Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments

[tarmo888]

What bounded assets? They are called Bonded stablecoins, like bonding curve. Use actual words.

No matter how many times I will  repeat stable those bounded assets  will not become such.  As they say "you can put your boots in the oven, but that don't make them biscuits ".

Version 1 was stable enough, version 2 is even more stable.

Stable relative to what, $ , BTC or Gbyte?

Why you call them bounded? There is no such thing, there is bonding curve and Bonded stablecoins.

Obviously, they are stable relatively to their pegged asset? What else should they be stable with? OUSDV2 is stable to USD value, OBITV2 is stable to Bitcoin value, OETHV2 is stable to Ethereum value and OAUG is worth same as 1 gram of gold.

[1713411181]

1713411181

[1713411181]

1713411181

[1713411181]

1713411181

[tarmo888]

What bounded assets? They are called Bonded stablecoins, like bonding curve. Use actual words.

No matter how many times I will  repeat stable those bounded assets  will not become such.  As they say "you can put your boots in the oven, but that don't make them biscuits ".

Version 1 was stable enough, version 2 is even more stable.

Stable relative to what, $ , BTC or Gbyte?

Why you call them bounded? There is no such thing, there is bonding curve and Bonded stablecoins.

Obviously, they are stable relatively to their pegged asset? What else should they be stable with? OUSDV2 is stable to USD value, OBITV2 is stable to Bitcoin value, OETHV2 is stable to Ethereum value and OAUG is worth same as 1 gram of gold.

OK, to convince me show the  step-by-step practical way   how  can I  sell  say 100 OUSD for $100 (or at least for $99) using the current exchanges, pools and rates.  I’m sure you can’t do it. You can talk a lot using theoretical arguments, but a theory without practice is worthless for me.

What's your argument now? That it's not a stablecoin because it's not listed on centralized exchange? Or you just whine about small liquidity because small marketcap?

You can sell OUSDV2 to GBYTE and GBYTE to BTC or USD.
https://ostable.org/trade/VLKI3XMMX5YULOBA6ZXBXDPI6TXF6V3D/buy-redeem

[icopress]

Has anyone bought or sold Obyte on Bit-Z? I am quite skeptical about exchanges that I don't know much, and I would be more calm if someone satisfied my curiosity. In particular, I am also interested in the circumstances under which the listing took place on this exchange. Did the listing offer come directly from the exchange itself, or was it an initiative from the Obyte team? Thank!

[tarmo888]

Has anyone bought or sold Obyte on Bit-Z? I am quite skeptical about exchanges that I don't know much, and I would be more calm if someone satisfied my curiosity. In particular, I am also interested in the circumstances under which the listing took place on this exchange. Did the listing offer come directly from the exchange itself, or was it an initiative from the Obyte team? Thank!

I haven't personally used it but obviously it has been used by other people who implemented the trading rewards because Bittrex and BitZ are the only 2 exchanges that are supported by that distribution. Cryptox.pl missing because the API doesn't have read-only access to user's trading info.

I think BitZ does KYC too from certain amounts, but not sure what they are, so in that sense it's might be not have any different from Bittrex who does KYC immediately.

BitZ listing was initiated long time ago by some community member who really wanted it, not by Obyte team or exchange. Until the recent trading rewards, it almost didn't have any volume, but now does sometimes more volume than Bittrex.

[tarmo888]

What's your argument now? That it's not a stablecoin because it's not listed on centralized exchange? Or you just whine about small liquidity because small marketcap?

You can sell OUSDV2 to GBYTE and GBYTE to BTC or USD.
https://ostable.org/trade/VLKI3XMMX5YULOBA6ZXBXDPI6TXF6V3D/buy-redeem

I don't whine about anything. I like transparent stuff.  You answer has proved that 100 OUSD can not be swapped to 100 USD. If I use OUSD-Gbyte  then  Gbyte-BTC and BTC-USD route afterwards  I will get far less than $100. That is why I would rather consider this particular asset as algorithmic   asset which remains relative  "stable" within  its bounded  algorithm but not in the real life.

