized).

after 3years bitshares delivered, now its up to adoption.

[TravelsAsia]

MP nixes DEX for real-time trading:

http://trilema.com/2013/why-i-nixed-p2p-colored-coins-and-all-that-jazz/


He implies that if we prove him wrong, then he can just take the value for himself.

But if the system is truly decentralized, he can't take the value and no one can.

Who is correct? MP or the future of DEX?

I'll say something about this with code.

certanly he never touched openledger.info, a 5yold kid can play with it, its useful, no logins gateways n smartscoins all togheter, no 3rd party software, no kyc, your wallet, your exchange, your vault, allinone, you dont need anything installed at your computer n still have 100% control of your funds, if you turn off your computer your orders stay there (n its not centrlized!), you dont need scrow! (n its decentrilized).

after 3years bitshares delivered, now its up to adoption.

Judging from the volume, the market disagrees with your assessment.

[laugh2btc]

volume is still in top 20!

[Rick M]

volume is still in top 20!

travelasia is probably talking about volume inside dex, that really needs to improve, its increasing, but pretty slowly according data from cryptofresh.com/charts


Bitshares, the asset, it yes is widely traded all around, china like bts asset, i hope they like n used more the product that is amazing in my opinion.

[brekyrself]

MP nixes DEX for real-time trading:

http://trilema.com/2013/why-i-nixed-p2p-colored-coins-and-all-that-jazz/


He implies that if we prove him wrong, then he can just take the value for himself.

But if the system is truly decentralized, he can't take the value and no one can.

Who is correct? MP or the future of DEX?

I'll say something about this with code.

Perhaps part of the reason of me starting this thread is because I share some of the ideals Bytemaster holds.  I was curious why no one uses the dex when it assists with our pursuit of "life, liberty, and property."  I do hold concerns around algo's, distribution, decentralization, etc... however these are all ground floor projects and if successful should be able to improve on these items over time.  With many things in life you only learn from failures and those who are strong enough pick themselves back up and try again.


Changing gears slightly with the article you linked but highly relevant about all blockchains.  Many talking points.

-How much decentralization or how distributed do we need a system to be?  Most obvious answer is enough to prevent downtime via artificial issues, ddos etc...
-Will xy amount be safer compared with the current banking system?  Social engineering of hacks, think bank of Bangladesh, civil asset forfeiture, list goes on.
-Will xy be safer compared with current business models?  Customer record keeping
-Where is the weak link?  Blockchain or end user?

A properly coded, peer reviewed, always improving blockchain (think llinux) should be a better solution compared to many of the systems out there.


When you read about the following, day after day, why is crypto still on the ground floor?  Yes BTC can help, but a combination of the current crypto systems can really make a difference.  Is it ego's or greed that keep the talent from cooperating on these projects?

The markets are rigged
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-23/cme-admits-futures-trading-was-rigged-under-old-system

Asset forfeiture.  You don't own property, you lease it from the .gov.  You don't own your money, your only allowed to use it under their terms
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-08/how-irs-used-civil-asset-forfeiture-ruin-lives-two-connecticut-bakers
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-22/irs-admits-illegally-seizing-bank-accounts-agrees-give-money-back#comment-7722469

Capital controls.  This will spread
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-22/uk-regulators-demand-bank-wargames-modelling-capital-controls-bank-runs-20-devaluati


iamnotback, I am curious where your project is headed.

[iamnotback]

iamnotback, I am curious where your project is headed.

I've got to get my crypto-currency design launched first, before developing other decentralized applications.

Dan has done some good work and experimentation that even influences some of my designs.

I don't think DPOS is the best we can nor is it acceptable, because after all PoS means the majority can decide to fork it. I mentioned some other weaknesses recently for DPOS (lazy to dig up the link). I want to take away the power of anyone to fork. Only proof-of-burn will work as a fork methodology after I am done changing the crypto-currency landscape with the first major overhaul of proof-of-work since Satoshi.

As for DEX trading, I think it is probably useful for exchanging not in real-time. For serious traders, they need a system that can't give any party any leverage. I haven't analyzed Dan's decentralized market place tech recently to see where he ended up and what are the strengths and weaknesses.

I've got so many fish to fry, that real-time trading stuff is a low priority for me. jl777 is working on that too, so I try not to duplicate the areas that those two others are already working on.

