Replies: 11 comments 16 replies
-
|
In a day where bisq is doing revenues of $500k per day($20m per month) whereas binance is doing $30Billion per day, its clear bisq is overwhelmingly under-performing. The upside is huge if bisq can manage to be customer-centric and user friendly. Right now its just a tight community of anonymous crypto hobbyists. To enjoy widespread success, Bisq needs to measure the project's access-ability from the newb user's perspective. How many minutes can they go from I want bitcoin to I got bitcoin? Benchmark against the centralized options: binance etc. Refine and improve until bisque is objectively faster. It will be interesting to see what percentage of users download the application, run it and bounce because its too many steps vs the percentage who stick to their guns until they do their first trade. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
''Binance Nigeria alone was doing about $5Billion volume daily'' WOW |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Low-hanging fruit potential growth drivers: 1. Stablecoins 2. Privacycoins 3. Mobile app |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I agree good avenues to pursue. I'd personally be low prioritising them, over everything else focused on getting the basics right. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
The above are immediate (ie: 2021) potential growth drivers that would require little effort and should IMHO be short-term priorities. For longer term growth, if we really want to compete on an equal footing with centralized exchanges we have to re-think who Bisq's target market is and TALK TO THEM, engage with them, gather feedback on why they are not using Bisq. I can imagine many of the reasons (liquidity, UX, trade time, etc) but to do this properly you need to hear it from them! That being said, here are some of my ideas for long-term priorities: 1. ATOMIC SWAPS 2. BSQ and other coloured coins 3. CENSORSHIP RESISTANCE The Chinese experience is interesting (see bisq-network/growth#135 ) 4. MARKET MAKERS I think the API will help a lot with this. But until we solve it, the market maker problem it should be a priority. 5. ONBOARDING and UX If Bisq is unable to attract pros (market makers) and also too difficult for noobs... what market does that leave us? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Support 1, 2, 3... above but 4 has most importance imo — and how to attract/keep them is their offers being taken quickly & low fee's.
But until we solve it, the market maker problem it should be a priority. I agree. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
There's no doubt onboarding and UX can be improved a lot, but much of the work to do this has already been done. Pedro's prototypes would go pretty far to achieve this. Problem is getting a skilled JavaFX developer to actually implement them...funding and talent need to be procured. Another more immediate issue is reducing minimum required deposits.
I had a passing correspondence with a vendor who was earning BTC revenue and was having issues with one of the big exchanges in selling the BTC for fiat. I'm not sure Bisq would be a viable option for this use case without the API, but will follow up anyway...there must be more like them.
Binance is engineered for convenience at the expense of everything else, and Bisq is engineered for freedom at the expense of everything else. Of course Bisq can do better than it's currently doing but it's unreasonable to compare its volumes to operations with vastly different goals. Apples and oranges. For growth I can say there was a project board established last year for prioritization but there really wasn't anyone around to collaborate with so I stopped maintaining it. China needs a mobile app. India seems workable without one, but they need UPI as a payment method. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
How is BSQ going in terms of usage? Trades for it are real low yeah? Focusing improving that process ability to buy BSQ (and thus sell for BSQ holders) should be a priority? ATM massive barriers in the way of people being able to buy simply. This would help funding overall? Lifeblood of project? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@m52go why does China need a mobile app? Because the users there are mobile or to crack the Great Firewall as opposed to a web app? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Users greatly prefer mobile and find the desktop program clunky -- that's the feedback we got from folks on the ground who tried to bootstrap the market in the past. If I remember correctly, I think they also mentioned that circumventing GFW is easier on mobile than on desktop. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I guess it is easier to use a luxury hotel wifi with a smartphone than by sitting in the lobby with your laptop 😜 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
The lack of a CEO type of entity within Bisq is something that has been discussed before and no good solutions have been found. I think the closest model we work after is Bitcoin where everyone works on what they see fit and only very small changes can be done, and when done, very slowly since a rough consensus has to be found before moving ahead. In Bisq we have the benefit of the voting to move decisions forward much faster, but we lack the resources and direction. Many of the point suggested here are not even contentious, just a lot of work. I think it's fine that everyone works on what they want, but it is a problem that progress is slow, many times due to the bisq client being monolithic. It makes it very hard to change anything without causing trouble for other developers in other domains and it makes it slow to move forward with dev work. Now that the API is ready I think some points could be worked on much more independently, moving certain projects forward without depending on some central reviewer or other issues stemming from the complex nature of the bisq client. @flix1 As an aside I can mention that I'm trying to get the BSQ atomic swaps working. It touches almost all modules, p2p, dao, trade protocol, offer protocol, desktop. It would also not be easy to extend the atomic swap functionality without dependence on a wallet for the asset that needs to be swapped, how else do you verify your tx? To get a bit more direction perhaps it would be good for a non dev to partner with a dev for work that needs to be done. Especially good if the non dev contributors would act a bit as a patron to new devs coming in. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@sqrrm I am very interested in this
I'll get in touch with you on keybase to see how I can help.
