Author Topic: Dan is doing the right thing .. again!  (Read 24236 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3506
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Ander
Ethereum devs are taking the heat pretty hard too right now. 

They got paid significantly more than the Bitshares devs did by the way. 

The bitch threads on reddit and bitcointalk about ethereum are at least as bad as anything newmine could post about BTS.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline valzav

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 294
    • View Profile
I do have a question though. I could swear devs were given 50k bonuses at the end of the year. Now I read 36k is all they've been paid. Is that 36k + 50k bonus or what? Is my memory wrong? Not that I care I've just learned to really question the family when they speak. I personally aided in chasing off some critics which I have grown to regret, but there is fair criticism and there is nonsense. Newmines jumps around between the 2.

Here is my personal situation in regard to bonus - it was paid in BTS in December, so as a big BitShares believer I kept all my savings in BTS until I had to pay my taxes in April, so I just said thank you to all other BitShares stakeholders that were dumping while I was holding and sold the bonus to pay my taxes. I have no idea what other 36k Newmine is referring to, since December my compensation was substantially smaller.

Offline Thom

Abbreviating Cryptonomex as CMX.  (Should it be CNX?)

1) Could BTS holders get revenue from licensing the Bitshares toolkit?   
* Before CMX: No, it was open source.
* After CMX: Still no.
Verdict: Same as before.

No, there was this whole theory of sharedropping from new chains.  Your verdict is wrong.

Quote
2) Can the dev team get revenue from licensing the bitshares toolkit?
* Before CMX: No, it was open source.
* After CMX: Yes.  If the core dev team generates revenue from this, then less dilution of BTS is required to support the dev team.
Verdict: Probably improves funding situation of Bitshares.


Your verdict is right but the way you got there is questionable.

Quote

3) Could competitors steal/copy Bitshares toolkit?
* Before CMX: Yes.
* After CMX: No, unless CMX lets them, which they *probably* wont do without getting compensation for BTS in some way.  Unless you believe CMX will just completely screw over BTS holders.  Which by the way, CMX collectively is a huge one of.
Verdict: Either the same as before if you dont trust that CMX cares about the future of Bitshares, or better if you do.

Well they have to steal it from pre-1.0 or they could always do it anonymously from bts 2.0 if their opsec is good and they find it worth their time. I've never heard that crytonomex will pay licensing fees back to BTS but I don't follow so closely anymore. It isn't that CMX doesn't care about Bitshares, I'm sure they do, but there are other things going on that have to be considered.

Quote
4) Can independent developers build new projects on the Bitshares toolkit?
* Before CMX: Yes.  Hopefully they would sharedrop on BTS if they did, but there was no guarantee of this.
* After CMX:  If they get permission of CMX.  Hopefully CMX would ask for compensation ot BTS holders, such as a sharedrop.
Verdict: The same or better if CMX acts to benefit Bitshares.  However, could potentially be worse if an independent developer is turned off by this, and chooses not to develop something and sharedrop on BTS?

With all the switching around directions etc it would appear the social consensus was effectively buried in the ground. The .9.2 codebase is probably decent enough for some things, but a toolkit it is not. The whole FC fiasco. I've never heard anyone speak positively about it. Yea, lets build a distributed p2p consensus toolkit/stack on software that is poorly documented and only one guy in the whole world promotes usage. .... really?  yes!

Quote
5) Will dev team abandon Bitshares to pursue better opportunities?  (Ex. 'job at google', 'build blockchain platform for goldman sachs', and other ideas of varying realisticness). 
* Before CMX:  This was always a possibility, especially when the funding situation was very dire.  Which it still is at current prices, if their only revenue source was BTS dilution.
* After CMX:  Still possible.
Verdict: If Goldman Sachs wanted to hire the Bitshares dev team away to work on a platform for them, then it doesnt really matter if they are referred to as 'The Bitshares Dev team' or 'Cryptonomex'.  Its the same result.
Agreed.
Quote
Overall the change improves the funding situation significantly.  It also prevents competitors from copying Bitshares.  It might hurt the potential for third party development efforts.

Some people worry that the existence of Cryptonomex could make the dev team abandon Bitshares.  That risk was present before, its not new.  I don't think the new situation increases the risk at all.  The best way to diminish this risk is for the crypto bear market to end.