I'll be doing other important achievements for decentralization.

And if I go quiet it means there is a better chance it may actually come to market. If I am here talking, you will know it will never come to fruition.

I'd probably have more to say if I took more time to think about it, but I've wasted enough of my and your time today foruming.

[iamnotback]

As for DEX trading, I think it is probably useful for exchanging not in real-time. For serious traders, they need a system that can't give any party any leverage. I haven't analyzed Dan's decentralized market place tech recently to see where he ended up and what are the strengths and weaknesses.

The whales probably want to trade on a centralized exchange where they can get preferred access such as for HFT.

Where the whales trade, the minnows will follow.

Seems a bit depressing, but apparently reality.

However, my response to the Popsicle is that he is living in the Old Industrial (fixed capital investment) World where stored monetary capital was King. We are moving to a new Knowledge Age, wherein networking is the most important. He response is WoT (Web-of-Trust) and I agree. But I think he is incorrect to presume the masses don't matter. I think he doesn't understand Knowledge creation:

http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Algorithm_!=_Entropy

I still believe in people. I love people (even though they frustrate the fuck out of me if I have to talk to 1000s of them in a forum and that is because it isn't a WoT so we frustrate each other due to not being well matched).

He seems to be focused on trading. I believe the future is about investment, but more saliently about investment of knowledge and community interaction, not about money. My redesign of what a DAO should be, will reflect my insight.

[pinkpanther03]

Maybe because its not trustworthy,  or some of the community they their own favorite exchange platform which is first legit and build trusted by the communities.   

[CoinHoarder]

Maybe because its not trustworthy

Smartcoins have been working for over two years. At what time frame would you consider something as being safe and secure?

They did not work as originally planned, but Bitshares has tweaked how Smartcoins work over the past 2 years. Say what you want to about Daniel Larimer, but he is one of the brightest individuals in cryptocurrency, and he can produce C++ code among the best in the industry. Not only that, but each tweak to Smartcoins over the past two years has been a community effort. This community effort took place in forum threads, and each tweak had hundreds of replies, in which critical discussions and evaluations were had. The DEX may have low volume, and I agree with that gripe, but as far as Smartcoins maintaining the value of their real-life counterparts... they have performed awesomely. People used to harp on the possibility of a "Black Swan" event in Bitshares' early days. However, Bitshares' Smartcoins have proven resilient against some really big 24 hour value changes (both positive and negative) throughout its 2+ year history. With each huge 24 hour swing that passes, and Smartcoins continue to track the value of their real life counterparts, I gain more and more confidence in their resiliency.

I get that people like owning the real tokens though. I get that argument as well, but if I can make the same trade without trusted third parties and all I am doing is trading/speculating, then Smartcoins make a lot of sense. Obviously, if you are using a cryptocurrency, then it is more convenient to own the real token, but even then there are gateways that exist which make it really easy to seamlessly transact across blockchains. Considering the low cost and ease of using gateways, can this really be considered a downside? Especially if someone is simply speculating/trading, which I think is the main hobby of the community.

This is my original thought process on why Bitshares is dope, and still I stick to this reasoning to this day. To get why Bitshares' DEX/Smartcoins (or possibly B&C exchange, or some Nxt/jl3 project, or a yet-to-be-developed Eth/Lisk blockchain app, or something else) will be very valuable one day, you only have to realize one thing. It sucks to get Goxxed/Cryptid/Etc. How many times will people need to get Goxxed/Cryptid before they realize that a decentralized exchange is ideal and most volume shift there? I posit that there is an answer to that question. I think most people will eventually agree that decentralized exchanges are better than exchanges where you have to rely on a trusted third party. It may take the cryptocurrency community a few more times getting goxxed, or it may take tens to hundreds of more times. I came to that realization shortly after the Mt. Gox situation and I think that eventually everyone else will realize that too, then exchange volume will shift to decentralized platforms. At the moment, I think Bitshares has easily positioned itself to be a leader in the space.

[brekyrself]

Maybe because its not trustworthy

Smartcoins have been working for over two years. At what time frame would you consider something as being safe and secure?

