Quote from: toast on December 10, 2014, 11:23:41 PM

Quote from: UnunoctiumTesticles on December 10, 2014, 09:35:15 PM

Quote from: mymenace on December 10, 2014, 09:14:15 PM

Quote from: UnunoctiumTesticles on December 06, 2014, 12:32:59 AM

Thank for those who have more knowledge about derivatives taking the time to make some explanations. Admittedly my patience was too short to elaborate sufficiently.

It doesn't really matter that some people are ignorant of the utility of derivatives, because they will always gravitate to what is succeeding.

And derivatives boost the ecosystem by orders-of-magnitude, because a large portion of the business world can't participate without them. No hedging, sorry they can't do Bitcoin.

how do side chains fit in to this scenario of derivatives

Merged-mining was my recent idea of how to do the programmable block chain correctly, not Ethereum nor Bitshares.

Bitshares actually started out as groups competing application-specific blockchains but all minor chains were abandoned in favor of pushing BTSX (branded just "BTS") adoption to get bitUSD network effect.

This is useful case history feedback. I like data. Thanks.

I don't think it would be possible to put monetary value in each side-chain. Naturally the market would want to consolidate value because it reduces risk (except for the long-tail risk such as censorship of one chain, but markets don't usually place much value on long-tail risk).

Rather I advocate the programmable aspects be in side-chains, and be paid for with the main chain economic unit. The miners will mine them because they are incentivized with payment on a competing basis. This reduces risk of otherwise forcing all miners to process all experiments in programmability.

Quote from: toast on December 10, 2014, 11:23:41 PM

Realistically the application-specific chains that should emerge soonest are voting and DNS which both have BTS sidechain projects already underway.

Yes these are important functions of a programmable block chain.