I think cryptonomex is a definite positive for BTS but not for the original vision which the family pushed and us suckers ate it up. I'm glad that the developers are being paid more. I want to see BTS succeed, as I rebought at some point. If this is what needs to happen then so be it, but this putting lipstick on a pig is too much at times.

I do have a question though. I could swear devs were given 50k bonuses at the end of the year. Now I read 36k is all they've been paid. Is that 36k + 50k bonus or what? Is my memory wrong? Not that I care I've just learned to really question the family when they speak. I personally aided in chasing off some critics which I have grown to regret, but there is fair criticism and there is nonsense. Newmines jumps around between the 2.

I really think that Dan & crew have likely came up with a good set of functionality. I believe they learned a LOT from pre 1.0. This will add a lot of value to the project. It has far more potential than most all other crypto projects, yet the potential is still not what I felt it was a year ago.

I was hoping VC money came through and we got a new captain of sorts. When that PR thing was just blindly cut and pasted to the blog it showed the maturity of the Bitshares leader. I mean, if you know me well you know I can get all druuunnnk and send off crazy emails (even if the content is very wise :), so no one is perfect. However when you're the public leader and people have invested a lot of their time and effort then they deserve better, regardless of how you might feel about their altruism.

A truly awesome and well balanced perspective IMO.  +5% +5% +5% +5%
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere - MLK |  Verbaltech2 Witness Reports: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,23902.0.html

Offline sschechter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 380
    • View Profile
So the devs sold off all bts they had and still working for bts at low pay? Completely BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who said ALL?
BTSX: sschechter
PTS: PvBUyPrDRkJLVXZfvWjdudRtQgv1Fcy5Qe

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile


Unfortunately Bm has said he must pay child support which means if he doesn't get paid he could go to jail. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BM is not as smart as I thought if he took this on knowing the probability of success was rather small while having life obligations and responsibilities as you claim.

Of all the things you could have responded to, you choose this?  Newmine, you are a great conversation starter but you have created the impression with me that you are unable to see beyond the points you make.  You never seem to open your mind to a broader context.  And finally, you seem to resort to discourtesy too readily.  If you can't let this go, you will miss the enjoyment of the successes to come (should they arrive.)  Don't live with bitterness, life is too short.

Pretty sure I responded to all BM's points and questions.

Offline rajarush

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
So the devs sold off all bts they had and still working for bts at low pay? Completely BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Ben Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Integrity & Innovation, powered by Bitshares
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: benjojo


Unfortunately Bm has said he must pay child support which means if he doesn't get paid he could go to jail. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BM is not as smart as I thought if he took this on knowing the probability of success was rather small while having life obligations and responsibilities as you claim.

Of all the things you could have responded to, you choose this?  Newmine, you are a great conversation starter but you have created the impression with me that you are unable to see beyond the points you make.  You never seem to open your mind to a broader context.  And finally, you seem to resort to discourtesy too readily.  If you can't let this go, you will miss the enjoyment of the successes to come (should they arrive.)  Don't live with bitterness, life is too short.

Offline Erlich Bachman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
  • I'm a pro
    • View Profile
BM is not as smart as I thought if....

nobody is smarter than you newmine

Let's make it official:

"newmineshares"

there it is, make sure you change all the logos in the code for the 2.0 release BM.  It should only kick the release date back a few days.  Small price to pay for such a brilliant name change.

Any other brilliant ideas to delay the project further Mass Man?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzPT4GFA2YY#t=7s
« Last Edit: July 01, 2015, 04:08:02 pm by Erlich Bachman »
You own the network, but who pays for development?

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile


Unfortunately Bm has said he must pay child support which means if he doesn't get paid he could go to jail. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BM is not as smart as I thought if he took this on knowing the probability of success was rather small while having life obligations and responsibilities as you claim.

Offline sschechter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 380
    • View Profile
No one around here owes anyone shit.  Especially not whiny little message board posters.

Please let the devs continue coding and enough with this nonsense.
BTSX: sschechter
PTS: PvBUyPrDRkJLVXZfvWjdudRtQgv1Fcy5Qe

Offline sittingduck

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 246
    • View Profile
Those bonuses were before the price crash below 10m and they had to pay taxes on the precrash price.   

It is really sad that new mine is unable to put himself in developer shoes long enough to do the math. 

Newmine may think Bm owes is life to bts for taking those donations, but the people he hired sure don't.   

So the devs leave and Bm works on it by himself for no wage.     This is what newmine suggests.   

Unfortunately Bm has said he must pay child support which means if he doesn't get paid he could go to jail. 

We are all in this together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Abbreviating Cryptonomex as CMX.  (Should it be CNX?)

1) Could BTS holders get revenue from licensing the Bitshares toolkit?   
* Before CMX: No, it was open source.
* After CMX: Still no.
Verdict: Same as before.

No, there was this whole theory of sharedropping from new chains.  Your verdict is wrong.

Quote
2) Can the dev team get revenue from licensing the bitshares toolkit?
* Before CMX: No, it was open source.
* After CMX: Yes.  If the core dev team generates revenue from this, then less dilution of BTS is required to support the dev team.
Verdict: Probably improves funding situation of Bitshares.


Your verdict is right but the way you got there is questionable.

Quote

3) Could competitors steal/copy Bitshares toolkit?
* Before CMX: Yes.
* After CMX: No, unless CMX lets them, which they *probably* wont do without getting compensation for BTS in some way.  Unless you believe CMX will just completely screw over BTS holders.  Which by the way, CMX collectively is a huge one of.
Verdict: Either the same as before if you dont trust that CMX cares about the future of Bitshares, or better if you do.

Well they have to steal it from pre-1.0 or they could always do it anonymously from bts 2.0 if their opsec is good and they find it worth their time. I've never heard that crytonomex will pay licensing fees back to BTS but I don't follow so closely anymore. It isn't that CMX doesn't care about Bitshares, I'm sure they do, but there are other things going on that have to be considered.

Quote
4) Can independent developers build new projects on the Bitshares toolkit?
* Before CMX: Yes.  Hopefully they would sharedrop on BTS if they did, but there was no guarantee of this.
* After CMX:  If they get permission of CMX.  Hopefully CMX would ask for compensation ot BTS holders, such as a sharedrop.
Verdict: The same or better if CMX acts to benefit Bitshares.  However, could potentially be worse if an independent developer is turned off by this, and chooses not to develop something and sharedrop on BTS?

With all the switching around directions etc it would appear the social consensus was effectively buried in the ground. The .9.2 codebase is probably decent enough for some things, but a toolkit it is not. The whole FC fiasco. I've never heard anyone speak positively about it. Yea, lets build a distributed p2p consensus toolkit/stack on software that is poorly documented and only one guy in the whole world promotes usage. .... really?  yes!

Quote
5) Will dev team abandon Bitshares to pursue better opportunities?  (Ex. 'job at google', 'build blockchain platform for goldman sachs', and other ideas of varying realisticness). 
* Before CMX:  This was always a possibility, especially when the funding situation was very dire.  Which it still is at current prices, if their only revenue source was BTS dilution.
* After CMX:  Still possible.
Verdict: If Goldman Sachs wanted to hire the Bitshares dev team away to work on a platform for them, then it doesnt really matter if they are referred to as 'The Bitshares Dev team' or 'Cryptonomex'.  Its the same result.
Agreed.
Quote
Overall the change improves the funding situation significantly.  It also prevents competitors from copying Bitshares.  It might hurt the potential for third party development efforts.

Some people worry that the existence of Cryptonomex could make the dev team abandon Bitshares.  That risk was present before, its not new.  I don't think the new situation increases the risk at all.  The best way to diminish this risk is for the crypto bear market to end.

I think cryptonomex is a definite positive for BTS but not for the original vision which the family pushed and us suckers ate it up. I'm glad that the developers are being paid more. I want to see BTS succeed, as I rebought at some point. If this is what needs to happen then so be it, but this putting lipstick on a pig is too much at times.

I do have a question though. I could swear devs were given 50k bonuses at the end of the year. Now I read 36k is all they've been paid. Is that 36k + 50k bonus or what? Is my memory wrong? Not that I care I've just learned to really question the family when they speak. I personally aided in chasing off some critics which I have grown to regret, but there is fair criticism and there is nonsense. Newmines jumps around between the 2.

I really think that Dan & crew have likely came up with a good set of functionality. I believe they learned a LOT from pre 1.0. This will add a lot of value to the project. It has far more potential than most all other crypto projects, yet the potential is still not what I felt it was a year ago.

