What if I don't like Cryptonomex and BitShares 2.0?

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

You can't do anything if you don't like it.

Soon it will be EVERYWHERE!!

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,16960.0.html

Aaaaand BOOM goes the dynamite!

[mike623317]

What if I don't like Cryptonomex and BitShares 2.0? - ... leave

Can't deny it. This is actually not a bad way of responding if people don't like it.

I'm not going to tell anyone to leave though because this community is one of the best in crypto...at least to me it is.

I agree fuzzy, I think its time to move on though. We know where we stand and i personally I would like to better understand some of these new features, discuss the user interface for 2.0 and get ready for the marketing push in a couple of months.

[Stan]

9.  Please observe the complete series of announcements we make this summer before you judge our commitment to BitShares success. 

Thanks for your post Stan. For the record I have never questioned your devotion to BitShares success.

The I³ team has a weakness in the PR department, and have made a few bad decisions IMO. I don't expect perfection, but the same type of mistakes are being repeated. It would instill more confidence if we would see an acknowledgement and that steps are being taken to correct them, but I don't expect that's going to happen.

The project is extremely challenging to manage, I recognize that. All I can do is offer my personal perspective. What you do with it is your choice. The collective voice of the community will indicate whether you have chosen well, if you are able to hear it.

It's not clear to me that I³ values or respects the voice of the community, based on the lack of discussion on important topics prior to asserting a position. That's not always the case tho. I recall a tremendous amount of discussion and debate concerning the merger back in Nov. before it was final. You and BM were quite active in the discussions.

Regarding the current 2.0 roll out I see it as a mixed bag. It doesn't seem as well thought out as I thought it would be. Being thought out is not the same thing as having every last detail settled and decided, but it does mean that the majority of the uncertainties are at least identified. I would like to see a more systematic approach to what is settled and what remains to be settled, in an organized, prioritized format. You know, like engineers like to do. Well, most engineers anyway.

It's an over-constrained problem requiring the balancing of many, many factors.
When you do such tradeoffs no single "design parameter" can be maximized.

Those who don't live this 24x7 often point out where individual parameters are not maximized.
We look at where we are as pretty near optimum given everything that had to be balanced.

And its going to be a great summer!

Announcement 2 is coming up tomorrow.   

[arhag]

i maybe dumb ....but what if I change every written code to achieve the same function while there is no way that you can call me copy , will that still be IP violation ? while copying all the idea .

The true answer is who the eff really knows. But this is likely very relevant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_America,_Inc._v._Google,_Inc..

[btswildpig]

i maybe dumb ....but what if I change every written code to achieve the same function while there is no way that you can call me copy , will that still be IP violation ? while copying all the idea .

[Thom]

9.  Please observe the complete series of announcements we make this summer before you judge our commitment to BitShares success. 

Thanks for your post Stan. For the record I have never questioned your devotion to BitShares success.

The I³ team has a weakness in the PR department, and have made a few bad decisions IMO. I don't expect perfection, but the same type of mistakes are being repeated. It would instill more confidence if we would see an acknowledgement and that steps are being taken to correct them, but I don't expect that's going to happen.

The project is extremely challenging to manage, I recognize that. All I can do is offer my personal perspective. What you do with it is your choice. The collective voice of the community will indicate whether you have chosen well, if you are able to hear it.

It's not clear to me that I³ values or respects the voice of the community, based on the lack of discussion on important topics prior to asserting a position. That's not always the case tho. I recall a tremendous amount of discussion and debate concerning the merger back in Nov. before it was final. You and BM were quite active in the discussions.

Regarding the current 2.0 roll out I see it as a mixed bag. It doesn't seem as well thought out as I thought it would be. Being thought out is not the same thing as having every last detail settled and decided, but it does mean that the majority of the uncertainties are at least identified. I would like to see a more systematic approach to what is settled and what remains to be settled, in an organized, prioritized format. You know, like engineers like to do. Well, most engineers anyway.

