BitSharesX -- out of nowhere?

[jabo38]

It's had a shifty business model and shifty direction of the platform and a shifty final product that still isn't clear yet.

It may very well end up being successful. As far as I know some of the functions are working most of the time as of now. But I'm still going to wait and see it in full action. Or I'll just wait until blockstream releases sidechains and somebody clones bitshares using btc as a backing and locks it into the side of Bitcoin

[brekyrself]

Slightshot

1.
You are making a lot of "scam" claims and not provided any single piece evidence.  Show us some malicious intent by the devs.  They have been nothing but open, honest, and go to great lengths to accept community feedback.  Did you ever post your concerns on www.bitsharestalk.org or join their live WEEKLY mumble session?

2.
You quoted TaunSew, a known troll.  Really?

3.
You stated you hold/held PTS, can you explain CLEARLY in one sentence or two why you are so angry?  If you held PTS, you acquired shares in multiple DAC's which have all been rolled into one main DAC.  Were you looking for 3rd party DAC's to honor your PTS?  You now hold BTS that uses DPOS, has a built in derivatives exchange, and will be adding new voting options both for delegate and as a vote DAC.

4.
http://followmyvote.com/follow-my-vote-joins-cavo/

5.
This board has turned into bag holders hating on others technology instead of appreciating dev's pushing the limits of blockchain technology which will benefit everyone.  If you do not agree with BitShares, either do not buy any or go short, simple solution.

[jwinterm]

5.
This board has turned into bag holders hating on others technology instead of appreciating dev's pushing the limits of blockchain technology which will benefit everyone.  If you do not agree with BitShares, either do not buy any or go short, simple solution.

Why shouldn't we discuss the possible shortcomings of competing technologies? It's not like this is a forum for exactly that...oh wait, it is

[brekyrself]

5.
This board has turned into bag holders hating on others technology instead of appreciating dev's pushing the limits of blockchain technology which will benefit everyone.  If you do not agree with BitShares, either do not buy any or go short, simple solution.

Why shouldn't we discuss the possible shortcomings of competing technologies? It's not like this is a forum for exactly that...oh wait, it is

99% of these threads are not discussion, just people posting scam this, scam that without actually discussing anything!  I'm all for talking about technology and or positives and negatives.

[jwinterm]

5.
This board has turned into bag holders hating on others technology instead of appreciating dev's pushing the limits of blockchain technology which will benefit everyone.  If you do not agree with BitShares, either do not buy any or go short, simple solution.

Why shouldn't we discuss the possible shortcomings of competing technologies? It's not like this is a forum for exactly that...oh wait, it is

99% of these threads are not discussion, just people posting scam this, scam that without actually discussing anything!  I'm all for talking about technology and or positives and negatives.

The thread started out as a general question about BitsharesX. Slingshot has been interjecting with some long-winded diatribes, but I think I've had a decent discussion with FandangledGizmo. It just seems stupid to tell people to shut up on a forum - it's a forum, for voicing one's opinion. What good would a forum be if everyone just quietly bought and sold, i.e. "If you do not agree with BitShares, either do not buy any or go short, simple solution."

[Crestington]

I have a couple questions

How does Bitshares manage it's Blockchain growth and storage over time? What happens to low volume markets?

[FandangledGizmo]

I have a couple questions

How does Bitshares manage it's Blockchain growth and storage over time? What happens to low volume markets?

1. Not sure, with the 101 delegate system, I think the theory is the average user will not have to download the entire blockchain, I see parts of it are discussed here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9204.0, maybe someone else can give a better answer.

2. There is a requirement for all shorts to cover every 30 days, so even if you bought an asset in a low volume market you should be able to get fair value for it. I imagine a market can also be discontinued with notice if there was really low volume.

[michaellanthros]

I have a couple questions

How does Bitshares manage it's Blockchain growth and storage over time? What happens to low volume markets?

It always seems all the good information on these projects is hard to find.

[Crestington]

I have a couple questions

How does Bitshares manage it's Blockchain growth and storage over time? What happens to low volume markets?

1. Not sure, with the 101 delegate system, I think the theory is the average user will not have to download the entire blockchain, I see parts of it are discussed here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9204.0, maybe someone else can give a better answer.

