I would like to introduce you to @takao (Takao Asayama) .
Takao recently got 100m JPY to lauch Zaif, the latest exchange to open in Japan.
Takao speaks fluent English and has a lot of experience dealing with technologies in Silicon Valley, already.
I spoke to him yesterday over Skype.
He is interested in adopting potentially NuBits because according to him most of Japanese traders want to trade bitcoin over BTC/USD, which means that they need to remit USD to overseas exchanges.
With all the fuss and AMLC related issues it involves, those traders cannot trade as much as they want.
Using NBT could solve it very simply since those traders would just need to “remit” NBTs which as you may know is very simple, almost free and almost immediate
However it involves enabling Japanese users to buy NBTs with JPYs in the first place.
Obviously setting up NBT/JPY would solve the problem. This would involve at the same time setting up USD/JPY.
Or the exchange could just deal with BTC/JPY and NBT/BTC.
Anyway, I will let Takao expresseshis thoughts/requests/questions here and the community interact with him directly now.
Please note Zaif has already an API.
I have been watching USD pegged crypto currency for a while. There are some demand for BTC/USD in Japan. Also, that will virtually let my users trade JPY/USD.
However, I am still being careful which one is the best.
Can you explain NuBits’ Pros and Cons compared to others such as BitUSD??
NuBits have demonstrated better stability and are simpler to use than BitUSD. Those factors translates to NBT being traded at much higher volumes than BitUSD - we saw in November and December that daily transaction volumes for NuBits regularly eclipsed $1,000,000 while BitUSD trading was several orders of magnitude less. Even now - with our previous top three volume exchanges having been hacked - we have higher daily trading volume than BitUSD.
In terms of stability, NBT have been as close to $1.00 US as possible while using NBT/BTC trading pairs over the past six months. The Nu design has maintained a robust peg even in crisis scenarios like the one we faced at the end of February.
In terms of simplicity, I would recommend trying out both the NuBits wallet and the BitShares wallet to judge for yourself. We would be happy to send you a few NBT to play with. I think you’ll quickly see the difference in quality and ease of use. That ease of use would translate to higher trading volumes on your exchange.
That covers the “Pros”. For “Cons”, our community is smaller than BitShares right now, so it has to be more strategic in its actions. As well, the BitShares community was quite vocal initially that our design did not allow permanent supply reductions of NBT, but our recent NSR-for-NBT burning and variable transaction fee proposals solved that problem. Our parking rate mechanism also allows temporary reductions in supply.
The current reality is that NBT/BTC trading pairs dominate our trading volume, yes. If a trader desired USD, it is easiest to sell NBT for BTC, and then BTC for USD. We are working behind the scenes to establish NBT/USD trading pairs on some exchanges however, and hope to accomplish that in the next couple months.
Some people says Nubits is not fully centralized because it’s run by a bot controlled by you guys. I haven’t read the white paper fully but where does that bot exist?
I used to support NBT/USD at CCEDK but with the recent hack I stopped the operations.
I also got agreement from the shareholders to increase the operations but I had to stop the plan.
Hi @takao. Understandable concerns around NuBot and centralisation. I hope I can clear them.
NuBot is hard coded with a strategy to maintain the NuBit $1 peg. Rather than there being a single instance of NuBot being run by the NuBits team, the idea is that Liquidity Providers from the community use NuBot to manage their own private funds on an Exchange.
Anyone is free to Run NuBot on any of the supported exchanges but only voted Custodians are able to submit information about their liquidity provision back to the community (through their custodian address).
Custodians are running NuBot on their own machines, on cloud servers and even on raspberry pis. The bot is configurable so that different custodians can use different price feeds -for calculating the value of $1 in the peg currency-, alter the spread they offer for NuBits or hold some funds away from the order book. There’s more configurations on the way too. These all means that each custodian can offer different strategies but all with the aim of maintaining the peg.
While it is true that there aren’t as many lliquidity providing custodians as there ideally should be, I don’t think the system in place could be termed centralised. There are projects underway which aim to create liquidity pool where community members can contribute what funds they want to a larger pot which is then used to provide liquidity. While in some ways this adds some centralisation, it is no more so than the mining pools we see in other cryptos.
Edit. Just saw your last post. NuBot can support any NuBit pair you can offer. That isn’t to say that it will be supported as that is reliant on finding a supporting Custodian. With the advent of liquidity pools though, that should become easier.
Since NBT aims to become the digital equivalent of USD in terms of value, why not start a trading pair of NBT/BTC as a substitute to USD/BTC? Also, until NuBits has a USD/NBT trading pair, JPY/NBT seems like a much better alternative than BTC/NBT for NuBot because JPY is not as volatile as BTC.
The beauty of the Nu Network is the ability to manage Nubits. I often tout the network as a decentralized central bank because shareholders decide the fate of Nubits. All nations have their central banks managing their currencies with explicit purpose of maintaining stability because an unstable national currency hurts importers and exporters which is also vital to a country’s growth.
Bitcoin on the other hand is fully exposed to the whims of the market, making it much less desirable as a currency. A friend bought $1,000 worth Bitcoin at Coinbase, he already lost $20 during the waiting period.
Imagine BTC is already mainstream. I wanted to buy $1M worth of iron payable in Bitcoin (3,448.27BTC at $290). An hour later, BTC loses $1 in value, I already lost $3,448 in transit. Who would want to assume the risk? The buyer or seller? As a seller, I would rather receive $1,000,000 USD, not 1 cent less or more.
nu has a potential to become the next world reserve currency