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: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required  (Read 496 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pseudoscops

Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« on: October 23, 2014, 03:36:43 PM »

I've been eagerly following the recent discussions about the merger. I was initially a little freaked out but it now all seems to make a lot of sense to me - in the short term we are stronger together rather than diluting effort. Luckily I didn't freak out enough to sell out back in to Bitcoin and hopefully share price will recover again once there is greater understanding across the whole community and weak handed short term speculators are shaken out of the tree. We'll also sadly lose some genuine believers who just find this evolution little bit too hard to swallow. C'est la vie. For those who have been genuinely burned by DNS I think that BM and Toasts recent appeasement for post genesis DNS buyers should help restore some shattered nerves and fill up some suddenly lighter DNS wallets. Those who felt that they were on the sharp end of what seemed to me to be one of the biggest negative outcomes will hopefully feel better now. Also there seems to be a fund being raised to try and appease other biggest losers who don't qualify for BMs and Toast's proposal (see this thread for details on both https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10381.0)

My main question:

Currently I own BTSX. 1/3 of my current BTSX stake is from Feb 28 PTS genesis snapshot and about a 1/3 of my total investment inside BitsharesX is pegged to BitUSD. Good to see a few more people hedging in there with me of late instead of leaving $ on a BTC exchange   ;)
I am also a long term holder of PTS and have tripled my stake there too since Feb 28.

I haven't actually set up wallets for or claimed for any other DACs yet, apart from my genesis for BTSX. (i.e. DNS, Vote, Lotto?). Under the new proposal what should I do now?

Nothing for DNS/Vote I think...? It'll get taken care of by the automatic dynamic value allocation/dilution post merger (i.e. my new BTS balance will be more than my old BTSX one). What about Music? Are there other DACS I should have claimed for that have done snapshots and will live on as separate DACs? I did I see Lotto mentioned somewhere.

Other related musings and some more questions:

The above one-time-only-merger-confusion and the historical confusion/effort required to keep track of new DACS is exactly the kind of confusion that this new merger proposal will eliminate.  There will be much less need to worry if there's a new product on the horizon from the team, when was the snapshot, is the wallet ready yet , can I import yet, which exchange supports the new DAC, where should I shuffle funds (PTS, BTSX, presale) etc etc. This is boring and time consuming. Moving away from this is a really good idea for those who want an efficient team and more profitable easier to track investment. If you wan to do some short term speculation then do it within the bitAssets ecossytem once the number of assets available grows. Overall a 100 separate bottle rockets vs one Falcon 9 rocket seems like a no brainier, especially when you couple the F9 rocket to the now easier to attain network effect.

I guess some entities will still decide to go it alone with their own DACs (hopefully not Music) and I'll have to keep an eye out for them. Ultimately separate DACs are going to be a fact of life if the DAC model proves itself to be a wider success. It may make a lot of sense for some DACS, especially competitive or incompatible or niche ones, to go it alone. In the grand scheme and the longer term it is to be encouraged. Over time more serious competition in the DAC space from larger similar-to-BTS (perhaps Etherium is closest. Anyone agree?) will mean that anyone long on BTS will hopefully have a big smile on their face anyway. Increased  real competition is validation of the whole DAC idea and will hopefully see lots more liquidity coming in the wider DAC ecosystem as a result. Let's just hope we can be at the number one spot.

So another clarification needed here. I'm sort of ELI5ing to myself here: under the new merger proposal, features/products added to a Bitshares DAC will not result in new BTS allocation, like we used to see with separate DACs, instead we hope they'll just add to the overall value proposition for the Bitshares DAC. This in turn will hopefully attract more liquidity and push the price of BTS upwards and that's how us early adopters benefit (i.e. no more snapshots or new shares for features added that get added inside the new SuperDac - our BTS share price hopefully just goes up instead). Have I got this right? I hate the term SuperDac by the way, FrankenDAC even more so. Maybe we should agree on a term? Universal DAC sounds much better to me.

