[Passed] Motion to provide seed funding for B&C Exchange - a decentralized exchange built on the Peershares platform

[Sentinelrv]

Ok, I will rework the third paragraph when I have some more time.

[crypto_coiner]

NXT

That’s not a satoshi blockchain.
Does BCex accept any coin (what about ripple) and why?

[Yurizhai]

I’m not sure where this list came from but I assume what coins will be added will decided by shareholders post release.

[Sabreiib]

1. NO XPM SUPPORT? The PPC’s sister coin has been forgotten.

2. BKC is pegged to 1 USD, good news!

3. How can we stop copycats use our open source B&C software? In future there are maybe many “pirate version” B&C exchanges running, And BKS price is as cheap as water.

4. Why BKS holders need BTC dividend other than BKC?

[Sentinelrv]

3. How can we stop copycats use our open source B&C software? In future there are maybe many “pirate version” B&C exchanges running, And BKS price is as cheap as water.

As Jordan has said, any copycats using our source code won’t have the advantage of NuBits liquidity operations. Since liquidity is the life blood of exchanges, any clones will be dead in the water. Check his quote here…

While it is expected that the B&C Exchange will be open source (unless NuShare holders indicate they have other preferences), let’s consider what would happen if someone created a clone of B&C Exchange.

Liquidity is of paramount importance for an exchange. Liquidity tends to have feedback loops associated with it. High liquidity attracts more market participants due to superior pricing, creating even more liquidity. Low liquidity simply encourages market participants to go elsewhere.

The original B&C Exchange will have a remarkable liquidity advantage because Nu, which is in the business of providing liquidity to stable cryptocurrency, will bring liquidity to it through its already established liquidity operations. Nu will do so because of the high degree of overlap in shareholder ownership and because B&C Exchange will be the cheapest place to provide NuBit liquidity due to its dramatically reduced risk of exchange default and theft. Nu is unlikely to provide any liquidity at all to clones of B&C Exchange because it will be against the interest of BlockShare holders to do so, and most BlockShare holders will also be NuShare holders.

[Sentinelrv]

That’s not a satoshi blockchain.
Does BCex accept any coin (what about ripple) and why?

I’d like to know this as well. Will there be a problem implementing NXT because of the differences?

[Sabreiib]

If I were the copycat of B&C, I would use BKC as NBT and that’s all.

In fact, I don’t believe the meaning of NBT after BKS/BKC comes out, what sort of thing can be done by NBT and not by BKC, technically?

NBT is a DAO/DAC, A COMPANY without profitability while BKS/BKC has bright future for its profit model: the exchange transaction fee.

Just bring every feature of NBT(decentralized pool etc.) into BKC, and we get a more fanancially backed pegged crypto: BKC, the seccessor of NBT, the gravedigger of NBT, if Jordan/Sigmike wouldn’t let that happen, the copycats will do that. LOL

[Sentinelrv]

The only thing BlockCredits are good for is paying fees on the exchange. They’re not meant to be used as a currency.

[Sabreiib]

No, BKC not meant to be used as currency, but in fact it CAN, especially Jordan/Sigmike cannot control their copycats.

[cryptog]

BKC not meant to be used as currency,

Someone could indeed make a fork of B&C if it is open sourced and set a system for maintaining liquidity walls to fix the peg so that 1 credit=1usd but then this person would have to redo the work done by Nu on the one hand and on the other hand it does not make sense conceptually to make a credit unit an universal currency.
It is like creating 1USD FED bills out of 1USD USPS stamps…

[Sabreiib]

How many liquidity of NBT now? Wallet says only 80,000bucks, maybe more in third/four tier, forgive me, many traditianal centralized exchange bosses can afford this liquidity as soon as B&C source opened.

I suggest we delay the source opening after we grow up enough.

[JordanLee]

How many liquidity of NBT now? Wallet says only 80,000bucks, maybe more in third/four tier, forgive me, many traditianal centralized exchange bosses can afford this liquidity as soon as B&C source opened.

I suggest we delay the source opening after we grow up enough.

Because the liquidity on B&C Exchange will be cheaper, it is likely there will be more than 80,000. Our reputed signers will have more credibility than clones because they will be drawn from the Nu community in most early cases. Clones won’t have a community and key contributors. Even so, closing source does much to prevent clones and it can be done if shareholders pass a motion to keep it closed. I think it is reasonable to use the Nu blockchain for such a motion. As everyone knows from the debate to open source Nu, there are disadvantages to closed source code as well.