2. There is a requirement for all shorts to cover every 30 days, so even if you bought an asset in a low volume market you should be able to get fair value for it. I imagine a market can also be discontinued with notice if there was really low volume.

I find bloat and efficiency to be one of the most defining factors but when I have time I'll do some more research into the project. I really like where it's heading in terms of technology, profitability and it's DAC system.

What was the timeline of transitions between coins? was memorycoin ever a part of protoshares? and protoshares became bitshares? What happens to people who still own the old coin?

[FandangledGizmo]

I have a couple questions

How does Bitshares manage it's Blockchain growth and storage over time? What happens to low volume markets?

1. Not sure, with the 101 delegate system, I think the theory is the average user will not have to download the entire blockchain, I see parts of it are discussed here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9204.0, maybe someone else can give a better answer.

2. There is a requirement for all shorts to cover every 30 days, so even if you bought an asset in a low volume market you should be able to get fair value for it. I imagine a market can also be discontinued with notice if there was really low volume.

I find bloat and efficiency to be one of the most defining factors but when I have time I'll do some more research into the project. I really like where it's heading in terms of technology, profitability and it's DAC system.

What was the timeline of transitions between coins? was memorycoin ever a part of protoshares? and protoshares became bitshares? What happens to people who still own the old coin?

This might not be accurate, I'm just someone that owns some BTS, so I don't know everything about the project.

Protoshares (PTS) was the first thing they created, but once they realised POW was inferior and that they needed more funding to build the first DACs they created AngelShares too. So originally the idea was that AGS & PTS would get a decent stake in DACs the BitShares Devs and community funding helped start and if any independent third parties wanted to use that toolkit or a lot of the underlying technology they were asked to sharedrop 10% on PTS & 10% on AGS to get the community and developers support.

An independent developer FreeTrade was just a third party that share dropped on AGS & PTS for his MMC, MMC2 & LTS projects, I don't think any were particularly successful and there was some controversy surrounding some. I never looked into them much their CAPs were too small to interest me.

Other projects more linked to the BitShares team share dropped bigger amounts on AGS & PTS, they have the 'BitShares' in their name. like BitShares DNS (Namecoin killer, $6 million CAP pre-merger http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=qeweF05tT50 ) BitShares Vote, BitShares Music http://peertracks.com/  & BitShares Play.

Of course the big one so far was BTSX that was awarded 50/50 to AGS & PTS holders on 28/02/14.

The main developer realised though that a lot of the DACs would end up being competitors rather than complimentary because the killer app is BitAssets like BitUSD http://whatisbitusd.com/, so you really want one main DAC that maximises network effect and bootstraps one DACs BitAssets to the entire world, so they decided to merge DNS, Vote, AGS & PTS into one main SuperDAC - 'BitShares' at no.4

Any shares you own in any of the merged DACs will be made easily accessible and released linearly over two years. Except BTSX those stay trading just the same as its blockchain forms the base of BitShares, it's just been diluted a bit to bring in the other DACs. The most recent newsletter covers a lot of it, a little bit 'cheerleader' for my taste but http://bitshares.org/bitshares-reloaded/

Another big change is the new BitShares has dilution, it's max is less than Bitcoin, probably much less than that in practice and unlike Bitcoin where it gets paid to miners, it's voted on by shareholders and released via delegates to fund development, marketing & charity but shareholders can also choose no dilution at all. (So anybody can get BTS but not for having the most expensive mining machine but rather for do something useful and valuable that the BitShares community wants to support or that they think will add value to BTS.)

[robrigo]

I have a couple questions

How does Bitshares manage it's Blockchain growth and storage over time? What happens to low volume markets?

There is some code in the toolkit for relaying encrypted mail, which will be used for messaging between users on the blockchain as well as broadcasting transactions to light weight clients. I believe this is one of the techniques they plan to utilize for dealing with a bloated chain.

https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/wiki/BitShares-Mail
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/tree/bitshares/libraries/mail

Market assets require at least 51 delegates to be producing a price feed for said asset to enable trading. So markets can be phased in as the demand comes for them. If a low volume market is trading and stays low volume, I would assume it just remains so until interest in that market picks up.

