No demand for decentralized exchanges?

[PremiumCodeX]

What if we do not wish decentralized exchanges that powerfully?

Let us look around and realize, all exchanges are centralized nowadays and people USE them, they have good traffic.

Furthermore, let us examine fiat banks/exchange/broker companies.
We know what advantages crypto has against them, but we all have bank accounts, accept our salaries in fiat, buy our houses for fiat, don't we?

[slaman29]

Not very sure if your OP meant to contradict your title, but yes, there is a lot of demand for decentralised exchanges - and if you will have a look at my signature, you can understand why some people are excited about NVO, which is trying this very same concept. It's a wallet that lets you store and exchange assets, while keeping full control.

[PremiumCodeX]

Why would people choose a decentralized exchange when they can choose from many centralized exchanges?

Isn't decentralization's purpose to give you the freedom of choice over a classic, centralized solution?

But if you can choose from many centralized services, what makes a decentralized exchange's demand?

[ulhaq]

Isn't decentralization's purpose to give you the freedom of choice over a classic, centralized solution?

No. The purpose of decentralization is to do things that cannot be done, or done well, with centralization, due to inherent limitations of a centralized system.


There is a strong preference on this forum for what I see as a decentralized exchange. The number of threads here advising not to store money in an exchange is uncountable. There have been many hacks or exchanges stealing funds for themselves. Exchanges have extensive verification requirements, which can be hacked and cause identity theft. There are withdrawal limits preventing active trading. I do not know the technical difficulties in creating a safe, liquid, decentralized exchange, but if it can be done then I imagine it will be the future, and the volume will slowly go up on such exchanges while decreasing on centralized.

[PremiumCodeX]

No. The purpose of decentralization is to do things that cannot be done, or done well, with centralization, due to inherent limitations of a centralized system.

I read replies daily about wanting decentralized exchanges. I just wonder what do people expect from decentralized exchanges? Is it only a nice expression or does it really offer something better than a centralized exchange?

[Reynaldo]

No. The purpose of decentralization is to do things that cannot be done, or done well, with centralization, due to inherent limitations of a centralized system.

I read replies daily about wanting decentralized exchanges. I just wonder what do people expect from decentralized exchanges? Is it only a nice expression or does it really offer something better than a centralized exchange?

ye, it offers no third party holding my coins an deciding to withhold them or not

[dariopy]

Speaking of which, why is no one using Bitsquare? It seems to be exactly what so many people here wants: a functioning, safe decentralized exchange. And it works.

Yet you run the client, and you can literally see the tumbleweeds roll by in the marketplace. It's baffling, and depressing.

Is it because there's no mobile client? Because you actually have to leave the software running and your funds in escrow for an offer to remain active? Or am I missing something?

[ulhaq]

No. The purpose of decentralization is to do things that cannot be done, or done well, with centralization, due to inherent limitations of a centralized system.

I read replies daily about wanting decentralized exchanges. I just wonder what do people expect from decentralized exchanges? Is it only a nice expression or does it really offer something better than a centralized exchange?

Did you not even read my post that you are replying to?

There is a strong preference on this forum for what I see as a decentralized exchange. The number of threads here advising not to store money in an exchange is uncountable. There have been many hacks or exchanges stealing funds for themselves.

- security concern

Exchanges have extensive verification requirements, which can be hacked and cause identity theft.

There are withdrawal limits preventing active trading. I do not know the technical difficulties in creating a safe, liquid, decentralized exchange, but if it can be done then I imagine it will be the future, and the volume will slowly go up on such exchanges while decreasing on centralized.

[ulhaq]

Speaking of which, why is no one using Bitsquare? It seems to be exactly what so many people here wants: a functioning, safe decentralized exchange. And it works.

Yet you run the client, and you can literally see the tumbleweeds roll by in the marketplace. It's baffling, and depressing.

Is it because there's no mobile client? Because you actually have to leave the software running and your funds in escrow for an offer to remain active? Or am I missing something?

There is a limit on transactions. The high volume traders can't trade. That reduces the liquidity, so everyone else doesn't want to trade because the spread is so high.

[Drawesome]

What about Bancor? I understand that the idea of it is that... Am I right?