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 - Empirical1.1

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ... 59
211
General Discussion / Re: Full Pay Delegates for Gateways
« on: December 28, 2014, 11:03:40 pm »
Quote from: onceuponatime on December 28, 2014, 10:45:21 pm
There are now several reputable bullion dealers who accept bitcoin for their wares (silver and gold coins and bars). For them to accept bitSILVER for silver coins and bitGOLD for gold coins seems like a very fertile opportunity.

Yes this is great. I would use delegates for this too, lets not expect those dealers to absorb any volatility and hassle. To kickstart the process our delegates should be eating a small loss and maybe even providing an incentive.

I'm a bit wary of the sharks in the water like BitReserve, or BitGold.com for now, but getting reputable bullion dealers to accept BitGold/Silver would definitely give a huge boost to their credibility & utility. Big bump in our value for getting this done I feel.

212
General Discussion / Re: Full Pay Delegates for Gateways
« on: December 28, 2014, 10:37:55 pm »
This is all worth serious discussion imo.

Anything that makes BitAssets look good and is seen to give them utility causes our share price to rise the most imo.

Nothing so far has moved our price positively other than good BitAsset news imo.

I suggested in another thread getting in some 100% delegates who start to accumulate BitAssets (CNY, Silver, & Gold) with their pay. This will get more BitAssets onto the main page of coinmarketcap and give them a daily turnover, even better if the delegates try buy through bter to bump their turnover on their too. It doesn't matter that it's not all genuine demand at first. It's about how it looks. What our business wants is our BitAssets in circulation seen to be rising with healthy daily turnover.

Those delegates then have a pool of BitAsset funds that can be directed to employment/marketing/gateways.

The next thing is of course to incentivise gateways. Any news that looks like BitAssets are gaining wider acceptance and utility is good for business. Our Share price rose 500% in 10 days on the release of BitAssets.
It was up 20% the other day on the BTC38 BitCNY news despite a huge fork problem. (I actually think had it not been for the fork that announcement would have been massive for us.)

So I'm all about getting the wheels turning on BitAsset CAP, turnover and utility by any means possible.
 

 

213
General Discussion / Re: PTS.. Opps, have I missed the boat?
« on: December 28, 2014, 01:46:48 am »
Quote from: NineLives on December 28, 2014, 01:32:02 am
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on December 28, 2014, 01:14:59 am
I don't know how much you've missed.

Just in case,

- If you held PTS before Nov 5th you now have shares in the new BitShares that's where most of the value went
- Your PTS also got you shares in Sparkle on Dec 14th but I haven't followed up on that
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?board=80.0
- You have shares in BitShares PLAY from Nov 5th I think
- & Yeah you now have PTS POW position converted to PTS DPOS

Question is, do I keep the PTS or not?  Its not much but still?

Your new PTS? It's up to you.

I like it as it's a no inflation DPOS crypto-currency, with a couple of passionate talented people supporting it and some third parties might drop on it.

Unfortunately they got a lot of understandable, fresh hostility directed at them, through no fault of their own because BTS dropped DevShares on them. But provided PTS rebrands, respects and doesn't antogonise or interfere with BTS and is not supported by BTS devs then it can hopefully start to build a little niche as a no inflation third party coin that can benefit from the rise of DPOS.

214
General Discussion / Re: PTS.. Opps, have I missed the boat?
« on: December 28, 2014, 01:14:59 am »
I don't know how much you've missed.

Just in case,

- If you held PTS before Nov 5th you now have shares in the new BitShares that's where most of the value went
- Your PTS also got you shares in Sparkle on Dec 14th but I haven't followed up on that
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?board=80.0
- You have shares in BitShares PLAY from Nov 5th I think
- & Yeah you now have PTS POW position converted to PTS DPOS


215
General Discussion / Re: BitShares.TV #4
« on: December 27, 2014, 11:51:06 pm »
 +5% Good video, I don't agree with the whole philosophy but I thought a passionate soundbite at 2:45 was great -

"The free market needs to produce solutions that can protect us against today's governments without requiring today's government's to disappear first. The solutions need to be so powerful and effective that they work today even in the middle of what many people would consider big brother government, 1984 level surveillance society."