For those DAC entities that use the toolkit and go it alone with their own blockchain, those that are outside the Bitshares Universal DAC, what will happen here?  If these entities want to honor the idea of a DAC having used the toolkit and reward those with a genesis allocation (i.e. like how PTS and AGS snapshots operate today). After the merger will they instead take a snapshot of BTS and publish their % allocations for BTS holders at the time of snapshot? If so is it still expected that if you use the toolkit you'll allocate some portion of your DACs genesis to BTS holders (i.e. nothing changes here - just the vehicle for working out the the snapshots becomes BTS instead of PTS/AGS)?  I guess what I'm asking here is, as long term holder who wants exposure to the BTS Universal DAC and future incompatible/niche extremal DACS using the toolkit, is just holding BTS a good strategy? For external DACs that I'm particularity interested in I can look out for pre-sales to try and get more exposure to them I presume.

On practicalities of the client software itself:

My one initial worry was that a BitShares FrankenDAC  from a usability point of view would be ugly and confusing - vote , exchange, music and eventually much more all under one GUI roof. The mall metaphor that Stan initially made, though generally pretty sound, made me think of this from a usability point of view. I hate malls - too busy and too much fighting for my attention.

But actually the mall metaphor from Stan is perhaps more meta than my initial basic interpretation of it. I prefer Universal DAC because it fits better with my more recent insight. The new Universal DAC is a bit like a mall, but that doesn't mean that all the shops have to be on the same street. The GUIs to all the different components of Bitshares do not have to be contained within one downloadable client.

With this insight it seems clear to me that there is a necessity for splitting up the various BTS products into separate GUI silos or apps. They will obviously need to have the BTS brand in common. A bit like how you have a separate Google Maps, Gmail and Google Cardboard app on your mobile phone today. All brought to you by Google, but each product with a separate focused app that you can choose to download or not. Each app has it's own team of engineers too. So the way you access the features and products, all sitting on the same BTS blockchain, may differ depending on the BTS product or feature you are interested in making use of. You most likely buy things with BitUSD or BitEUR within these apps. For some products it might be via specialized downloadable clients/wallet for your pc, for others a a browser-only based interface, others still will be touch/mobile apps. Perhaps some products will eventually have all three or more.  Personally I'm looking forward to features and products that require a VR based interface. What is the short term plan here? I've not seen the practicalities of how it will all work together discussed or spelled out. Will Vote/DNS and, perhaps Music if they come on board, all be initally contained in one client or will we have separate ones? I hope to god it's the latter otherwise it's going to get messy fast.

I'm all in on BTSX/PTS at the moment ($0 Bitcoin for a few months now). Confident in the team and community long term to steer the ship in the right direction. PR needs to be handled better in future without muting BM. This will become less of an issue for price volatility as more liquidity from the mainstream flows in. As we grow most investors won't read the musing and detail discussed over here in the forum. The big decisions will get made and passed off through Brian's marketing team. Most investors will then just read the main official press releases and blog posts and keep an eye for Bitshares news on Coindesk and perhaps Reddit etc. What they see there will hopefully be correctly spun or managed by an efficient and proactive marketing machine once it finally comes online.

Once last thing! For those who think they are in a similar place to me (i.e. long), do you think we're near bottom on PTS yet? Are you planning to buy more? Looks tempting to me.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2014, 03:39:20 PM by pseudoscops »

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BTS: Stan
Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #1 on: October 23, 2014, 04:02:28 PM »
...
On practicalities of the client software itself:

My one initial worry was that a BitShares FrankenDAC  from a usability point of view would be ugly and confusing - vote , exchange, music and eventually much more all under one GUI roof. The mall metaphor that Stan initially made, though generally pretty sound, made me think of this from a usability point of view. I hate malls - too busy and too much fighting for my attention.

But actually the mall metaphor from Stan is perhaps more meta than my initial basic interpretation of it. I prefer Universal DAC because it fits better with my more recent insight. The new Universal DAC is a bit like a mall, but that doesn't mean that all the shops have to be on the same street. The GUIs to all the different components of Bitshares do not have to be contained within one downloadable client.

