Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - JoeyD

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ... 31
301
BitShares PTS / Re: 111* days estimated for Difficulty to retarget. Could this kill PTS?
« on: May 19, 2014, 08:34:22 pm »
Check the bitsharesX updates or discussion thread. I just saw that ByteMaster posted an update and instruction on running an new and improved test-net on your local machine, with additional features enabled compared to the previous test-net, such as fork-handling and delegates enabled iirc.

It also seems to be a secure way to check if your balance has been recorded correctly in the genesis block, without needing to expose your keys to the internet. Judging from a couple of remarks here and there, it might even be that other DACs will be going live before the official release of the bitsharesX (non-test) DAC.

EDIT
Whoa, my posting-fu is severely lacking if there are 2 reactions before I finished my single one.

302
General Discussion / Re: MaidSafe IPO on Mastercoin
« on: May 16, 2014, 01:04:56 pm »
Quote from: AdamBLevine on May 14, 2014, 10:34:13 pm
Quote from: JoeyD on May 14, 2014, 10:08:53 pm
Quote from: AdamBLevine on May 14, 2014, 03:51:52 pm
I don't really care if you value my comments or not, I'm putting my complaints and suggestions on the record.   You can read my entire posting history and see all the context of my current irritation with Invictus.   If you have specific questions I'm happy to educate.

Nice.

For the record I did try asking nicely with sugar on top and this is your response. Sorry if I'm not part of your little club, but why in hell should I be bothered wasting my time researching each and every posts from someone who can't be bothered to explain his current comments or respond in a normal way. So if you don't care if your points come across, you consequently can't blame people for ignoring what you write.

Why would I want to be "educated" by you anyway, are you some computer science super genius or Nobel-price winner for economics? The whole reason I wanted to discus things with you is because I think you made some factual errors and that there are some actual real technical reasons why things can't work the way you want them to. I'm not particularly interested in a lesson in arrogance, I had my fair share of that in university.

It seems like you're taking things really personally, what exactly did I say that offended you?  I assumed you didn't want to take the time to get the full picture, which is why I offered to answer any specific questions you might have had.  Answering your question about stuff that I've taken the time to learn about and you haven't sure seems like education to me and yet you bristle at the term.   

Did you actually have any question, or do you just like complaining about me?
I'm not a native English speaker and was neither offended nor addressing you personally, which I think is impossible to do via forums anyway. It seems I completely failed in trying to communicate what I was trying to say, so I'll try again and add some specific examples, even-though I still think it would have been better to do so in a separate thread, instead of in response to a completely unrelated topic.

In your comments you assume too much and that is the very definition of arrogance (google translate assumption -> latin) and it gets in the way of some of the valid points you make and in the discussion afterwards.

I agree with most of your points about Invictus dropping the ball in regards to marketing, stimulating community involvement, attracting investment etcetera. However at the same time you completely destroy those points by stating as facts some of your personal assumptions that are dubious to say the least.

For example the statement that everything would have worked out fine if Invictus would have stuck to the plan. This is however not corroborated by any facts. Plans fail the moment you execute them and you are supposed to adapt after that. What you most definitely should not do, is stick to the plan after it failed. While you might have missed the statements Dan Larimer made regarding this and I agree that Invictus could and should have done a better job at communicating the reasons for the change of plans, your alternate, oversimplified and personal version of the situation does more harm then good at clearing things up.

Your proposed solution of going with some multi-staged, patch-work, unmaintainable, easily attacked and guaranteed to fail pow-blockchain and then migrating to a new POS-system, sounds completely ludicrous. If Invictus had gone that Dr. Frankenstein route I would have had no faith in their abilities and walked away laughing. Talk about waste of time, effort and resources and suicidal pr move.

Also I don't get what your beef with the AGS fundraiser is, especially seeing how PTS is still there. I have yet to see a better solution for a public fundraiser anywhere else. I have not seen any evidence as of yet of Invictus being particularly frugal or irresponsible with those funds, but I'd be more than happy to be enlightened if you have some information we mere forum-dwellers do not.