[jabo38]

I have a couple questions

How does Bitshares manage it's Blockchain growth and storage over time? What happens to low volume markets?

1. Not sure, with the 101 delegate system, I think the theory is the average user will not have to download the entire blockchain, I see parts of it are discussed here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9204.0, maybe someone else can give a better answer.

2. There is a requirement for all shorts to cover every 30 days, so even if you bought an asset in a low volume market you should be able to get fair value for it. I imagine a market can also be discontinued with notice if there was really low volume.

I find bloat and efficiency to be one of the most defining factors but when I have time I'll do some more research into the project. I really like where it's heading in terms of technology, profitability and it's DAC system.

What was the timeline of transitions between coins? was memorycoin ever a part of protoshares? and protoshares became bitshares? What happens to people who still own the old coin?

This might not be accurate, I'm just someone that owns some BTS, so I don't know everything about the project.

Protoshares (PTS) was the first thing they created, but once they realised POW was inferior and that they needed more funding to build the first DACs they created AngelShares too. So originally the idea was that AGS & PTS would get a decent stake in DACs the BitShares Devs and community funding helped start and if any independent third parties wanted to use that toolkit or a lot of the underlying technology they were asked to sharedrop 10% on PTS & 10% on AGS to get the community and developers support.

An independent developer FreeTrade was just a third party that share dropped on AGS & PTS for his MMC, MMC2 & LTS projects, I don't think any were particularly successful and there was some controversy surrounding some. I never looked into them much their CAPs were too small to interest me.

Other projects more linked to the BitShares team share dropped bigger amounts on AGS & PTS, they have the 'BitShares' in their name. like BitShares DNS (Namecoin killer, $6 million CAP pre-merger http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=qeweF05tT50 ) BitShares Vote, BitShares Music http://peertracks.com/  & BitShares Play.

Of course the big one so far was BTSX that was awarded 50/50 to AGS & PTS holders on 28/02/14.

The main developer realised though that a lot of the DACs would end up being competitors rather than complimentary because the killer app is BitAssets like BitUSD http://whatisbitusd.com/, so you really want one main DAC that maximises network effect and bootstraps one DACs BitAssets to the entire world, so they decided to merge DNS, Vote, AGS & PTS into one main SuperDAC - 'BitShares' at no.4

Any shares you own in any of the merged DACs will be made easily accessible and released linearly over two years. Except BTSX those stay trading just the same as its blockchain forms the base of BitShares, it's just been diluted a bit to bring in the other DACs. The most recent newsletter covers a lot of it, a little bit 'cheerleader' for my taste but http://bitshares.org/bitshares-reloaded/

Another big change is the new BitShares has dilution, it's max is less than Bitcoin, probably much less than that in practice and unlike Bitcoin where it gets paid to miners, it's voted on by shareholders and released via delegates to fund development, marketing & charity but shareholders can also choose no dilution at all. (So anybody can get BTS but not for having the most expensive mining machine but rather for do something useful and valuable that the BitShares community wants to support or that they think will add value to BTS.)

I am no expert either, don't own any and only loosely followed the story, but I have followed it since PTS was being mined.  Your account generally covers how I remember things unfolding. 

[Crestington]

I have a couple questions

How does Bitshares manage it's Blockchain growth and storage over time? What happens to low volume markets?

1. Not sure, with the 101 delegate system, I think the theory is the average user will not have to download the entire blockchain, I see parts of it are discussed here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9204.0, maybe someone else can give a better answer.

2. There is a requirement for all shorts to cover every 30 days, so even if you bought an asset in a low volume market you should be able to get fair value for it. I imagine a market can also be discontinued with notice if there was really low volume.

I find bloat and efficiency to be one of the most defining factors but when I have time I'll do some more research into the project. I really like where it's heading in terms of technology, profitability and it's DAC system.

What was the timeline of transitions between coins? was memorycoin ever a part of protoshares? and protoshares became bitshares? What happens to people who still own the old coin?

This might not be accurate, I'm just someone that owns some BTS, so I don't know everything about the project.