The word is bonded, not bounded. And there is GBYTE-USDT market too, just low volume. Just because USD stablecoin doesn't have direct fiat off-ramp, doesn't make it algorithmic stablecoin. If you have to go multiple pairs until getting back into fiat, you might get back even more than 100 USD too, this has nothing to do about what typr the stablecoin is, but all about what markets it is being traded on.

You are making up new words, there is not such stablecoins as Bounded stablecoins. The prices that Bonded stablecoins use are not bounded, but bonded - means that the prices are bonded with some other value (such as supply) on a bonding curve.

There are algorithmic stablecoins, but these are usually not backed by anything and just inflate or deflate their supply to keep the peg.

Bonded stablecoins are as algoritmic as any AMM exchange - it's not overcollateralized, it doesn't have margin calls and it doesn't have liquidations.

[tarmo888]

Don’t nag. That was just a typo on my part.  By stressing on debate about "bonded" or "algorithmic" ( which back burner issue and soft soap,  by and large)  you are  leading away from the main point I have put in front of you - those assets which you call "bonded  stablecoins" are not stable at all

LOL at typo. How many times I had to correct you that it's not Bounded, but Bonded and the name comes from bonding curve, not some bounded price range?
Your whole nonsense started with you question, why it has so strange name (it actually doesn't have strange name):

Why does Obyte use such strange term as "bounded" when describing their stablecoins? For me all their stablecoins fall into well established class  of algorithmic stablecoins the price of which is automatically controlled by algorithms. They use the  bivariate function in their algo to control the price but the essence of their stablecoins  doesn’t change - they are just algorithmic ones.  IMO, this  "bounded" in conjunction with stablecoin looks like "window-dressing" .

Asset which is not sustainable is not entitled to be called stable.

Look, a couple months  ago I have bought 100 OUSD for around $100.  Right now I can swap  those 100 OUSD into 1.0587Gbyte  and sell them (via BTC) for ~ $76.7 (even less).  IMO, fancy stability  

You can call them whatever you want, but they’re not stable.

Just because you are shitty trader, doesn't mean that something is not stable. Markets can be irrational and dump at whatever price they want, but those with brain can find their way out without injuring themselves. You are just plain FUDster or just clueless, not knowing that introducing of V2 stablecoins have caused more sell pressure for V1 tokens and buy pressure for V2 tokens.

[tarmo888]

Just because you are shitty trader, doesn't mean that something is not stable. Markets can be irrational and dump at whatever price they want, but those with brain can find their way out without injuring themselves. You are just plain FUDster or just clueless, not knowing that introducing of V2 stablecoins have caused more sell pressure for V1 tokens and buy pressure forWhy did you put m2 in here? tokens.

Nice,   I have proven that  assets you called as "stablecoins"  are not stable  at all and you started insulted me?  You are shitty developer after that and because of that the shit-algo you developed doesn't make your  algorithmic  assets  stable.  You use soft soap by applying to your shitcoin the  fancy word like "bonded" and such,  and  think no one understands it? Why did you brought up V2  here while I was talking about V1?  You think I’m gonna get into your shit again? You're wave off base, shit-developer of tarmo888.

I have not use any soft soap, I straight up told you that don't understand basics, you are clueless and you are shitty trader.

It's not Bounded stablecoins, it's not Bonded stablecoins. The word comes from "bonding curve". It is not fancy. Bancor uses it, Uniswap uses it, every Uniswap clone uses it.
It's not algorithmic stablecoins (something else is called like that), it's stablecoins that use bonded curves. Bonded Stablecoins even use multi-dimentional bonding curve aka bonding surface.
How much more nonsense do I have to correct?