Again I'd rather have the discussion about the past, present and future failings of Invictus in a dedicated thread with all information easily accessible, instead of having to tell people to read someones entire post history, expect them to wade to an unholy amount of incoherent and irrelevant rubbish and then suggest to enlighten them should they prove to be too stupid to know what I mean. Your posts should stand on their own and not need to be unlocked by your own personal "expertise", because as you say your person should be completely irrelevant to the discussion.

303
General Discussion / Re: Idea to promote better the bitshares-AGS fundraising oportunity !!!
« on: May 16, 2014, 09:28:34 am »
Quote from: davidpbrown on May 16, 2014, 08:48:34 am
So, the second part of my question still unclear though compounded from above now.. what are the relative returns on new DACs? Is it the case that a new DAC chooses to how to reward AGS and PTS, and perhaps rewarding AGS more just because they understand that commitment??
Here's how I understood it.

The social contract states that all new DACs based on the toolkits developed with the help of the PTS and AGS funds in return issue 10% or more of it's shares to each of those funds. So at least 10% to PTS-holders and 10% to AGS-holders respectively at the date of the snapshot. Where the snapshot is the closing date for the funding-round of the DAC at which moment in time a copy is made of the PTS and AGS-records and that record then becomes the base for distributing those 20%(or more) shares at the start of the new DAC.

The difficulty in assessing the relative returns is that not all PTS have been mined and not all AGS have been auctioned, so the equation changes daily. Also a fixed amount of AGS is distributed daily relative to the donations of that day, which means that if you time it right you could get an advantage via AGS compared to PTS. But keep in mind that AGS is more of a kickstarter style fundraiser, where you donate money for the cause with a chance to get an early adopter bonus in return. If you're not interested in donating, you might want to reconsider going with AGS, because it is locked to your donating wallet (private keys) and not liquid like PTS.

Since only 20% of the shares in a new DAC are reserved, that means that 80% can be distributed by other means and potentially bring you a much higher ROI, via those alternate funding options.

Probably the most prudent option is to wait till the DAC's you are interested in have launched and just buy into the ones you like. Looking at a number of recent IPOs in the crypto scene that actually looks to be one of the better ways to get the most bang for your buck, with the least amount of risk at the cost of being an early adopter or stakeholder.

You can also choose a mix of the above depending on your personal assessment.

304
General Discussion / Re: Idea to promote better the bitshares-AGS fundraising oportunity !!!
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:46:18 pm »
Quote from: Stan on May 15, 2014, 11:20:18 pm
Quote from: liondani on May 15, 2014, 10:42:25 pm
Quote from: davidpbrown on May 15, 2014, 02:46:55 pm
Is it possible that PTS could be in a position stronger than AGS later

In my mind in the future (after the end of fundraising) 1AGS will worth 1PTS or even more!!! And that's because the most AGS holders are 100% stronger believers of the bitshares/DACs concept then PTS holders. A percentage that hold's PTS are pure/semi speculators and not real investors of the project that will sell just a few hours before the snapshots... If you would give shares of your company (DAC) for "free"  which would you prefer most, the AGS holders or the PTS holders? Only if Bitshares concept fails PTS holders will have an "advantage" over AGS holders. Correct me please BM if you think I am partially wrong...

I like your thought processes, but you overlook one small thing:  The last-minute traders you would be giving your shares to are the people who bought PTS at the high right before the snapshot!

However it is true that people willing to sacrificially donate to your cause are the second most sought-after demographic  you can find.

(The first being those who are willing to die for your cause.)   :)
Don't think I agree with that estimate.

If they are dieing for your cause they might not be the most sustainable of demographics.

305
Marketplace / Re: [meta] Favorite Bounty Suggestions
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:39:17 pm »
So if I understood correctly you suggest to split the bounties between:
- projects that convey the message in a clear and preferably graphical way
- getting the word out to all the right vocal people in other communities

And in both of these to concentrate on bitsharesX.

Does it make sense to also try and target areas other than the current crypto-watering holes or is it too early for that?

Don't know if it is too much work, but besides putting up bounties would it also be possible to list some things that need doing even if they don't have bounties attached. If the bitshares projects get a little more traction I'd consider that a very nice bounty already.

