Author Topic: When will we achieve next order of magnitude increase?  (Read 21252 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Brent.Allsop

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
    • Canonizer.com
...The majority of delegates will want to jump off the cliff, and only a few will be trying to do the right thing and change directions faster...

I'm not sure what you mean by this?


All grass roots, and beurocratic organizations have the same problem.  First off, you can't do anything alone, especially with world finances like this.  You need to have the largest herd possible.  So, the problem becomes, how do you get the largest possible herd (get smart people to stop splitting), AND get that herd to make the drastic and often difficult to make changes necessary for survival and the most rapid possible progress, without getting bogged down by size.

And leading minds, like everyone creating all the Alt coins, are like cats.  If we could all work together, efficiently and intelligently, everyone working together, rather than trying to kill everyone else, or hoping they die, we would have conquered the financial world by now.

There is always popular herding opinion, that is often not the best way to think, believe, and act.  A few minority experts always see this first, but how do you make it easy for them to help the entire herd to get educated, and change directions as fast as possible.

I think that in the near future, the Bitshares community will be faced with an existential issue.  If the herd does the right thing, instantly, they will survive, if they do the wrong thing (like Bitcoin is choosing to stay with POW) or if it takes too long to get all delegates to OK a change, we will die, or be significantly hurt, compared to what could be.  You can already see this today - inability to get the entire herd to see the best rules to make for BitUSD and all that.  Sure, THE bytemaster is the world's most brilliant person with all this, but we could do so much better, if everyone could communicate concisely and quantitatively.  We need a quantitatively measurable way to determine what the experts believe is best.  Like is possible at Canonizer.com, we could be progressing so much faster, without THE bytemaster bottleneck.  We all need to be able to perform at his level, if we really want to change direction fast as a huge herd, without having lots of splitters. diluting or forking things.

Of course,  your idea of "the right thing" may be very different from someone else's idea of "the right thing". 

I'm talking about something for which, in the future, everyone will agree it is the right thing, but only a few experts see it that way today.  I'm not talking about differences like strawberry and chocolate.  Canonizer.com can find and educate and get the entire herd on board very fast.


You say "we could do so much better, if everyone could communicate concisely and quantitatively" but...EVERYONE CAN'T.


You obviously haven't yet seen how this is very possible at canonizer.com



Bottom line, everyone won't agree on everything so I don't think that's a reasonable expectation.  Seems to me BM takes as much input as he can given the constraints and makes his best decision.


Again, I am not talking about everything.  Just important things where, a year from now, everyone will agree that it is the right thing, but today, only a few experts see it that way.  This kind of amplification of the wisdom of the crowd, concise and quantitative communication can cut this time down from years to days.  The entire heard can literally change on a dime, and you can know, concisely and quantitatively, exactly how many people will be on board with any such decision.


 

Regarding the dilution, splitters and forking, I don't think you can do too much about that unless someone gets a huge investment behind them and can be big enough to be the loudest voice and push the agenda. 


Kinda like how bitcoin is now. 

The fact that Bitcoin has become a bureaucracy that is so hard to change is exactly what is holding everything back.  Canonizer.com type system can do far better be completely removing the bureaucracy and making things easy.  It's far easier and faster for someone to get a change in, than to do all the extra work to start up a brand new currency.


We are the straying cats to bitcoin as the current "establishment" crypto currency.  After all, it's open source and smart people who think they have a better idea will try to make a go of it.  I do agree that it can make for a confusing marketplace and decentralized decision making is not always pretty :).

Right now, in the US, we are still using primitive magnetic credit card readers for the majority of payments.  The only reason we are unable to improve, is because the world and industry doesn't yet know how to build consensus among large herds.  It needs to know how to communicate concisely and quantitatively.





Tuck Fheman

  • Guest
Shouldn't we recruit some of the core devs away from nxt?

Considering they are trying to recruit (and succeeding) dev's to NXT (SuperNet or anything James is involved with), I don't think that will happen.

Offline serejandmyself

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 358
    • View Profile


Shouldn't we recruit some of the core devs away from nxt?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

good idea, just be sure that they dont double play
btsx - bitsharesrussia

bitbro

  • Guest
Oh and I'm in close contact with the guy working on Instant Transactions, which is what initially drew me to Nxt, it is definitely taking too long, it's a big project though and until about a month ago was working a full time job and doing this in his spare time.  Apparently just switched over to full time though.  And it scales very nicely.. entirely world could switch to Nxt and the instant transaction system would scale. Other parts would break first.  The other thing is that it apparently somewhat depends on Transparent forging, which isn't due until November, to be released on Nxt's first birthday.

Sounds too good to be true, to me.  I'd be interested in knowing THE bytemaster's take on this.  You know if he believed in it, he'd be busy integrating it into BitsharesX.

Shouldn't we recruit some of the core devs away from nxt?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Method-X

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1131
  • VIRAL
    • View Profile
    • Learn to code
  • BitShares: methodx
I like to think that we love cold, hard truths in this community. That we can react accordingly, and cut off nostalgic attachment to ideas as they become dated.



Truer words have never been spoken.

Offline CLains

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clains
I like to think that we love cold, hard truths in this community. That we can react accordingly, and cut off nostalgic attachment to ideas as they become dated.


Offline GaltReport

...The majority of delegates will want to jump off the cliff, and only a few will be trying to do the right thing and change directions faster...

I'm not sure what you mean by this?


All grass roots, and beurocratic organizations have the same problem.  First off, you can't do anything alone, especially with world finances like this.  You need to have the largest herd possible.  So, the problem becomes, how do you get the largest possible herd (get smart people to stop splitting), AND get that herd to make the drastic and often difficult to make changes necessary for survival and the most rapid possible progress, without getting bogged down by size.

And leading minds, like everyone creating all the Alt coins, are like cats.  If we could all work together, efficiently and intelligently, everyone working together, rather than trying to kill everyone else, or hoping they die, we would have conquered the financial world by now.

There is always popular herding opinion, that is often not the best way to think, believe, and act.  A few minority experts always see this first, but how do you make it easy for them to help the entire herd to get educated, and change directions as fast as possible.

I think that in the near future, the Bitshares community will be faced with an existential issue.  If the herd does the right thing, instantly, they will survive, if they do the wrong thing (like Bitcoin is choosing to stay with POW) or if it takes too long to get all delegates to OK a change, we will die, or be significantly hurt, compared to what could be.  You can already see this today - inability to get the entire herd to see the best rules to make for BitUSD and all that.  Sure, THE bytemaster is the world's most brilliant person with all this, but we could do so much better, if everyone could communicate concisely and quantitatively.  We need a quantitatively measurable way to determine what the experts believe is best.  Like is possible at Canonizer.com, we could be progressing so much faster, without THE bytemaster bottleneck.  We all need to be able to perform at his level, if we really want to change direction fast as a huge herd, without having lots of splitters. diluting or forking things.

Of course,  your idea of "the right thing" may be very different from someone else's idea of "the right thing".  You say "we could do so much better, if everyone could communicate concisely and quantitatively" but...EVERYONE CAN'T.  It would also be nice if I were wealthy and didn't have to work anymore but...I'M NOT so it's not Christmas everyday after all and people have to use their best judgement and rely on others expertise.  Bottom line, everyone won't agree on everything so I don't think that's a reasonable expectation.  Seems to me BM takes as much input as he can given the constraints and makes his best decision. 

Regarding the dilution, splitters and forking, I don't think you can do too much about that unless someone gets a huge investment behind them and can be big enough to be the loudest voice and push the agenda.  Kinda like how bitcoin is now.  We are the straying cats to bitcoin as the current "establishment" crypto currency.  After all, it's open source and smart people who think they have a better idea will try to make a go of it.  I do agree that it can make for a confusing marketplace and decentralized decision making is not always pretty :).
« Last Edit: September 11, 2014, 07:23:29 pm by GaltReport »

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag

All these attack fears everyone has, I just do not see.  It is all just a complete waste of time, and quite the distraction.  How about we spend some time on something that is important?

In my opinion, the most significant risk, is something where the popular thing to do, is to jump off the cliff.

A good example is the popular thing in the Bitcoin community is POW and mining.  There is a clear expert consensus that dPOS is far better, but the popular hurd isn't getting this expert minority message.  So Bitcoin, Ether, and everyone is about to jump off the POW cliff.  It will be nice for Bitshares, as we will lose some significant competitors, but it still hurts to see all of that about to die a miserable death.  And that kind of loss will really hurt this industry, where if someone could get the herd to change directions sooner, we could progress much faster.

And with the complete lack of current governance systems with BTSX,  it is only a matter of time before the BitsharesX community faces a similar issue.  The majority of delegates will want to jump off the cliff, and only a few will be trying to do the right thing and change directions faster,  possibly unsuccessfully or way to slow, leaving us very vulnerable, just as Ether is now very vulnerable to dPOS.

That risk, and a fork in the community (the splitter stellar currency has now killed ripple, or at best cut it in half) is what I most fear for BitsharesX.

What about everyone else?  What do you see as the biggest risk?

I agree with you. I think the biggest risk is the community not taking the most effective steps to grow the system and being replaced by a clone that does it right. Although in that case I suppose those who agree with the clone's strategy can move their stake over to the clone and still profit. It does however divide the community and the resources that can be used to increase adoption quickly, which is not preferable.