I would not worry (too much) about other assets right now. The priority should be to prove that BSQ-BTC atomic swaps (a.k.a one-tx exchange) are possible and get them working. If it can be done for one coloured coin, it can be done for others built on the same template. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@Conza88 Thanks for your compilation of priorities! I think it contains most of the challenge we need to tackle. Before getting into the resources allocation issue here is my personal priorities list for now. Operational priorities (need to be tackled)
We do have a priorities board which covers the current challenges, but no further roadmap. This is mainly because of the lack of resources. It is great to have a long-term roadmap, but we just need devs to be able to tackle them. Priorities
I think what Bisq needs is a small team (4-6) of full-time contributors, who steer the ship, so other contributors can come and go doing stuff for Bisq every now and then. I wasn't able to contribute more than to review/merge and ship new versions in the last couple of months because of my paternity leave which will continue until summer. I should be able to contribute more time to Bisq again afterwards. I personally think what we need to do is first to enable contributors to make changes to Bisq and to be able to see if it has a positive effect or not. To enable that the whole Bisq monitor project was started that never reached a stable state and was recently taken over by @Emzy (https://monitor.bisq.network/d/dEVJDduWz/key-performance-indicators?orgId=1). It has with A good first step could be as @sqrrm mentioned to establish small project teams of new devs and long-time non-dev Bisq contributors. Maybe we could come up with a list of non-dev contributors who are willing to join such project teams so they can be matched with new devs coming in. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'm definitely in the dark on operational priorities, but certainly see them as important. Reducing hassles for support I know. Naturally they should be a guidepost for what bug fixes are causing the most hassles/issues. Definitely think a core bunch of dedicated dev's to steer the ship is required. Fund wise - is this the real hold up? Surely some whales out there, or Jack & JayZ (lol) could support Bisq (i.e. the GLOBE) and not just Africa with a dev fund (not denigrating that at all btw). Are BSQ bought for trades not enough funding? How long till the payouts to those who got the bad end of the stick on the 'security breach' way back? That's slowing things down? API - allowing people to help integrate, freedom is sweet. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
The whole CEO concern I think is not such a big deal as we make it out to be. We are perhaps a bit too influenced by what we have seen in other startups. If Bisq has a clear mission, priorities can just as easily be set by a small group as by a CEO. You can have a structure like this:
A council of 5-10 Team Leads should be able to agree on priorities most of the time, or break ties through majority vote or in extreme cases put it to the DAO for a vote. Of course right now Bisq is even smaller than the minimum numbers described above. Most of the discussion about structure is moot. The problem is not how to organize the people we don't have! The problem is how to attract more contributors and how to pay them. GROWTH should be the priority.