With this insight it seems clear to me that there is a necessity for splitting up the various BTS products into separate GUI silos or apps. They will obviously need to have the BTS brand in common. A bit like how you have a separate Google Maps, Gmail and Google Cardboard app on your mobile phone today. All brought to you by Google, but each product with a separate focused app that you can choose to download or not. Each app has it's own team of engineers too. So the way you access the features and products, all sitting on the same BTS blockchain, may differ depending on the BTS product or feature you are interested in making use of. You most likely buy things with BitUSD or BitEUR within these apps. For some products it might be via specialized downloadable clients/wallet for your pc, for others a a browser-only based interface, others still will be touch/mobile apps. Perhaps some products will eventually have all three or more.  Personally I'm looking forward to features and products that require a VR based interface. What is the short term plan here? I've not seen the practicalities of how it will all work together discussed or spelled out. Will Vote/DNS and, perhaps Music if they come on board, all be initally contained in one client or will we have separate ones? I hope to god it's the latter otherwise it's going to get messy fast.

Think of the BitShares blockchain as a database that can have any number of separate APIs windowing into it.
Even a debit card is ultimately a simple API that works through existing infrastructure to access this database.
A voting booth metaphor and an e-trade app and ordinary wallets of various snazzy custom designs represent other examples.

You don't have to expose all the DACs functions in every API.  That's why I used the mall metaphor.  There can be many storefronts unique to each business.  They just all share a DAC-OS of common services listed in my OP on the BitShares Platform.  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10293.msg135034#msg135034

Then when smart contracts arrive, you can do high-frequency deals between every company in the Mall (aka Business District).
Everyone understands the merits of businesses co-locating in a mall or business district.  Nobody calls such network effect enhancing conveniences a FrankenMall.  :)
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline GaltReport

Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #2 on: October 23, 2014, 04:12:57 PM »
...
On practicalities of the client software itself:

My one initial worry was that a BitShares FrankenDAC  from a usability point of view would be ugly and confusing - vote , exchange, music and eventually much more all under one GUI roof. The mall metaphor that Stan initially made, though generally pretty sound, made me think of this from a usability point of view. I hate malls - too busy and too much fighting for my attention.

But actually the mall metaphor from Stan is perhaps more meta than my initial basic interpretation of it. I prefer Universal DAC because it fits better with my more recent insight. The new Universal DAC is a bit like a mall, but that doesn't mean that all the shops have to be on the same street. The GUIs to all the different components of Bitshares do not have to be contained within one downloadable client.

With this insight it seems clear to me that there is a necessity for splitting up the various BTS products into separate GUI silos or apps. They will obviously need to have the BTS brand in common. A bit like how you have a separate Google Maps, Gmail and Google Cardboard app on your mobile phone today. All brought to you by Google, but each product with a separate focused app that you can choose to download or not. Each app has it's own team of engineers too. So the way you access the features and products, all sitting on the same BTS blockchain, may differ depending on the BTS product or feature you are interested in making use of. You most likely buy things with BitUSD or BitEUR within these apps. For some products it might be via specialized downloadable clients/wallet for your pc, for others a a browser-only based interface, others still will be touch/mobile apps. Perhaps some products will eventually have all three or more.  Personally I'm looking forward to features and products that require a VR based interface. What is the short term plan here? I've not seen the practicalities of how it will all work together discussed or spelled out. Will Vote/DNS and, perhaps Music if they come on board, all be initally contained in one client or will we have separate ones? I hope to god it's the latter otherwise it's going to get messy fast.

Think of the BitShares blockchain as a database that can have any number of separate APIs windowing into it.
Even a debit card is ultimately a simple API that works through existing infrastructure to access this database.
A voting booth metaphor and an e-trade app and ordinary wallets of various snazzy custom designs represent other examples.

You don't have to expose all the DACs functions in every API.  That's why I used the mall metaphor.  There can be many storefronts unique to each business.  They just all share a DAC-OS of common services listed in my OP on the BitShares Platform.  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10293.msg135034#msg135034

Then when smart contracts arrive, you can do high-frequency deals between every company in the Mall (aka Business District).
Everyone understands the merits of businesses co-locating in a mall or business district.  Nobody calls such network effect enhancing conveniences a FrankenMall.  :)

Good description Stan. In case it's not obvious, people using different apps/api may not even know of the other's existence.  Everyone has their own "store" app/api and may optionally use common resources and exchange useful information.

Offline Mysto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #3 on: October 23, 2014, 04:21:58 PM »
Sorry to hijack your thread but I have a similar question.
Do I need to move my BTSX balance from BTER to my wallet by Nov. 5th for the snapshot?

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12280
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #4 on: October 23, 2014, 04:24:21 PM »
Do I need to move my BTSX balance from BTER to my wallet by Nov. 5th for the snapshot?
nope .. BTSX just continues as "usual" .. the other DACs are "airdropped" ..
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline Mysto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #5 on: October 23, 2014, 04:27:15 PM »
Do I need to move my BTSX balance from BTER to my wallet by Nov. 5th for the snapshot?
nope .. BTSX just continues as "usual" .. the other DACs are "airdropped" ..
Oh ok thanks!  :)

Offline Thom

Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #6 on: October 23, 2014, 05:08:14 PM »
So another clarification needed here. I'm sort of ELI5ing to myself here: under the new merger proposal, features/products added to a Bitshares DAC will not result in new BTS allocation, like we used to see with separate DACs, instead we hope they'll just add to the overall value proposition for the Bitshares DAC. This in turn will hopefully attract more liquidity and push the price of BTS upwards and that's how us early adopters benefit (i.e. no more snapshots or new shares for features added that get added inside the new SuperDac - our BTS share price hopefully just goes up instead). Have I got this right? I hate the term SuperDac by the way, FrankenDAC even more so. Maybe we should agree on a term? Universal DAC sounds much better to me.

I too would like clarification of these points.

As bot a name, why not just Bitshares? If you're looking for a classification, why not DAC-eXchange? I personally don't have a problem with the classification / category name, superDAC or universal DAC is descriptive enough. But I would prefer we all get in the habit of using bitshares in place of superDAC. Let's start getting some name recognition going here!

But let me ask this here, since with all this merger discussion the newbie thread ism't getting as much attention:  What is meant by "airdrop"
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere - MLK |  Verbaltech2 Witness Reports: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,23902.0.html

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BTS: Stan
Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #7 on: October 23, 2014, 05:15:34 PM »
So another clarification needed here. I'm sort of ELI5ing to myself here: under the new merger proposal, features/products added to a Bitshares DAC will not result in new BTS allocation, like we used to see with separate DACs, instead we hope they'll just add to the overall value proposition for the Bitshares DAC. This in turn will hopefully attract more liquidity and push the price of BTS upwards and that's how us early adopters benefit (i.e. no more snapshots or new shares for features added that get added inside the new SuperDac - our BTS share price hopefully just goes up instead). Have I got this right? I hate the term SuperDac by the way, FrankenDAC even more so. Maybe we should agree on a term? Universal DAC sounds much better to me.

I too would like clarification of these points.

As bot a name, why not just Bitshares? If you're looking for a classification, why not DAC-eXchange? I personally don't have a problem with the classification / category name, superDAC or universal DAC is descriptive enough. But I would prefer we all get in the habit of using bitshares in place of superDAC. Let's start getting some name recognition going here!

But let me ask this here, since with all this merger discussion the newbie thread ism't getting as much attention:  What is meant by "airdrop"

Gift shares to another blockchain using the same keys.
http://bitshares.org/bitshares-airdrop-theory/

It is BitShares the DAC.  SuperDAC is just descriptive of uniting more than one business on the same block chain - sort of a DAC Business District or DAC Mall.
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3507
    • View Profile
  • BTS: Ander
Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #8 on: October 23, 2014, 05:20:11 PM »
Once last thing! For those who think they are in a similar place to me (i.e. long), do you think we're near bottom on PTS yet? Are you planning to buy more? Looks tempting to me.

Decision to buy PTS should be based on its price relative to BTSX.

For example, lets say PTS price is .005 satoshis.

Add 10% to that, and then add two zeros, you get .000055. 
If BTSX is above .000055 then you could buy PTS and get bonus shares in the end, but you get the 2 year restriction.  So you need for BTSX to be valued enough above that that it becomes 'worth it' to you to lock up some of your money for 2 years in order to get the extra shares.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline Thom

Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #9 on: October 23, 2014, 05:33:09 PM »
Gift shares to another blockchain using the same keys.
http://bitshares.org/bitshares-airdrop-theory/

Sorry to inject this side discussion. Reading that article quickly exposes my newbie status. You said in it:
Quote
Just take a snapshot of the account balances in their block chain and use the same public keys for their corresponding accounts in your block chain.

What if the public keys of their blockchain (by chance) already exist on your blockchain for some other user? Why could that not happen? I mean how can such a collision of random numbers be assured not to occur?
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere - MLK |  Verbaltech2 Witness Reports: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,23902.0.html

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12280
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #10 on: October 23, 2014, 05:36:21 PM »
What if the public keys of their blockchain (by chance) already exist on your blockchain for some other user? Why could that not happen? I mean how can such a collision of random numbers be assured not to occur?
If someone else has a private key that results in the exact same public key you can consider that key compromised (read: "stolen")

By random/chance ... this does not happen ... not even rarely
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

Offline cryptillionaire

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
    • View Profile
Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #11 on: October 23, 2014, 05:40:49 PM »
Neither DNS or VOTE were actually fully functioning, were they? Do they really deserve as much as several percent in the merger? I think they're severely overvalued.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BTS: Stan
Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #12 on: October 23, 2014, 05:41:58 PM »
Gift shares to another blockchain using the same keys.
http://bitshares.org/bitshares-airdrop-theory/

Sorry to inject this side discussion. Reading that article quickly exposes my newbie status. You said in it:
Quote
Just take a snapshot of the account balances in their block chain and use the same public keys for their corresponding accounts in your block chain.

What if the public keys of their blockchain (by chance) already exist on your blockchain for some other user? Why could that not happen? I mean how can such a collision of random numbers be assured not to occur?

I think someone once compared it to the chance that two people would both pick the same grain of sand in the universe.

Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline Thom

Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #13 on: October 23, 2014, 05:53:45 PM »
What if the public keys of their blockchain (by chance) already exist on your blockchain for some other user? Why could that not happen? I mean how can such a collision of random numbers be assured not to occur?
If someone else has a private key that results in the exact same public key you can consider that key compromised (read: "stolen")

By random/chance ... this does not happen ... not even rarely

Hmm... Perhaps my ignorance is less of a mater of being a newbie than it is of statistical probability.

It's not just a case of a single collision. The probability goes up with the number of public keys on both blockchains. The more keys that exist the more likely a collision, is that not true? I can accept that the probability may be extremely low (that's where my unfamiliarity of the crypto details come into play), but am I wrong conceptually?
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere - MLK |  Verbaltech2 Witness Reports: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,23902.0.html

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12280
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BTS: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
Re: Some musings on the merger and some clarification required
« Reply #14 on: October 23, 2014, 06:29:44 PM »
yhea .. probability .. nice tool ..
even more interesting is the exponential function .. base 2 .. 2 to the power of x ..

take a look at this:
http://miguelmoreno.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/fYFBsqp.jpg
you may also want to read this:
http://security.stackexchange.com/a/25392

conceptually .. two random processes can produce the same output .. also for 256 bit .. although unlikely ..
Give BitShares a try! Use the http://testnet.bitshares.eu provided by http://bitshares.eu powered by ChainSquad GmbH

 

Google+