Author Topic: Kim DotCom is broke. Bankrupted by legal fees.  (Read 5174 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Murderistic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 288
    • View Profile

[/quote]

You have no idea, the guy is a genius. You've been brainwashed dude.
[/quote]

Agreed, he is very forward thinking and brilliant.  Excessive, but brilliant.  If he hooked up with us, we would be a huge target overnight...

Offline wasthatawolf


julian1

  • Guest
There's no doubt having an identifiable figure-leader can help attract attention to a product.

Bitcoin has probably trumped everyone on this front, with the mythic figure of Satoshi who appears out of nowhere to gift his genius invention to the world, and then just as mysteriously retreats from view again.

It's created a real mystique for the product, with all the speculation about his identity, motive, wealth etc.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2014, 08:34:43 am by julian1 »

charleshoskinson

  • Guest
If you want him, then contact him and pitch the tech. I admire your conviction. https://twitter.com/kimdotcom

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
You get users by providing value not sensationalism. You have to articulate clear reasons why your platform is better than the status quo whether it be philosophical, technological, or something else. Then you build a network of surrogates to keep the momentum.
How did Kim Dot Com make Mega so popular? He tapped into the cultural current of the Internet at that time and marketed to a very specific demographic. You may not agree with Kim Dot Com's character but he was effective in his marketing. He accomplished something we can only hope to accomplish.
With people like Kim, it's really not about the product. It's about Kim and how that product reflects upon him. It's a cult of personality. Use mega to make a statement about the United State's persecution of innocent people.
Sure you can say that now but it doesn't change the fact that MegaUpload had far more users than Bitcoin. It had better marketing than Bitcoin. BitTorrent and Napster were perhaps two of the most successful so if we could get Shawn Fanning and Bram Cohen to say they use Bitshares that would help also.

If no one important goes out in public and says they use Bitshares then why would their followers care to use it?

Perhaps about the corruption of copyright laws made by Disney, George Lucas, and the evil RIAA. In any event, you're never talking about the product.
This is true but the problem is most people don't seem to care about how Bitshares or MegaUpload worked. Most people will never understand how it works and just want to know which famous people are using it and why. Most people who will use it will be people who don't fit well into the current system or people who actually do have political disagreements or activist mindsets so how do we target these people? Also most people who use Bitshares will not be American so they have no reason to care about the fate of American companies like Disney.
Bitshares is a pioneer in this space for coming up with the DAC, the first to use a sharedrop, deploying fungible market pegged non-volatile assets, and focusing on economic sustainability in a cryptocurrency's design. Why would you want to introduce a divisive man who instantly makes your movement about copyright law and an us versus them mentality. It seems to me to be a chase for the vanity metric of users at the expense of all that is good. 

The mainstream audience isn't technical enough to understand the technological argument. We understand it which is why we are here but what about the majority of the planet? Also we are missing out on women in these communities as well because once again there isn't much focus on the activist women's empowerment component. In my opinion we should focus on "user empowerment" without distinguishing gender and then let marketing focus on targeting different kinds of users. Mega while it was very divisive was a disruptive technology which focused on user empowerment so I can say their spirit was in the right place even if they took a very risky counter productive approach.

Instead what you guys need to do is study the dart and polymer projects from Google. They are in a similar situation. Javascript is terribly flawed as a language and the Web is a rather difficult ecosystem to develop for given the overwhelming diversity of connected devices and limited control over the host environment.
Again these are all technological approaches. Users want to be empowered and don't seem to care how technology works as much as you seem to think. Why not focus on a strategic marketing campaign around user empowerment?

Google has delivered a home run with dart and polymer in terms of ease of development, yet they are up against a wall. There is simply too much momentum in the status quo for them to change the whole field in an single night. So it has to be a systematic, relentless campaign. And their base unit of effort is the developer advocate. The dart project is as much a political campaign as it is an open sourced project.
I agree we have to attract developers but we also need mainstream users.
This is how you guys need to think. What is the vision. How do we articulate it. And how do you build a network of advocates to amplify it in every single channel. As a rule an advocate talks about your vision, not his. This is why Kim would be terrible.