I was hoping VC money came through and we got a new captain of sorts. When that PR thing was just blindly cut and pasted to the blog it showed the maturity of the Bitshares leader. I mean, if you know me well you know I can get all druuunnnk and send off crazy emails (even if the content is very wise :), so no one is perfect. However when you're the public leader and people have invested a lot of their time and effort then they deserve better, regardless of how you might feel about their altruism.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode


Here's the shorter version from a different perspective:

Ford says: we need to build a factory with a revolutionary thing called an assembly line and you will be a partial owner of it, will you fund us?

We: Sure! Here's a pile of cash. Good luck!

Time passes.

Ford: Well, the assembly line had some flaws that is preventing it from being able to build a car for a profit. No one is buying our cars. Also...we're out of money so...ya.

We: wtf? You had so much when the market was at its highest point in history! Why did you not foresee this crash and manage the funds better? Is Crystal Ball 1.0 broken?

Ford: Anyway, we have a dedicated team of engineers who have decided to band together and build something meaningful. Ya, the first attempt didn't work out as we had hopped. Risky venture is risky. We can't come back to you and ask for more money so we need to figure out how to fund ourselves.

We: Wait, what? We paid you for this and it doesn't work! WTF? Everyone knows investments in experimental technology always pan out!

Ford: OK, relax. We have come up with a new assembly line that we think will work amazingly well. We didn't want to come to you for more money so we basically did this on our own dime. Never the less, we are still going to give it to you for free. We probably should have just said sorry, out of funds, project failed. Anyone is welcome to pick up where we left off but we're done with Bitshares and are going to get jobs elsewhere. Kthxbye.


It's kind of like if Ford came to you and said "we need to build a factory with a revolutionary thing called an assembly line and you will be a partial owner of it, will you fund us?"
-we say, "hell yes, here's is a couple million"
-Ford says "cool it will be ready in a couple months. Then profit time for everyone !"
Couple months go by
-we say, "hey what's going on"
-they say, "we came up with a cooler idea and had to redesign"
-we say, "ok, when will it be done"
-they say, " a couple months"
A couple months go by
-they say, "we have the assembly line built, but it only has the ability to build 1/4 of a automobile"
-we say, " awesome. How long till it's fully completed?"
-they say, "a couple months, and we are coordinating a massive ad campaign to go along."
-we say, "sweet, can't wait"
A couple months go by, the assembly line is running better but still only builds 1/3 of an automobile
-they say "hey we are out of funds and need more money to finish. We have this great idea that we can pay ourselves in bits and pieces of what the assembly line produces to fund ourselves till the end of time. If you don't agree, we will go work for GM"
-we say, "just get us a completed assembly line and it's cool."
-they say, "no problem. We got this."
Assembly line then starts to stall because certain sections were installed backwards.
-we say, "hey, we walked through the plant and you have a problem that needs fixed"
-they say "we know. We are working on it"
A couple months go by
-we say, "Why hasn't the problem been fixed? We are losing money because of this.
-they say, "we are working on it, we know there is a problem. It will be done in a few months"
-then next week they say, "guess what? We built a better assembly line that we will lease to you for free. But if you want upgrades, or fixes, you will have to pay us because we own the assembly line. Oh, and we reserve the right to help other people create assembly lines exactly like yours. AND, we will make people pay that want to partner up or streamline your assembly line in ways we cannot. And you guys dont get to profit off our other ventures even though you basically paid us to create this while we were supposed to be working on the original line. And we are going to continue cashing in on the bits and pieces from the old line and then the new line when its released."
-I say, "WTF?"

And lets not forget..

“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

― Henry Ford

 +5%
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline Riverhead


Here's the shorter version from a different perspective:

Ford says: we need to build a factory with a revolutionary thing called an assembly line and you will be a partial owner of it, will you fund us?

We: Sure! Here's a pile of cash. Good luck!

Time passes.

Ford: Well, the assembly line had some flaws that is preventing it from being able to build a car for a profit. No one is buying our cars. Also...we're out of money so...ya.

We: wtf? You had so much when the market was at its highest point in history! Why did you not foresee this crash and manage the funds better? Is Crystal Ball 1.0 broken?

Ford: Anyway, we have a dedicated team of engineers who have decided to band together and build something meaningful. Ya, the first attempt didn't work out as we had hopped. Risky venture is risky. We can't come back to you and ask for more money so we need to figure out how to fund ourselves.

We: Wait, what? We paid you for this and it doesn't work! WTF? Everyone knows investments in experimental technology always pan out!