[Sabreiib]

B&C is just a fork of Nu and add some new feature. For copycats, when they fork B&C, the Nu implement is also easily copied. And they don’t need BKC MKII and NBT MKII at same time, just BKC MKII, enough.

[Sabreiib]

One option is to delay the open source.

BKC and NBT may compete each other, so how about bring pegging differentiation?

In the past, some people prefer NBT as anti-inflation, some like loose peg(0.9-1.1$), and some even give out other pegging mechnism like benjamin, I think this is a good chance to experiment new stuff. Whichever is better, BKC or NBT, they are both ours, not competitors.

[JordanLee]

Nu can be copied at any time, but it won’t have the community, the good distribution of shares, the trust built up over time, the liquidity pools and users, the dev team, etc. There is quite a bit of value beyond the code of both Nu and B&C Exchange that can’t be copied.

I believe the combined value of Nu and B&C Exchange is greater than a single blockchain embodying both functions. This is due to better scalability, independent release paths, greater simplicity and branding advantages.

You have mentioned repeatedly that there is something lacking in Nu’s business model. I suspect the business model supporting NuShares will prove to be considerably more lucrative than the B&C business model. I’m surprised some in the community think otherwise. Selling NuBits will be extremely lucrative with even modest adoption. Nu is a very young startup that has also experienced a financial setback in the form of the exchange defaults. I predict this talk of an unprofitable business model will stop as soon as NuBit adoption picks up modestly.

[Sabreiib]

Our reputed signers will have more credibility than clones because they will be drawn from the Nu community in most early cases. Clones won’t have a community and key contributors.

I’ll wait and see what Neucoin can do within several month, if Neucoin overtakes PPC, the PoS scarcity can hardly set up.
For Nu/B&C system, because of the scarce BTC/FIAT in it, the scarcity exists, but they need grow up ASAP. The BTC(other PoW coins)/FIAT hold in Nu/B&C is equivalent to the hashrate of bitcoin, the more, the harder for competitors to replace them.

So let’s wait and see whether my opinions below are wrong:

1) PoS system can hardly build up scarcity.
2) Only profitable DAC can survive in long run.

[Sentinelrv]

You have mentioned repeatedly that there is something lacking in Nu’s business model. I suspect the business model supporting NuShares will prove to be considerably more lucrative than the B&C business model. I’m surprised some in the community think otherwise. Selling NuBits will be extremely lucrative with even modest adoption. Nu is a very young startup that has also experienced a financial setback in the form of the exchange defaults. I predict this talk of an unprofitable business model will stop as soon as NuBit adoption picks up modestly.

I actually understand this. What I’m doing is buying BlockShares so that I’ll have extra profit at the end of the month in dividends to buy more NuShares. The potential profit in the long-term with NuShares is much greater if it succeeds.

I’ll wait and see what Neucoin can do within several month, if Neucoin overtakes PPC, the PoS scarcity can hardly set up.

@Sabreiib, we have actually been discussing this recently and @mably has been working on an idea that would help introduce scare resources into Peercoin. It would allow user created assets that would be secured by Peercoin’s proof-of-stake. This would allow businesses that want equity asset tracking to skip Peershares and go directly to Peercoin (Peershares is best for more advanced DAOs anyway). There would be no reason for businesses to have to worry about minting and how distribution would affect security, because Peercoin minters would take care of everything. If successful, it would be much harder to simply copy Peercoin, because clones wouldn’t be able to easily copy all the assets and businesses tied to the Peercoin blockchain. Sunny King has called a meeting to discuss the idea, so we’ll have to see what he thinks first.

[BCExchange]

I’m not sure where this list came from but I assume what coins will be added will decided by shareholders post release.

It is an initial list of cryptoassets that are popular, secure, and likely to increase the total number of traders using B&C Exchange. BlockShare holders will have the final say over whether to add, delete, or retain any trading pairs on the platform after the blockchain is launched.

[BCExchange]

Total funds committed have reached $166,401 including seed funds. We are now over 83% of the way to our goal of $200,000.

[tomjoad]

BKC and NBT may compete each other, so how about bring pegging differentiation?

I don’t see how they will compete at all. Users are unlikely to purchase more BKC than they expect to consume (ie. completely destroy) in a reasonable time frame. They are intended as transactional tokens that provide access to a network, not a tool for general enduring commerce. Nobody considers US postage stamps a competitor of US dollars in facilitating general trade.