They did not work as originally planned, but Bitshares has tweaked how Smartcoins work over the past 2 years. Say what you want to about Daniel Larimer, but he is one of the brightest individuals in cryptocurrency, and he can produce C++ code among the best in the industry. Not only that, but each tweak to Smartcoins over the past two years has been a community effort. This community effort took place in forum threads, and each tweak had hundreds of replies, in which critical discussions and evaluations were had. The DEX may have low volume, and I agree with that gripe, but as far as Smartcoins maintaining the value of their real-life counterparts... they have performed awesomely. People used to harp on the possibility of a "Black Swan" event in Bitshares' early days. However, Bitshares' Smartcoins have proven resilient against some really big 24 hour value changes (both positive and negative) throughout its 2+ year history. With each huge 24 hour swing that passes, and Smartcoins continue to track the value of their real life counterparts, I gain more and more confidence in their resiliency.

I get that people like owning the real tokens though. I get that argument as well, but if I can make the same trade without trusted third parties and all I am doing is trading/speculating, then Smartcoins make a lot of sense. Obviously, if you are using a cryptocurrency, then it is more convenient to own the real token, but even then there are gateways that exist which make it really easy to seamlessly transact across blockchains. Considering the low cost and ease of using gateways, can this really be considered a downside? Especially if someone is simply speculating/trading, which I think is the main hobby of the community.

This is my original thought process on why Bitshares is dope, and still I stick to this reasoning to this day. To get why Bitshares' DEX/Smartcoins (or possibly B&C exchange, or some Nxt/jl3 project, or a yet-to-be-developed Eth/Lisk blockchain app, or something else) will be very valuable one day, you only have to realize one thing. It sucks to get Goxxed/Cryptid/Etc. How many times will people need to get Goxxed/Cryptid before they realize that a decentralized exchange is ideal and most volume shift there? I posit that there is an answer to that question. I think most people will eventually agree that decentralized exchanges are better than exchanges where you have to rely on a trusted third party. It may take the cryptocurrency community a few more times getting goxxed, or it may take tens to hundreds of more times. I came to that realization shortly after the Mt. Gox situation and I think that eventually everyone else will realize that too, then exchange volume will shift to decentralized platforms. At the moment, I think Bitshares has easily positioned itself to be a leader in the space.

Nice post, we think alike.

I'd much rather support a crypto blockchain when investing in an etf such as BitGold.  Monday is going to be a bloodbath for the markets and there is major talk of capital controls, markets halting, etc...  At least with a blockchain we can move in and out of these vehicles with ease.

If there was only some liquidity...

[iamnotback]

The probable reason that whales (insiders) don't want DEX (decentralized exchange) is because then they can't do their "print demand out of thin air" margined premine manipulation pumps:

r0ach your allegation about ETH being manipulated is starting to resonate on this board:

The bolded part in your response is exactly what ETH/DAO is. Not to say these maniacs can't push the price much higher in the future but the con will only last so long.

The way the insiders manipulate the market with these premined tokens is explained, and note the high leverage employed which means if they run out of tokens to margin with, it is like a house-of-cards and will implode to 0 in a heartbeat:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1524111.msg15340159#msg15340159

They siphon off BTC for as long as they can and high as they can pump it, then game over and they walk away with BTC and the fools walk away with empty bags.

Also some (including the Daoattacker) allege that the USGovt + MIT (university) are complicit in the ETH pump:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1413819.msg15343686#msg15343686

[iamnotback]

Why does no one use the BitShares Exchange DEX?

Because we are just fools:

It seems that a corrupted exchange is an essential ingredient for pumping a crypto currency to $billion nosebleed mcaps, so apparently not only is demand being created out-of-thin-air using margined coins the insiders deceptively obtained from the ICO by buying from themselves (taking out a BTC loan and paying it back after the ICO)...

...but likely also that some high volume exchange is also creating tokens literally out-of-thin-air and is another Mt.Gox or Cryptsy waiting to default when there is a run to withdraw.

A likely essential ingredient in BitCON's rise from $10 to $1200 was because Mt.Gox was creating coins out-of-thin-air and handling most of the BTC volume, so this provided more coins for everyone to leverage and create fake demand with.

So this huge pump in ETH likely means another high volume exchange will end up stealing all your coins again soon.

The way this criminal enterprise crypto-currency enterprise works is that the insiders create tokens out-of-thin-air on the exchanges, then when the ponzi scheme implodes, the "hackers" or owners of the exchange are blamed instead of blaming the real manipulators behind the curtain.

We apparently have criminal gangs in the crypto-currency ecosystem. The DAO attacker says the UGGovt + MIT/Cornell universities are complicit. Others say Goldman Sachs is in this. Probably also Russian criminals, etc..

That is likely why there is no enforcement from the SEC. Because the SEC is owned by the criminal gangs.

Nothing has changed! We have not defeated fiat. We have not defeated the same banksters bastards who are always enslaving us.

We're just fools.

[brekyrself]

Why does no one use the BitShares Exchange DEX?

Because we are just fools:

It seems that a corrupted exchange is an essential ingredient for pumping a crypto currency to $billion nosebleed mcaps, so apparently not only is demand being created out-of-thin-air using margined coins the insiders deceptively obtained from the ICO by buying from themselves (taking out a BTC loan and paying it back after the ICO)...

...but likely also that some high volume exchange is also creating tokens literally out-of-thin-air and is another Mt.Gox or Cryptsy waiting to default when there is a run to withdraw.

A likely essential ingredient in BitCON's rise from $10 to $1200 was because Mt.Gox was creating coins out-of-thin-air and handling most of the BTC volume, so this provided more coins for everyone to leverage and create fake demand with.

So this huge pump in ETH likely means another high volume exchange will end up stealing all your coins again soon.

The way this criminal enterprise crypto-currency enterprise works is that the insiders create tokens out-of-thin-air on the exchanges, then when the ponzi scheme implodes, the "hackers" or owners of the exchange are blamed instead of blaming the real manipulators behind the curtain.

We apparently have criminal gangs in the crypto-currency ecosystem. The DAO attacker says the UGGovt + MIT/Cornell universities are complicit. Others say Goldman Sachs is in this. Probably also Russian criminals, etc..

That is likely why there is no enforcement from the SEC. Because the SEC is owned by the criminal gangs.

Nothing has changed! We have not defeated fiat. We have not defeated the same banksters bastards who are always enslaving us.

We're just fools.

Thanks for the links and discussion.  I still can not for the life of me wrap my head around the "volume" of alt coins traded recently.  With no transparency into these exchanges, we have no idea what is going on behind the scenes.  I'll put dollars to doughnuts there is more then meets the eye. 

This is another reason I like how the dex is trying to flip the 3rd party exchanges into becoming gateways instead.  For example, if you look at the user issued asset from the gateway OpenLedger, open.BTC, you can see this in action.  https://bitshares.openledger.info/#/market/OPEN.BTC_BTS  They make the 0.2% fee exchanging bts to and from open.BTC.  From the wallet you can then withdraw open.BTC and receive BTC.  This would make exchanges compete for your business via fee's charged, liquidity provided, and assets offered.  Also, say one of these gateways went bust while you hold their UIA, another gateway can step in and accept that IOU as you are still in control of that asset.

On the other hand, do you feel government regulated exchanges will help or hurt blockchain technology?  Positive is less (not zero) bs going on behind the scenes.  While it may go against the financial freedoms blockchains seek, short term it would help the average Joe get in and out of the market.

[iamnotback]

Thanks for the links and discussion.  I still can not for the life of me wrap my head around the "volume" of alt coins traded recently.  With no transparency into these exchanges, we have no idea what is going on behind the scenes.  I'll put dollars to doughnuts there is more then meets the eye.

It is obvious that the high volume are the insiders buying from themselves in order to control the market price.

The way this works is that if you flood the exchange with high bids and high asks, then the small volume of actually lower asks is insignificant and minor cost for the insider. For example let's say the insider is 99% of the volume (using Sybil identities on the exchange), then the 1% that wants to sell is an insignificant cost to the insider, because the manipulation of the price drives more speculator demand on the bid side than on the ask side.

So in this way, the insider is actually unloading tokens at higher and higher prices. This games goes on until the insiders have unloaded their tokens at nosebleed prices. Then it collapses.

In Ethereum's case, it was alleged by the Dao attacker that the insiders are using their tokens as margin to do margin trades to provide more upside price leverage manipulation. So first you use your tokens buying from yourself to pump up the price, then you use your ETH to short the ETH price, and start selling tokens rapidly to cause a crash in price. You cover your shorts, and repeat the process again driving the price up. But you don't crash the price too far, so as to keep the dream alive. Having very good marketing also helps.