216
General Discussion / Re: How to lure top devs into being hired by BitShares
« on: December 27, 2014, 06:46:46 pm »
Quote from: sumantso on December 27, 2014, 06:19:52 pm
Quote from: delulo on December 27, 2014, 05:59:46 pm
Quote from: btswildpig on December 27, 2014, 04:57:56 pm
2.5K USD a month can hire a very talented PC developer in big cities in China . (by highly talented , I mean highly highly )

The developers on mobile device are more expensive , around 3000 -4000 USD a month .

But the problem is that crypto currency industry is not yet recognized in China . Most people think crypto currency is somehow a ponzi , let alone quit their real stable job and working for one .
BitShares / blockchain developement bootcamp in China :) Might even be profitable...

Or a chinese developer could simply be guarented a pay in cny and a delegate converts the bts into cny and pays it to the developer. If there are some legal hurdles 15% or something could be kept for doing legal due diligence and maybe setting up a chinese enterprise if necessary. Just a few wild ideas...

I think the main issue is finding the right developer. Toast was already involved through this forum, met Dan and co and it worked. I think he brought in Vikram too.

Having said that, there is a strong Chinese presence, and besides the dude who fronted the money for I3 certainly has resources to find the right guy (he allied with BM in the first place after all).

This is the obvious direction I see BitShares and everyone who wants to be competitive going. China is the 2nd largest economy in the world, largest population and we are very lucky that they are already our largest stakeholders. As it's a global market and crypto is global, if shareholders can get the same quality of work for <1/3 of the price then obviously many of the development jobs in this industry will move there over time. The high money Western jobs will end up going to a few rockstar developers but mainly BitShares entrepeneurs, advertising, marketing & PR as that's something a strong Eastern base won't be able to get right for a global market internally.

217
General Discussion / Re: Stop the Crowd Sales, Long Live Crowd Funding
« on: December 27, 2014, 06:42:48 pm »
Quote from: Rune on December 27, 2014, 12:08:00 pm
Quote from: btswildpig on December 27, 2014, 06:46:54 am
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on December 27, 2014, 05:37:25 am
+5% I like it

Matt608 suggested using the phrase 'CrowdHiring' to describe delegate selection which gained immediate traction over at null. I can see that becoming a big buzzword associated with BitShares in 2015.

It's a word that already existed .....I don't know what the effect will be .
http://www.crowdhiring.com/

I think it only strengthens the reasons to use crowdhiring to explain delegate voting, since what they describe is basically the same thing as what we do. Crowdhiring.com is a business with the ability to crowdhire that makes money by sharing this ability with other companies that gain value from it. Bitshares is a business with the ability to crowdhire that uses it to hire its own employees and thus gain value from it directly.

Yes I didn't mean it was a new word. But you can see how 'crowdhiring' is currently applied is different than our use & it is not very well known.  I'm saying I think crowdfunding is a word understood by a wide market and that the process of delegate selection may become known as crowdhiring as it's easily relatable to crowdfunding, but we will see.

218
General Discussion / Re: Stop the Crowd Sales, Long Live Crowd Funding
« on: December 27, 2014, 05:37:25 am »
+5% I like it

Matt608 suggested using the phrase 'CrowdHiring' to describe delegate selection which gained immediate traction over at null. I can see that becoming a big buzzword associated with BitShares in 2015.

219
General Discussion / Re: You guys don't understand devshares.
« on: December 26, 2014, 10:07:31 pm »
Quote from: Stan on December 26, 2014, 09:34:48 pm
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on December 26, 2014, 07:44:56 pm
Quote from: bytemaster on December 26, 2014, 07:32:41 pm
People have mentioned that we didn't DISCUSS it with everyone and just acted.   That was mostly because we didn't want to DELAY our test network launch and we didn't WANT IT TO BE POLITICAL.  We just wanted a network out there and assumed it would be of low enough value that no one *SHOULD CARE*.    Bad assumptions apparently.   

Now we have a firestorm and have lost days of effort dealing with the fallout.   

I guess it is too much to ask for people to pick their battles.

