Author Topic: PTS何去何从,中文社区的赶紧来投票,需要你的声音。  (Read 8195 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline callmeluc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
切换到DPOS算法
缺点:要专门选举101个注定要亏本的受托人出来维护网络

在BTSX或者ME里发行BitPTS资产
缺点:BTSX是高风险的测试性网络,假如锚定出什么问题,可能会重置,可能会影响PTS,有点像把2个鸡蛋都放进一个还不稳妥的篮子
切换到DPOS算法
优点: 提高代表分散性

现在看来, 转独立链上哪再去找101个受托人去? pts流通量交易量本来就小, 亏本生意没人做啊
« Last Edit: October 01, 2014, 05:50:27 pm by callmeluc »
BTS_自扯自淡

Offline ebit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1905
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ebit
Quote
@PTS中国:在发明超光速通信前,行星间,DPOS发挥不了作用啊

碉堡了,还是pts继续pow吧。行星间需要pow。刚才用pts转账,速度也很快。
telegram:ebit521
https://weibo.com/ebiter

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
user issued but  1:1 map to the pts holders@snapshot  ,no one get  loss.


ags&pts just stand for rights to get honored by DACs using  bitshares toolkit
any  lowcost&stable  carrier is acceptable

You are misunderstanding me. The point is not whether anyone loses in the conversion. The point is that the market will associate PTS as a subsidiary of BTSX. This may cause potentially competing products to avoid allocation to PTS. Ethereum is currently considering using DPOS but they are objecting to the AGS/PTS allocation. If PTS was a user-issued asset in BTSX, I guarantee there would be a much stronger opposition, due to market sentiment alone. Marketing and public perception are critical to the success of PTS, since it was designed to be appealing to a wide range of DACs - NOT to be biased, preferential, or dependent upon any one DAC.

If Ethereum adopts DPOS my guess is that the price of PTS would at least double. By advocating for PTS to be a user-issued asset in BTSX, you would effectively be killing any chance of that happening.

o i see   Ethereum is a competitor of btsx

I don't see them as direct competitors, but there is certainly some overlap. If and when Bitshares X develops some type of automated scripting features the overlap will be greater. Tomorrow there may be another DAC that is released that more closely competes with BTSX. When that happens, AGS and PTS holders would benefit from getting equity in that DAC. By moving PTS to a user-issued asset in BTSX we would be discouraging competitors of BitsharesX from using DPOS. Everyone benefits from competition. Both AGS and BTS holders already have a large stake in BTSX. Why would we want to discourage future competitors from giving us equity??? Keeping PTS independent is the best option if you want to maximize your AGS and PTS investment.

Offline sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
user issued but  1:1 map to the pts holders@snapshot  ,no one get  loss.


ags&pts just stand for rights to get honored by DACs using  bitshares toolkit
any  lowcost&stable  carrier is acceptable

You are misunderstanding me. The point is not whether anyone loses in the conversion. The point is that the market will associate PTS as a subsidiary of BTSX. This may cause potentially competing products to avoid allocation to PTS. Ethereum is currently considering using DPOS but they are objecting to the AGS/PTS allocation. If PTS was a user-issued asset in BTSX, I guarantee there would be a much stronger opposition, due to market sentiment alone. Marketing and public perception are critical to the success of PTS, since it was designed to be appealing to a wide range of DACs - NOT to be biased, preferential, or dependent upon any one DAC.

If Ethereum adopts DPOS my guess is that the price of PTS would at least double. By advocating for PTS to be a user-issued asset in BTSX, you would effectively be killing any chance of that happening.

o i see   Ethereum is a competitor of btsx

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
user issued but  1:1 map to the pts holders@snapshot  ,no one get  loss.


ags&pts just stand for rights to get honored by DACs using  bitshares toolkit
any  lowcost&stable  carrier is acceptable

You are misunderstanding me. The point is not whether anyone loses in the conversion. The point is that the market will associate PTS as a subsidiary of BTSX. This may cause potentially competing products to avoid allocation to PTS. Ethereum is currently considering using DPOS but they are objecting to the AGS/PTS allocation. If PTS was a user-issued asset in BTSX, I guarantee there would be a much stronger opposition, due to market sentiment alone. Marketing and public perception are critical to the success of PTS, since it was designed to be appealing to a wide range of DACs - NOT to be biased, preferential, or dependent upon any one DAC.

If Ethereum adopts DPOS my guess is that the price of PTS would at least double. By advocating for PTS to be a user-issued asset in BTSX, you would effectively be killing any chance of that happening.

