This is a sad, sad thread. As ABL warned my similarly-minded friend
, this will probably be pearls before swine, but I suppose I just can't resist the opportunity to do the right thing.
AB and GM are more than aware of Bitshares and DPoS, they just think that neither are any good, or even worth spending any time talking about. They laugh at 1:19:54 because all of the proof of stake ideas floating around today are just repeats of what was tried (and abandoned) in 2011 or earlier.
Having corresponded with Blockstream about this in particular, I know that at 1:21:28 Adam Back refers to "Working on What?" in my own anti-PoS blog post ( http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-and-mining/
or, more specifically, his post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=907157.0
). Then they discussed Nothing-At-Stake, and finally 1:23:45 AB refers to stake-grinding (from Poelstra's paper). All of that is in my post, and, in fact, after writing my post, multiple early Bitcoin-wizards wrote to me to basically say "You seem like a smart guy, you shouldn't waste your time on this because we've all moved on a long time ago. No knowledgeable people care about proof of stake anymore. Try working on X instead."
It is as RH comments here ( http://lesswrong.com/lw/gt/a_fable_of_science_and_politics/
). That "people who learn the answer leave the conversation".
At 1:25:05, and 1:27:08, GM is poking fun at Bitshares (among other things).
As for BitUSD, there is no clear documentation of the constantly-shifting, constantly-ridiculous technical and economic methods by which BitUSD is constructed. There are too many examples of this to list, try https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4692.msg59823
and note that "Howard" at http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/bitusd/
couldn't even source the BitUSD interest rate after several days of searching. All kinds of new, untested stuff (delegate feeds, market-matching algorithms) has been thrown together in an essentially embarrassing way.Out.