There is no battle & expecting the human response to information stimuli to be different than it is, is too much to ask. I think 99/100 media guys could have told you a post 11/05 drop of BTS anything to PTS was negative at this stage. I don't think it's too much to ask to run something by 1 person the community thinks is decent at PR. Then there is no delay, no fallout, no drama. All of which are completely unnecessary.

I wonder what those media guys would have advised if our plan had been to stick with the 11/05 date and therefore sharedrop on ourselves before we returned all the PTS...

 ::)

They would probably have said drop 100% to BTS

You have the potential for a massively successful business here, if you don't respect the input of Western 'media guys' at least just ask someone like CN-members 'hey what do you think of this?'

China is by far the biggest market and he's one of the main conduits.

Exploring PR solutions, that can still work within tight time constraints that development sometimes demands could completely transform shareholder perception & confidence in development decisions and as a result the fortunes of BTS.

I've already mentioned your personal style often comes across as patronising, condescending, evasive and now in the above comment snide. I don't know if your sometimes messenger role is more of a help or further hindrance to BTS at times myself.




220
General Discussion / Re: You guys don't understand devshares.
« on: December 26, 2014, 08:37:14 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on December 26, 2014, 08:18:19 pm
Quote from: btswildpig on December 26, 2014, 08:04:26 pm
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on December 26, 2014, 07:44:56 pm
Quote from: bytemaster on December 26, 2014, 07:32:41 pm
People have mentioned that we didn't DISCUSS it with everyone and just acted.   That was mostly because we didn't want to DELAY our test network launch and we didn't WANT IT TO BE POLITICAL.  We just wanted a network out there and assumed it would be of low enough value that no one *SHOULD CARE*.    Bad assumptions apparently.   

Now we have a firestorm and have lost days of effort dealing with the fallout.   

I guess it is too much to ask for people to pick their battles.

There is no battle & expecting the human response to information stimuli to be different than it is, is too much to ask. I think 99/100 media guys could have told you a post 11/05 drop of BTS anything to PTS was negative at this stage. I don't think it's too much to ask to run something by 1 person the community thinks is decent at PR. Then there is no delay, no fallout, no drama. All of which are completely unnecessary.

on one hand , they want to be free from all the professional things that big companies do .

on the other hand , they want to attract big money and big investors like big companies do in order to grow .

It's a transition stage that they might not be ready . All the blow backs , just part of what shareholders would do in even a 5 million USD worth of  company in the real world , let alone a 40 million USD one . They want to earn the big bucks , they'll have to be equiped to earn it , do things they don't like in their bones .

Does Bitcoin have all of the professional things that big companies have?   
Big companies have professional things because they keep things behind closed doors.   We do almost everything in the open. 
A DAC must not depend upon any one individuals strengths or weaknesses.

You do realise this drama was caused by a unilateral, behind closed doors DVS equity decision that you're now justifying by suggesting everything must done in the open and not be decided by a small group of unilateral decision makers. I'm suggesting do things however you think is best just include someone, anyone the community considers decent at PR to give you a good gauge of aggregate public opinion if you're in the position that you don't have time to waste gauging it from the market via discussions, though where possible especially with anything equity related engaging BTS through discussions or a blockchain vote would be best.

Anyway I've done my best to take the time to give constructive feedback on addressing what I believe is BTS's main and unnecessary weakness at this stage. I'm off to enjoy some of the holidays. Thank you guys for all your hard work! Looking forward to the NY as I said in another post I really think POW is clearly dying right now and I think we have an opportunity to go really big time. Please consider the possibility that PR is not BTS's strong point and that other PR approaches are worth considering if they have a chance at preventing these kind of dramas, delays etc. in the future.


221
General Discussion / Re: You guys don't understand devshares.
« on: December 26, 2014, 07:44:56 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on December 26, 2014, 07:32:41 pm
People have mentioned that we didn't DISCUSS it with everyone and just acted.   That was mostly because we didn't want to DELAY our test network launch and we didn't WANT IT TO BE POLITICAL.  We just wanted a network out there and assumed it would be of low enough value that no one *SHOULD CARE*.    Bad assumptions apparently.   

Now we have a firestorm and have lost days of effort dealing with the fallout.   

I guess it is too much to ask for people to pick their battles.

