Notification: OpenLedger Removal

exchange
#1

Some of you will recall that we started to explore the use of Decentralised Exchanges back in May 2018. As a trial, we undertook to provide some liquidity to one decentralised exchange in particular (OpenLedger).

However, we have just received notification from OpenLedger that they are no longer going to support MAID on the exchange because the trading volumes are too low. We’re currently trying to get confirmation from them directly as to (1) the precise date that this will happen and (2) any other advice that they might have for existing MAID-holders who may be using the service.

We’ll let you know as soon as we hear further from them but at this stage, our advice would be to remove any MAID that you have on OpenLedger as soon as possible in order to avoid any complications.

14 Likes
SAFE Network Dev Update - May 2, 2019
#2

Man Oh Man :disappointed_relieved:

2 Likes
#3

It’s kind of messed up MAID is getting ousted left and right. It can’t be the only Omni asset and therefore cost that much overhead and a lot of people HODL MAID long term. Just a damn shame.

6 Likes
#4

We need that roadmap to hopefully breathe life into trading. Unfortunately this project is too complex for most to fully understand. We who live here barely grasp time frames so I am not surprised traders give it a wide berth.

9 Likes
#5

I suspect the price of MAID won’t do to well until SN-beta is on the visible horizon and won’t really take off until it’s out in the wild. The complexity aside there are too many alternative tokens/coins that are easier to hype and trade on and there is probably little to no expectation for making a trading profit in any short-term scenario with MAID. Furthermore, making MAID easier to trade and to hold while helpful for all, might just end up being a more helpful vehicle to those who would attempt to short MAID … but who knows.

As a long-term hodler and not a market maker it’s not the end of the world for me personally that the token is an OMNI-token and OMNI has served it’s purpose. We’ve also had a discussion on the forum before about moving the token to another platform like ethereum and IMO the idea was effectively shot down.

OTOH …

I’ve heard that Tether is moving to Tron and without the heavyweight of Tether, it would seem that there aren’t many reasons for exchanges to support OMNI at all – leaving MAID out in the wilderness …

So curious what traders and other holders think. Also how difficult would it be to move some tokens to Ethereum with a burn address and hence have MAID on both platforms? Would this be a much bigger headache for burning for safecoin in the future?

4 Likes
#6

The new Tether Tron tokens will exist alongside their Omni layer (which makes up the vast majority of their current tokens) and ERC-20 coins, Tyler. So not moving way as such, but adding to the 2 they already have. So they will have coins spread across 3 different blockchains. Not sure if this is a good or a bad thing for their users, it means quite a bit more to manage (if exchanges want to carry all 3 for example) but it does give their users a choice of different tools and apps.

3 Likes
#7

Thanks for the details Nick. I’m not too surprised as moving the tokens off of OMNI would probably be difficult to do in the short term.

Perhaps though they will do a transition away from OMNI over time - by buying up their own OMNI tokens – assuming exchanges prefer not to use OMNI, which I have no idea about. I expect that this is mostly for the sake of exchanges though and not so much users.

1 Like
#8

This of course assumes they have the funds to do that :smiley:!

4 Likes
#9

If exchanges switch over (prefer) one type of token over another, then they’ll just switch over - so the Tether peeps aren’t even involved.

On the other hand if Tether is issuing new tokens on one platform then they can simply buy up token on the other platform - so just an account balancing act.

Also, don’t know if you are aware, but apparently in a recent court case involving Tether, it came out that they are only holding a fractional reserve amount of USD to Tether … so effectively they can leverage a lot of tokens with minimal USD.

#10

Yes I know, my comment above was a poor attempt at humour :). I won’t be giving up the day job!

6 Likes
#11

No problems, they just do another 1 billion token sale like the one they are doing now to cover the missing $850 million dollars “fully backed” stable coin. :joy: Someday in the future the shit will hit the fan but hopefully SAFE is released before that.

@TylerAbeoJordan

That sounds like alot of very fancy words for describing a scam to me. :joy:

1 Like
#12

True … but it’s what the average bank across the globe does every day when it makes a loan to someone.

#13

A scam is a scam, if someone else does it, does not make it or exclude it as less of, or not, a scam.

