Bitcoin Sidechains via Bip300: https://drivechain.info
Quote from: Troy on October 15, 2014, 12:13:04 AMI am curious what would be the effect if an individual could author a market that is open indefinitely and completely exempt from a final resolution via Vote. I've been studying the nature of the bitshares market peg which has been remarkable. If a TruthCoin market were to be open indefinitely, would the market be able to peg the price of the assets at a value very close to their true ending value? Could market manipulators ever really be able to win in the end when they would be at permanent risk of losing a tremendous amount? In order to force a wrong decision, malicious parties would have to keep pouring more and more CashCoin into a truly worthless asset while buyers on the other side would be risking very little. And the only way for manipulators to liquidate their shares which they would have artificially inflated, would be to start selling their shares, driving the prices back towards the true outcome which would almost certainly yield a massive net loss since there will be very few buyers who aren't manipulators themselves. Eventually the manipulators either run out of money to keep propping the prices in the wrong direction, or they have to start selling and collapse the value of the shares they do own. Buyers who know the correct outcome (which is everyone in the world) have every incentive to keep buying cheap relentlessly and burn out the bad guys.Granted, the bitshares market peg system does not attempt to peg prices at a final fixed value at one end of a fixed range. A market open indefinitely with no resolution could probably never actually achieve a perfect ending, but would it still work? I guess I'm wondering if the VoteCoin and human decision process is even necessary for any particular market at all.
Quote from: zack on October 15, 2014, 03:53:37 PMYes, markets need to resolve.
Quote from: Troy on October 15, 2014, 10:48:10 PMyou would only need a small minority of CashCoin owners to buy the correct shares cheaply and burn out the manipulators for a huge profit.
Quote from: psztorc on October 15, 2014, 01:19:23 AMI don't really want to get into it now (have lots of stuff to do, and want to be able to have my full say in writing), but it is actually a problem that BTSX : BitUSD tracks as well as it does. Instead, BitUSD should be permanently cheaper, for as long as there is technical and social risk associated with the BitsharesX project. "How much cheaper" is set by the market itself, but it might need to be quite substantial at first (imagine early Bitcoin, worth essentially nothing).But you actually have your answer, I think: BitsharesX tried "markets which were open indefinitely" and no one wanted what it was selling (which is precisely because $1 was too expensive for 1 Bit$. The volume was microscopic (probably all devs or testers) and usage was zero.
Quote from: vbuterin on February 12, 2015, 07:33:48 PMprice in the best case