Why do you say shit like that when you know that's not true at all? Both have been transparent about what they are trying to do. Would you rather keep cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology stagnant than innovate and pivot where need be?

I'm terribly disappointed with this community. It discouraging enough that most people don't understand the importance of the blockchain, its even more discouraging when so called proponents of blockchain tech don't understand the importance of trying new things.

If you put you're money into one of these platforms thinking you were going to get rich quick you are a loser and don't understand how investing in start ups works.

The OP asked for a crypto currency that he can use to hedge bitcoins volatility. BitUSD also pays more than 5% interest a year.

BitUSD or BitCNY

Why monero?

Why is it necessary to create another DPOS blockchain? If you want you can just fork bitshares

are you trying to create a currency or a better blockchain?

Bitshare's DPOS has been tested with 2 second block production.

People wont be using bitcoin, like people don't use Altavista now.

You do realize that if you have your money in bank, exchange or on paypal that you have an IOU for fiat.

The stable currencies on the bitshares block chain are not IOUs from a centralized entity, it is an IOU from the block chain that is backed by more the 2x its value in a liquid collateral and earns interest. If you understand how a bank works than you understand that you can automate the functionality of it on the block chain. That is you can create a collateralized debt instrument that is enforced by the block chain and is not subject to counterparty risk.

We don't want fiat, we just want the price stability of fiat and to not really on opaque financial intermediaries that can lose or seize our money.  

Bill raises some great points about the shortcomings of Bitcoin. What he may not be aware of is the amount of innovation on the block chain level that has occurred over the past year. These problems associated with crypto currencies have been solved, but unfortunately not by Bitcoin...Other block chain protocols that have a more dynamic development process are creating stable crypto currencies that can be exchanged right on the block chain so users can maintain full control over their money and private keys. If you haven't looked into Bitshares or Ethereum you should look at the solutions they provide:

http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2014/12/18/What-are-BitShares-Market-Pegged-Assets/
https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/11/11/search-stable-cryptocurrency/
 
In the case of charge backs, multisig transactions are certainly an underused solution. Bitshares goes a step further to make escrow transactions . A buyer can send their funds to an escrow account with restrictions on the state of the funds. The buyer can only release the funds to the seller, the seller can only release the funds to the buyer, and the escrow agent can decide what portion of the funds goes to each party in the case that buyer and seller cannot come to agreement on their own. This greatly reduces the coordination cost necessary to conduct multi sig transactions, since buyer and seller do not need to rely on the third party even in the case a chargeback is necessary.

Anonymity is not a problem either because the block chain is a public record of transaction. The public key cryptography allows for users to maintain privacy at their discretion. If someone wanted to disclose their financial record to the government they could do so an I would assume in the future this will become more of requirement for those who want to exchange crypto currencies for fiat. This is also a major reason why stable currencies that can be exchange on the block chain are so important. If you can exchange different stores of value on the block chain no money every needs to exist the network. That means less sell pressure on external exchanges and no regulations by governments.

The more financial instruments we create on the block chain the more liberated we will be from the prohibitively expensive costs of financial intermediaries and the regulations of specific jurisdictions that restrict global monetary exchange. The future of banking certainly relies upon block chain technology but whether or not we will see Bitcoin adapt to meet the needs of the currently underbanked population is much less certain. I hope it does, but at the very least we should continue to support those projects that make block chains more useable for the broader population.

bitshares is a decentralized exchange

http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2015/01/05/The-Future-of-Crypto-Currency-Exchanges/

You get all of the advantages of a crypto currency (particularly security over private keys) without the volatility of bitcoin. You are also keeping all the value in the crypto space as apposed to putting your money back into fiat. Its a fairly new concept so the volume is still low, but I'd expect adoption to spread as we see lower and lower bitcoin prices.   

http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/nubits/#markets

there's no volume in the nbt/usd market on ccedk. the only markets are nbt/btc. i don't think its even close to 0% reserve theres not enough btc on the market, but they certainly have taking losses from their btc holdings. the proof is the trade data...

there are 99 billion xrp. they havent added any to the supply. xrp has already reached a market cap of over $2.5b a month or so ago. its very close to surpassing bitcoins market cap

You do understand that given the current valuation of BTS these developers are making far less than they are worth... Stop calling people greedy because you want them to provide you something for nothing. Their time and resources cost money, and simply because you are not willing to help foot the bill doesn't mean others are not. Also as an aside, every long term investor has made tremendous gains.

Short positions are settled every 30 days at the feed price (the market price on external exchanges)...Your claim is like saying futures contracts can only be settled with the underlying asset, which is not true at all. Most contracts are settled in cash payments.

I'm not saying its not a good feature to have. Its not a game changer because the game has already changed.

Not exactly a game changer since bitshares has 10 second confirmation times.

People arent going to go to the store with gold and silver. Metals are a terrible medium of exchange which is why throughout history they are typically not used as the primary currency. Currencies should be a claim on asset and not the asset itself. Thus I can see a digital version of the gold and silver being the primary mediums of exchange. If I have a crypto currency that maintains the purchasing power of gold and entitles me to interests on my initial capital then  I would certainly use that over the physical asset.

PoW gives power to those that are willing to destroy the most resources at the lowest cost. It is not economically rational and tends more to centralization than PoS systems.