1
General Discussion / Re: The Benefits of Proof of Work [BLOG POST]
« on: January 06, 2016, 12:37:45 am »fyi social media buttons on the blog, at least Twitter, is not working
works for me
hmmm .. comes up for me with no link just text
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.
fyi social media buttons on the blog, at least Twitter, is not working
works for me
Will I have to pay the new and improved stealth fee for stealth transfers made through the CLI?
I think I should not. I have this feature now, and I will see the 45K as a bribery so this feature is stolen from me (and the rest of BTS holders) and sold to the highest bidder.
Bad precedent all around.
feel free to use itreally appreciate your help.
So what about this one?
...
Requesting permission to use the image for a document am working on.
Regards
I think that CNX would beat him to market by a long shot, and his technology, coming out later, would have to be better and/or less expensive to gain traction, right?
Thx @Xeldal and @yvv for your replies to my confusion. Your replies do help.4. Are the fees generated from FBAs standalone, or is the 20% that goes to the network eligible for the refer program to also gain from the features? My concern is that larger and larger portions of the eco-system develop and what the refer program claims to offer starts to become less true as what refers can earn becomes marginalized against all the other areas of Bitshares where transactions are occurring.
I'm not sure if this is a bad thing. The purpose of referral program is to get more users. If we get more users more effectively with FBAs we don't have a need for a referral program.
I have nowhere seen the discussion or rationale about 80/20 split. Is it fair for the network
and shareholders ? Why not 90/10 or 50/50 ? Who sets ten numbers ? Should not this be
discusses or voted first what is fair for the network and for FBA holders ? Because
this percentage splits will be set forever !
Agree with these concerns. Also concerning is that there is no business plan, especially in the case of the STEALTH asset. With no business plan results will be disappointing and may cause shareholders to take measures that circumvent that FBA. I see infighting in our future if profits for bts holders are not generously shared and if marketing is not well incentivized.
This again? C'mon, go back and read the thread. Stan addressed the reason for the 80 / 20 split. In essence, it has become the "traditional" split for most efforts around here, like the referral program. I see this objection as just cloaked envy.
As to "no business plan", that is a valid concern, but nothing new around here. Most everything done around here is fly by night / seat of the pants, without market research, prototypes or the usual planning that goes into most business ventures. It's entrepreneurship, but with more risk and speculation. Lots more intuition and guesswork.
4. Are the fees generated from FBAs standalone, or is the 20% that goes to the network eligible for the refer program to also gain from the features? My concern is that larger and larger portions of the eco-system develop and what the refer program claims to offer starts to become less true as what refers can earn becomes marginalized against all the other areas of Bitshares where transactions are occurring.
I'm not sure if this is a bad thing. The purpose of referral program is to get more users. If we get more users more effectively with FBAs we don't have a need for a referral program.
I have nowhere seen the discussion or rationale about 80/20 split. Is it fair for the network
and shareholders ? Why not 90/10 or 50/50 ? Who sets ten numbers ? Should not this be
discusses or voted first what is fair for the network and for FBA holders ? Because
this percentage splits will be set forever !
I fully support this proposal.
I am disappointed by the one dimensional thinking that seems to surround arguments around the entrepreneur profiting from its development.
Everyone seems to not realize that if you want to have a similar feature to profit from you can certainly spend the money to have it done and profit it from it for yourself.
I think this is where the 'something for nothing' argument comes from. If you really are serious about wanting to profit from a feature like this, you can certainly have a competing feature that does so.
Just to weigh in on this numbers debate. Once again, it assumes only one option will ever exist. It also assumes massive growth from where we are now, and that every transaction will be stealth. So I tend to agree it's weighing on the lala land side of having any semblance of accuracy as far as projections go. I believe there is a higher probability it will take him years to recover just his investment.