Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Invictus: Why is 2 years of mining PTS better than 2 months?  (Read 1906 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lighthouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 376
  • Making a Market in PTS since 11/06/2013
    • View Profile
    • Lighthouse Bulk Orders and Trusted Escrow (Closed)
Invictus: Why is 2 years of mining PTS better than 2 months?
« on: November 12, 2013, 12:48:06 AM »

I wonder what would have happened if they hadn't made the change and mining was done in three or four weeks.  Seems like that might be better given the purpose of the project is to give shares of invictus innovations future products to people starting on January 1st.

Protoshares that are mined after january first will be much less valuable unless they're basically bundled with a protoshare - Can someone from Invictus explain how this will work?  If it's a fork it seems like once the issuance date passes these will have missed the boat. 

Maybe it would be better to instead do a 2 month mining frenzy then wait 1 month of hot-potato trading as people speculate on the value of what the Protoshare will deliver to them (Bitshares), then whoever is holding the PTS gets a bitshare, and the protocoins start trading based on speculation of the value of the next project to be forked from it.

I also think it might be better for IPOcoins like this to simply have 10% of the mining reward go to the company being funded.  90% reward is plenty to incentivize miners and then you don't have to have this nutty drop everything to mine strategy that saw bytemaster run himself on no sleep and lose funds because it was bugged alpha code.   If this were just an altcoin and you were just developing this altcoin that would be very unpopular but given the point of this coin (to raise funds and support the development of blockchain-products) I think 10% is very modest and would better align the developers motives with doing the best for the community instead of scrambling to grab everything they can or else lose out on their own creation.

What say you?

Before you say the price of PTS is too high, take a look at theThe Reason.  Protoshares are an entirely new type of Cryptocurrency, one that pays to hold.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2864
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BTS: Stan
Re: Invictus: Why is 2 years of mining PTS better than 2 months?
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2013, 02:39:16 AM »
Lots of good issues worthy of discussion!

The two years was intended to span our planned development cycle for BitShares and its spinoffs.

But I agree, it would probably still work if we mined out faster, since its all about speculative trading on the idea and promise of BitShares as a whole class of DACs.  But having a longer tail during which mining could remain profitable due to anticipated ProtoShares appreciation seemed like a more conservative approach.

Concerning the "drop everything to mine" syndrome, we'll see what it's like when BitShares takes its snapshot.  All ProtoShares holders will automagically get their initial stake, but I'm betting most will still participate in the new gold rush to get some more of the new BitShares Mother Lode.  Hopefully we'll have the parameters dialed in by then and all the tools in place to make it a more pleasant experience for everyone -- including Bytemaster.

You are probably right - some people may sell their ProtoShares after they get their BitShares snapshot.  However, I expect that by that time many will have fully internalized why ProtoShares is the gift that keeps on giving.  Snapshot after snapshot as new DACs debut.  They will want to keep them to cash in again and again on whatever new offerings are on the horizon at that time.  (If there is nothing on the horizon at that time, then shame on us and our competitors!)

Another possibility we might do with ProtoShares is to use them to clone TestShares, DAC where people can experiment with trading algorithms without risking the stake they mined and traded so hard for.  Then, when they have a strategy and feel competent to risk the Real Thing, they can move over to one of the BitShares exchanges and play for keeps. 

That of course depends on whether there appears to be interest in such a thing.

Quote
I know not what course others may take, but you can have my ProtoShares when you pry them from my cold dead hands.   
-- Patrick Henry and Charlton Heston
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline barwizi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 764
  • Noirbits, NoirShares, NoirEx.....lol, noir anyone?
    • View Profile
    • Noirbitstalk.org
Re: Invictus: Why is 2 years of mining PTS better than 2 months?
« Reply #2 on: November 13, 2013, 02:43:51 PM »
I wonder what would have happened if they hadn't made the change and mining was done in three or four weeks.  Seems like that might be better given the purpose of the project is to give shares of invictus innovations future products to people starting on January 1st.

Protoshares that are mined after january first will be much less valuable unless they're basically bundled with a protoshare - Can someone from Invictus explain how this will work?  If it's a fork it seems like once the issuance date passes these will have missed the boat. 

Maybe it would be better to instead do a 2 month mining frenzy then wait 1 month of hot-potato trading as people speculate on the value of what the Protoshare will deliver to them (Bitshares), then whoever is holding the PTS gets a bitshare, and the protocoins start trading based on speculation of the value of the next project to be forked from it.

