Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors  (Read 810 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Method-X

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
  • VIRAL
    • View Profile
    • Learn to code
  • BTS: methodx
Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« on: October 20, 2014, 07:22:22 PM »

a) Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin with the intention of it being decentralized digital gold. Gold 2.0.

b) Daniel Larimer created Bitshares with the intention of it being a decentralized autonomous company. Shares 2.0.

Deflation (or controlled inflation) makes sense if you're trying to be a decentralized global currency like Bitcoin. But what if you're trying to reimagine what a company is?

FACT: "Regular" centralized companies issue new shares to facilitate growth all the time. For a Decentralized Autonomous Company to compete with a centralized corporation, it MUST have the ability to issue new shares or it can never hope to compete. If it comes down to a centralized corporation vs. a DAC, the centralized corp will always win because it has the ability to fund its own growth.

In Dans latest proposal, shareholders must reach a majority consensus through voting before new shares can be issued. This makes complete sense if we want DACs to be self funding and competitive with real world corporations. If we as a community don't get behind the idea of delegated share issuance, the whole concept of a DAC is dead on arrival.

Let's completely embrace the share 2.0 metaphor and get on with changing the world.

Offline roadscape

Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2014, 07:27:29 PM »
Agree 100%.
http://cryptofresh.com  |  witness: roadscape

Offline graffenwalder

Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2014, 07:30:19 PM »
Yes, Nice and simpele metaphor  +5%

Offline onceuponatime

Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2014, 07:30:41 PM »
This has my vote (PTS, AGS, btsx, DNS holder)

Offline luckybit

Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2014, 07:32:57 PM »
Remember it must also be decentralized.

Also the same argument you're making for corporations to dilute is the exact argument governments make for why they must have inflation. Be aware that the DAC can substitute for a corporation or a country.

These delegates are also the board of directors. I'm not against having monetary policy flexibility to do whatever is necessary for the survival of the chain but I don't think it should happen just because 20 or so guys in a hangout decide it should happen.

There should be a process where a proposal is formally presented, it should be debated, and then only ratified it gets a super-majority of 75% of the vote.  It should be very hard to dilute the shares and so far Bytemaster and others haven't given good enough reasons.

So while it's a capability to have in the toolbox it doesn't seem like Invictus is out of money. If Invictus isn't out of money then why do they need to borrow money from shareholders? Dilution is a loan from the network to whoever receives the buying power.

https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2014, 07:40:29 PM »
Remember it must also be decentralized.

Also the same argument you're making for corporations to dilute is the exact argument governments make for why they must have inflation. Be aware that the DAC can substitute for a corporation or a country.

These delegates are also the board of directors. I'm not against having monetary policy flexibility to do whatever is necessary for the survival of the chain but I don't think it should happen just because 20 or so guys in a hangout decide it should happen.

There should be a process where a proposal is formally presented, it should be debated, and then only ratified it gets a super-majority of 75% of the vote.  It should be very hard to dilute the shares and so far Bytemaster and others haven't given good enough reasons.

So while it's a capability to have in the toolbox it doesn't seem like Invictus is out of money. If Invictus isn't out of money then why do they need to borrow money from shareholders? Dilution is a loan from the network to whoever receives the buying power.

It will only happen if a majority of stakeholders decide for it to happen. I3 has no authority to implement it, it will only be the voted delegates that hold the power to do it.

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1213
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BTS: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #6 on: October 20, 2014, 07:40:47 PM »
a) Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin with the intention of it being decentralized digital gold. Gold 2.0.

b) Daniel Larimer created Bitshares with the intention of it being a decentralized autonomous company. Shares 2.0. Oh yeah, and on the side he also created Gold 3.0 (BitGLD).

FTFY  :D

Offline Empirical1.1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #7 on: October 20, 2014, 07:41:12 PM »
I have contrasting views that suggest a properly planned hybrid is possible. A DAC that operates within the framework of a digital gold because what it loses in adaptability it gains in the confidence & certainty it provides to investors, supporters and customers in the crypto-currency space.