With the current economics I don't see how Bisq can ever afford more than 2-3 full time devs. You don't need a CEO or any org structure with 3 devs. What you do need is to be asking yourself every single day: "How do we double trading volumes in the next 6 months?" |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I agree with that, and wasn't suggesting need for CEO or anything. Just the heightened understanding that in organisations, that position / person has a very important role... and if those actions don't get performed or thought about at all... that's not necessarily a good thing. Which is where you get lots of little things being snapped up, but major projects that are far more important go waiting/stagnant etc. Such is my concern anyway. "How do we double trading volumes in the next 6 months?" That's I think what needs to be addressed yes, and what I was driving at with summarising issues. Top things that shouldn't be as 'next level as Taproot & Schorr etc.' 1. API Release |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hi @Conza88 thanks for creating this thread. I would like the question to be specific to BTC. "How do we double trading volumes in BTC the next 6 months?" BTC, over time, is going to do it's thing and keep increasing in price. It would be easy to look at trade volumes in USD and say well done, when in reality if the volume of BTC traded is falling I wouldn't see that as a success. In answer to how do we double trading volumes in BTC the next 6 months? I would suggest 6 months is a short period therefore a quick win is needed. If Bisq doubles its XMR/BTC volume in 6 months it will achieve this objective and can be done without any need for valuable dev resources that can go towards the points you have discussed. Therefore, I would pose the question how can we double XMR/BTC volume in 6 months? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
So:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Sharing the Bisq DAO summary report commissioned by @chimp1984 as it feels a relevant place to share it. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Would we say 8. has been ticked off? Atomic swaps for BSQ - very noice. Still incredibly adamant that if Bisq dev's are able to get at least 4. and especially 5 - ticked off, before big moves/time spent on Misq (Bisq 2), then a shite load of bootstrapping can happen organically, when others realise their country DOES have folks selling/buying... and its not all just in one market mostly EUR. That and single transaction (lower fees), oooof, come at me. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I still miss the "buy BSQ" clearly visible button, or at least display the BSQ available balance on the top. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Yes, absolutely. There were several pr's that basically did ask that from memory? UX that got sidelined I guess because of the swap or coming overhaul? Should definitely want to highlight in a way that doesn't come off as it being a shitcoin, or in your face that is off putting but it definitely needs to be present somewhere more prominent imo. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Never happened to me 😎 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Haha ok. That makes sense. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Remaining to date:
4 being easily the most important by far. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I generally love to hear about the big picture changes that are coming, or what should at least be considered as priorities.
The role of a CEO is in part—capital allocation. Where do they direct funds to, what projects take priority etc. Where are the biggest problems currently, and will these projects/developments fix them?
With Bisq n' the DAO, there is no CEO. So I am wondering a bit more generally, is the prioritisation set by the bounty's for these projects? With dev's taking it upon themselves to fix low hanging fruit? How about, as to whether the pieces fit together?
For instance I've been hammering home the benefits of 5. Increase liquidity by allowing each offer to have multiple payment methods & currencies associated with it #5147 but maybe all the work would be un-done or made harder by then having to change e.g. 4 "Combining the 4 on-chain transactions into one" if that was done later on? So inefficient from an overall perspective?
I guess I would be interested in discussions of what folks think should be prioritised? And also structure wise moving forward? Or pointing me towards something that indicates how various considerations are weighed? I've scanned the pull requests, issues, other repositories for some of (imo) top priorities.
1. API Release
2. Lightning Network integration (L2)?
3. Taproot & Schorr advancements?
4. Reduce trade protocol to 1 single transaction
5. Increase liquidity by allowing each offer to have multiple payment methods & currencies associated with it
6. Implement new-user-onboarding and new UI design
7. Improving Support Mediation
8. Improve BSQ overall
9. Improve Reporting
10. Additional universal fiat payment methods
10. Using Bisq for Peer to Peer BTC loans and interest accounts
Bug squashing and reliability is obviously a given but a department I lack knowledge about. In any case, please jump in with priority preferences, or if there's a road map I've missed etc.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions