Author Topic: Latest Bitcoin news - Caution Alert  (Read 19992 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
I still would not hold any of that against whoever it is you are talking about.
(I once thought I had made a grave error in judgement myself ... turned out I was wrong.)

And some of my favorite personalities on this forum strongly resemble
The North End of A Southbound Donkey.


But if such a person were to make false claims about what we are doing
which have been answered here over and over again to the contrary
That would be crossing the line.

Such actions hurt everybody's investment.
Deliberately risking or causing real financial or legal damage to our stakeholders should not be condoned.
Even in the name of tolerance.

 :)

The perfect way to end this thread...with a steaming pile of donkey shite.



Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
I still would not hold any of that against whoever it is you are talking about.
(I once thought I had made a grave error in judgement myself ... turned out I was wrong.)

And some of my favorite personalities on this forum strongly resemble
The North End of A Southbound Donkey.


But if such a person were to make false claims about what we are doing
which have been answered here over and over again to the contrary
That would be crossing the line.

Such actions hurt everybody's investment.
Deliberately risking or causing real financial or legal damage to our stakeholders should not be condoned.
Even in the name of tolerance.

 :)
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 fuzzy

theFU,
You called him a "gatekeeper" clearly implying he is censoring and controlling Bitshares issues, topics and the potential flow of Bitshares new users.
(it is "theFu.."---not to be confused with "theFuckU") and it is an inside joke because gamey lost the Z key on his keyboard and pledged to use ".." instead of "zz".  Thanks for noticing...though I understand why you would assume otherwise :P

It's also quite clear by your tone that you don't like Adam. I've read it that way since Arthur "left". Judging from your posts are are a "cryptoanarchist" with zero taste for people lead or created hierarchies.  You are certainly entitled to those opinions and beliefs and by no means do you HAVE to like anyone.

However, you are proving Adams point by jumping on every little post/statements he makes, calling him names and a FUD spreader.  Adam is invested in Bitshares and has valid concerns. If you don't agree, say you don't agree, the reasons why and leave the ad hominem attacks out. I am quite certain had the personal attacks on Adam never taken place he would have never used terms like "defense team" and "echo chamber". By personal attacks I mean questioning his intent.  As BM, Stan etc have shown, Adams questions concerns are valid and aren't taken as a personal attack.

Anyway, how about that FreeTrade and LTS?

I actually do not "dislike" Adam.  I am certainly disdainful of unnecessary hierarchy.  Trust me there are probably 100+ people on these forums who know far more than Adam with respect to crypto.  I wont name names, but we have a bunch of badasses on here...and that is why I try to have my opinions, but acknowledge their value by PAYING OUT OF POCKET to give them the mumble server for these "townhall" style hangouts.

For those who are not aware (and I am very busy so you'll have to peruse the forums--it is alllll there!), Adam approached me a long time ago and asked me to be part of LTBN with this and I (nicely) declined.  I did not want to be a figurehead (though I want my ample voice heard...like anyone).  It was not because I disliked Adam...but instead because it didn't sit well with me that everything crypto seemed to be consolidate under one single roof--specifically biased toward bitcoin.  This is not because I am against bitcoin or Adam...but because mining manufacturers and other problem power centers in bitcoin have largely overtaken everything with respect to crypto. 

If you go back far enough, the entire community was really engaged and nice with Adam for a long time.  We actually have threads trying to help him think through ideas he wanted to bring to life for his multiple business enterprises...he even had www.dacindex.com made so he could help our ecosystem.  However Adam seemed to get livid when (as with most startup organizations) certain unforeseen problems arose.  AGS was created partially to help with them (if they wouldn't have been created...bitshares would not exist--or at least would be crippled by a lack of funding).  Adam fell on one side and it seemed a majority of the community on the other (though certainly not all of them).  Initially I was actually WITH Adam (then known as "lighthouse") on AGS until Dan changed the proposition from 10%PTS/10%AGS to 50%/50% (due largely, in fact, to my comments on the matter at that time).  It more than made up for the issues that arose and the apparent dilution of shareholder funds that AGS represented. 

