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.
... Our simple wallet will use Facebook authentication to make it extremely easy so in some ways will have slightly less ''personal & contextual privacy' than Bitcoin...
I'm fine with lifetime royalties as long as they're decreasing over time. So say it's 80% until they recoup their investment, then 20% and halving every four years until finally it stays at 1% forever. If BitShares is successful that's 1% of a multi billion $ activity.
As BM said in the other thread: the feature needs to be able to fund it's own development and upgrades.
With time the original code developed with the original investment will get less and less relevant so it only makes sense that it'll receive decreasing share in profit.
well ... i have 64-bit versions of berkeley-db and boost installed manually and in non-default locations, but when i try to use cmake with
LDFLAGS="-L$BOOSTPATH/lib -L$BERKELEYDBPATH/lib" CPPFLAGS="-I$BOOSTPATH/include -I$BERKELEYDBPATH/include" cmake .
then cmake doesn't find the boost headers / library and the berkeley header / libraries.
this is how i remember using cmake in other projects ...
anyway, since i couldn't get cmake to recognize libraries in non-standard locations, i went with brew since brew will do symlinks into the standard install location.
i take it i am using cmake wrong ... correct?
---- edit to add ---
also, that particular library is built when running make and not created from any brew install (although knowing that brew does not do 64-bit libraries is good to know ...).
so, in that case, is the bitshares repo compiling and then archiving a 32-bit library on an x86_64 architecture? or did i miss reading which particular library is the offender ?
well your using the flags right, just not sure if your missing something / how your system is set up, hard to diagnose from here.
i can tell you for certain the error you got has to do with trying to compile with 32bit versions, beyond that im not sure how to fix it without seeing the system environment.
If the following were told to me:
- Crazy manipulation by (an organized gang of?) traders on Poloniex is leaching value from BitShares, hurting the whole project
- There is a person or a body of people, trusted by the BitShares community, with the ability to fight back on Poloniex for the benefit BitShares
- This trusted entity has a trading plan which has been 'audited' to the satisfaction of the community. (Analyzed behind closed doors by a select few if necessary)
- The plan is risky and could backfire, but there is a good chance of success
- The amount of BTS needed to operate the plan is great
- The amount of BTS needed could be pooled by creating a User Issued Asset and selling it to BitShares supporters (or to people who want to speculate, anticipating a cut of any profit)
- There are loads of people on bitsharestalk who have stated that they'd like to allocate a proportion of their BTS into buying this UIA
then I would say, "Oh, I'm definitely interested in buying a chunk of such a UIA, but I know nothing about trading and would like to see what others think of this idea on bitsharestalk".
That is all...
LOL. Now there is an idea. If being a whale was so profitable then I am sure you would see funds set up doing just this! The fact that there are no funds like this out there tells me all I need to know about the effectiveness of being a whale and manipulating the price for profit.