Kim is considered to be a martyr to millions of people. Kim already spoke out in favor of Bitcoin so like it or not he's already attached to the cryptocurrency space. I can understand some of your arguments that Kim Dot Com with is anti-establishment political views might be risky but at the same time he would attract users who otherwise never would have heard about Bitshares so you have to weigh the risk against the benefits.

The strategy I consistently promote on this forum is "user empowerment".  As long as we empower the user and phrase it exactly like that then we can avoid the specific political ideological discussions. Different users in different countries around the globe will have their own uses for Bitshares. If we cannot convince some of them to join the Bitshares main chain then perhaps instead offer to help them build a custom chain with 50/50 split between both communities at some point in the future. The Rand Paul chain is an example of this strategy in action and I think in the long term the main reason people will want to be involved or get involved will be to empower themselves.

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

Offline hpenvy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
    • View Profile
We will debate the merits of Kim Dotcom for 3-5 days, it will surface again every few weeks and we'll probably be no closer to any type of resolution. Here's my advice, take it for what it's worth, if you want to contact someone, contact them. It's a decentralized project, make your contacts and bring new people into the ecosystem.
=============
btsx address: hpenvy
Tips appreciated for good work

charleshoskinson

  • Guest
You get users by providing value not sensationalism. You have to articulate clear reasons why your platform is better than the status quo whether it be philosophical, technological, or something else. Then you build a network of surrogates to keep the momentum.

With people like Kim, it's really not about the product. It's about Kim and how that product reflects upon him. It's a cult of personality. Use mega to make a statement about the United State's persecution of innocent people. Perhaps about the corruption of copyright laws made by Disney, George Lucas, and the evil RIAA. In any event, you're never talking about the product.

Bitshares is a pioneer in this space for coming up with the DAC, the first to use a sharedrop, deploying fungible market pegged non-volatile assets, and focusing on economic sustainability in a cryptocurrency's design. Why would you want to introduce a divisive man who instantly makes your movement about copyright law and an us versus them mentality. It seems to me to be a chase for the vanity metric of users at the expense of all that is good.

Instead what you guys need to do is study the dart and polymer projects from Google. They are in a similar situation. Javascript is terribly flawed as a language and the Web is a rather difficult ecosystem to develop for given the overwhelming diversity of connected devices and limited control over the host environment.

Google has delivered a home run with dart and polymer in terms of ease of development, yet they are up against a wall. There is simply too much momentum in the status quo for them to change the whole field in an single night. So it has to be a systematic, relentless campaign. And their base unit of effort is the developer advocate. The dart project is as much a political campaign as it is an open sourced project.

This is how you guys need to think. What is the vision. How do we articulate it. And how do you build a network of advocates to amplify it in every single channel. As a rule an advocate talks about your vision, not his. This is why Kim would be terrible.

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
Are there emails from Dan and Stan floating around acknowledging they know criminal activity is happening with their assets like say invictus owned server and then discussing how to obfuscate it? Don't think so. And MegaUpload is the big offender not Mega. Kim wised up on the business model.

I've said my peace and I'm not going to get dragged into this convo. Cheers.

So you're saying because Bitshares is decentralized that this alone is what separates it from being treated like MegaUpload? Ok fair enough but my point is that Bitshares needs users and Kim Dot Com knows how to bring them.



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

charleshoskinson

  • Guest
Are there emails from Dan and Stan floating around acknowledging they know criminal activity is happening with their assets like say invictus owned server and then discussing how to obfuscate it? Don't think so. And MegaUpload is the big offender not Mega. Kim wised up on the business model.

I've said my peace and I'm not going to get dragged into this convo. Cheers.

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
I am also undecided about Kim .. To people that move will look shady ..

We look shady by default to the people you're trying to impress. Why was Kim Dot Com considered shady? Because his business was a threat to older more established businesses?

I dont wish anyone to get extradited for copyright infringement, but that guy clearly was playing with fire by making millions off copyright infringement. I remember watching an interview with him, and he called it "innovation".
If Bitshares makes billions then everyone here is playing with fire for making money off whatever future users do with it? So I guess anonymity could get everyone in trouble?

I don't understand these arguments. Bitshares is way more threatening than Mega. Bitshares threatens the entire structure of the global economy while Mega threatened the business models of Big Hollywood.