You don't have to worry about the framework changing at the whim of majority shareholders.
Humans on average as individuals and almost always when acting as a group make inferior decisions which maximise their perceived short term gain in exchange for excessive long term pain, minimising the advantage flexible companies, currencies and countries have over less flexible competitors. (Which is why the average Western human is overweight, in debt and their currencies, companies and countries are on the edge of darkness.)

However in the context of BitShares I fully support the latest proposal for dilution and a single BitShares  :)
« Last Edit: October 20, 2014, 07:43:29 PM by Empirical1.1 »

Online vegolino

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
  • Reality is Information
    • View Profile
Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #8 on: October 20, 2014, 07:51:36 PM »
Clear and simple way to communicate things is a gift. Thank you MeTHoDx for using this gift and sharing it with forum users.

Offline Method-X

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
  • VIRAL
    • View Profile
    • Learn to code
  • BTS: methodx
Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #9 on: October 20, 2014, 07:55:38 PM »
Remember it must also be decentralized.

I believe the intention is to allow for share issuance in a decentralized way.

Also the same argument you're making for corporations to dilute is the exact argument governments make for why they must have inflation. Be aware that the DAC can substitute for a corporation or a country.

I do see shares as having more in common with fiat than say, gold. Most people against dilution have that view because they're stuck in the coin paradigm. Deflationary shares don't make a whole lot of sense because it drastically limits growth. I guess the question is what's the difference between a company's shares, fiat currency and a deflationary commodity like gold.

These delegates are also the board of directors. I'm not against having monetary policy flexibility to do whatever is necessary for the survival of the chain but I don't think it should happen just because 20 or so guys in a hangout decide it should happen.

Agree.

There should be a process where a proposal is formally presented, it should be debated, and then only ratified it gets a super-majority of 75% of the vote.  It should be very hard to dilute the shares and so far Bytemaster and others haven't given good enough reasons.

Agree. I think Dan wants to future proof Bitshares. i.e. What it the SEC freezes Invictus' assets? It's good to have this mechanism in place.

So while it's a capability to have in the toolbox it doesn't seem like Invictus is out of money. If Invictus isn't out of money then why do they need to borrow money from shareholders? Dilution is a loan from the network to whoever receives the buying power.

Other than the AGS/PTS/BTSX merger, I don't think they plan on issuing any new shares until it's absolutely necessary.

Offline GaltReport

Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #10 on: October 20, 2014, 07:59:58 PM »
+100% - The sooner the better.


Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12175
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #11 on: October 20, 2014, 08:02:05 PM »
nice OP! +5% ...

another metaphor for later ..

Once a subdivision matures and can stand on it's own we can have a spin off as mentioned briefly by BM in the recent hangout .. having parallel chains with the same board of directors :)
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline graffenwalder

Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #12 on: October 20, 2014, 08:09:18 PM »
This might be one for the stupid questions thread.

But since it's a DAC, anybody can come up with a dilution proposal right?
It doesn't necessarily have to be Invictus issuing new shares, as long as they get enough votes.

Online vegolino

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
  • Reality is Information
    • View Profile
Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #13 on: October 20, 2014, 08:11:20 PM »
This might be one for the stupid questions thread.

But since it's a DAC, anybody can come up with a dilution proposal right?
It doesn't necessarily have to be Invictus issuing new shares, as long as they get enough votes.
Yes

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12175
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Gold 2.0 vs. Shares 2.0: Lets Talk Metaphors
« Reply #14 on: October 20, 2014, 08:12:42 PM »
But since it's a DAC, anybody can come up with a dilution proposal right?
It doesn't necessarily have to be Invictus issuing new shares, as long as they get enough votes.
From what I know this should be the case ... and better will be
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

 

Google+