From then on...Adam really started to nitpick at things he really had no clue about.  Instead of asking questions and asking the community what they thought, it was a statement of fact, nearly every time.  The next round was when Adam wanted to launch LTBCoin...and he was frustrated at the progress of bitshares (he must have been firmly considering it as his platform?) and wanted them to simply release it quickly and fix it as they went along.  Once again--terrible idea for MANY reasons. 

I think we can all say that we are glad that Dan took the extra time to "reinvent the wheel" (look that term up to find some of the conversations).  If he had done with Adam wanted... you would likely be bag holders or not here at all right now.  So my concern is largely with respect to protecting YOU!

I am not a programmer but have been around them all my life and I know quite well that engineering quality programs requires a great deal of analysis, planning, design, implementation, and maintenance...in cycles called an "iterative process".  Sometimes you get almost to the end where you think you are finished and find a potential flaw that forces you to redesign huge portions of the program.  And let us not forget...Dan was taking into account the FLAWS of POW and Bitcoin (which Adam certainly has a huge stake in) in order to fix them. 

Then One day I was listening to his show (yes...i am a listener! D:) and heard him compare bitshares to Ripple (notice I didn't say contrast).  Now having invested a large portion of what I had left after being raped by pump and dump "feature-based" clones, thinking I was "diversifying", I was pretty frustrated.  Why?  Because he rarely if ever warned so seriously about the centralization of mining cartels and their pump and dump schemes that steal value (not create it). 

Even some of his counterparts were overly harsh--saying that they heard in bitcoin circles of "who's who" in bitcoin that bitshares was potentially a very dangerous investment.  Of course, wonderfully, Andreas and Stephanie Murphy were not in any way as bad with this...far more objective I think.  We can now see who of them was closest to being right.  Even the other LTB fella who had issues has since given them love for their accomplishments.     

By this time, however, Adam had chosen counterparty to launch LTBCoin.  This actually was understandable if he wanted the "first mover's advantage" in the crypto-podcast sphere.  He is a smart businessman...I give credit where (I think) it is due. 

Meanwhile he would continue to come on here saying how counterparty released their project early and worked on it as they went...blah blah blah.  Now can counterparty theoretically reach 10,000tx/sec, polymorphic assets backed by 200% collateral, TITAN or 10-15 second tx times?  Answer...No (and it will take a multibillion dollar company to fund them in order to get them even close).  If Adam had his way you (and all of us here) would be stuck with a project no better than any other 2.0 out there, watching XCP blow past us.  Instead we are all looking at the BEGINNING bitshares toolkit which has not even had time to fully blossom creating our first 50+ million dollar mktcap company.  This is not even to mention the other shares we all will receive for this wait--have you seen the bitshares MUSIC buzz??  Or P2P already in the top 20 (if coinmarketcap were to list it)?

Again, if Adam had his way ...it never would have happened.  It is kind of sucky that you think that I hate Adam.  I simply show him the respect he shows our community and some of the most RESPECTABLE devs I have been blessed to know. 

And let us remember...Instead of ever saying sorry (please send me a link if I am incorrect here), he comes on here consistently finding new "flaws" with such fervent energy that I have absolutely no other reason but to believe he actually is very lightly invested in bitshares compared to their competitors...and he wants to cripple the movement. 

There is so much to this whole ball of wax...but I would much rather not get into it.  Not because I don't want you to know about it but because I would rather Adam either show up and be constructive or not show up at all.  If you will notice, we field MANY concerned questions in this community and rarely does someone cause the drama that he does.  We can take questions and concerns.  In fact I have had my own concerns that I SHARED with Adam (as well as others).  He might say it is "our problem", but then why the hell does he still come here?  Because he cares?  Nice way to show it...

We are all learning here...and this is going to become very political in time (already?).  We should all be able to admit when we have been explicitly proven wrong.  It helps us grow.  We should also do our best to not pretend to be "platform agnostic" as this simply does not exist.  It is like you saying you are a Unicorn and rainbows fly out of your ass (pardon my wording, but you get the point). 

Humans by our VERY nature conspire.  I conspire too!  Guess what, if you think you don't...have you ever bought a box of chocolates and roses for your g/f on valentines day, hoping to receive something else (cough cough) in return?  If you have...congratulations...you are a conspirator.  If I saw you buy the chocolates and roses,  kneel to a girl to give them to her, and knew it was valentines day,...and I say you are conspiring for something all men want, is that being a conspiracy theorist?  Damn right it means that.  All the quantifiable evidence points to one thing...and we both know what it is. 

So I understand your curiosity and in part concern...but I have actually even withheld a great deal of these historical issues from the conversation so I don't play a role in another drama fest (that and i'm going on about 40 hours without sleep now). 

As for Beyond Bitcoin (LTB) --which is what Arthur said he was going to do...it is now labeled "Beyond Bitcoin".  Now if you look closely at our forum, and you can even look at past screenshots--if a mod can do it for you...you will see that OUR Beyond Bitcoin has (BTS) beside it. 

This is because Arthur was supposed to be responsible for the LTB division.  I was supposed to have responsibility over the BTS division and Arthur was supposed to regularly be a part of this.   But if you notice when you watch Arthur's show on LTB...well for some reason they refrain from even acting like there ARE OTHER divisions. 

Now with that said...if you have ever had a complaint about marketing, this should upset you.  If it doesn't, you either want to lose money or you have been smoking too much hookah ;)

Oh...and about Freetrade.  I asked him Repeatedly to come on and chat with the community to clear up these crazy issues.  It is not my fault he refused.  Or are you implying somehow it is? :/

« Last Edit: October 13, 2014, 10:09:26 pm by theFu.. »
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
In any event, DACs are DECENTRALIZED and with our latest innovations they are now self funding.   Our mission has been accomplished.


;D
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 liondani

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3737
  • Inch by inch, play by play
    • View Profile
    • My detailed info
  • BitShares: liondani
  • GitHub: liondani
In any event, DACs are DECENTRALIZED and with our latest innovations they are now self funding.   Our mission has been accomplished.

 +5% +5% +5%

Offline bytemaster


Ags is what it is.  If regulators decide it is a security then like sdice, we may have to pay $50k fine.   Guess what: we have already paid that much in lawyer fees trying to maintain compliance.   

No one is going to jail as no harm has been done.  No fraud.  At most a disagreement over interpretation of the law which we worked hard to comply with.   


I won't comment on Adam's PMS.

The way the crypto community hates government regulation, paying a fine to the SEC might be a genuine badge of honor. It could be the best $50K BitShares has ever spent on advertising!

However, I thought this thread began with discussion of FINCEN, not the SEC? As far as I know, the only part FINCEN cares about is the money transmitter thing and I don't see that going on here. So when someone else is talking about imminent FINCEN action against other Bitcoin businesses, etc., that doesn't equate to a knock on the door from the SEC. Don't confuse your agencies.

The SEC is a different beast. That's why they pay the lawyers. Thank goodness for play money and for third party DAC developers who are not obligated to give a dime of their DAC stakes to anyone. If they so choose, they can honor the Social Consensus. I donated to help build this ecosystem. I came away with a HOPE, but NO EXPECTATION that my donation might be rewarded by a generous third party DAC developer who wishes to ingratiate himself/herself to the community. The fact that some of us in the community make liberal use of the "invest" word doesn't mean a damn thing; it's never been tied to expectation, only to hope.

I would like to add further that SEC actions are CIVIL while FINCEN may be criminal.  This is a huge difference.  In CIVIL actions jail is clearly off the table and ultimately bankruptcy is the worst possible outcome.    There are limits on the size of fines SEC can apply by law.   In any event, DACs are DECENTRALIZED and with our latest innovations they are now self funding.   Our mission has been accomplished. 


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.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile

Ags is what it is.  If regulators decide it is a security then like sdice, we may have to pay $50k fine.   Guess what: we have already paid that much in lawyer fees trying to maintain compliance.   

No one is going to jail as no harm has been done.  No fraud.  At most a disagreement over interpretation of the law which we worked hard to comply with.   


I won't comment on Adam's PMS.

The way the crypto community hates government regulation, paying a fine to the SEC might be a genuine badge of honor. It could be the best $50K BitShares has ever spent on advertising!

However, I thought this thread began with discussion of FINCEN, not the SEC? As far as I know, the only part FINCEN cares about is the money transmitter thing and I don't see that going on here. So when someone else is talking about imminent FINCEN action against other Bitcoin businesses, etc., that doesn't equate to a knock on the door from the SEC. Don't confuse your agencies.

The SEC is a different beast. That's why they pay the lawyers. Thank goodness for play money and for third party DAC developers who are not obligated to give a dime of their DAC stakes to anyone. If they so choose, they can honor the Social Consensus. I donated to help build this ecosystem. I came away with a HOPE, but NO EXPECTATION that my donation might be rewarded by a generous third party DAC developer who wishes to ingratiate himself/herself to the community. The fact that some of us in the community make liberal use of the "invest" word doesn't mean a damn thing; it's never been tied to expectation, only to hope.
+5%
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile

Ags is what it is.  If regulators decide it is a security then like sdice, we may have to pay $50k fine.   Guess what: we have already paid that much in lawyer fees trying to maintain compliance.   

No one is going to jail as no harm has been done.  No fraud.  At most a disagreement over interpretation of the law which we worked hard to comply with.   


I won't comment on Adam's PMS.

The way the crypto community hates government regulation, paying a fine to the SEC might be a genuine badge of honor. It could be the best $50K BitShares has ever spent on advertising!

However, I thought this thread began with discussion of FINCEN, not the SEC? As far as I know, the only part FINCEN cares about is the money transmitter thing and I don't see that going on here. So when someone else is talking about imminent FINCEN action against other Bitcoin businesses, etc., that doesn't equate to a knock on the door from the SEC. Don't confuse your agencies.

The SEC is a different beast. That's why they pay the lawyers. Thank goodness for play money and for third party DAC developers who are not obligated to give a dime of their DAC stakes to anyone. If they so choose, they can honor the Social Consensus. I donated to help build this ecosystem. I came away with a HOPE, but NO EXPECTATION that my donation might be rewarded by a generous third party DAC developer who wishes to ingratiate himself/herself to the community. The fact that some of us in the community make liberal use of the "invest" word doesn't mean a damn thing; it's never been tied to expectation, only to hope.

Offline NewMine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
    • View Profile
theFU,
You called him a "gatekeeper" clearly implying he is censoring and controlling Bitshares issues, topics and the potential flow of Bitshares new users.


It's also quite clear by your tone that you don't like Adam. I've read it that way since Arthur "left". Judging from your posts are are a "cryptoanarchist" with zero taste for people lead or created hierarchies.  You are certainly entitled to those opinions and beliefs and by no means do you HAVE to like anyone.

However, you are proving Adams point by jumping on every little post/statements he makes, calling him names and a FUD spreader.  Adam is invested in Bitshares and has valid concerns. If you don't agree, say you don't agree, the reasons why and leave the ad hominem attacks out. I am quite certain had the personal attacks on Adam never taken place he would have never used terms like "defense team" and "echo chamber". By personal attacks I mean questioning his intent.  As BM, Stan etc have shown, Adams questions concerns are valid and aren't taken as a personal attack.

Anyway, how about that FreeTrade and LTS?

Offline Thom

Thanks Fuzz for your voice of reason. You've mentioned unanswered community questions posed to ABL in several of your posts, can you point me to forum threads with them?

I like the balance of your remarks, but to lend credibility to them for the noobs (and I consider myself one of them, since I am not aware of such questions posed to ABL) it would be great to create a post or thread that references those questions.