And last but not least (don't know if I mentioned this before) conversing via the forums might be a tad slow and cumbersome, maybe organizing a realtime video/voice-chat thinktank session might speed things up a bit. It would only require a pre-announced time, date and maybe set of topics and a public accessible channel. I'm no expert, but the mumble-server listed on this forums seems to work reliably every time I tried it. Google hangouts does have more features, but to me also seems to be more prone to glitches, lag and bad audio.

306
General Discussion / Re: U.S. Fed Launders $141.2 Billion Through Belgium
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:03:24 pm »
@liondani Wow that's one very impressive marketing image.

Too bad copyright's gonna be a bitch on that, do you have the e-mail address of the artist, maybe he'll cut us a deal ;D.

307
General Discussion / Re: MaidSafe IPO on Mastercoin
« on: May 14, 2014, 10:08:53 pm »
Quote from: AdamBLevine on May 14, 2014, 03:51:52 pm
I don't really care if you value my comments or not, I'm putting my complaints and suggestions on the record.   You can read my entire posting history and see all the context of my current irritation with Invictus.   If you have specific questions I'm happy to educate.

Nice.

For the record I did try asking nicely with sugar on top and this is your response. Sorry if I'm not part of your little club, but why in hell should I be bothered wasting my time researching each and every posts from someone who can't be bothered to explain his current comments or respond in a normal way. So if you don't care if your points come across, you consequently can't blame people for ignoring what you write.

Why would I want to be "educated" by you anyway, are you some computer science super genius or Nobel-price winner for economics? The whole reason I wanted to discus things with you is because I think you made some factual errors and that there are some actual real technical reasons why things can't work the way you want them to. I'm not particularly interested in a lesson in arrogance, I had my fair share of that in university.

308
General Discussion / Re: U.S. Fed Launders $141.2 Billion Through Belgium
« on: May 14, 2014, 09:24:38 pm »
Quote from: tonyk on May 14, 2014, 07:39:34 pm
'the more I learn the more depressed I get, even more so when I'm unable to find information to prove myself wrong. I so wish from the bottom of my heart that I'm wrong, but I can't find the evidence for it no matter how hard I look.

To be honest I'm worried that Bitcoin and all subsequent projects including bitshares are too little too late. Deep down I have my doubts if trying to find ways around this collapse is the right thing to do and maybe it's time for the old to die so that new things can flourish, even if we're part of the old.'

Rotten empires die slowly… usually takes 300 to 500 years ,even with the current acceleration due to technology, you still have good 20-30 years assuming the demise started in the mid-sixties…

Assuming we look at the US as a separate empire and not just a slight shift in location of administration of the old and dying one. Seeing how interwoven "the West" is I'm not so sure if those seemingly separate nation-states aren't just factions in a power struggle of the same empire with a very select few family-members at the center. In that case the demise started way before the sixties. But I'll think positive and accept those precious decades you've given me Tonyk ;D and try and work on the life-rafts and possibilities for a future after such an event.

Come to think of it, why am I even getting depressed? I don't see any ways to fix the current mess anyway, so why shouldn't we throw it all out and start from scratch?

309
General Discussion / Re: U.S. Fed Launders $141.2 Billion Through Belgium
« on: May 14, 2014, 07:01:22 pm »
Quote from: Empirical1 on May 14, 2014, 02:22:01 pm
Quote from: solaaire on May 14, 2014, 04:23:00 am
fast forward to the 70s, the US has depleted a lot of its gold reserves, and a few countries are jumping ship because of this. shortly after, the US halted the ability for nations to convert their currencies into gold, effectively ending the bretton woods system. this process weakened the dollar a bit, but ultimately the US came out ahead: many countries still peg their currencies to the USD despite its faults, allowing it to remain the worlds reserve currency.

hope u enjoy the fun facts, and please correct me if im wrong 8)

newb question here, but are there any other nations that mightve infused belgium with the cash for these bonds besides the US? perhaps even a joint effort?

The dollar may well have collapsed in the seventies and there was very high inflation, but one of the main things that saved it was the petrodollar, the West managed to convince most oil producing countries in the Middle East to only sell their oil for USD. As most countries are oil importers it forces them to keep buying USD even if they're no longer backed by gold. (The West also intervened in the gold market to suppress the gold price which helped the USD a lot.)