Who exactly do you people believe will be using Bitshares in the next 5 years? The same people who use Mega or the people you're trying to impress? Not everyone who used Mega was doing copyright infringement just like not everyone who uses Bitcoin was involved with Silk Road but I guess most people here think Bitcoin was all for Silk Road.

So how did you end up here if you think that way?
« Last Edit: November 29, 2014, 02:29:32 am by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
The guy is a blowhard and an unstable businessman with limited respect for the law. Take my advice and don't invite people like Kim into your community. Reach out to Ledar Levinson. Honest and has integrity.

What law did Kim Dot Com break that we aren't breaking? How was Mega against the law?

Quote
You have no idea, the guy is a genius. You've been brainwashed dude.

Wired had a good writeup of Kim: http://www.wired.com/2012/01/kim-dotcom/. He's a very effective self-promoter and an excellent Call of Duty player, but not a technologist or well respected in any business circle. The man makes his money for better or worse via enabling copyright infringement.

Whether you agree or disagree with existing laws, Bitshares isn't primarily about copyright law. You guys have market pegged assets, decentralized exchange, DAC business models, incumbency value transitions, and stealth addresses. It seems you should be looking for allies in those spheres such as people like Ray Kurzweil or Pieter Hintjins. The latter btw is one of the worlds foremost network engineers and completely philosophically aligned with your movement > http://hintjens.com/blog:36 (His book is free: http://cultureandempire.com/#/).

Allies are easy enough to find, but you have to have vision and proper execution to actually utilize them. You have to say hey in a year we will be here and accomplish this and within three years we'll be there. Then people with like goals will naturally be drawn to your movement.

Couldn't it be said that Bitshares enables the drug trade and criminal activity? I just don't understand this particular line of thought. Whomever is in power who feels threatened will call their competitors criminals.

In the case of Mega there is no more of a crime than there is with Bitshares. Anyone afraid of Mega definitely will never try Bitshares and share a network which could be used by terrorists or criminals at some point in the future.

Please explain how Bitshares can avoid any of the same accusations you've put forth.  Avoiding associating with Kim Dot Com might only result in less users of Bitshares because you'll be avoiding your own philosophical and political base in your marketing.  Like it or not the majority of early users are people who have committed copyright infringement and while I'm not endorsing breaking the law it's just a fact that the whole P2P industry is based around that demographic.

I don't see how Bitshares can be even as successful as Mega if it's not going to take similar risks at some point. I highly doubt the old guard is going to get behind Bitshares in the next 5 years mainly because they'll likely be too stupid just as they were with Napster.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2014, 02:35:44 am by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

charleshoskinson

  • Guest
Quote
Hmm.. I feel as though your analysis overlooks the many partnerships that have been established in VOTE, the sun microsystems Aus CEO, MethodX.  As for the sharedrops and other business strategy shifts, startups pivot to get closer to the best path, bitshares is no different.

The only thing I was complimenting you on was your ability to rub elbows with high-popularity technologists and journalists.  Don't see why you needed to rant on Dan like that.  I get the sense that you don't want to contribute because of Dan.  However, this is open-source, self-funded, and unstoppable at this point.  From here on, all of us are either helping bring the product to the masses or standing on the sideline.  The choice is yours alone.

Not exactly a rant rather a reflection on what has happened over the last year. And as for being unstoppable, perhaps the ideas are, but Bitshares, Ethereum and even Bitcoin are not even close. You can have 100 million people like Myspace and watch some startup dominate in just a few years. Companies rise and fall. Ideas live on, get mixed, modified and tested in the crucible.

I honestly think there is too much tech in the pipe right now. There's ethereum, counterparty, hyperledger, maidsafe, storj, Nxt, factum and that's just off the top of my head. I'm much more interested in correcting practical problems that have been ignored despite the enormous innovation over the past two decades.
 
For example, we have digital identity management via PKI or web of trust. One lives in the 1970s following a telecom model whereas the other is unaware of trusted computing, TPMs, blockchains and all the advancements in mobile technology. There are some great apps like GnuPG and mailvelope, but nothing is a bundle and adds reputation. I'd love to see the market create something for this need.

Second, communication over the web is a mess. It's insecure, lacks effective curation, generally travels on long terrible tangents, and is highly fragmented. There are some great platforms like stackexchange and obviously some advancements in social signals to rate the quality of things, but I'd love to be able to say hey I'm interested in XYZ and then get everything relevant to it. Combining cryptocurrencies, one can add an economic incentive layer asking questions and having real bounties.   

