Right I mentioned that specifically for people don’t know much about Nu. I also made a point to say that the payment is done by the blockchain (not by human) and parking is done in one’s own wallet (not e.g. through a website).
Please post a disclaimer saying it’s not a smart contract ponzi/pyramid like those funny stuff already built on ethereum… people at bitcointalk.org are becoming “BTC extremists” lately
There is no shortage of high interest stuff. Some POS coins have like 100% minting “interest”, which in fact is just getting even with inflation. What separate Nubits parking from the rest is that it is done by a pegged currency. I didn’t want to explain too much in the post because a short, well-linked message is better received. … well a second thought maybe I should say a bit more to hammer in the difference?
The point is we don’t really want people to park at the longer periods. We want them to park for the first non-sero period we specify with this method. But because of the way premium is calculated, we specify longer period to form a flat per-park reward distribution.
I think only the 5.5 - 23 days should now be non-zero when we are still inexperienced about how people react to park rates, and about prolonged period of low NBT demand. We sould keep offering effective short terms and if the rate doesn’t go down we make the terms longer. i.e. after N weeks of rate being above x% continuously we start to offer N-week rates at x%.
I agree that we don’t want that, but my point is about meeting the market and that we may have to.
Speaking of market. Just for comparison. You can supply margin on Bitfinex and the current rate is 0.0769% for USD. That’s 23.8% after fees. That’s a big name, and it is a rate for fiat.
The dollar weighted average rate is: 0.05969% - or 18.5%.
What are the terms for those margin calls? e.g. 1 months?
Anywhere from 2 days to 30 days.
It is open market - like lending on polo.
Seeing an interesting turn in the market with the sell side lower than the buy side. https://alix.coinerella.com/charts/
Bitcoin broke through the 450 USD and traders are locking in their profits. This maybe the signal to lower the rates soon.
Current rate for supplying BTC is 1/10 of that, about 0.008. I guess it is because BTC is more liquid. Since we want people’s BTC to help our nbt/btc wall, the btc rate on bitfinex is more relevant.
Then if the btc rate is more important. I would consider polo’s rate @ 0.04%. Because a savvy investor goes to the best.
But the whole thing is confusing to me. Since we are dealing in virtual fiat.
Still talking about parking NBT, has anyone here tested parking NBT with a different unpark address when major protocol event/change occurred?
Is that even possible to occur some crazy bugs* when a hard-fork (or even soft-fork) occurred before it’s unpark time?
- e.g. issue while trying to unpark (coins stuck on protocol level; coins unparked and sent to different address; coins “unparkable” only in previous client version; etc)
Why would a network change be an issue? Once the number of blocks exceeds the parking duration the outputs become valid to use.
I just came up with that eventual possibility after reading what happened here:
BTW I was thinking about rates: maybe it’s plausible voting for APR/2 (half the APR) of liquidity providers average (expected or past) profit.
Wouldn’t that be logic considering the risks taken by both players (LP and “Parkers”)?
That thread had to do with issues with the wallets. The coins were where they were supposed to be on the blockchain the whole time.
Most parkers will park once the rates either stop going continuously up or even start coming down. This will coincide with our first wave of potential economic recovery. I do not expect a serious amount of parking until then. In theory, shareholder sentiment will cause that to occur as the BTC price starts leveling off or reversing, which is also when demand for NBT starts picking up again. The whole thing is very fuzzy, but they’re all positive feedback mechanisms that will either tip the scale or not. If it doesn’t tip enough, we have to deal with the negative feedback stuff again later. If it tips too much we become wasteful of resources.
This can’t be a coincidence (see screenshot). Round numbers for all park rate durations. Someone is controlling and manipulating the interest rates here. Would be interested to hear why. It scares me as it means someone or a small group collaborates and control very large parts of the current minting power. This doesn’t help to convince people that we have a good distribution as this appears to proof otherwise sadly, even though this proves it only for the current minting power. Hope someone can clarify this and explain the purpose of this experiment please.
It isn’t so hard to collaborate in this. Many shareholders could follow a single proposal about park rates.
What are the current numbers that all data feeders use?
edit: i see they are all different!
No worries about it
I guess a script can be made by someone(s) in order to alter dynamically their park rate voting in order to make this result.
Ok, let’s play and collaborate then