This is why we often see a huge decline in the price after the initial ICO pump, as this enables the insiders to accumulate tokens very cheaply and then the upward price manipulation begins.

Note the insiders need to make sure they are the only large holders, so no one can compete with them and for example sell into their pump.

It seems if you don't do this manipulation, then your token will be scorned by speculators and your reputation as altcoin developers will be tarnished.

The developers if they are honest, will take their funding and continue to work hard. The market manipulators are going to come in and buy up any good coin and pump it. The only way to stop that would be for the developer (and/or the community) to hold the coins tight fisted, but then this creates a dead market such as Monero which has never seen more than 4X gain after the initial pump by rpietila.

So what can an honest developer do   He has no choice but to let the speculators have what they want. The important thing is the developer is funded and able to drive the ecosystem to success. If so, then the downside price crash will be limited or at least a great buying opportunity. Fundamental development (coding) and marketing matters.

But alas, DEX is going to be scorned because the manipulators can't operate there. Or can they? Speculators will go where the (manipulated) volume is.

[brekyrself]

Thanks for the links and discussion.  I still can not for the life of me wrap my head around the "volume" of alt coins traded recently.  With no transparency into these exchanges, we have no idea what is going on behind the scenes.  I'll put dollars to doughnuts there is more then meets the eye.

It is obvious that the high volume are the insiders buying from themselves in order to control the market price.

The way this works is that if you flood the exchange with high bids and high asks, then the small volume of actually lower asks is insignificant and minor cost for the insider. For example let's say the insider is 99% of the volume (using Sybil identities on the exchange), then the 1% that wants to sell is an insignificant cost to the insider, because the manipulation of the price drives more speculator demand on the bid side than on the ask side.

So in this way, the insider is actually unloading tokens at higher and higher prices. This games goes on until the insiders have unloaded their tokens at nosebleed prices. Then it collapses.

In Ethereum's case, it was alleged by the Dao attacker that the insiders are using their tokens as margin to do margin trades to provide more upside price leverage manipulation. So first you use your tokens buying from yourself to pump up the price, then you use your ETH to short the ETH price, and start selling tokens rapidly to cause a crash in price. You cover your shorts, and repeat the process again driving the price up. But you don't crash the price too far, so as to keep the dream alive. Having very good marketing also helps.

This is why we often see a huge decline in the price after the initial ICO pump, as this enables the insiders to accumulate tokens very cheaply and then the upward price manipulation begins.

Note the insiders need to make sure they are the only large holders, so no one can compete with them and for example sell into their pump.

It seems if you don't do this manipulation, then your token will be scorned by speculators and your reputation as altcoin developers will be tarnished.

The developers if they are honest, will take their funding and continue to work hard. The market manipulators are going to come in and buy up any good coin and pump it. The only way to stop that would be for the developer (and/or the community) to hold the coins tight fisted, but then this creates a dead market such as Monero which has never seen more than 4X gain after the initial pump by rpietila.

So what can an honest developer do   He has no choice but to let the speculators have what they want. The important thing is the developer is funded and able to drive the ecosystem to success. If so, then the downside price crash will be limited or at least a great buying opportunity. Fundamental development (coding) and marketing matters.

But alas, DEX is going to be scorned because the manipulators can't operate there. Or can they? Speculators will go where the (manipulated) volume is.

How deep does the crypto rabbit hole go?  Who are the insiders?  Individuals with play money, ninja miners, or the exchanges themselves doing the ICO purchasing?

To your last question on whether or not its possible on the DEX, it sure is to an extent.  The dex, unlike a 3rd party exchange, can not get in on the ICO purchases which may be happening at current times.  When it comes to trading, all is visible through a block explorer.  https://cryptofresh.com/

Does not solve all the problems, however if a developer was to ICO a User Issued Asset through the DEX, there would be increased transparency.

[schnib]

If you use a dezentralised exchange like Bitshares Exchange DEX, how can you be sure you won't get hacked as well?

Can i have a cold storage of my account holdings and still being able to trade all my coins vs others etc.?

If possible, is there a convenient way to do so yet?