Regarding governance, I think this is why it is really important to implement delegate proposals that can be ratified by the shareholders which influence the rules of the DAC. These proposals can direct funds (from revenue and even inflation if absolutely necessary) to the entities that shareholders have decided can best use the funds to increase the value of the DAC. For reasons of simplicity in implementation, I was thinking a simple majority approval would suffice (since if the majority of stake was in agreement on anything those stakeholders could always elect delegates to take the blockchain consensus of the DAC in any direction they wanted anyway). The problem with the majority vote is that it is really hard to get >50% of a population to agree on any one thing. So there is a risk that the DAC would stagnate and eventually be replaced by another pushed by innovators who were in consensus with one another.

I think this problem can be resolved to some degree by having voting outside the blockchain using whatever fancy voting methods that the shareholders all agree best represent their consensus (BitShares Vote would be critical here and perhaps Canonizer would be handy too). Then to make it official, shareholders would follow the social consensus to simply approve any proposal on the blockchain that adhered to the shareholder consensus as determined by the verified results of the outside election.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2014, 06:52:58 pm by arhag »

Offline Brent.Allsop

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
    • Canonizer.com
...The majority of delegates will want to jump off the cliff, and only a few will be trying to do the right thing and change directions faster...

I'm not sure what you mean by this?


All grass roots, and beurocratic organizations have the same problem.  First off, you can't do anything alone, especially with world finances like this.  You need to have the largest herd possible.  So, the problem becomes, how do you get the largest possible herd (get smart people to stop splitting), AND get that herd to make the drastic and often difficult to make changes necessary for survival and the most rapid possible progress, without getting bogged down by size.

And leading minds, like everyone creating all the Alt coins, are like cats.  If we could all work together, efficiently and intelligently, everyone working together, rather than trying to kill everyone else, or hoping they die, we would have conquered the financial world by now.

There is always popular herding opinion, that is often not the best way to think, believe, and act.  A few minority experts always see this first, but how do you make it easy for them to help the entire herd to get educated, and change directions as fast as possible.

I think that in the near future, the Bitshares community will be faced with an existential issue.  If the herd does the right thing, instantly, they will survive, if they do the wrong thing (like Bitcoin is choosing to stay with POW) or if it takes too long to get all delegates to OK a change, we will die, or be significantly hurt, compared to what could be.  You can already see this today - inability to get the entire herd to see the best rules to make for BitUSD and all that.  Sure, THE bytemaster is the world's most brilliant person with all this, but we could do so much better, if everyone could communicate concisely and quantitatively.  We need a quantitatively measurable way to determine what the experts believe is best.  Like is possible at Canonizer.com, we could be progressing so much faster, without THE bytemaster bottleneck.  We all need to be able to perform at his level, if we really want to change direction fast as a huge herd, without having lots of splitters. diluting or forking things.



Offline johncitizen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile

All these attack fears everyone has, I just do not see.  It is all just a complete waste of time, and quite the distraction.  How about we spend some time on something that is important?

In my opinion, the most significant risk, is something where the popular thing to do, is to jump off the cliff.

A good example is the popular thing in the Bitcoin community is POW and mining.  There is a clear expert consensus that dPOS is far better, but the popular hurd isn't getting this expert minority message.  So Bitcoin, Ether, and everyone is about to jump off the POW cliff.  It will be nice for Bitshares, as we will lose some significant competitors, but it still hurts to see all of that about to die a miserable death.  And that kind of loss will really hurt this industry, where if someone could get the herd to change directions sooner, we could progress much faster.

And with the complete lack of current governance systems with BTSX,  it is only a matter of time before the BitsharesX community faces a similar issue.  The majority of delegates will want to jump off the cliff, and only a few will be trying to do the right thing and change directions faster,  possibly unsuccessfully or way to slow, leaving us very vulnerable, just as Ether is now very vulnerable to dPOS.

That risk, and a fork in the community (the splitter stellar currency has now killed ripple, or at best cut it in half) is what I most fear for BitsharesX.

What about everyone else?  What do you see as the biggest risk?



I agree,

Cannot see an attempt for some time and my confidence lies with the team to deal with/if it occurs.

A recent concern is the dilution of crypto. We have in my opinion, stagnant projects such as mastercoin, counterparty, maidsafe and this ridiculous "super net". The way that I see it, there are two contenders to take the spotlight and coexist. Bitshares and Ethereum. All the other technologies have done great things but are becoming redundant. For every new place opening up there is a division of resources and community. All the dying coins and stagnant projects are in a declining state for reason. At what point do you move on? NXT may not be failing as such but I cant see a long prosperous future at this stage. Ripple and stellar are classic examples of dilution.

It may not kill us but its getting foggy out there.

*Next order of magnitude increase: <25 days

1b <6 months


Offline GaltReport

...The majority of delegates will want to jump off the cliff, and only a few will be trying to do the right thing and change directions faster...

I'm not sure what you mean by this?

