There was a very low concept to word ratio in the discussion and they failed to provide any evidence for this 'bad feeling.' People who do not understand a concept cannot/should not be attempting to educate or inform others. Reflects badly on them.
The odd thing I see with Sovryn Tech is that he openly promotes mining--as in nearly all his sponsors are for mining rigs. This is not a good idea in my humble opinion if you want a decentralized ecosystem to truly flourish. I like Sovryn Tech, and especially love his idea of "freedom cells" as this was really the basis of what Sovereignty is about...and it is my opinion that bitShares is the closest to actually enabling this with what they are doing. I am at a loss how he can say one thing and see tech based only on a single blockchain and or sidechains as preferable given his open stance against centralization of power. I will relisten at some point to make sure I didn't miss something, but I will say this is odd.
Hi Dan， any comment on the noise from Sovryn Tech latest talk show on bitshares? please listen it from 28:30 of the sound track.
The major argument was: "I just have some wired feeling".
Aside from that the only substantial thing he said was that he suspects Invictus to have a need to ride on the fame/publicity that Mastercoin and Ethereum have.
Conclusion: Major goal: Building relationships, being trustworthy. See https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4059.msg50857#msg50857
Suggestion: Call him up and ask him what exactly he meant and then explain your motivation... In the end it's all about personal trust.... Humans...
Overall: Nothing major, because there was just no strong argument there. But subjective impressions people get matter, this is what this shows.
I feel the community should do their best to contact sovryn tech and focus on getting him to invite Dan on to voice these concerns. It is precisely this kind of Bitcoiner feedback that causes the "trend" he sees. The trend I see? Everyone wants to build on top of bitcoin and altcoins are only there for bitcoin to steal innovation from, and for pump and dumps that enrich whales who are further centralizing control around ASIC mining infrastructure. Of course, those whales are also part of the system that helps to furnish these shows with income they need to pay for travel and entry to these conferences.
Sure there is pressure on Dan to find some
way to reach out to the Bitcoin community because the movement that started out with "libertarian" enthusiasm has quickly started to morph into a movement where much of the community is supporting the old paradigm, only 2.0. I recall that this fella not too long ago told Stephane Murphy that he can't really explain Proof of Stake (POS) to her because he is not yet schooled enough on it, so how can he appreciate the true
innovation behind what Dan and team are doing with DPOS--and future iterations? Perhaps he should dive in and actually learn about the real "bleeding edge"?
Something tells me if he were to receive a fat donation of 1000+ bitShares, he'd whistle about how great they are. This is precisely
the reason I do not want to charge people for Beyond Bitcoin. If this goes well, and we all earn trust from the community, our rewards will come from relationships with people who will always be there if we need them. This, personally, is a fine reward...
Sincerely hope our community will do what is right and focus our efforts on getting Brian Sovryn to talk to Dan so Dan can have an opportunity to teach him.
A good post to respond to can be found here. Please check out Sovryn Tech's twitter account and post your opinions. Also a good idea to advise him to ask Dan some questions about these things before putting this type of opinion out. Twitter him @sovryntech.