The LTB Network Forum

What exchanges would you like to see LTBcoin listed on?

Back to LTBcoin Talk

Comments

Matt

Offline
Posts: 227
Location: Charlotte, NC

Poll!

Posted on July 9, 2014 at 7:08 PM

0 likes

• MikeJohnson

  

  Offline
  Posts: 427

  Cryptsy would be awesome.

  Posted on July 9, 2014 at 7:19 PM
  Permalink
  2 likes
• William

  

  Offline
  Posts: 308

  Any of the following would do: Mintpal, Poloniex, Bittrex or Craptsy.

  Posted on July 9, 2014 at 8:01 PM
  Permalink
  2 likes
• mich

  

  Offline
  Posts: 50
  Location: Philadelphia

  Probably cryptsy. it will be interesting to see how upper level coins fare on centralized exchanges. What other 3rd level coins are on exchanges right now if any? If LTBCoin gets picked up on a few it will definitely be paving a way.

  Posted on July 9, 2014 at 8:12 PM
  Permalink
  1 like
• cmason

  

  Offline
  Posts: 119

  Actually, none, but let me qualify that.

  One of the main advantages of Counterparty is that the exchange is decentralized and no trust is required. If you bring centralized exchanges into the mix, you're back to having to deposit funds with a third party that could go bankrupt, make a mistake, get hacked, or just disappear into the night.

  I would love to see more wallets/clients that have added support for the Counterparty protocol. Some might be dedicated to Counterparty assets, others might be meta-wallets that support the management of multiple assets across multiple blockchains (Mastercoin, NXT, Ethereum, etc.) Anything that doesn't require you to give up your keys or trust a website where you have to "deposit" your coins/tokens.

  Not only would this provide better security, and allow for competition in terms of features, easy of use, UI, etc., it would increase the network effect by expanding the Counterparty (or other) market directly, allowing for increased volume, liquidity, easier and faster trades, and better price discovery. I mean if you want to buy or sell a Counterparty asset, why would you want to limit yourself to some small, illiquid (and possibly shady) corner of the market, instead of dealing with the entire market as a whole?

  I agree with adding more trading options, but we don't need old school exchanges to do that.

  Posted on July 9, 2014 at 8:32 PM
  Permalink
  3 likes
• MikeJohnson

  

  Offline
  Posts: 427

  @mich Probably cryptsy. it will be interesting to see how upper level coins fare on centralized exchanges. What other 3rd level coins are on exchanges right now if any? If LTBCoin gets picked up on a few it will definitely be paving a way.

  It would most certainly be paving a way and be absolutely amazing to see a new concept such as this one thrown up on an exchange.

  Posted on July 9, 2014 at 8:41 PM
  Permalink
  0 likes
• William

  

  Offline
  Posts: 308

  @mich Probably cryptsy. it will be interesting to see how upper level coins fare on centralized exchanges. What other 3rd level coins are on exchanges right now if any? If LTBCoin gets picked up on a few it will definitely be paving a way.

  Maidsafe just got on Polo today.

  Posted on July 9, 2014 at 9:23 PM
  Permalink
  0 likes
• William

  

  Offline
  Posts: 308

  @cmason

  Actually, none, but let me qualify that.

  One of the main advantages of Counterparty is that the exchange is decentralized and no trust is required. If you bring centralized exchanges into the mix, you're back to having to deposit funds with a third party that could go bankrupt, make a mistake, get hacked, or just disappear into the night.

  I would love to see more wallets/clients that have added support for the Counterparty protocol. Some might be dedicated to Counterparty assets, others might be meta-wallets that support the management of multiple assets across multiple blockchains (Mastercoin, NXT, Ethereum, etc.) Anything that doesn't require you to give up your keys or trust a website where you have to "deposit" your coins/tokens.

  Not only would this provide better security, and allow for competition in terms of features, easy of use, UI, etc., it would increase the network effect by expanding the Counterparty (or other) market directly, allowing for increased volume, liquidity, easier and faster trades, and better price discovery. I mean if you want to buy or sell a Counterparty asset, why would you want to limit yourself to some small, illiquid (and possibly shady) corner of the market, instead of dealing with the entire market as a whole?

  I agree with adding more trading options, but we don't need old school exchanges to do that.

  Yeah, but a big disadvantage to counterparty is the time it takes to actually complete a transaction. And, about half of the transactions don't go through, in my experience. So the DEX is a really cool idea that doesn't work particularly well yet.

  Posted on July 9, 2014 at 9:25 PM
  Permalink
  0 likes
• cmason

  

  Offline
  Posts: 119

  @william ...

  Yeah, but a big disadvantage to counterparty is the time it takes to actually complete a transaction. And, about half of the transactions don't go through, in my experience. So the DEX is a really cool idea that doesn't work particularly well yet.

  Completely agree, I've tried a few trades, none have gone through yet. Why? New technology, small market, high expectations. Solution, fix the bugs, expand the market, increase the users. Compare this to Masterchest and it's way ahead.

  I think we're both complaining about the same thing, make something that works, and give it to us! But distributed exchanges are new and barely working, it will take time. Getting the core code and functionality up to scale is the main task, right? Do you see third-party exchanges helping or hurting this effort?

  Posted on July 9, 2014 at 9:36 PM
  Permalink
  1 like
• William

  

  Offline
  Posts: 308

  @cmason

  @william ...

  Yeah, but a big disadvantage to counterparty is the time it takes to actually complete a transaction. And, about half of the transactions don't go through, in my experience. So the DEX is a really cool idea that doesn't work particularly well yet.

  Completely agree, I've tried a few trades, none have gone through yet. Why? New technology, small market, high expectations. Solution, fix the bugs, expand the market, increase the users. Compare this to Masterchest and it's way ahead.

  I think we're both complaining about the same thing, make something that works, and give it to us! But distributed exchanges are new and barely working, it will take time. Getting the core code and functionality up to scale is the main task, right? Do you see third-party exchanges helping or hurting this effort?

  I think decentralized exchanges are pretty interesting. Are there any others that are up and running that I could play around with, other than XCP? I seem to recall that there are some altcoins working on this...

  Posted on July 9, 2014 at 9:38 PM
  Permalink
  0 likes
• cmason

  

  Offline
  Posts: 119

  @william ...

  I think decentralized exchanges are pretty interesting. Are there any others that are up and running that I could play around with, other than XCP? I seem to recall that there are some altcoins working on this...

  Mastercoin was supposed to have one (that's the "masterchest" thing I was talking about, but it's dead now), NXT sort of has one, then there's XCP. Ethereum isn't directly trying to make one, but they aim to make one easier to implement. I believe this was first proposed over a year ago, and nothing has come to be yet, except for XCP. So, yes, it sucks in many ways, but it actually exists, and does work, with limitations. This is all brand new stuff, let's give them a chance.

  Posted on July 9, 2014 at 9:54 PM
  Permalink
  2 likes

Post Reply