1 Like
#14

That’s right … and that’s why I’m in crypto! :wink:

1 Like
#15

If banks would say that every dollar in the bank is backed by gold but then it unfolds that it isn’t, that is a scam. In many countries if a bank goes bankrupt then a persons money is covered by a national bank which will compensate up to for example $100k-200k. But if tether goes bust than there will be no form of compensation, if the market falls and people are getting worried that there are not enough dollar for every tether than they might do a “run on the bank” and then everything colapses.

1 Like
#16

You’re right that banks are insured. I don’t know if the company behind tether has any insurance or not … it’s a good question.

In any case bank lending is based on the fractional reserve principle allowing them to loan out a multiple of bank credit (printed money) relative to the amount they have in reserve (your savings, or even someone’s loan deposits!) generally this ratio is in the range of 1 reserve to 9-11 x bank credits … but given they all hold the credit of each others loans in the whole of the banking system it’s basically unlimited and the total amount out there is limited only by loan demand and how loosely the bank lends.

Fundamentally it’s a game of musical chairs and a pyramid scheme of ever increasing debts … mostly from home mortgages - which is why the central banks are always fretting over the prime interest rates - if they raise them when the economy isn’t doing well, then the repayments of loans exceeds outgoing new loans which causes an economic collapse of the pyramid (depression).

Globally we are a real pickle. It’s unfortunate really given we do now have the tools to abate catastrophe, but just as people won’t stop using facebook because that is where all their friends are (network effect) people won’t stop using fiat funny money … because that is what everyone conventionally uses to trade with.

So a collapse is probably in the cards. Wish it wasn’t so, but seems to be baked in at this point IMO.

Sorry for the off-topic stuff. Have a look at https://mises.org for more info into honest economics.

Cheers

1 Like
#17

Yes, you are right about fractional reserve banking, I have studied alot of economics so I know how it is built up. Fractional reserve banking don’t have to be negative, if it is used properly it can allow for quicker economic growth through technical investments and to allow for young people to buy a home.

The problem to me comes when their is lack of regulation both in traditional markets but also in crypto that allows for scamers and people to abuse the market for their own gains.
Fractional reserve banking is necessary to the point where the societies we live in would not be possible without it. But if that is good or bad probably depends on what happens in the future. It is a deep and complex subject that would benefit for a professor in economics to explain and full understand. Thankfully I don’t have to think about these things on a daily basis because the complexity tends to give me a slight headache. :slight_smile:

1 Like
#18

Well I disagree with your view there completely. This isn’t a place for that discussion though and you may not be interested in having one … but if you are, create a new off-topic thread and I will explain in detail there why FRB can only be a “bad”.

3 Likes
#19

I agree with you that this should not be discussed in this topic. I also believe that FRB is a, none question, otherwise someone clever in the last 500 or so years would have proven that it is wrong.

To allow maximum economic growth the only question I can see is, what rate should FRB be at, what default rate do business and homes have?, what value can be recovered and what shuld (the risk) interest rate be at? I would not be surprised if there have been estimations from statitics about default rate and what would be an optimal fractional reserve percentage.

I have a hypothesis that you wont be able to give a fully complete analysis and there of you will not be able to make a conclusion if FRB is good or bad. I’am a little curious what your points will be, so if @neo or any other admin put this discussion in off-topic, that would be great. I think that you will use some cherry picking but fail to include all relevant parts to make a conclusion. If you can argue and with mathematical proof and statistics show that FRB is bad then I will gladly kneel and bow to you.

I don’t have the energy to spend alot of hours referencing statements and there for will only read you comment and maybe react to logical and rational misstakes. I have suffered alot to gain knowlege of most important parts of economics, I don’t think I have missed something important, and I also have promised professors to stand up for logical and rational thinking and that is what I will try to do anywhere where it is needed.

2 Likes
#20

Off-topic but interesting. It’s like arguing whether or not economic growth is a good thing. (Virtually every species on earth should argue it’s not.) FRB is good for growth but with that comes risk and volatility. Usually the “best” answer lies somewhere in the middle, not in the extremes.

1 Like