Article on btcgeek.com: Bitshares is Trying What MemoryCoin Did a Year Ago (to D

[abit]

dritz3r, you received BTS from the last sharedrop to AGS and PTS. As a result you also received DVS.

I am trying to import my wallet and nothing happend. My donations are made after magic date Feb 28. Beside PTS can we receive BTC back. It's clear that 'social consensus' don't exist any more and I didn't received any BTS.

If you want BTS instead of DVS, just wait for a new version of BTS wallet (maybe release in next week).
Since you have AGS, you may have VOTE and DNS, which will be converted to BTS in the new wallet.

[dritz3r]

AGS is a large community of people with a demonstrated willingness to give money to develop this industry.  It is the absolutely BEST select group of individuals in the whole wide world for a DAC developer to be courting.

Thank you Stan&co.

[btswildpig]

dritz3r, you received BTS from the last sharedrop to AGS and PTS. As a result you also received DVS.

I am trying to import my wallet and nothing happend. My donations are made after magic date Feb 28. Beside PTS can we receive BTC back. It's clear that 'social consensus' don't exist any more and I didn't received any BTS.

devshares need to do extra step to get it . Bytemaster said he will release a how-to shortly .

[dritz3r]

dritz3r, you received BTS from the last sharedrop to AGS and PTS. As a result you also received DVS.

I am trying to import my wallet and nothing happend. My donations are made after magic date Feb 28. Beside PTS can we receive BTC back. It's clear that 'social consensus' don't exist any more and I didn't received any BTS.

[mint chocolate chip]

at least we got some publicity.

[Stan]

Or you guys could light up the comments and let Everyone reading the article know they can come onto mumble every week and clear these issues up Directly with Bytemaster.  Make it a point to continuously do this at least with the "journalist".

Fuzzy, 

What is the best link to post in these articles that brings them to your Mumble via a landing pad with the necessary training in how to install and join the right session - proper etiquette, etc?

[Stan]

1、MMC was still a POW coin ,  it had all the disadvantage of POW coins . COST > PROFIT .
2、The block reward difficulty was flawed , too much coins produced at the first several months .
3、MMC didn't have a killer product like BitUSD . It existed for the sole purpose as a speculative instrument that somehow everybody in the world would adopt MMC as a currency because they claimed wasted electricity is somehow like the mining of gold , just like all the other POW coins .
4、You can hire 1000 genius to work for a POW coin and the coin still would fail .
5、I didn't have time to follow the whole "hired by blockchain" thing , if I had I would've correct it . I was a miner of MMC once.

And it didn't honor the Social Consensus du jour.   

[Gentso1]

I think some of the point is being missed here guys.

Does it point out some legit past mistakes and possible future hurdles, yea.

Is it obviously written from a biased standpoint, you bet.

The important thing to remember is Bitshares is being talked about. It wasn't a piece written about ltc,paycoin,nubits. It was written because the author believes this is a topic people will lead people to his site.

If people are interested in Bitshares you have all ready gotten them to take the first step. It doesn't matter if they love or hate us. Now that they have taken that step you attempt to educate them about the lesson's learned and the differences. You open them up to a intelligent conversation and shares thoughts and ideas.

This and any other article written is a good thing, sit back sip your coffee and prepare to expand minds.

[btswildpig]

1、MMC was still a POW coin ,  it had all the disadvantage of POW coins . COST > PROFIT .
2、The block reward difficulty was flawed , too much coins produced at the first several months .
3、MMC didn't have a killer product like BitUSD . It existed for the sole purpose as a speculative instrument that somehow everybody in the world would adopt MMC as a currency because they claimed wasted electricity is somehow like the mining of gold , just like all the other POW coins .
4、You can hire 1000 genius to work for a POW coin and the coin still would fail .
5、I didn't have time to follow the whole "hired by blockchain" thing , if I had I would've correct it . I was a miner of MMC once.

[cass]

To be fair mmc2 was born of our community.

yup 

[bytemaster]

To be fair mmc2 was born of our community. 

[fuzzy]

wtf is up with that picture of a guy reading "Wicked" upside down? Absolutely moronic article. I think we all need to stop giving it and the shitty website any further attention, lest it become the go-to article for BTS trolls -- like that shit P. Byrne article that keeps popping up.

Fuck journalism.

And who the hell cares whether or not BTS was truly the "first" at hiring someone for the blockchain? What matters is that it was an important event for our ecosystem, and it was clearly the most obvious/influential "hiring" of anyone for a blockchain yet. It's clearly just marketing speak, which always stretches the truth/exaggerates for effect, not some dirty scheming lie trying to brainwash the masses or some shit.

Fuck technicalities.

Or you guys could light up the comments and let Everyone reading the article know they can come onto mumble every week and clear these issues up Directly with Bytemaster.  Make it a point to continuously do this at least with the "journalist". 

