Can we have commodity categories like "computation", "storage", "memory", "sensory", and other core components that make up a computer? Then have commodities in these categories which represent various essential components?

For example, Intel CPUs would be like "BitIntelI7CHIP". This commodity would track the price of the Intel I7 chipset.

Or for example, AMD CPUs would be like "BitAMDKaveriCHIP". This of course would track the price of the AMD Kaveri chip.

Additionally we would be able to put some graphics cards, solid state drives, ram, slr cameras, smart phones, headphones, you get the picture.

This would allow people to treat computing, storage, ram, cameras, smart phones, headphones, as commodities to be traded on a BTX chain. I don't know about you but I would love to be able to speculate on computing hardware prices.

What about video game consoles? That is another area for another potential chain where every console is treated as a commodity or popular games become commodities. People like to collect both consoles and games, so this would work well too.

When speculating on something like ram or hard drives you never know if a natural disaster will result in the price of hard drives being artificially inflated for several years or if some breakthrough will completely change the industry. Ideally you would think it would go down but how would it move in relation to the other chips on the market? What about sales? Perhaps chips that sell better could win a sort of bet so that people can profit if AMD outsold Intel chips that season.

What are your thoughts?

I'd actually disagree with the idea that DACs as a whole are closely related to AI or to machine learning. Possibly the closest thing is swarm AI or other emergent behavior research areas. It's all about engineering incentive structures for large numbers of human actors, while the computers themselves just do "dumb" bookkeeping.

That said it is awesome to have an ML researcher here, I'm sure it will come in handy eventually. What in particular within ML do you work on? I have a long train ride and would love to think of potential applications of AI to DAC design.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

That is how DACs work right now but those aren't actual DACs yet and that is why they are still dumb. When they grow up they will become older, smarter, and machine intelligence will take on increasingly greater and sophisticated roles.

For example I have ideas for a DAC which requires sensors. The ideas I've presented allow DACs to pay software agents to do jobs for other DACs and get paid in stock (BitAssets). These software agents would then sell these stocks for goods and services or hold onto them. The machine intelligence would be useful for the sensors which could feed information to the software agents (and that is a bit more than just swarm intelligence).

So while the first generation that we are calling DACs are like the uneducated children, I believe second generation DACs will need a lot less human involvement, especially once the template code is in place. You will see what I mean once you complete the toolkit and I have a chance to build a DAC, I think if the incentive allocation can be controlled by AI then the DAC itself could direct humans on how to build it according to it's programming. It could also learn from it's mistakes if it's programmed to.

Quote from: toast on March 16, 2014, 09:32:04 pm

I'd actually disagree with the idea that DACs as a whole are closely related to AI.

I am working on learning theory, not specific applications such as kernel machines or deep learning, but sth. beneath them. Let me explain what this is about, machine learning in one word is "generalization", that is, to optimize so as to make it performs better **in future** based on the information in the current. This is intrinsically similar to what you are doing. You are creating a purpose, that is, creating a distributed intelligence to make itself survive and to achieve certain purpose. If we can create a statistical model of such intelligence, that we can optimize based on the machine learning theory and to let is survive in the **future**. Although the current DACs are a bit "static", i.e., based on block-chains, and the intelligent part is mainly based on humans in the end-nodes holding the voices, I would like to see the leaders of you to see beyond such static picture.

Actually, I think DACs have a lot to do with AI despite what Toast said.

For instance the resource/incentive allocation structure, the automation of certain tasks and work, a lot of this I believe could be done by AI to push automation forward and lower costs.

If you have the time please review some of my ideas and let me know if any of it is scientifically feasible.

Particularly these ideas
https://trello.com/c/KcZ6FfSu/2-500-write-spec-for-voting-on-bounties

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=998.0

I welcome any assistance or knowledge on the subject of machine intelligence.

Wow thanks for posting that luckybit - I'd agree, that video was very well executed and produced.

What is it about British accents that just make things seem so 'pristine'?  Even before seeing this video, I was thinking "It'd be awesome to borrow Jony Ive's voice for the BitShares explainer video!"

..maybe its an American thing??

1,918,448 views on that video. Find someone like her (Stephanie Murphy or just find her) to do voice overs and do a similar video. Then market the video exactly as they have for a similar result.

Whoever is working on the Bitshares GUI should pay careful attention to this video. That is how a GUI should look.

Did anybody mention death and inheritance issue before on this forum? What happens to my BTS, PTS etc shares when I die, assuming noone else has my private keys?

I don't know if you have plans for this but here is my idea:

Add inheritance capability to Keyhotee. For example, I select an inheritor account for my belongings. If I do not make any transactions for an extended amount of time, all my belongings are transferred to the inheritor account.

What do you think?

Read my thread on economic allegiance systems. It addresses that and more at the Keyhotee level.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1745.0

In theory you could form a group and if one person dies or is inactive then all of their assets will slowly disperse to the group they designate at the rate they designate.

This is better than how it's being set up now where inactivity will result in your assets being slowly destroyed. While that is good for the network, it's not as good as inheritance.

Inheritance should be set up to go to any group, individual, or just people in your economic allegiance network in a specific order. The point is to give the user maximum control and it might be a good idea to allow for scripting here.

Quote from: SuanBing on March 16, 2014, 03:01:46 pm

make a wallet backup to your familly

It doesn't solve the problem.  You may have your spouse as your main beneficiary but if you give him/her instructions on how to access your wallet you could wake up one morning and your wallet is empty and you're getting served with divorce papers.  Divorces happen, family members argue over money and inheritences, and family members sometimes fight and have falling outs.  Much better to give the individual the control.

Scripting will be necessary. Additionally you will need multisig. If you're economically allied with a certain group of individuals and you set it to give all your assets to that group of individuals it would. You could determine the rate as well so that they don't get it all at once but slowly over the years.

You could use scripts to make sure they only get it under specific circumstances and set it up so they must supply verified proof of circumstances to a third party. So you could say to your children the social contract says you must get married and donate x% a year to charity to receive your inheritance. You could set the script up so that a specific fraction of x go to one of the charities on your list each year and the rest they can choose from.

A script would make it trivial. Economic allegiances could be in the form of scripts. Inheritances could be in the form of scripts. It's just a matter of using an easy language like Python so anyone can write these scripts or find a template. These scripts would be smart contracts enforced by the blockchain itself.

If the charities on the list for example have certain addresses or a Keyhotee ID which doesn't change then the inheritance script would include a dictionary or list. The list would determine the options that the person inheriting the funds could choose to donate to and once the donation is completed it would be on the blockchain and the the script would check and verify it was completed. Marriage could also be certified on the blockchain and a third party could sign it making it a completed task. Once they are both completed then the funds for that year would be released.

Each year the challenge for the participant would be to donate x% to a charity, it verifies on the blockchain, and the funds are released to them. You could even set it up so the list of charities is automatically updated according to the effectiveness of each charity in solving the real world problem. This would mean they'd get more inheritance funds for that year if they donate to the most effective charities, as points would be rewarded which would count toward their inheritance amount.

Bytemaster and Dan Notestein, if you're reading this please make it a priority to allow for us to use scripting in this way. C++ is not going to work for most of us, so Python or Ruby please. Let that hook into the C++ library.

What do you mean when you say Bitshares won't be volatile? Do you mean BitUSD won't be volatile? XTS itself will be extremely volatile at first while the markets are figuring out how powerful it is, which could take a couple years.

You have to buy BitUSD with Bitshares. Bitshares is far less volatile than Bitcoin if you know how to use it. I wouldn't necessarily choose BitUSD but you could use that. I also don't think it would take a couple of years, that depends on the marketing and education effort.

Mastercoin isn't very volatile either. I think the reason has to do with the fact that there is no mining and that the value proposition isn't changing constantly. Also the fact that there isn't a lot of reasons to sell Bitshares. If you can cash out into BitUSD within Bitshares why would anyone sell them unless they had to pay taxes or some bill they can only pay with fiat?

It takes away the necessity to store your mining profits as fiat. It removes a lot of the reasons people have to cash out.

I think BitUSD has excellent potential to replace BTC and LTC to be the default base currency on the centralized exchanges. I think your mining pool (which is an excellent idea, btw) should pay out exclusively BitUSD. Fundamentally, demand for BitUSD will be the main driver for Bitshares value; if there's demand for BitUSD, then the value of XTS will climb as people buy into it to short BitUSD.

If you look at the Bitshares code it supports gold, silver, usd, euro, pound, crude oil, there is no reason for anyone in their right mind to choose fiat over all these options. Most people cash out to pay for their bills but beyond that there is no reason to and if bills could be paid with BitUSD no one would ever cash out. I could see companies like Invictus paying their employees in BitUSD.

