Doesn’t it seem strange to you that in the storage tab, there are coins that no longer exist, others that have been scams but chia don’t come out?
Yes, I know there are “offers”.
I think Chia needs to do anything about facilitate shopping.
They’ve talked about this in the AMAs.
The problem is that Chia is (to paraphrase) built different, you cannot plug it into an exchange like other cryptocurrencies. It’s coming but it’s taking some time mainly because the exchanges are slow at adopting and developping for the tech behind Chia.
Chia Inc now has someone internally who is dedicated to facilitating work with exchanges. I’d expect something for this year for sure.
2 Likes
Good news then, thank you!
can you share link with me please?
wich coins showing on the binance page ?
Seriously, this sounds like bullshit. You can transfer coins from one address to another and you can do all the RPC stuff like with all other coins. Also Okx and other small exchanges offer XCH trading. Hence, different infrastructure is no excuse. There is no different infrastructure. LOL.
You’re free to believe that what I say is bullshit, and go directly yourself to the source I pointed to confirm. Chia is new tech, there’s not much more to it.
1 Like
If I remember correctly, the BLS signatures Chia uses are not supported by the big US exchanges yet, no idea why when like you say many other smaller exchanges do.
1 Like
Smaller exchanges are more flexible, work faster, have less responsabilities than big exchanges in terms of amounts exchanged on their platform and thus don’t need as much security.
Well in this case, please link your sources.
The main problem is that all major exchanges ask 6 to 7 figure “fees” just to list your coin…
There is another aspect to the listing issue:
There are two kinds of exchanges out there: One’s who self custody, and ones who rely on a custody service.
The self-custody exchanges manage all crypto funds in their own wallets only they control, and that they own and maintain all the technology around. Some of those exchanges are very rigid in their policies and will not do one-off snowflake solutions, meaning if BLS G2 is a whole new development challenge for them, they will take the time and do it the “right way” within their policy framework, no matter how long it takes. The other ones might opt to play it fast and loose, and will do things like having a manual step where a human runs CLI commands for every transaction, and therefore they can make a bandaid to support BLS G2 in the short term until they build a more permanent solution that fits within their infrastructure.
Then you have the other class of exchange, the ones who use a custody service. There are only about a half dozen or so of those services of strong repute and renown that people are comfortable allowing to hold the entirety of their business’s funds in, and those exchanges are wholly reliant on those services. Let’s imagine 7 exchanges use service A, 4 exchanges use service B, and 2 exchanges use service C. Now if service A simply isn’t interested in building a solution to support BLS G2 until a turn-key, plug and play variant is available for them, and service B is willing to build something from the ground up the right way, and service C is happy to make a bandaid solution of a human typing CLI commands, we now have a bit of a disparity betwen 3 companies that is actually impacting 14 exchanges.
This is why there is such an uneven adoption and why you can’t just look at the snapshot of “If exchange X can support it, then they all can so I call BS”.
2 Likes
J,
We just need one major exchange to adopt XCH : Coinbase, Binance etc.
We do not need all exchanges at this stage!!
1 Like
We do not need exchanges… we need decentralized market making and atomic swaps! 