We can then start retweeting the journalist's own article (knowing our comments are loading his/her article's comment section) and challenging them to verify the validity of their claims Live during our hangouts. 

This is just ONE of the reasons our hangouts have always been here.  It is to give the little people a voice...and to keep FUD'ers in check.  If they are afraid they will be called out publically with a loud speaker, they will be far less likely to try to sell FUD. 

[nomoreheroes7]

wtf is up with that picture of a guy reading "Wicked" upside down? Absolutely moronic article. I think we all need to stop giving it and the shitty website any further attention, lest it become the go-to article for BTS trolls -- like that shit P. Byrne article that keeps popping up.

Fuck journalism.

And who the hell cares whether or not BTS was truly the "first" at hiring someone for the blockchain? What matters is that it was an important event for our ecosystem, and it was clearly the most obvious/influential "hiring" of anyone for a blockchain yet. It's clearly just marketing speak, which always stretches the truth/exaggerates for effect, not some dirty scheming lie trying to brainwash the masses or some shit.

Fuck technicalities.

[inarizushi]

The article before the last on btcgeek mentioned BitShares/BitGold as a way to buy Gold, and was more positive : http://btcgeek.com/how-to-buy-gold-with-bitcoin/

It's sad we lost a "supporter" and got a FUD spreader instead.

[Gentso1]

at least we got some publicity.

[btswildpig]

LOL , one day they tell us Chinese hold all the coins , the next day they tell us Invictus hold all the coins .....

But this is also the reason why I said we need to pay attention on PR at this stage . 

You need 3 month to build reputation , and only take one day for someone to attack when they find it .

 

[eagleeye]

at least we got some publicity.

[Agent86]

The big difference between BTS and MMC is approval voting.  Real time approval voting on the blockchain solves the "group trap" problem and allows blockchains to hire workers (or use delegates as workers) that are motivated to act in the best interest of the system as a whole instead of a smaller group of supporters.  Without this realization, "Self-funding DACs" and blockchain hiring doesn't work.   Without approval voting MMC hadn't solved the problem, which is why it was a disaster.

I still don't really agree with how we are doing things though and I would much rather see us separate workers from delegates and require over 50% approval (of "active stake") for workers to be elected… For instance, you could say that any stake that isn't voting for at least one delegate isn't considered active for the purpose of worker elections (voting for at least one delegate would be considered a basic shareholder duty because delegates are required for the network to function).  You can say stake that hasn't moved in a year isn't active and people could also voluntarily abstain.  I think a 50% threshold approval of active stake is achievable and worth achieving.

[Rune]

It's been posted to reddit.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2r0vbt/a_critical_look_at_the_i_turned_down_an_offer/

[Empirical1.1]

Yeah I did say in this thread that it came to my attention MMC technically did it first, so we left ourselves open to a PR attack with that angle.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=12789.0

Centralisation of voting stake is something I've been keen to address too, specifically measures to keep less on the major exchanges and transparency wherever possible on general voting stakes as this is the obvious angle that will be played as BTS gains attention. A decentralised system responsible for voting for dilution to the tunes of millions of dollars will have to address these very issues more and more.

For the opposite and counter PR argument we only have to look at POW. Taken at the value when the coins were mined, LTC has paid miners over $80 million in 2014, for security that could be achieved for less than a few hundred thousand dollars and their blockchain hasn't been improved at all.

Other possible improvements..

1. Keep a comprehensive, publicised, updated list of all delegates on more than 3% with a short paragraph explaining the value they add to BTS.

2. Consider measuring delegate approval by % of claimed stake not total stake if that's not already the case?

[Rune]

dritz3r, you received BTS from the last sharedrop to AGS and PTS. As a result you also received DVS.

[onceuponatime]

Wow, is this some sort of PR attack by ethereum?

Possibly a PR attack by OP. He is a disgruntled investor. (See his only other post.)

The link will drive traffic to an otherwise obscure website (Got me and you to go there  )

[Rune]

Wow, is this some sort of PR attack by an ethereum investor?

Most of what they say is true and are real concerns, but not really a big deal long term. Then they basically fabricate a terrible lie: "As observers know, Bitshares is one of the most centralized serious cryptocurrency system in existence today, with (former) Invictus members holding most of the tokens."

A person who reads this with no prior exposure to bitshares will assume this is true and will have the idea that BTS has bad distribution influence all their impressions of bitshares. Terrible tactics.

[dritz3r]

"First person to get directly hired by a blockchain!” Sound futuristic? That’s what one of the lead developers of Bitshares, Nikolai, told Reddit. The reason it’s surprising is that this isn’t true, and the developer certainly knows it isn’t true"

http://btcgeek.com/bitshares-trying-memorycoin-year-ago-disastrous-ends/#comment-5396