There is no battle & expecting the human response to information stimuli to be different than it is, is too much to ask. I think 99/100 media guys could have told you a post 11/05 drop of BTS anything to PTS was negative at this stage. I don't think it's too much to ask to run something by 1 person the community thinks is decent at PR. Then there is no delay, no fallout, no drama. All of which are completely unnecessary.

222
General Discussion / Re: You guys don't understand devshares.
« on: December 26, 2014, 07:18:49 pm »
Quote
I would much rather not be the one to make decisions because it is easy to critique but difficult to decide.   I also don't want to let the squeaky wheel rule the day just because they complain the loudest.   So it is a real challenge to determine where the AGGREGATE PUBLIC OPINION falls.     

This is true too. With any decision there will be negativity from a group. The initial reactions can be emotional, negative and personal, including from myself. Most businesses have a media and PR department who give input, feedback & help communicate a message.  (cn-members already fulfils this kind of a role, as most of the Chinese hear the announcements via his and others translations of them.) I don't think you or other devs should have to deal with the negativity or are best equipped to respond to it. (It also probably results in devs feeling under-appreciated and frustrated too, fulfilling this dual role, when they are on the receiving end of most of the negativity yet they're the ones doing nearly all the hard world changing work.)

I don't think Stan is the ideal intermediary or messenger myself. I don't go to the mumble but that seems to be a good place for better communication though it is often reacting to a situation that has already happened. Perhaps some kind of PR team, including Method and CN members, people the community have already endorsed to fulfil those kind of roles could be useful. They can give the developers overall input and feedback & interpret the aggregate public opinion pretty well. They can also help be the conduits for things like this. NullStreet has perhaps also funnelled the Western marketing department. So going over there and saying 'This is what we're working on and looking at doing in the next few weeks, what's your input on how to approach these announcements.'
So they're not influencing your work just helping shape the message and putting up a red flag if something is going to cause a PR problem. Once you've included the marketing wing of your shareholders in the messaging process, they're more likely to be interpreted positively & the marketing team can bear some of the brunt and communication responsibility.

223
General Discussion / Re: You guys don't understand devshares.
« on: December 26, 2014, 06:13:14 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on December 26, 2014, 05:41:54 pm
Quote from: Empirical1.1 on December 26, 2014, 05:12:22 pm
My current conclusion

Our dev team plus Stan, even collectively lack the ability  to discern within a market acceptable degree of accuracy the likely response of the market to their actions.

Why? Developers seem to be very literal. They appear to be genuinely confused & frustrated even as a collective,  why the market would respond negatively to some of their decisions.

The title of Toast's thread and even BM's last post in the same thread highlight it best. (They actually think it has something to do with DVS.) They also think it is shareholders fault for reacting that way, not an entirely predictable response of a market.

It's also possible Stan doesn't intend to be so condescending, patronising and evasive in most of his posts either.

Everyone thinks you are all rock stars we want you to be appreciated and respected as such. We want you to change the world for the better, be rich and famous and make us wealthy in the process.  I doubt most want to overly influence what you work on or what you do. What you have though is a dev brick wall atm. Even when you think you've taken input, it gets filtered through the literal wall and we end up with decisions the create completely unessecary PR problems for the umpteenth time. The result is frustration and confusion from the markst because we can't understand how a group of exceptionally intelligent people can make such unnecessary  unpopular, divisive and BTS value damaging decisions.

It's perfectly obvious that the DVS thing of going post 11/05 would be interpreted badly especially by the Chinese market after the merger & is not worth the blowback.

But I will try to understand that I'm dealing with a group of people that don't intend to make such negative PR decisions that look antagonistic towards their own shareholders. They are genuinely even as a collective just very literal people who are unable to pre-emptively discern how their actions will be received and the wider implications of them on the market

I certainly recognize that I did blame others for their response and that in general I have no one to blame but myself.   I appreciate that you recognize our INTENT is do do well by all and that we cannot possibly know others expect. 

One thing I have learned is that changing anything is bad and I am loath to do it even if the original decision was a mistake.   

I would much rather not be the one to make decisions because it is easy to critique but difficult to decide.   I also don't want to let the squeaky wheel rule the day just because they complain the loudest.   So it is a real challenge to determine where the AGGREGATE PUBLIC OPINION falls. 