Edit: AGS holders would also profit nicely from Ethereum adoption. Why discourage them by associating PTS with BitsharesX??? You gain nothing by doing that, but lose a tremendous amount if the Ethereum crowd decides against DPOS. They are already hesitant to adopt DPOS, and I guarantee they would not want to support a user-issued asset in a competing currency. The question you need to ask yourself is - do you want to maximize your AGS/PTS returns, or do you want to limit the success or failure of your investment to a single product.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2014, 04:40:22 am by alphaBar »

Offline sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
user issued but  1:1 map to the pts holders@snapshot  ,no one get  loss.


ags&pts just stand for rights to get honored by DACs using  bitshares toolkit
any  lowcost&stable  carrier is acceptable
« Last Edit: August 20, 2014, 02:19:27 am by sudo »

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6333.15

Invictus only produces software. Pts is maintained by testz.   Btsx by dacs unlimited

Invictus will not issue any crypto currency or shares. 

If the pts community organizes a well accepted upgrade that would be good for everyone. 

My opinion is that someone should create a user issued asset on btsx. based on an official snapshot. 

It will not be invictus, but I would support moving the social consensus to such an asset if executed well. 

Those that want it to happen should organize to make it happen. I think most would rather see it on btsx than not.   Exchanges are already integrated with it too. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

PTS would literally die if we did this. Did you know that some of the smartest minds in crypto, including Vitalik, are skeptical about BTSX market-pegged assets? If those features fail, BTSX can crash hard and severely taint all of its user-issued assets along with it.

Even if everything about BTSX is an absolute success, ask yourself this question: do you think Ethereum would want to allocate 10% of their shares to a user-issued asset in BTSX (a direct competitor)?

In my opinion, this is the strongest argument in favor of an independent DPOS blockchain for PTS. PTS must remain neutral and independent if it is to reach its full potential and to reach the widest adoption by new DACS - some of which will be directly competing with BTSX.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2014, 02:02:08 am by alphaBar »

Offline sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6333.15

Invictus only produces software. Pts is maintained by testz.   Btsx by dacs unlimited

Invictus will not issue any crypto currency or shares. 

If the pts community organizes a well accepted upgrade that would be good for everyone. 

My opinion is that someone should create a user issued asset on btsx. based on an official snapshot. 

It will not be invictus, but I would support moving the social consensus to such an asset if executed well. 

Those that want it to happen should organize to make it happen. I think most would rather see it on btsx than not.   Exchanges are already integrated with it too. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
« Last Edit: August 20, 2014, 01:24:53 am by sudo »

Offline sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
换一种难度调整算法得了,比如KGW之类的。

白白送给pow矿工有什么意思呢?被人砸的滋味很舒服么?

bts不被砸是因为市场预期,不是无矿工。ppc也是无矿工,还不照样被砸。

全流通+燃烧通缩 对价格肯定有影响。

ppc的pos 数量无上限

Offline ebit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1905
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ebit
换一种难度调整算法得了,比如KGW之类的。

白白送给pow矿工有什么意思呢?被人砸的滋味很舒服么?

bts不被砸是因为市场预期,不是无矿工。ppc也是无矿工,还不照样被砸。
telegram:ebit521
https://weibo.com/ebiter

Offline ebit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1905
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ebit
telegram:ebit521
https://weibo.com/ebiter

Offline sudo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2255
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ags
换一种难度调整算法得了,比如KGW之类的。

白白送给pow矿工有什么意思呢?被人砸的滋味很舒服么?

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
I said this in the prior thread but I will paste it here for the benefit of English speakers. For the rest, I would appreciate if someone can translate:

PTS was intended to be a distribution mechanism for future DACs. Making it a user-issued asset in the very first DAC violates the intent of PTS. There are very ambitious features of the BTSX DAC that could fail spectacularly, independent of DPOS (pegged assets, for example). PTS should not be subject to the volatility and risk introduced by these features or future features that may be implemented by BTSX. PTS should be independent, both in price, volatility, and features from the DACs that are born from it. It should be the Switzerland of DACs, agnostic and separate from even the market perceptions of a DAC and its features. This way it ends up representing a more distributed and non-biased segment of investors who are not for or against any particular feature of any particular DAC, but who believe in the underlying protocol as a foundation (DPOS). Even the marketing and perceptions of a particular DAC (today or in the future) has the potential to taint PTS and dissuade future DACs from using PTS.

Offline hanzac

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
换一种难度调整算法得了,比如KGW之类的。

Offline jifehuang

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
建议做快照,终结PTS。快照之后的PTS不参与将来的配股。给足够的时间从交易所提币。