I brought up V2 because you started your nonsense exactly 1 post after the announcement of V2 Bonded Stablecoins? Don't you remember anymore when you started your "bounded" nonsesnse?
If you dump something that others don't want, you change it's price. If you are smart and not a sheep like everyone else, you see that you can profit from other people mistakes and fix the peg.
Same thing happens when buying something at once, you drive up the price for your own stupidity. Would you had bought them in chunks, the price would have had time to correct.

All in all, you have to look at the timeframe when the price is stable and when it's not. When markets are irrational and dump and fomo, then during that period, the price is not stable, but in a long run, it is.

[jwinterm]

Just because you are shitty trader, doesn't mean that something is not stable. Markets can be irrational and dump at whatever price they want, but those with brain can find their way out without injuring themselves. You are just plain FUDster or just clueless, not knowing that introducing of V2 stablecoins have caused more sell pressure for V1 tokens and buy pressure forWhy did you put m2 in here? tokens.

Nice,   I have proven that  assets you called as "stablecoins"  are not stable  at all and you started insulted me?  You are shitty developer after that and because of that the shit-algo you developed doesn't make your  algorithmic  assets  stable.  You use soft soap by applying to your shitcoin the  fancy word like "bonded" and such,  and  think no one understands it? Why did you brought up V2  here while I was talking about V1?  You think I’m gonna get into your shit again? You're wave off base, shit-developer of tarmo888.

I have not use any soft soap, I straight up told you that don't understand basics, you are clueless and you are shitty trader.

It's not Bounded stablecoins, it's not Bonded stablecoins. The word comes from "bonding curve". It is not fancy. Bancor uses it, Uniswap uses it, every Uniswap clone uses it.
It's not algorithmic stablecoins (something else is called like that), it's stablecoins that use bonded curves. Bonded Stablecoins even use multi-dimentional bonding curve aka bonding surface.
How much more nonsense do I have to correct?

I brought up V2 because you started your nonsense exactly 1 post after the announcement of V2 Bonded Stablecoins? Don't you remember anymore when you started your "bounded" nonsesnse?
If you dump something that others don't want, you change it's price. If you are smart and not a sheep like everyone else, you see that you can profit from other people mistakes and fix the peg.
Same thing happens when buying something at once, you drive up the price for your own stupidity. Would you had bought them in chunks, the price would have had time to correct.

All in all, you have to look at the timeframe when the price is stable and when it's not. When markets are irrational and dump and fomo, then during that period, the price is not stable, but in a long run, it is.

lol can't believe you're still on this thread scamming people tarmo, proud of you buddy 

[tarmo888]

To my shame I late figured out  all their scam with so-called bonded "stable"coin.  That shit  has proven to be not stable. He argued that they are not stable because market was not stable in the chosen timeframe,  but one wonders who needs "stable"coins that are stable only in a stable market, any coin would be stable at such conditions.

Regarding their "bonded" word attached to "stable"coin. They don't know themselves what it means. I have encountered their Discord discussions  where they try to give this word a sense of sense. IMO, they attached it to keep sugar coating this scam for others.

It's only you who is still dumb enough not to understand where the word "bonding" comes from, even when it's mentioned in the tagline of the website and there has been "How it works" page since the beginning https://coinmarketcap.com/alexandria/glossary/bonding-curve

Nobody said that markets have to be stable, what i said was that if people want to dump something for a newer thing, then obviously they can do it so and lower the price.

I don't know what Discord you are, but only discussion on Obyte Discord has been how to call the consensus mechanism of Obyte.

Own up your fault that you can't read properly and just FUD. Learn to read.

[sammy007]

Where i can sell black bytes and what price?

[tarmo888]

Where i can sell black bytes and what price?

Better to sell Gbytes,  I’m glad I did when they were $90

I wouldn't take investing advice from xenon131, he just wants GBYTE/USD price to go down so he could get his 100 OUSD out of the liquidity pool without divergence loss (even though he probably already got rewards from liquidity mining). He also can't read properly, even when you try to correct him for 2 weeks and he can't tell the difference between different type of stablecoins out there. He also thinks that multi-dimensional bonding curve means multi-asset collateral (not sure where he got that nonsense from).

Nope, all liquidity providers lose their money because they need to swap to Gbyte at the very end. None of the existing stablecoins can be directly traded for BTC, Gbyte is the only option. Price is getting crazy, my blockfolio app shows $136.77 right now.  Gbyte, I'm saying  seriously, stop immediately and go back to $20.

Why so huge surge in price, almost 70% up? I tried to find  the news that would in potential to trigger the current rise but failed to find any. There is a rumor that Obyte has to target kucoin, is that true? Anyway I don't think the price increase of Gbyte could make  liquidity providers happy right now. They are losing money in their pools. Gbyte, go back to $20.

The big problem I see for your  algorithmic stablecoins (OK,  you may call them bounded, but they are algorithmic, by and large) is that their  price in Gbyte do  not reflect their real value in BTC/$. Probably  to control their prices you need to implement not two-dementional  but three- or even four dimensional function. Those two extra dimensions would be BTC and $. Market oracles would be helpful.  

[tarmo888]

I wouldn't take investing advice from xenon131, he just wants GBYTE/USD price to go down so he could get his 100 OUSD out of the liquidity pool without divergence loss (even though he probably already got rewards from liquidity mining). He also can't read properly, even when you try to correct him for 2 weeks and he can't tell the difference between different type of stablecoins out there. He also thinks that multi-dimensional bonding curve means multi-asset collateral (not sure where he got that nonsense from).

Bollocks, I pulled my OUSD  out of your  fatuous pools a long time ago.  I could tell you even more. I used shortcomings of your  algorithmic stablecoins to make 25% daily profit from arbitrage swapping with the  end in Gbyte.  But you don't have to know all the details because I intended to use this again and again while there are fools who lock their funds in your pools which are real cock-up. I sold almost all my Gbytes on cryptox. A few left for arbitrage. Bye, barmy.

LOL, it's by design, if you got funds out then it means you were within the allowed limits. I guess you are little smarter about DeFi than others, so you are making profit, but it's seems you don't understand why you get profit. Oswap.io is no different from Uniswap, both work with same AMM-logic.

How long as it been now, already a month since you haven't figured out what people call algorithmic stablecoins and what's bonding curves?

[tarmo888]

I wouldn't take investing advice from xenon131, he just wants GBYTE/USD price to go down so he could get his 100 OUSD out of the liquidity pool without divergence loss (even though he probably already got rewards from liquidity mining). He also can't read properly, even when you try to correct him for 2 weeks and he can't tell the difference between different type of stablecoins out there. He also thinks that multi-dimensional bonding curve means multi-asset collateral (not sure where he got that nonsense from).

Bollocks, I pulled my OUSD  out of your  fatuous pools a long time ago.  I could tell you even more. I used shortcomings of your  algorithmic stablecoins to make 25% daily profit from arbitrage swapping with the  end in Gbyte.  But you don't have to know all the details because I intended to use this again and again while there are fools who lock their funds in your pools which are real cock-up. I sold almost all my Gbytes on cryptox. A few left for arbitrage. Bye, barmy.

 I guess you are little smarter about DeFi than others, so you are making profit,

I are correct in your guessing.

Oswap.io is no different from Uniswap, both work with same AMM-logic.

I know this and I use it to make profit. Oswap.io is so much easier to do this because I don’t need a lot of money to move the price.

How long as it been now, already a month since you haven't figured out what people call algorithmic stablecoins and what's bonding curves?

By and large they are the same in the essence.  A fancy word can’t hide what’s behind it.