Offline Brent.Allsop

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
    • Canonizer.com

All these attack fears everyone has, I just do not see.  It is all just a complete waste of time, and quite the distraction.  How about we spend some time on something that is important?

In my opinion, the most significant risk, is something where the popular thing to do, is to jump off the cliff.

A good example is the popular thing in the Bitcoin community is POW and mining.  There is a clear expert consensus that dPOS is far better, but the popular hurd isn't getting this expert minority message.  So Bitcoin, Ether, and everyone is about to jump off the POW cliff.  It will be nice for Bitshares, as we will lose some significant competitors, but it still hurts to see all of that about to die a miserable death.  And that kind of loss will really hurt this industry, where if someone could get the herd to change directions sooner, we could progress much faster.

And with the complete lack of current governance systems with BTSX,  it is only a matter of time before the BitsharesX community faces a similar issue.  The majority of delegates will want to jump off the cliff, and only a few will be trying to do the right thing and change directions faster,  possibly unsuccessfully or way to slow, leaving us very vulnerable, just as Ether is now very vulnerable to dPOS.

That risk, and a fork in the community (the splitter stellar currency has now killed ripple, or at best cut it in half) is what I most fear for BitsharesX.

What about everyone else?  What do you see as the biggest risk?


Offline Method-X

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1131
  • VIRAL
    • View Profile
    • Learn to code
  • BitShares: methodx
Quote from:  OldMan
Perhaps the best thing to do, prior to the spotlight arriving, is to say: 'Yes, there is an attack vector. Here is what is required for a successful attack. And here is the end result'.

 +5%

Offline oldman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
Taking control of 51 delegates is not easy in any way, but I don't know how it would compare to Nxt nor how much damage that could do in Nxt compared to BTSX, so can't really comment on that. My surely biased gutfeeling is that it would be less harmful in BTSX, but I don't have anything to back that up I'm afraid :)

I think it may be worthwhile, either in whitepaper or wiki, to run some 'what if' scenarios so folks can have a reality check on how difficult it would be to corrupt the DPOS platform.

The knee-jerk reaction is always going to be to assume collusion of 51 delegates for the purpose of harming the system.

A plausible motivation for doing this, especially in the context of ROI or risk/benefit, is difficult to establish.

The impact of such an attack is really quite minimal - disruption/fork, perhaps a burn.

It is critical for folks to understand that even if the system is attacked successfully their funds are never at risk.

Moreover, the feasibility/practical considerations in actually corrupting/coercing 51 individuals should be discussed. While it is easy to throw down the assumption of corrupting 51 delegates spread all over the world... how would someone actually do this?

Perhaps the best thing to do, prior to the spotlight arriving, is to say: 'Yes, there is an attack vector. Here is what is required for a successful attack. And here is the end result'.

Most folks will see that an attack requires enormous input for little/no gain. Done.

"Bitshares is the most resilient and secure wealth management tool in human history".


« Last Edit: September 10, 2014, 05:41:51 pm by OldMan »

Offline svk

So I don't understand how you can be pro-BTSX but anti-Nxt due to an 'unfair distribution'.

If it's that you are worried about too much of the network being controlled by people with big accounts.. the delegates could collude just as easily as forgers.  It's not implemented yet but long term, 90% protection will be implemented.  In fact taking control of delegates is easier, yes it would be a lot of work but it say a group of 5-10 Counterparty people decided to do it, it would be doable with fake accounts and what not.  Hard and unlikely to happen, yes.

If it's that you are worried about dumping.. you just said that someone owns ~10% of BTSX!  It'd take multiple Nxt accounts all deciding to sell at the same time to achieve that level of dumping.  Personally as a Nxt fan, I would love to see that level of dumping.

Yeah, wish I could say more about instant transaction method but it was posted at Nxtforum.org for 3 or 4 months for all to see, discussed with lots of other nxt developers, but the developer is staying quite about how it works currently, so I will too.

I guess this was a response to my comment?

It's partly about dumping, but it's also about the stain left on a currency by an unfair initial distribution. It's the plague of most current altcoins. To me that just reeks of a "get rich quick" scheme, and does not in any way inspire confidence. While I3 may control ~9% of BTSX, I'm not really worried about them dumping those BTSX, it's their baby, they're the ones developing it still and while it may be hard to judge personality through the internet, BM does not strike me as someone who would allow that...

For Nxt however it would only take a couple people to dump 10%, and those people are AFAIK anonymous, not involved in the development of Nxt, and already have astronomical returns on their initial investments.

Taking control of 51 delegates is not easy in any way, but I don't know how it would compare to Nxt nor how much damage that could do in Nxt compared to BTSX, so can't really comment on that. My surely biased gutfeeling is that it would be less harmful in BTSX, but I don't have anything to back that up I'm afraid :)
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks