Estimated Price of 1 Bitshare

[luckybit]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

Sometimes weird stuff happens.

For example yesterday you could burn 1 BTC to have 1 000 XCP. Today trades happen at 100 XCP @ 1BTC, just because the burn period is over.

I also think that 200$ is too optimistic, but I don't think that PTS price is a good indicator.  Who knows what might happen once people realize that Bitshares supply is fixed.

XCP is underpriced. It's going for something like $100 USD because 100*10 = 1000 which is the street value for 1 BTC. I think XCP and PTS are both actually worth more like $1000 USD because there are only around 2 million and the upside is tremendous. $1000 USD will be considered dirt cheap a year from now while $100 USD is a steal.

The reason XCP is at $100 USD is because no one knows about it and no one is using it yet. When the next Bitcoin bubble happens and the price goes above $10,000 a Bitcoin the new investors will look for places to park their Bitcoins and XCP, PTS or Bitshares are all excellent places to park it.

There will be no inflation, and in the case of PTS and Bitshares the interest rate alone is a reason for people to buy it. If you look at Asicminer and Btct you'll find that shares easily reached Bitcoin parity and beyond. Asicminer reached almost 5 BTC, and Btct was offering shares in their exchange which I don't remember what the price of it was but it was well over 5 BTC.

I don't predict that XCP, PTS or BTS will be over 1 BTC this year or even next year, but at some point they will all reach parity and once that happens there wont be any going back. The best strategy is to buy and hold until it approaches parity with Bitcoin. 0.8-0.9 BTC per PTS by 2016.

[BldSwtTrs]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

Sometimes weird stuff happens.

For example yesterday you could burn 1 BTC to have 1 000 XCP. Today trades happen at 100 XCP @ 1BTC, just because the burn period is over.

I also think that 200$ is too optimistic, but I don't think that PTS price is a good indicator.  Who knows what might happen once people realize that Bitshares supply is fixed.

[JakeThePanda]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

Pts is severely undervalued atm, it will gain its real value once people witness III projects blossoming.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

You said on launch, not down the road.

[bytemaster]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

[Giga]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

Pts is severely undervalued atm, it will gain its real value once people witness III projects blossoming.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[JakeThePanda]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

[Giga]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

[Brent.Allsop]

Having looked at the topics... Regarding questions like "is Jesus the Son of God?" (if that is a question that is derived from the topic "Jesus is the Son of God"): The truth you will find there will be 1000 perspectives always depending on your assumptions and the perspective from which you ask this question. The stated goal here should be exchanging perspectives / understanding each other and not finding the truth because the question as such is as such that there can not be an answer to it.
Also questions often imply a lot of assumptions already...
Those questions have been debated in scientific and in non scientific arenas and probably millions of pages worth reading have been written about it. So I would see such a project not as a means to finally come to a conclusion but it can serve to organize debates better (and show who has which financial ties etc. in order to put things in perspective) and make them more accessibly. If applied right there might be a scientific use. Something like: Summarizing papers I have written that answer a question and then put a link on the respective canonizer sub-page referring to this link.

Brilliant

[Brent.Allsop]

Requiring people to use their real world identities also might have disadvantages and limitations

Currently, with the prototype, people can chose to "support" and "contribute" to camps, using an anonymous id.  And it would be nice to be able to implement a canonizer that would filter anonymous support, and/or one that would focus on that, should people chose to do so.

I like your project!

Thanks!

[santaclause102]

The camps seem like a realistic approach to me that reflects the ambiguity of reality perception but labeling it as a sure way to finally find "the truth" doesn't reflect this realism

No!  I continuously point out that Canonizer.com has nothing to do with "the truth".  You quote that as if I said or "labeled" it as "the truth"?

Canonizer.com is only building and measuring for consensus, and for what people currently think they want, concisely, quantitatively, and in real time - nothing more.

Ok. So you mean truth less in the sense of "the truth" but more in a logical sense as "1" (as opposed to 0)... The first meaning is more common language the latter more scientific... I would emphasize though that some of the topics discussed are not those where only one perspective will remain.
Requiring people to use their real world identities also might have disadvantages and limitations but this way you could also let people prove that they are or are not associated with a lobby/interest group...Nontransparent lobbying is the biggest thread/disease for a democracy imo
I like your project!

Edit: Having looked at the topics... Regarding questions like "is Jesus the Son of God?" (if that is a question that is derived from the topic "Jesus is the Son of God"): The truth you will find there will be 1000 perspectives always depending on your assumptions and the perspective from which you ask this question. The stated goal here should be exchanging perspectives / understanding each other and not finding the truth because the question as such is as such that there can not be an answer to it.
Also questions often imply a lot of assumptions already...
Those questions have been debated in scientific and in non scientific arenas and probably millions of pages worth reading have been written about it. So I would see such a project not as a means to finally come to a conclusion but it can serve to organize debates better (and show who has which financial ties etc. in order to put things in perspective) and make them more accessibly. If applied right there might be a scientific use. Something like: Summarizing papers I have written that answer a question and then put a link on the respective canonizer sub-page referring to this link.

[Brent.Allsop]

The camps seem like a realistic approach to me that reflects the ambiguity of reality perception but labeling it as a sure way to finally find "the truth" doesn't reflect this realism

No!  I continuously point out that Canonizer.com has nothing to do with "the truth".  You quote that as if I said or "labeled" it as "the truth"?

The goal of Canonizer.com isn't to get to any "Truth".

Canonizer.com is only building and measuring for consensus, and for what people currently think they want, concisely, quantitatively, and how this changes in real time - nothing more.

[santaclause102]

The camps seem like a realistic approach to me that reflects the ambiguity of reality perception but labeling it as a sure way to finally find "the truth" doesn't reflect this realism

[Brent.Allsop]

Haven't digged much into it... But what makes canonizer different from wikipedia?

Wikipedia works great for encyclopedic consensus information that everyone agrees on.  But if there is any disagreement, at all, the focus and edit wars quickly focus on that, everyone gets hurt and leaves, unless you like spending your life flaming with endless edit wars.  Anything at all controversial (all important things) like global warming just don't work at all.

Also, there is no measure of the quality of information with Wikipedia, and for that matter, that is the problem with the entire internet and everything out there.

Canonizer.com solves both of these problems by adding "camps"  The I3 people create and wiki their camp and the Etherium people create their camp, and everyone indicates which one they currently have as their working hypothesis that it is the best one.

Each reader can select their experts by selecting their preferred canonizer algorithm on the side bar, and "canonize" things accordingly.  In other words, 80% of your chosen experts might be in the I3 camp, and 10% of them in the Etherium camp....

The scientific proof comes from the free market, falsifying the incorrect theory camps, and forcing everyone into the same one.  But of course, if the popularity swings to support a dumb currency, while smart/agile currencies are really better, the majority will join the dumb camp, at least temporarily, but such will not convert the smart experts.  Eventually the best camps will out perform dumb camps, the early minority supporters of such taking lots of money away from the flash and crash, pump and dump ones.

The goal of Canonizer.com is to measure, in real time, how much support there is for each theory, before expending the effort to do the real world experiment, putting it on the market.  Then you can track to find out which are the best experts, in the 'right' camps the earliest, once the experiments are completed, so you can trust them more the next time...

[CLains]

We know that it is possible to gather a huge amount of information through hundreds of thousands of hierarchical structures and integrate it all into an amazingly coherent representation where all conflict and ambiguity is resolved.

How do we know this? That's how we consciously perceive the world! 

#inspiration

[santaclause102]

Haven't digged much into it... But what makes canonizer different from wikipedia?