I can see the concept better transmitted with something like this: http://www.flash-usb-drive.com/index.php/products

Perhaps in a very targeted campaign.

Quote from: luckybit on March 10, 2014, 08:46:07 pm

Quote from: onceuponatime on March 09, 2014, 04:43:43 am

I like this very much.

My one caveat is that having: "add in employees" "show them each going poof"
"and give all the money saved to the customers?"
will open up of an attack vector by vested interests.

Political enemies of our innovations might make hay with that by spotlighting the disruptive side of this opportunity.
 
FOX News, CNN, et al are very adept at capitalizing on opportunities for spreading FUD.

I say be bold. Let them attack it.

But I also say we should highlight the fact that you can work for DACs or at least participate and earn shares in some of them. It's an error to make it look like a closed loop system where you just have the digital company, pure profit, and customers. That might be the ideal but it would be dishonest to present it as if that is what it is.

I think we need to be bold about the fact that it's disruptive and proud of it because younger generations want that, while at the same time understand that not everyone is a customer with money. Some people will have to find a way to earn their way into the system and we want to figure out how to show that in the video even if briefly. We have to consider that a large portion of the people viewing the video now and increasingly into the future will graduate into a recession.

So how about we add in removing the boss as the main employee that gets removed. That one addition to the video would counter every political attack. It all depends on which employees you show being removed, if it's the boss and the management, you present this as money saved being passed to the user/customer then you'll be able to market to the little guy. I put emphasis on user/customer because not everyone is immediately going to buy Bitshares and you don't want to make it seem like the only way is to spend $100 because you could end up with a situation where people start saying it's too expensive.

I think presenting it like you're removing the employees could be making it seem like somehow the upper management or boss is immune and that the little guy is thrown under the bus. Most importantly, show that in the future anyone will be able to participate, so more emphasis on the fact that DACs might still need some human operators and developers.

Imagine that a lot of the people looking at the video will be graduate or college students, or recent graduates who want a job. They might want to take part in bounties or be involved in some way other than as a customer so what about that demographic?

Why not show employees moving from bad jobs to great jobs?

The number of new careers that can be followed from a beach in Bora Bora is mind boggling.

I like this very much.

My one caveat is that having: "add in employees" "show them each going poof"
"and give all the money saved to the customers?"
will open up of an attack vector by vested interests.

Political enemies of our innovations might make hay with that by spotlighting the disruptive side of this opportunity.
 
FOX News, CNN, et al are very adept at capitalizing on opportunities for spreading FUD.

Sounds like a fun video.
But DACs do use employees, the video can even show more people being employed and the extra cash going to the employees and shareholders (and not to fat cat executives and big bosses, maybe they can disappear).

Lots of money going to this one guy creates the whole too good to be true look and people start shouting ponzi scheme.

DACs are companies that decentralize ownership and increase sharing of profits for everyone (employees and shareholders). A super positive thing. They are not taking away overall jobs and making this one guy rich.

Quote from: luckybit on March 10, 2014, 01:37:18 pm

Quote from: barwizi on March 10, 2014, 01:11:12 pm

Anonymity is compromised the moment you start mailing material.

Anonymity isn't sacred for every user.

Not everyone wants anonymity. If early users promoting the Internet said we shouldn't promote AOL because insecure, it's expensive, slow, and it's not anonymous, who exactly would have tried the Internet?

If the early promoters of operating systems said let's not bother packing Windows in with computers, let's just ship computers without an OS or with a copy of Unix and let them install that then how many people would have got on the Internet or have been introduced to personal computers?

The people who never heard of Bitshares but want the financial services it offers and aren't necessarily concerned with the anonymity. The vast majority of people who will use Bitshares want to protect their money.

If they want to receive it anonymously then they can borrow one of these DVDs or CDs from a friend or get on Tor and download Bitshares.

I do see your argument that in some countries where it could be banned they might want anonymity. But I remember when I first got Linux I had to give my address to get a copy of the CD, and I also remember receiving DVDs from AOL for years in the late 90s to early 2000.

I also received CDs for Internet Explorer, Netscape, Microsoft Word, and a bunch of other software. Believe it or not this is how most people discover new technology, they aren't all going to be on Bitcointalk or surfing the dark web.

They might be reading a finance or investment magazine and stumble upon an advertisement for some new Forex software.

lol, my customers will have to give up anonymity in order to trade for USD, no getting around that.

We stipulate the use of performance contracts to keep efficiency at a maximum. Rather tahn voting systems which can be manipulated, we opt to use  an officers' performance as a means of retaining employment or being fired. The initial employment uses what luckybit just mentioned, reputation.

Hi all,

Ethereum (often considered a Bitshares alternative) is about to start something in 6 days / 25.1.2014... (see countdown at Main site: http://ethereum.org/ )
Do you think its better than bitshares? Why yes, why no?
Is it better to invest 100% in Ethereum instead of indirectly investing 1:10 (PTS share of bitshares is 10% only)
into bitshares right now? Can bitshares outperform ethereum by factor 10?
Really thinking about it where to invest and its a tough decision.. so whats your oppinion on that and why?


Whitepaper: http://vbuterin.com/ethereum.html
Forums: http://forum.ethereum.org/

Mich431