Quote from: delulo on November 01, 2015, 05:30:33 pm

@ Adam, is it correct that this would bring new users to Bitshares? Then you can make a pofit doing so (bringing new users onto the Bitshares blockchain) with the referral system, see https://bitshares.org/technology/referral-rewards-program/

The referral system has been created in order to make more intellegent marketing decisions. Entrepreneurs that are confident that their service is valuable to customers and brings new users to Bitshares profit big time. It's capitalism: The entrepreneur has to risk his/her own money (invest it).

Voting on worker proposals comes with the difficulty that BTS holders have to asses the profitability of the proposals for BTS so only things that can not be funded via the referral system should be funded with worker proposals. Worker proposal funding is like state or corporatism funding - people risk other people's money - this should be reserved for basic infrastructure that can not be funded via the referrral system.
This one, as I see it would be ideal to be funded via the referral system.

We're not interested in picking sides of what token will or will not be successful, the goal of this integration would be to add Bitshares derived tokens as a compatible option within our commerce systems that already include counterparty.  Our purpose is to pioneer new redeemable and access token based business models and opportunities, which does not require capabilities beyond what we already have.

I personally would like to be able to offer our users a choice of creating and using an expensive/fast token or a cheap/slow token within our wallet and ecosystem. That's what I see with bitshares and counterparty. Right now we just have the slow/cheap model which means we can't go after some use-cases but that's fine because we just picked ones that don't require less than 30 minutes between token ordering and delivery.

I understand what you're saying about that being the purpose of the referral system, but the reality is that if the bitshares blockchain can't provide for this through a worker or a volunteer doesn't decide to implement this themselves it's not going to happen in the near future.   If it's not a fit no worries.

Quote from: monsterer on October 30, 2015, 08:26:09 pm

Quote from: Troglodactyl on October 30, 2015, 02:46:49 pm

IOTA/Tangle is slightly similar, but it builds a single transaction tree in which transactions are confirmed more quickly when they increase convergence between the most significant branches.  Each transaction references at least 2 existing transactions, similar to TAPOS.

IOTA has a token. Also, its POW, and not much like TAPOS at all, since TAPOS references a block not a transaction, and is POS not POW

I like IOTA for many reasons, it just needs some refinements

Page 6

Quote

The primary risk is individuals are responsible for protecting the cryptographic private keys that sign transactions proving ownership of assets.

The primary risk lies in individuals being responsible for protecting the cryptographic private keys that sign transactions proving ownership of assets.

Quote from: delulo on October 22, 2015, 11:00:41 am

The trading fe is about 5 US cents atm which NO trader cares about! Traders have 0.1 % upwards on the volume of their trades (roughly) on centralized exchanges. On the other side these fees can be a substantial income stream to fund development.

Do you pay the fee on centralised exchanges like BTC38/Polo even if your order isn't filled?
I haven't paid attention.