Imagine a world where BitUSD has taken over today's BTC market: $7B worth of BitUSD would mean that the market cap of XTS will be over $10B (at a 1.5x margin call threshold), which is $2500 per XTS. That is, simple back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that wide-scale acceptance of BitUSD would make us all rich (I realize this is obvious, I just really like simple calculations that make the potential profits look really stark). Thus, I suggest that the mining pool try to promote BitUSD acceptance as much as possible.

That will happen easily. $10B is not a lot of money. Once people figure out that BitUSD can be used by businesses to avoid the volatility issues of Bitcoin then the business world will switch over. Bitpay might be convinced to deal with BitUSD and if not then a competitor will come along.

Some businesses might want to hedge into gold and silver and now they can.

Thus, I suggest that the mining pool try to promote BitUSD acceptance as much as possible.

This would be easy. Just let people choose to receive their payout as whatever Bitasset they want. Bitshares should be the standard but if people think it's too volatile they could set it to receive BitUSD.

The real important part is getting businesses to accept BitUSD and getting employers to pay in BitUSD. Once that happens it will be a success, but that could take a while. The corporate acceptance part is something Brian should be working on, along with the ATM support and the ability to pay our bills and taxes.

If I could pay my bills, taxes, rent, with BitUSD, I would never cash out of Bitshares because there would be no reason to.

Doesn't mining almost certainly centralize the issuance of tokens?  I mean, sure, anyone can "mine", but only a very few people will be able to do so profitably, and those people will not necessarily be dictated by their technical skills...but more by their connections to ASICs manufacturers. 

Who ever said the mining should only be for ASICs?
There are many different algorithms other than SHA-256.

The only way I can see mining as being worthwhile is if it utilizes something like the BOINC protocol, which makes the mining perform a task that serves to benefit all humanity (protein folding, searching for extraterrestrial life...etc)...but that still wouldn't fix the centralization issues. 

Of course it can use BOINC -> XRP -> BTC -> BTS.
It can use anything which can be sold for BTC -> BTS.

The reason for this is that even though you might have 30 different ASICs to choose from in order to mine the algo of your choice, it still is centralized to those 30 algos--unless we are looking at a world where a couple thousand algos and 10's of thousands of ASICs manufacturers exist. 

That is the world we are looking at. There isn't an ASIC for memorycoin2 yet, or for a lot of these coins. It's unlikely there will ever be an ASIC for the vast majority of them and anyone can make any altcoin with any algorithm in the future which we could all mine and get BTS.

Even with this, though, what is stopping ASIC manufacturers from colluding to centralize manufacturing into the hands of a few?

The fact that anyone can make a new algorithm at any time and we can use that new algorithm to mine BTS.

I think you misunderstood what I'm expressing. The mining pool is algorithm independent, it takes whatever coin you're mining and gives you a payout as BTS. It doesn't matter what you mine as long as it's the most profitable coin at that time. So it uses the profits of the altcoin being pumped at the time and turns it into fuel for your Bitshares wallet. Since Bitshares is the best store of value in the crypto-community everyone is going to want to store their profits as Bitshares and not whatever they mined.

Mining altcoins is not centralized. Only Bitoin is and that is because of the ASICs.

I'm sorry to doubt the DAC but I have to make this comment.  Gov'ts can block this DAC very easily .... Just make it illegal to be an insurance DAC adjuster. How do we adapt?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unless every government on earth blocks it at the same time why does it matter?
Do we even have to know who the adjuster is or where the adjuster is if we know who it is?

Interesting concept.  What benefit does a user gain over mining doge and the selling for bts on cryptsy? 

It seems like this alternative is already available. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because this automates everything. You go to the multipool and it points your miner to whatever is the most profitable coin at that time. Instead of the payout being in that coin and you having to waste time and energy going to Cryptsy to trade it for BTS, that all happens on the backend. Your payout is in BTS and the more extra hash power you have to spare the more BTS you can get.

Sure if I really wanted to I could mine and go to Cryptsy but then why would I buy BTS? I might see something else like Counterparty or Litecoin to buy. But if BTS is the payout I don't think about it, it's just automatic.

The mining pool itself markets BTS and other products. The mining pool itself might be profitable for whoever runs it.