Unfortunately most modern wars revolve around maintaining the petrodollar - we install or support existing dictatorships as long as they stick to the petrodollar even vetoing any action against them when they kill thousands, (See Saddam Hussein). It's only when he started selling oil for Euros that he became enemy no.1 and we only overthrew Gaddafi in Libya recently because he was going to introduce a gold currency in which his oil would be sold. (When the West needs to replace them we can pretend it's because they're dictatorships and we're trying to help spread democracy... )

It's a real pity that Bitshares X isn't up yet (Though I know they are developing as fast as is responsibly possible) Cyprus really lifted Bitcoin into the spotlight and the events that could happen any time now would have a 1000x bigger effect on Bitshares X. It is really a perfect collision in the history of the world between the collapse of the greatest empire in history and the introduction of decentralised money/value systems.  (It's possible Bitcoin has already been compromised and if not .Gov can always get the hashing power, so a lot is riding on projects like Bitshares X for humanity IMO.)

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-13/russia-holds-de-dollarization-meeting-china-iran-willing-drop-usd-bilateral-trade

Funny a couple of months back I had almost the exact same discussion with a few people and said almost the exact same things as you just did. Even the part where I was struck by the coincidence of all these separate factors coinciding with the emergence of crypto-currencies and the foundation of the open-source-movement preceding it. Uncanny how all those things seem to point to this moment in time. On the other hand as the listed history has shown in the last few decades we dodged the bullet quite a few times and have been kicking the can forward by a couple of decades every time, but this Russian-roulette policy can't go on forever and will blow up in our face at one point.

Haven't been reading zerohedge, but I arrived at similar conclusions via other routes. Thing is I know I should be looking into all that stuff more, but the more I learn the more depressed I get, even more so when I'm unable to find information to prove myself wrong. I so wish from the bottom of my heart that I'm wrong, but I can't find the evidence for it no matter how hard I look.

To be honest I'm worried that Bitcoin and all subsequent projects including bitshares are too little too late. Deep down I have my doubts if trying to find ways around this collapse is the right thing to do and maybe it's time for the old to die so that new things can flourish, even if we're part of the old.

310
General Discussion / Re: Testing BitShares XT Launch...
« on: May 14, 2014, 09:08:29 am »
Quote from: sudo on May 14, 2014, 08:14:24 am
New test network with full DPOS + P2P connections will be out next week.

now Wednesday……
Are you afraid that the Invictus team have lost access to calenders or what?
Or do you have another metric for measuring weeks, that start and end on wednesdays?
We're only halfway the "next" week and he did not write in "a" or "this" week, so your post is a week early.

311
General Discussion / Re: MaidSafe IPO on Mastercoin
« on: May 14, 2014, 08:30:02 am »
Quote from: AdamBLevine on May 14, 2014, 02:20:12 am
Quote from: liondani on May 13, 2014, 11:47:21 pm
Quote from: tonyk on May 13, 2014, 11:42:25 pm
Did you advise them for Bitshare products inclusion or against? After such shares become available off course.

Loaded question  ???

I told them to not put all their eggs in one basket and to be a solution agnostic platform that would let them be friends and provide exchange services between all the protocols that seem worthwhile.

You seem to think I don't like Bitshares, why would you think that?   I just don't like that every self imposed deadline has been blown and now we've put all our eggs in the DPOS basket which might work but might just as easily have a horrible glaring flaw that could not be foreseen because nobody has done it before.  I would rather have launched the products as described (Keyhotee and Bitshares) then worked on obsoleting mining in subsequent rounds of innovation.   

Bitshares is not being excluded or conspired against by anyone, there just isn't much to talk about and what there IS to talk about has been very poorly articulated by Invictus, mostly buried in these echo-chamber forums.  When they have a great product and somehow nobody is including them in their exchange, then you can cry conspiracy.  Until then the only people you should be complaining to are invictus for not having a product to even consider for inclusion.

I've asked this before a few times, so lets hope you do read this comment this time. Would you be prepared to discuss your points somewhere?

Your type of hit and run remarks are not really solving the "echo-chamber" problem you perceive, nor are they helping someone like me, who only joined the forums after the discussion you seem to have had, to understand the points you are trying to make. Also some of your points are not as clear cut to me as you make them out to be, such as the mining would have worked assumption. I also get the impression you always feel personally attacked and the need to defend yourself by attacking others when you post here.