But I also see truth in what NewMine said below.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2014, 03:58:43 pm by Thom »
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere - MLK |  Verbaltech2 Witness Reports: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,23902.0.html

Offline fuzzy


Agree that's my main problem with Adam.  He shoot first then ask later.
 I'll be shocked if he would do it any different.

It certainly gets a lot of eyes on a thread. Keep in mind this forum has 7k members. If even 10% of them are real people that just lurk he's getting his message out.

Adam may not be the enemy but he may not be a friend either and frankly that's OK. This is business; we aren't here to make friends. We're here to change the financial world and hopefully gain some financial independence along the way.

I say keep posting sensationalist questions. It certainly generates a lot of conversation. What I would like to see though is the conversation being not about what Adam's motives are but rather 1) Is it a valid question/concern? 2) Why or why not?

If it's not explain why and get on with your day. If it is valid then answer or let someone else who knows. Getting upset isn't going to solve anything.

Previous business associations and issues between LTBN, BB, and BBX are just that. Nothing really to do with BitShares.

Agreed...very good point. 

However, I will say why I "defend" against "attacks".  There are many newbies coming in nowadays....and those newbies can be scared very easily into doing something bad for their own pocket-book.  Now i'm not saying we have to make everything safe...but it is our obligation to try to protect those who are interested in crypto and have found this little oasis. 

After awhile of someone asking questions and posting FUD with literally no backing (80%+ of the time), it needs to become apparent that said person is aware of that about which they are complaining.  If he cannot answer the questions the community asks...his motives must become suspect. 

This entire idea about "attacking people" is not really attacking.  If you notice, I never call Adam any names or say he has no value or anything to that effect.  His Motives ARE questionable and it is proven by his willingness to consistently come on here with strawman arguments.  Now if we are always playing nice and not "defending" so-to-speak...the ultimate noobie who just bought his/her first bitcoin and is thinking about parting with some of it for a stake in Bitshares, comes here and reads Adam's FUD, might say "omg he has a show in Bitcoin! I better listen to his advice first and foremost". 

This is very dangerous stuff.  People with power should recognize that with that power comes responsibility.  If there is a legitimate concern, it should be noted...but if it is a concern with no legitimacy, it should be confronted. 

I do agree, however, that the anger directed toward A and the Empire does not necessarily help us, though.  Really sometimes think that is the primary reason for these methods of coming onto forums and trying to shake confidence in the entire system.
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline James212

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile

Agree that's my main problem with Adam.  He shoot first then ask later.
 I'll be shocked if he would do it any different.

Getting upset isn't going to solve anything.


I disgaree.  It is important to challenge those who would spread "truth" in such a way as to cause maximum damage.  ....... Yelling FIRE in a crowded theater as it were. 
BTS: theangelwaveproject

Offline Riverhead


Agree that's my main problem with Adam.  He shoot first then ask later.
 I'll be shocked if he would do it any different.

It certainly gets a lot of eyes on a thread. Keep in mind this forum has 7k members. If even 10% of them are real people that just lurk he's getting his message out.

Adam may not be the enemy but he may not be a friend either and frankly that's OK. This is business; we aren't here to make friends. We're here to change the financial world and hopefully gain some financial independence along the way.

I say keep posting sensationalist questions. It certainly generates a lot of conversation. What I would like to see though is the conversation being not about what Adam's motives are but rather 1) Is it a valid question/concern? 2) Why or why not?

If it's not explain why and get on with your day. If it is valid then answer or let someone else who knows. Getting upset isn't going to solve anything.

Previous business associations and issues between LTBN, BB, and BBX are just that. Nothing really to do with BitShares.

Offline oco101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • View Profile
It's funny how some people seem to think I take some sort of pleasure in this, I don't.

A little bit of tact goes a long way in how our writings are perceived/interpreted.

Agree that's my main problem with Adam.  He shoot first then ask later.
 I'll be shocked if he would do it any different.

Offline roadscape

It's funny how some people seem to think I take some sort of pleasure in this, I don't.

A little bit of tact goes a long way in how our writings are perceived/interpreted.
http://cryptofresh.com  |  witness: roadscape