These are the things that get me up in the morning to think about and my next venture will likely do something along these lines. I'm agnostic to the technology. Rather I just want it to work, scale, be secure, and easy to use.

Quote
The only thing I was complimenting you on was your ability to rub elbows with high-popularity technologists and journalists.

Lol, your only value is connections and marketing. Right no technical skills, ability to educate, leadership, or stuff like that :). Why do you think I can make those connections?
« Last Edit: November 28, 2014, 11:31:41 pm by charleshoskinson »

Offline carpet ride

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
    • View Profile
Quote
I've heard you are very good marketer in this way. .. perhaps once marketing begins you'll try to get involved again

Carpet, the things that frustrates me most is that Dan has invented a brilliant product with a lot of room to innovate and monetize; however, Invictus is short a chief marketing officer and a chief software architect. They keep saying hey this is when the vision gets realized and then a benchmark is missed, a brand is diluted or changed, or great partnerships are never established.

Counterparty's work with Overstock is a great example. The CEO is philosophically more with Bitshares than any other venture in the space and the platform is far better to deploy Medici than CP. Vennd.io is another platform that should be in the Bitshares ecosystem.

I do understand that people are working hard and I do admire toast, Stan and Bo Shen for their efforts. I've been there and it's tough as hell building something like this. You feel like you're moving in slow mo when the world is racing past you. Also every mistake becomes a rally point where successes are often overlooked or trivialized. This is why it's essentially that you recruit a great team and hold them to strict metrics. Furthermore as an open sourced project, you need to account for the community's contributions, which is why I mentioned Pieter in the prior post. ZMQ is a very well run OSP.

You might also want to try to get Eric Raymond to lend a hand. http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/

Hmm.. I feel as though your analysis overlooks the many partnerships that have been established in VOTE, the sun microsystems Aus CEO, MethodX.  As for the sharedrops and other business strategy shifts, startups pivot to get closer to the best path, bitshares is no different.

The only thing I was complimenting you on was your ability to rub elbows with high-popularity technologists and journalists.  Don't see why you needed to rant on Dan like that.  I get the sense that you don't want to contribute because of Dan.  However, this is open-source, self-funded, and unstoppable at this point.  From here on, all of us are either helping bring the product to the masses or standing on the sideline.  The choice is yours alone.
All opinions are my own. Anything said on this forum does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation between myself and anyone else.
Check out my blog: http://CertainAssets.com
Buy the ticket, take the ride.

charleshoskinson

  • Guest
Quote
I've heard you are very good marketer in this way. .. perhaps once marketing begins you'll try to get involved again

Carpet, the things that frustrates me most is that Dan has invented a brilliant product with a lot of room to innovate and monetize; however, Invictus is short a chief marketing officer and a chief software architect. They keep saying hey this is when the vision gets realized and then a benchmark is missed, a brand is diluted or changed, or great partnerships are never established.

Counterparty's work with Overstock is a great example. The CEO is philosophically more with Bitshares than any other venture in the space and the platform is far better to deploy Medici than CP. Vennd.io is another platform that should be in the Bitshares ecosystem.

I do understand that people are working hard and I do admire toast, Stan and Bo Shen for their efforts. I've been there and it's tough as hell building something like this. You feel like you're moving in slow mo when the world is racing past you. Also every mistake becomes a rally point where successes are often overlooked or trivialized. This is why it's essentially that you recruit a great team and hold them to strict metrics. Furthermore as an open sourced project, you need to account for the community's contributions, which is why I mentioned Pieter in the prior post. ZMQ is a very well run OSP.

You might also want to try to get Eric Raymond to lend a hand. http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/

Offline carpet ride

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
    • View Profile


Allies are easy enough to find, but you have to have vision and proper execution to actually utilize them. You have to say hey in a year we will be here and accomplish this and within three years we'll be there. Then people with like goals will naturally be drawn to your movement.

I've heard you are a very good marketer in this way. .. perhaps once marketing begins you'll try to get involved again
All opinions are my own. Anything said on this forum does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation between myself and anyone else.
Check out my blog: http://CertainAssets.com
Buy the ticket, take the ride.