Ford: OK, relax. We have come up with a new assembly line that we think will work amazingly well. We didn't want to come to you for more money so we basically did this on our own dime. Never the less, we are still going to give it to you for free. We probably should have just said sorry, out of funds, project failed. Anyone is welcome to pick up where we left off but we're done with Bitshares and are going to get jobs elsewhere. Kthxbye.


It's kind of like if Ford came to you and said "we need to build a factory with a revolutionary thing called an assembly line and you will be a partial owner of it, will you fund us?"
-we say, "hell yes, here's is a couple million"
-Ford says "cool it will be ready in a couple months. Then profit time for everyone !"
Couple months go by
-we say, "hey what's going on"
-they say, "we came up with a cooler idea and had to redesign"
-we say, "ok, when will it be done"
-they say, " a couple months"
A couple months go by
-they say, "we have the assembly line built, but it only has the ability to build 1/4 of a automobile"
-we say, " awesome. How long till it's fully completed?"
-they say, "a couple months, and we are coordinating a massive ad campaign to go along."
-we say, "sweet, can't wait"
A couple months go by, the assembly line is running better but still only builds 1/3 of an automobile
-they say "hey we are out of funds and need more money to finish. We have this great idea that we can pay ourselves in bits and pieces of what the assembly line produces to fund ourselves till the end of time. If you don't agree, we will go work for GM"
-we say, "just get us a completed assembly line and it's cool."
-they say, "no problem. We got this."
Assembly line then starts to stall because certain sections were installed backwards.
-we say, "hey, we walked through the plant and you have a problem that needs fixed"
-they say "we know. We are working on it"
A couple months go by
-we say, "Why hasn't the problem been fixed? We are losing money because of this.
-they say, "we are working on it, we know there is a problem. It will be done in a few months"
-then next week they say, "guess what? We built a better assembly line that we will lease to you for free. But if you want upgrades, or fixes, you will have to pay us because we own the assembly line. Oh, and we reserve the right to help other people create assembly lines exactly like yours. AND, we will make people pay that want to partner up or streamline your assembly line in ways we cannot. And you guys dont get to profit off our other ventures even though you basically paid us to create this while we were supposed to be working on the original line. And we are going to continue cashing in on the bits and pieces from the old line and then the new line when its released."
-I say, "WTF?"

Offline Erlich Bachman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
  • I'm a pro
    • View Profile
You took the money to create Bitshares and promised a delivery date of March 2014, then you delivered a half ass shitware in July 2014, then promised a 1.0 version in November 2014. And here we are in June 2015, no 1.0 and promises of a 2.0.
damn right

Yes, the person most responsible for the software delay should pay the shareholders.

Newmine, you have just caused the most delay in getting the code released.  Bytemaster's resonse to your public man crying was technically his longest post in history, and it only served to delay the release of BTS2.0

Thank you for wasting Dan's all time longest post in history on your wittle tears.

Therefore, someone please calculate exactly how much money that Newmine has just cost us all.

You owe me a ..........

Nope, sorry newmine, but you owe us now.  You have wasted enough of our dev's time here discussing things that do not help us reach our goal of getting 2.0 released ASAP.  Your prime motive of delaying the 2.0 release has been revealed to the disgust of this community, and we hate to do this, but as Dan's new boss, we, the community are going to have to officially forbid Dan (under penalty of wage gauging) from ever addressing or reading anything from Newchuck Hoskinson ever again.

The community has spoken.  Dan works for us, and nobody else (yet), and therefore, this brief time period that we have him will not be wasted reminiscing about the good old days with beer buddies from the past.  We, the community, have Dan's attention currently, and we determine where he can focus it, until he chooses to leave us, which he is free to do at anytime.  This relationship between Dan and his bockchain is like a marriage where we both must respect each other, and the power of the individual to end the relationship at any time.  Just like how our lives can end at anytime, and we cannot appeal to anyone for what we feel is "owed" to us.  Life "owes" us nothing.  If you want to make others feel like they are indebted to you, then you can continue to follow the old ways of "debt money."  BitShares is creating a government where all debts are explicit, and enforced by the blockchain.  So if you are making a pact with someone, then make it on the blockchain, otherwise, it is null and void, and therefore irrelevant to anybody here on this crypto forum.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2015, 04:33:20 am by Erlich Bachman »
You own the network, but who pays for development?