If changing to a 100% BTS allocation would make everyone happy it would be a no brainer.  I am not in this to pick favorites. 

So is there any objection to a 100% BTS allocation, if so please speak up now.

I am actually thinking about allocating 10% to nullstreet leaders and 10% to Chinese community leaders and 10% to core developers and 10% AGS 10% PTS and 50% to BTS.   This way the key players all have something to work with.

My only fear in changing anything is that it will just result in a DIFFERENT PR mess.    Can you all prove to me that the PR would be better by changing it now than by letting it ride?

My prediction is that if we were to exclude AGS / PTS all together that many people will create just as much negative PR.

I agree with the market not liking changes.

My prediction is that a 100% drop to BTS is optimal.

I would look in particular to hear what CN-members has to say. China is the biggest market and his interpretation of the situation is probably one of the best guages of overall market opinion to how BTS as a market will respond to decisions imo.

Other: Shareholders will feel they needed more consultation & input on anything relating to equity imo. The overall market cannot complain about anything that goes 100% BTS though imo, so unless there's a huge advantage to doing otherwise, in cases like this I can't see it not being the best option.


224
General Discussion / Re: You guys don't understand devshares.
« on: December 26, 2014, 05:12:22 pm »
My current conclusion

Our dev team plus Stan, even collectively lack the ability  to discern within a market acceptable degree of accuracy the likely response of the market to their actions.

Why? Developers seem to be very literal. They appear to be genuinely confused & frustrated even as a collective,  why the market would respond negatively to some of their decisions.

The title of Toast's thread and even BM's last post in the same thread highlight it best. (They actually think it has something to do with DVS.) They also think it is shareholders fault for reacting that way, not an entirely predictable response of a market.

It's also possible Stan doesn't intend to be so condescending, patronising and evasive in most of his posts either.

Everyone thinks you are all rock stars we want you to be appreciated and respected as such. We want you to change the world for the better, be rich and famous and make us wealthy in the process.  I doubt most want to overly influence what you work on or what you do. What you have though is a dev brick wall atm. Even when you think you've taken input, it gets filtered through the literal wall and we end up with decisions the create completely unessecary PR problems for the umpteenth time. The result is frustration and confusion from the markst because we can't understand how a group of exceptionally intelligent people can make such unnecessary  unpopular, divisive and BTS value damaging decisions.

It's perfectly obvious that the DVS thing of going post 11/05 would be interpreted badly especially by the Chinese market after the merger & is not worth the blowback.

But I will try to understand that I'm dealing with a group of people that don't intend to make such negative PR decisions that look antagonistic towards their own shareholders. They are genuinely even as a collective just very literal people who are unable to pre-emptively discern how their actions will be received and the wider implications of them on the market

225
General Discussion / Re: You guys don't understand devshares.
« on: December 26, 2014, 06:01:44 am »
Quote from: Riverhead on December 26, 2014, 05:42:51 am
Quote from: gamey on December 26, 2014, 04:11:30 am


The fact that this is an issue pisses me off to no end.  Maybe rename it to testshares, or bullshitshares and then the greedy people who can't see past their big toe won't make a pointless issue.

This.

You people are either insane or don't understand DevShares. I'm not sure which is better.

Seriously, who the heck cares how they are allocated as long as there is some distribution that gets them into the hands of a community.

It's about the price of BTS.

China is by in large the main market. They had a nightmare with the merger having to convince people that the merger was good and that PTS was dead and would no longer be supported. The people speaking up here couldn't care about the value of DVS. They're also not greedy themselves, they're simply care about how the market as a whole will interpret the news. The Chinese consensus is definitely that this will be seen as contrary to the conditions of the merger. This is also how the majority of the currently smaller English market seem to receive it too.

If you don't hate money. Try to get out of your own mind and answer the question, 'how will the market react & interpret this decision as a whole short and medium term?'

In this case it's PR 101 for media minds to know this is a very negative value move and there's no reason it's worth the risk of how it will be received. So what you see here is not greedy people but mostly PR and Media minded people having to step up and do damage control, for the sake of BTS CAP on their Christmas Day for the actions that a brick wall of dev minds might have thought was completely reasonable.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ... 59

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 20 queries.