[rgcrypto]

I am in full support of the current proposal and will buy more bts this week.

[arhag]

Without BM & team BitShares is probably dead, and we can't blame them if they want to get paid for their work.

Yes.  It was always the case that if BM and team announced "we are done with Bitshares, goodbye", then the project would be pretty much done for.  Bitshares is not at bitcoin levels of adoption where many others could arise and carry on.

...

 

Let me try to clear a few of these up:

...

 

In case you don't watch the show, it's a good thing.

Hah, . Let's just hope the non-dev investors in Cryptonomex aren't able to use their voting power as shareholders in Cryptonomex to oust people we trust (like bytemaster) from important decision making roles.
Spoiler (apparently SMF doesn't have a spoiler tag): [spoiler] _{Then again Richard makes a pretty incompetent CEO and probably should just stick to the tech.} [/spoiler]

I trust bytemaster's interests to be aligned with BitShares. I just hope the other mysterious investors' interests are/remain aligned with BitShares as well. Well, at least long enough for BitShares to grow big enough that we are no longer dependent on Cryptonomex anyway. At that point the BitShares community would be capable of funding devs, potentially poaching Cryptonomex devs (you guys aren't signing a non-compete clause that would prevent you from working on similar technology after leaving the company, right?), to fork off the most recent free software licensed version of Graphene and continue development of features with a new implementation that is also free software licensed and that Cryptonomex has no claim to.

[fuzzy]

What if I don't like Cryptonomex and BitShares 2.0? - ... leave

Can't deny it. This is actually not a bad way of responding if people don't like it.

I'm not going to tell anyone to leave though because this community is one of the best in crypto...at least to me it is.

[mike623317]

What if I don't like Cryptonomex and BitShares 2.0? - ... leave

I cant help but feel there are some here that are trying to stir things up and be overly negative. Personally i think BM have been pretty clear in his response to the questions. We have had great news and by looking at the forum no one is really talking about these - multisig, bonds etc.

I think we should draw a line under this and move on. Lets focus on having a successful marketing push in a couple of months.

[Riverhead]

6.  ALL of the current stakeholders in Cryptonomex are members of the global BitShares community who invested their own time and/or money to make Graphene possible.

 

[CLains]

Let me try to clear a few of these up:

1.  Invictus ran out of donated BTC at the end of last year.  All PTS was returned on advice of our accountants.
2.  During recent months 100% delegates have earned about 4277 BTS * $0.006 = $25 per day.  (BitShares paid for 1/2 hour every day)
(Enough for them to answer a few questions or fix a simple bug every day or so.)
3.  By dipping into our BTS reserves set aside for legal, accounting, and government contingencies, I3 was able to provide a small stipend for some of them amounting to about 3 paid hours per day.  To meet the rest of their living expenses, they were forced to live off their savings from last year.
4.  This left them somewhere around 8 unpaid hours a day as independent agents.  With this time, the team continued to provide essential updates for BitShares and worked on Graphene with the hope of producing something of value that could be used to recover all their sacrificed pay.  This was a huge gamble.  It would have been smarter to take a job at Google, use their new salaries to buy up cheap BTS.  Instead they stuck with it.   Net cash flow during all this time was from the developers to BitShares, not the other way around.
5.  When it became clear that Graphene would be a success, the team decided to build a new company to monetize it and recover their painful losses.
6.  ALL of the current stakeholders in Cryptonomex are members of the global BitShares community who invested their own time and/or money to make Graphene possible.

In case you don't watch the show, it's a good thing.