Protoshares (PTS) was the first thing they created, but once they realised POW was inferior and that they needed more funding to build the first DACs they created AngelShares too. So originally the idea was that AGS & PTS would get a decent stake in DACs the BitShares Devs and community funding helped start and if any independent third parties wanted to use that toolkit or a lot of the underlying technology they were asked to sharedrop 10% on PTS & 10% on AGS to get the community and developers support.

An independent developer FreeTrade was just a third party that share dropped on AGS & PTS for his MMC, MMC2 & LTS projects, I don't think any were particularly successful and there was some controversy surrounding some. I never looked into them much their CAPs were too small to interest me.

Other projects more linked to the BitShares team share dropped bigger amounts on AGS & PTS, they have the 'BitShares' in their name. like BitShares DNS (Namecoin killer, $6 million CAP pre-merger http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=qeweF05tT50 ) BitShares Vote, BitShares Music http://peertracks.com/  & BitShares Play.

Of course the big one so far was BTSX that was awarded 50/50 to AGS & PTS holders on 28/02/14.

The main developer realised though that a lot of the DACs would end up being competitors rather than complimentary because the killer app is BitAssets like BitUSD http://whatisbitusd.com/, so you really want one main DAC that maximises network effect and bootstraps one DACs BitAssets to the entire world, so they decided to merge DNS, Vote, AGS & PTS into one main SuperDAC - 'BitShares' at no.4

Any shares you own in any of the merged DACs will be made easily accessible and released linearly over two years. Except BTSX those stay trading just the same as its blockchain forms the base of BitShares, it's just been diluted a bit to bring in the other DACs. The most recent newsletter covers a lot of it, a little bit 'cheerleader' for my taste but http://bitshares.org/bitshares-reloaded/

Another big change is the new BitShares has dilution, it's max is less than Bitcoin, probably much less than that in practice and unlike Bitcoin where it gets paid to miners, it's voted on by shareholders and released via delegates to fund development, marketing & charity but shareholders can also choose no dilution at all. (So anybody can get BTS but not for having the most expensive mining machine but rather for do something useful and valuable that the BitShares community wants to support or that they think will add value to BTS.)

Thanks for the very informative explanation, looks like the project is progressing well despite a few bumps in the road. I'll go through everything when I have more time but I can see why there is so much interest in Bitshares, even if some may have gotten a raw deal down the track you can't deny that they are making some good headway and doing well.

[bitcoinrocks]

How have they achieved their incredible marketcap though?  It sounds like it may be a great project but the marketcap is just incredible, especially considering how quickly it's been achieved.  And BitSharesX does have competitors who were fairly well-established first.  I don't think I buy the "because it's so great" argument here.  There must be something else at play.

[FandangledGizmo]

How have they achieved their incredible marketcap though?  It sounds like it may be a great project but the marketcap is just incredible, especially considering how quickly it's been achieved.  And BitSharesX does have competitors who were fairly well-established first.  I don't think I buy the "because it's so great" argument here.  There must be something else at play.

Well when it was just an idea in Daniels big brain, people were paying a $30 million CAP at the end of February & now he's actually delivered it with 10 second, private  transactions and working BitAssets, so I think it's actually undervalued now. The merger also brings in BitShares DNS which is a Namecoin killer and had a $6 million CAP before the merger was announced as well as BitShares Vote, which Daniel is excited about though I don't understand the potential yet.

For me the valuation secret here is BitAssets like BitUSD.

When you think of normal user issued assets on NXT for example, (Which BTS has too)  NXT users only get a transaction fee, so even though there are $12 million+ worth of NXT assets, NXT is still only worth circa $20 million because they only directly benefit from their assets transaction fees & perhaps a bit of network effect.

BitAssets let you store the value of a dollar/gold/silver/stocks/commodities in a decentralised way which is sick. 'Game changer' gets so overused in crypto, but solving the volatility problem is huge.

The real value part though is that to create BitAssets requires a long to purchase them using BitShares and a short to provide 2X that value in BitShares collateral.

So $1 million worth of new external BitUSD demand adds $2 million+ to the CAP of BitShares not just a few thousand dollars worth of transaction fees

There's $1 million BitUSD in circulation today, imagine if by the end of the year it's $3 million then $10 million by March then... You'll see that if BitAsset demand is growing, depending how far forward investors value BitShares the market CAP could get MASSIVE very quick on anticipation of future demand.