I'm not saying this is what you meant to say, but without the rest of the information your post comes across as: You should have gone with mining, told you so and all the real information is buried on this forum because of all ya fanboys here talking nonsense.

You can't really blame people for not valuing your comments as much as you feel they should if you respond in this manner. You do not participate in the discussion following your comments and in just about every post you make you throw around some odd snide remarks geared toward the entirety of the forum members, or concentrate on persons instead of arguments. I think the way people respond to you and the voiced theories directed at your person are caused by the way you choose to "participate".  You might have some very good and valid points, but what you're doing now only provokes irritation and makes you come across like a troll more than anything else, because you don't provide the information needed to understand your points.

Again this is not a conspiracy theory or a personal attack, I just want to understand what you're trying to say, but I don't think you're making that as easy as it could be.

312
General Discussion / Re: Reaching out to the Left
« on: May 13, 2014, 11:47:42 pm »
Quote from: luckybit on May 13, 2014, 11:40:59 pm
Wealthy people tend to call other people greedy when those other people are refusing to work for them and their businesses (because they're working for themselves, disruptive competition). If these people don't work at all then the wealthy call them lazy.

So is it better to be greedy or lazy?
Are those the only options? If so it depends on what you want, chances are lazy people live longer, where greedy people might suffer from stress related illnesses like say a bad heart.

In that sense the live long and prosper quote might be a hidden curse instead of a blessing.

313
General Discussion / Re: Reaching out to the Left
« on: May 13, 2014, 06:59:58 pm »
Actually I think one of the most important points of what bitshares is trying to do and is not emphasized, realized and sold nearly enough: Everyone is free to make their own version of a blockchain-solution with the tools and prototypes being developed here.

I think most assume the goal is to create either a pump-n-dump or another vendor-lock-in monopoly chain to rule them all scheme. Most people also focus on the "premine" aspect without realizing that PoS needs that exact stake(premine) to be present in order to function in the first place. To counterbalance that fear of premines, it should be communicated more clearly that the goal is to create toolkits and prototypes and that everyone is free to compete/collaborate and devise coin-distributions as they see fit. Bitshares should be clearly differentiated from the standard scam-coins, while off course even allowing scam-coins to be built as well if one so desires.

I don't think there is that much opposition to the idea of trying to setup sustainable ecosystems apart from people vested in threatened monopolies. If profitability is a scary word for many people and only appeals to greed how about using the term sustainability instead? Although I must admit I personally think greed(more than the other vices) is the most fundamental human trait making DACs sustainable.

314
Keyhotee / Re: Keyhotee Rebranding - BitMail / BitKey / KeyMail / KeyID
« on: May 13, 2014, 06:29:09 pm »
Quote from: toast on May 13, 2014, 05:55:47 pm
Quote from: JoeyD on May 13, 2014, 05:29:29 pm
Then again, a yahoo was not one of the most awe inspiring characters from Gullivers Travels and who knew there was a way to make a play on the words goggling and oggling be all the rage.

"Yahoo" existed as an exclamation before that show,  and it was a play on "googol" which has no pre-existing connotations.
Is there actually a show about the book? Then again, why am I surprised about that, who reads books anymore? Also I very much doubt the goggle and oggling soundalike is an accident, at the very least I suspect it to be the root cause for the "spelling mistake" which led to the name and them liking the name in the first place.

Also I hope the fact that the less than subtle critique in Don Quichote, on the loss of core values and principles in society and one mans seemingly crazy opposition to this, is not entirely lost on the reader. It would be sad if all that remains would be crude statements where double entendres are only interpreted as confusing. There's a lot that can be done in binary, but I don't like the idea of human communication becoming binary one bit.

315
Keyhotee / Re: Keyhotee Rebranding - BitMail / BitKey / KeyMail / KeyID
« on: May 13, 2014, 05:29:29 pm »
Then again, a yahoo was not one of the most awe inspiring characters from Gullivers Travels and who knew there was a way to make a play on the words goggling and oggling be all the rage.

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ... 31

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 20 queries.