0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/lets-talk-bitcoin-129-dogeparty-and-delegated-proof-of-stakeOn Todays EpisodeAdam talks about the costs of Counterparty and introduces Dogeparty (dogeparty.io) an experimental solution, along with Proof of Charity - a new Token Initialization MethodDaniel Larimer, CEO of Invictus Innovations (bitshares-x.info) (bitsharestalk.org) speaks with Stephanie, Andreas and Adam about the release of BitsharesX, their Delegated Proof of Stake system, automatic stealth addresses, bitUSD and more.We were tough in the interview, Daniel did very well and I'm quite pleased with the resulting work regardless of the process that brought us here.Major kudos!
I've said it before and I'll say it again, POW = anti-innovation at this point. It was and is a great thing, absolute genius but everything is refined.
You guys don't get it Daniel simplifies to say mining = burning money but does not recognize that it is not percieved as such. If you could achieve same-mining-power-per-person at no percieved additional cost to the person, you give them a way to become a part of it (a stakeholder) without requiring them to go through the same mental calculus as whether they need to decide to buy or even worse, invest in something.
But yeah you should totally call people POW fanboys lol, that's what's going on here.
You guys don't get it Daniel simplifies to say mining = burning money but does not recognize that it is not percieved as such. If you could achieve same-mining-power-per-person at no percieved additional cost to the person, you give them a way to become a part of it (a stakeholder) without requiring them to go through the same mental calculus as whether they need to decide to buy or even worse, invest in something.I made this argument loudly in december and january when this was re-allocated from 10% to PTS holders to 50% to PTS holders and 50% to AGS holders, leaving none remaining for those interested and available with time but not able to devote money up front to becoming part of it.But yeah you should totally call people POW fanboys lol, that's what's going on here.
The reason sharedrops that "simulate mining" work is because all of the early adopters etc are miners. Most of the die-hard types sitting on forums have at least dabbled in mining and believe it to be "fair". There is nothing special about mining that sells a distribution except the existing adopters have mentally bought in. They've put their capital into mining equipment so now they're a middle man selling hashes and taking the profits and paying the electricity providers. This is not much different from paying for shares directly, people just need to have it explained to them. Mining is also labor intensive so it keeps large capital from showing up and just buying in. This is probably the one biggest thing people need to avoid in the longrun, the perception that the guy with the most money at the start ends with the most money. Lots will disagree with it, but this is probably the biggest perception at play when people don't like POS. An "unfair" distribution. Mining is only marginally more fair because it requires labor to set it up.
Quote from: bed on July 27, 2014, 03:57:41 pmI just realized why Andreas used such a long-winded and loaded question trying to confirm whether Bitshares would be for traditional businesses looking for better transaction ledgers."BitShares does for business what Bitcoin did for money" ---- This was the first thing Andreas saw when he researched BitShares prior to the interview! It lead him down a completely incorrect rabbit hole of thinking. No wonder he didn't have any follow up comments to that question -- He had been completely mislead by our slogan into thinking the USP of our technology would be for traditional businesses rather than the masses. If we had had a clear slogan on the website that actually explained our USP, Andreas would have participated 10x more in the discussion because he would have been correctly prepared rather than thrown off-guard . I can only imagine how many people the current slogan has deceived.We need a better slogan -- Now!Edit: Brian, get on this. and not to be a dick, but get on it now! Be reminded of this -- discussions about correcting the slogan have have gone on for months and even you have conceded that ithe slogan needs to be changed. As DOM it is your duty to make this right. Please respond to this with confirmation as to whether you will or will not change the slogan.Isn't Andreas another POW fanboy ? Bitshares has been around for quite some time, I don't think he got much from the slogan.edit - And with this post, I become "Hero Member".
I just realized why Andreas used such a long-winded and loaded question trying to confirm whether Bitshares would be for traditional businesses looking for better transaction ledgers."BitShares does for business what Bitcoin did for money" ---- This was the first thing Andreas saw when he researched BitShares prior to the interview! It lead him down a completely incorrect rabbit hole of thinking. No wonder he didn't have any follow up comments to that question -- He had been completely mislead by our slogan into thinking the USP of our technology would be for traditional businesses rather than the masses. If we had had a clear slogan on the website that actually explained our USP, Andreas would have participated 10x more in the discussion because he would have been correctly prepared rather than thrown off-guard . I can only imagine how many people the current slogan has deceived.We need a better slogan -- Now!Edit: Brian, get on this. and not to be a dick, but get on it now! Be reminded of this -- discussions about correcting the slogan have have gone on for months and even you have conceded that ithe slogan needs to be changed. As DOM it is your duty to make this right. Please respond to this with confirmation as to whether you will or will not change the slogan.
He might be, but listen to his question in the interview, it's all about the application of the technology --- "using it for businesses" like our slogan implies. Our slogan implies we will use incorruptible transaction ledgers for traditional business. It is our fault that he was not better prepared. We need to take responsiblity for this.Btw. congrats on 500 posts, hero member
Quote from: changematey on July 23, 2014, 04:38:05 amHow about an option for "holding" even though if it means zombie btsx accounts for year or two.I you don't move you btsx once a year you might be forced to pay a 5% inactivity fee .. just FYIhttp://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/Inactivity_Fees
How about an option for "holding" even though if it means zombie btsx accounts for year or two.
Quote from: xeroc on July 23, 2014, 04:43:14 amQuote from: changematey on July 23, 2014, 04:38:05 amHow about an option for "holding" even though if it means zombie btsx accounts for year or two.I you don't move you btsx once a year you might be forced to pay a 5% inactivity fee .. just FYIhttp://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/Inactivity_FeesWould this also apply for unclaimed btsx? For example AGS allocation not yet imported?
Can't wait to listen BTW, the poll should have a third option, the always capitalized "HODLING"
What was Andreas thinking during BM's dialogue? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Empirical1 on July 22, 2014, 09:29:53 pmQuote from: AdamBLevine on July 22, 2014, 08:16:43 pmWe were tough in the interview, Daniel did very well and I'm quite pleased with the resulting work regardless of the process that brought us here.Major kudos!Ok listened to it. Thanks Adam & co! Yeah some challenging questions, but I thought it was fair. Fantastic, interesting interview covered a lot of ground. I thought Daniel was GREAT!
Quote from: AdamBLevine on July 22, 2014, 08:16:43 pmWe were tough in the interview, Daniel did very well and I'm quite pleased with the resulting work regardless of the process that brought us here.Major kudos!Ok listened to it. Thanks Adam & co! Yeah some challenging questions, but I thought it was fair. Fantastic, interesting interview covered a lot of ground. I thought Daniel was GREAT!
We were tough in the interview, Daniel did very well and I'm quite pleased with the resulting work regardless of the process that brought us here.Major kudos!
Got excited and went and bought some more.