They're not even on version 1.0 & they're only starting to market BitAssets to the world in December, targeting fiat on ramps, merchant adoption, consumer incentives incl. perhaps a BitUSD debit card, they have a partner in global remittances and a campaign geared towards Argentina and are considering Russia where inflation and limited access to alternatives will make BitAssets like BitUSD the nuts.

For me the biggest headwind is their new dilution system. It's very low &  necessary to fund some of the development, lightweight clients & marketing etc. but I'm concerned how the market will view it, (BTSX was actually at $55 million at the beginning of Oct and people worried about the merger/dilution has effected the price.) There's also not that much stake voting atm which could create centralisation concerns though nothing like Bitcoin mining pools. Easier ways to vote, easy offline signing options and voting incentives should improve that though in the coming months.

Having said, I've been back on the Bitcoin forum this last week to see what's out there but it's really still BitAssets all the way for me. You especially want to be in them now for the marketing push starting in December imo.

[bitcoinrocks]

BitSharesX had a marketcap of $30M in February before any code was released?  It's $38M now and it looks like $30M wouldn't even move it out of 4th place on coinmarketcap.  How can a coin attract that much investment without releasing code?

[FandangledGizmo]

BitSharesX had a marketcap of $30M in February before any code was released?  It's $38M now and it looks like $30M wouldn't even move it out of 4th place on coinmarketcap.  How can a coin attract that much investment without releasing code?

Well that was the valuation donaters were paying right at the end of Feb before the cut off for BTSX allocation.
The crypto market was also more bullish then I guess, Bitcoin was at $750-900 during their donation period.

I suppose you could argue if it had been like today's market back at the beginning of the year they may have valued it a lot lower.

(PTS got 50% of BTSX shares on 28/02/14. You can see PTS had a $25 million CAP that day then a $10 million one right after, indicating $15 million of value for 50% of BTSX hence a $30 million valuation back then.)

[robrigo]

How have they achieved their incredible marketcap though?  It sounds like it may be a great project but the marketcap is just incredible, especially considering how quickly it's been achieved.  And BitSharesX does have competitors who were fairly well-established first.  I don't think I buy the "because it's so great" argument here.  There must be something else at play.

Probably for some of the same reasons that the largest portion of value flowing into BTC is from China. A large quantity of people are interested in crypto over there.

http://fiatleak.com/

BitShares has a large and active Chinese community. The official client was historically released by DACSunLimited (Hong Kong company that released the official BitSharesX code, a fork of the BitShares repo). I think the official release branch may be migrating into the newly renamed development repo (https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares) but I am unsure if they are consolidating the release process with the recent merger (read more here: http://bitshares.org/bitshares-reloaded/) or just renaming the repo that core development is committed to.

There are Chinese news sites like http://www.bts.hk/ and groups on QQ to talk about BTS. There are community members that help translate English and Chinese to bridge communication gaps. It is interesting see how their culture differs from the West by deciphering some of the Chinese posts on bitsharestalk.org with translation extensions.

Also, the Play DAC team is based in China (more info: http://playshare.io/index.php and http://bitsharesplayfoundation.org/en/).

So to answer your question, my theory is that BitShares is more popular in the East compared to West currently, and more value is being moved around by Chinese smart money / early adopters. Also the exchanges with the most BTS(X) liquidity are Chinese (bter, yunbi, and btc38). Consequentially, most people trading BitShares use those sites.

[bitcoinrocks]

Do we know why Chinese investors were attracted to BitSharesX instead of the other 2.0 platforms?

[robrigo]

Do we know why Chinese investors were attracted to BitSharesX instead of the other 2.0 platforms?

Great question. I started looking at DACs and BitShares back in July, so I am relatively a latecomer compared to others in the community. My personal beliefs are that they have had better success with grassroots marketing. There are some BTS memes like "BTS worth 1 USD properly, properly" and there is more social engagement / 3rd party websites regarding BTS, so you can see they have already have an established BTS community. Also I'm pretty sure the developer of http://www1.agsexplorer.com/ is Chinese. Maybe it is because they view it as a smart investment? BitAssets have the potential to be very useful after all.