I also think it might be better for IPOcoins like this to simply have 10% of the mining reward go to the company being funded.  90% reward is plenty to incentivize miners and then you don't have to have this nutty drop everything to mine strategy that saw bytemaster run himself on no sleep and lose funds because it was bugged alpha code.   If this were just an altcoin and you were just developing this altcoin that would be very unpopular but given the point of this coin (to raise funds and support the development of blockchain-products) I think 10% is very modest and would better align the developers motives with doing the best for the community instead of scrambling to grab everything they can or else lose out on their own creation.

What say you?




As an introductory launch i believe it is going as well as can be, it has brought together some serious minds with an eye for dvelopment. For something to be mined in a short span of time would raise questions of insider information and scandal that would hurt the venture. I think that a new chain is in order, perhaps in a few days. It would essentially be the beta to protoshares' alpha. Many miner complained about the absence of pools, the absence of stand alone miners and other infrastructural needs which can now be addressed.

As a benefit of have this beta chain, improvements can be made on block times, retarget algo, chain integrity and  mineability. Also this invites the slower crowd that is only catching on about invictus now, they join the crowd and the community becomes larger. I believe that Invictus should consider one of my older crypto ideas-- Currency Suiting. This is to have a set of currencies under their wing which are cross-tradable, each with it's own characteristics. That would then Justify a small premine, with which to float the inter-change. Say you have one coin that is good for trade--Proto, but you would like to sign up for something that Invictus offers, you can buy the required currency using your proto , then sign up.


--Bar--  PiNEJGUv4AZVZkLuF6hV4xwbYTRp5etWWJ

The magical land of crypto, no freebies people.

Offline bytemaster

Re: Invictus: Why is 2 years of mining PTS better than 2 months?
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2013, 03:33:17 AM »
I wonder what would have happened if they hadn't made the change and mining was done in three or four weeks.  Seems like that might be better given the purpose of the project is to give shares of invictus innovations future products to people starting on January 1st.

Protoshares that are mined after january first will be much less valuable unless they're basically bundled with a protoshare - Can someone from Invictus explain how this will work?  If it's a fork it seems like once the issuance date passes these will have missed the boat. 

Maybe it would be better to instead do a 2 month mining frenzy then wait 1 month of hot-potato trading as people speculate on the value of what the Protoshare will deliver to them (Bitshares), then whoever is holding the PTS gets a bitshare, and the protocoins start trading based on speculation of the value of the next project to be forked from it.

I also think it might be better for IPOcoins like this to simply have 10% of the mining reward go to the company being funded.  90% reward is plenty to incentivize miners and then you don't have to have this nutty drop everything to mine strategy that saw bytemaster run himself on no sleep and lose funds because it was bugged alpha code.   If this were just an altcoin and you were just developing this altcoin that would be very unpopular but given the point of this coin (to raise funds and support the development of blockchain-products) I think 10% is very modest and would better align the developers motives with doing the best for the community instead of scrambling to grab everything they can or else lose out on their own creation.

What say you?




As an introductory launch i believe it is going as well as can be, it has brought together some serious minds with an eye for dvelopment. For something to be mined in a short span of time would raise questions of insider information and scandal that would hurt the venture. I think that a new chain is in order, perhaps in a few days. It would essentially be the beta to protoshares' alpha. Many miner complained about the absence of pools, the absence of stand alone miners and other infrastructural needs which can now be addressed.

As a benefit of have this beta chain, improvements can be made on block times, retarget algo, chain integrity and  mineability. Also this invites the slower crowd that is only catching on about invictus now, they join the crowd and the community becomes larger. I believe that Invictus should consider one of my older crypto ideas-- Currency Suiting. This is to have a set of currencies under their wing which are cross-tradable, each with it's own characteristics. That would then Justify a small premine, with which to float the inter-change. Say you have one coin that is good for trade--Proto, but you would like to sign up for something that Invictus offers, you can buy the required currency using your proto , then sign up.

I am afraid that a 'do-over' would do far more damage to our brand.   Major players in the field have invested over $1 million dollars buying PTS from the miners and if we were to say 'ooopps' and reset the clock then these important players would never trust our social contracts again.    It is regrettable that early miners and pools received so much benefit, but on the other hand most weak hands and non-beleives sold 'cheap' to believers.   There was still a major give away for everyone who signed up to our newsletter or followed our posts and listened to Lets Talk Bitcoin.  Otherwise mining should always be as difficult as price and with the price we have it would have been very difficult for the regular guy to get any if we started over.

All of that said, we did reserve the right to launch ProtoShares 2.0 and honor the 1.0 shares.   We have mined out 50% of the money supply and the mining rate and profits have almost reached an equilibrium.    As a result I think there isn't much benefit to starting over.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

 

Google+