So, why are you still scamming other people by trying to convince them that Bonded Stablecoins are something what they clearly aren't.
Algorithmic stablecoins are those that manipulate the supply in order to get a peg. These are stablecoins with elastic supply with rebases and debases, like AMPL, BASED, YAM, BASIS
https://www.okex.com/academy/en/elastic-supply-stablecoins-explained

Like the OKEx article explains, there are 2 types of stablecoins:
* collateralized
* elastic supply

Collateralized stablecoins can also be divided into 2 groups:
* on-chain collateral (DAI, Bonded Stablecoins)
* off-chain collateral (USDT, USDC, GUSD, BUSD)

If you understand how Uniswap and Oswap.io works, how is it so complicated for you to understand how Bonded Stablecoins work? The name Bonded Stablecoins comes from the term Bonding Curve and just because smart-contract (AA) uses algorithms, doesn't make it immediately an algorithmic stablecoin. That term is already used for stablecoins that have elastic supply.

Bonded Stablecoins works basically the same as Uniswap and Oswap.io - when you provide liquidity to Uniswap or Oswap.io, you get pool tokens. When you provide liquidity (buy GRDV2, SFUSD, IUSDV2) to Bonded Stablecoins, you also get pool tokens, but they are not called pool tokens, they are called by the name, which asset they are pegged to (IUSDV2) or provide arbitrage liquidity for (SFUSD).

Let me explain more detailed, if you still haven't had the Heureka moment by now. If you didn't get it yet, you probably thinking: "How come is it like providing liquidity to Uniswap, if on Uniswap, I have to add 2 tokens at once. Well, Oswap.io has a feature to provide liquidity with only one token too. Let's see what it does:
* we add only OUSD to GBYTE-OUSD pool.
* AA notices that only OUSD is sent, so it swaps half of the OUSD to GBYTE.
* now AA has half in OUSD and half in GBYTE, so it adds 2 tokens to pool
* AA returns you OPT-tokens (Oswap.io pool tokens) based on half the OUSD and swapped GBYTE.

Okay, so now that we have this difference sorted out, what the actual difference between AMM-exchanges like Uniswap/Oswap.io and Bonded Stablecoins.

The main difference is the bonding curve formula that is used. Most AMM-exchanges (except Banchor and Balancer) use the basic formula called “constant product market maker” or  “x * y = k”, which is a bonding curve.


Bonded Stablecoin uses multi-dimensional bonding curve (aka bonding surface), it's not like DAI added more off-chain centralized stablecoins as additional collateral. It just means that the reserve needed and the price of tokens depends on multiple on-chain metrics, so the curve becomes 3D.


In case of Bonded Stablecoins, the formula is r = S1**m * S2**n, which means the amount needed for collateral depends on amount of growth tokens in circulation and amount of interest tokens in circulation. Every time you buy SFUSD or IUSDV2, you add more GBYTE as collateral, which is same as adding liquidity to AMM-exchange and every time you redeem SFUSD or IUSDV2, it's same as removing liquidity with pool tokens and getting GBYTE back.

Maybe educate yourself first before spreading nonsense https://medium.com/balancer-protocol/bonding-surfaces-balancer-protocol-ff6d3d05d577

[tarmo888]

The main difference is the bonding curve formula that is used.

Thanks for nice explanation that proves your bonded tokens ( which are not stable, by and large) fall perfectly into algorithmic category. Changing formula for  algorithm doesn't  make them something special but if you like fancy terms you are free to use "bonded" instead of algorithmic when describing your tokens, I’ll let you do it.

Come back when you learn to read. If you don't believe me that algoritmic stablecoins are something totally different then read what others write, I provided you even the links that explain bonding curves, stablecoins with collateral and stablecoins with elastic supply.

[julian071]

I replied to Elon's tweet about Bitcoin using so much energy, asking if Tesla would be interested in becoming a witness in the Obyte network. Chances are near zero he even reads it, but still better then nothing.

Maybe the "green" aspect of Obyte coud get a little more emphasis in the marketing...

[tarmo888]

I replied to Elon's tweet about Bitcoin using so much energy, asking if Tesla would be interested in becoming a witness in the Obyte network. Chances are near zero he even reads it, but still better then nothing.

Maybe the "green" aspect of Obyte coud get a little more emphasis in the marketing...

I did the same, the more people do it, the higher chance we have to get noticed, by anybody. But I think Elon FUDed Bitcoin for other reasons (maybe nobody bought any Tesla with it).

I don't think Bitcoin goal was to build a currency that would be energy efficient, I think any cryptocurrency will consume more electricity than traditional finance at same scale because the more full nodes there are keeping the copy of the ledger, the more resources are used. So, while PoW coins are clearly more wasteful because of miners, there is even more power consumption based on how distributed they are. And that's reasonable cost for decentralization.

Obyte has no PoW, not even the local one like Nano and IOTA have.

So, the least power consuming cryprocurrencies are in this order (without taking account how many full nodes they have):
1) (d)PoS, DAGs without local PoW and other non-PoW
2) feeless DAGs with local PoW
3) PoW with low hashrate
4) PoW with high hashrate

[tarmo888]

Why Obyte  has removed the option to buy their interest tokens  with Gbyte?  Right now the only available option is BTC. It is also impossible to buy v1 tokens like IUSD and such  which is  not clear to me as the pools filled with them are still in existence. Changing things on the move without warning users is a bad luck for a coin. History with Obyte repeats itself.

You can still buy V1 tokens from trade page.
You can buy with GBYTE from front-page and from trade page.
https://ostable.org/buy page is now external tokens only and all buys go through.

Fork the website and revert it, if you don't like that change.

[julian071]

Do you really want this manipulator to be on board?

No not really, it was just a way to get some attention. You wouldn't want someone onboard who'd talk you up and down depending on his own hidden agenda.

[Fallenkeith75]

Why Obyte  has removed the option to buy their interest tokens  with Gbyte?  Right now the only available option is BTC. It is also impossible to buy v1 tokens like IUSD and such  which is  not clear to me as the pools filled with them are still in existence. Changing things on the move without warning users is a bad luck for a coin. History with Obyte repeats itself.

I replied to Elon's tweet about Bitcoin using so much energy, asking if Tesla would be interested in becoming a witness in the Obyte network. Chances are near zero he even reads it, but still better then nothing.

Maybe the "green" aspect of Obyte coud get a little more emphasis in the marketing...

Do you really want this manipulator to be on board?

lol please never use Elon to manipulate and promote Obyte like he did with Doge. The whole doge thing has been really cancerous, especially on Reddit and Twitter

I really think this is a good project and the merits of the project will speak for itself

[tarmo888]

I replied to Elon's tweet about Bitcoin using so much energy, asking if Tesla would be interested in becoming a witness in the Obyte network. Chances are near zero he even reads it, but still better then nothing.

Maybe the "green" aspect of Obyte coud get a little more emphasis in the marketing...

Do you really want this manipulator to be on board?

lol please never use Elon to manipulate and promote Obyte like he did with Doge. The whole doge thing has been really cancerous, especially on Reddit and Twitter

I really think this is a good project and the merits of the project will speak for itself

It's up to the community and Order Providers (Witnesses) to decide. Anybody can put up their candidacy, community can signal the Order Providers (by changing their OP list) who they want to replace and if they do it coordinated way (that they all replace the same old OP with same new OP) then it's only Order Providers, who have the last say and they have pledged to change their list when better candidate comes around.

I understand that although witnesses don’t get to decide about acceptance or non-acceptance of individual transactions and the sole criterion for their acceptance is their validity according to protocol rules, witnesses still have to make decisions about changing their own witness lists, and I pledge to make changes to my witness list only as I feel is best for the Byteball network, only when I’m confident that the new witness properly understands the role of a witness and is going to follow the same rules while being in some way better than the witness being removed from the list.
I understand that I may lose trust of Byteball community in the future or just better (than me) witness candidates may come along who have, for example, more to lose in case of misbehavior, or are better known or more trusted by the community, and if I feel that it is the case, I pledge to voluntarily remove my address from my witness list and publicly support a better candidate.