 

[Tuck Fheman]

Let me try to clear a few of these up:

1.  Invictus ran out of donated BTC at the end of last year.  All PTS was returned on advice of our accountants.
2.  During recent months 100% delegates have earned about 4277 BTS * $0.006 = $25 per day.  (BitShares paid for 1/2 hour every day)
(Enough for them to answer a few questions or fix a simple bug every day or so.)
3.  By dipping into our BTS reserves set aside for legal, accounting, and government contingencies, I3 was able to provide a small stipend for some of them amounting to about 3 paid hours per day.  To meet the rest of their living expenses, they were forced to live off their savings from last year.
4.  This left them somewhere around 8 unpaid hours a day as independent agents.  With this time, the team continued to provide essential updates for BitShares and worked on Graphene with the hope of producing something of value that could be used to recover all their sacrificed pay.  This was a huge gamble.  It would have been smarter to take a job at Google, use their new salaries to buy up cheap BTS.  Instead they stuck with it.   Net cash flow during all this time was from the developers to BitShares, not the other way around.
5.  When it became clear that Graphene would be a success, the team decided to build a new company to monetize it and recover their painful losses.
6.  ALL of the current stakeholders in Cryptonomex are members of the global BitShares community who invested their own time and/or money to make Graphene possible.

In case you don't watch the show, it's a good thing.

[fuzzy]

I mean...let's face it.  Even PTS still is in the top 65 of all altcoins...so just imagine what people will begin thinking about bitcoin's fate when there are 20-30 different bitshares-powered chains in the top 100 on coinmarketcap...and one is very similar to their own philosophies...

My belief is that people should be free to exist in the system they feel best matches their personality.  If they are an anarchist, they should have a bitshares version that reflects that...as long as they have devs who will support it.  If they are communist...or socialist.. the same applies.

Why? Because the MOST value comes from synergies between PEOPLE with like minds and similar passions...not a given system of belief that forces everyone to join or face punishment.

Do the devs really think this would hurt them in the long run?  I can't see how it could...because ultimately they are going to all want to be snatched up and paid large sums of money for being capable of innovating to the level this team has accomplished...so even if there are 100 dpos chains like bitshares...but with different devs and philosophies...guess who is going to be in the history books for creating the crypto gold standard DPOS would become?  You got it....the devs!  I'm sure they will find work making plenty of money...and will be able to look at these days as "paying their dues" to earn a reputation of gold in a very lucrative industry.

What did Bruce Lee say again?  Oh yeh..."Be like Linux, my friend"...or something like that

Now is not the time to divide.

Sent from my Timex Sinclair

The problem with this is that people think we would only be dividing a finite community that currently holds bts.  I assure you new people who hate the current path of bitshares would likely invest in a chain with technological benefits of dpos, but a philosophy that is counter to it. 

Also, I'm getting a good few posts from people who are longtime supporters who are either giving up on this project or seriously considering it.  So if you think my thoughts on the way forward are going to divide the community you may be right...but the division is happening regardless. 
Regardless, you or I don't get to choose anyway :/

[Riverhead]

I mean...let's face it.  Even PTS still is in the top 65 of all altcoins...so just imagine what people will begin thinking about bitcoin's fate when there are 20-30 different bitshares-powered chains in the top 100 on coinmarketcap...and one is very similar to their own philosophies...

My belief is that people should be free to exist in the system they feel best matches their personality.  If they are an anarchist, they should have a bitshares version that reflects that...as long as they have devs who will support it.  If they are communist...or socialist.. the same applies.

Why? Because the MOST value comes from synergies between PEOPLE with like minds and similar passions...not a given system of belief that forces everyone to join or face punishment.

Do the devs really think this would hurt them in the long run?  I can't see how it could...because ultimately they are going to all want to be snatched up and paid large sums of money for being capable of innovating to the level this team has accomplished...so even if there are 100 dpos chains like bitshares...but with different devs and philosophies...guess who is going to be in the history books for creating the crypto gold standard DPOS would become?  You got it....the devs!  I'm sure they will find work making plenty of money...and will be able to look at these days as "paying their dues" to earn a reputation of gold in a very lucrative industry.

What did Bruce Lee say again?  Oh yeh..."Be like Linux, my friend"...or something like that

Now is not the time to divide.

Sent from my Timex Sinclair