You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Segregated Trading Pairs Decrease Overall Liquidity
BTS blockchain would then be outwardly displaying preferential treatment for gateways. As mentioned already before, people CHOOSING their wallet is important. You can't just throw peoples BTS at bitcoin that COULD be compromised and POSSIBLY not paid back.
The idea being explored here is a way for the bts protocol to enable greater liquidity among BTC pairings to support all gateways. It is a structural headwind for the platform to support several various BTC pairings each struggling with lagging liquidity. This is still a brainstorming session - I do not proclaim to have a situation right now.
I suppose if you were to have a set-up screen where you could aggregate them via GUI. The reason I think this is import is because is exchange/gateway A: has some sort of quantum resistant service and gateway b: has a shaky design with a vulnerability -- I want to be able to choose which gateway will receive x.asset. The BTS blockchain is not Atomic Swap and thus the central security of the gateway is imperative and thus the grouping is subject to massive implications.
Yes the idea would be to grant the user maximum freedom to use which gateway he wanted. Bts protocol is not atomic swap but it is a second layer solution (DEX) for other chains like BTC.
So I would be willing to "federate", as you mentioned, my own pairings, but I think for worker/commitee action to choose a default would be wrong.
Yes the gateways would vountarily form a federation. Non-Aggression Principle.
Emphasizing personal preference and responsibility in the gateway would be sufficient for a true decentralized exchange. The only way I can see this working is if a ton of money is spent verifying security and/or insuring storage for this "easy-mode" pairing. But I guess the BTS commitee and workers have a metric ton of money to work with. lol
Agreed that the committee may not be well-positioned to handle this. There could be an opportunity for a private firm to serve as a BTC wholesale of sorts on the DEX.
I see what you mean, that would require a HELL of a lot of faith in the ecosystem itself. The stability and security of the "dpos" "voting block" can be a blessing, but it could also shove a knife in the back of the beast. You know what i mean?
I do. I trust the market and the dex is just that.