Quote

It may be that the future of BTS 3.0 is on a parallel EOS chain just like Peerplays is on a parallel Graphene chain.

Peerplays performs functions that the bts token can not.
I hope that EOS tokens cannot possibly be used as collateral in a CFD.
This is a key selling point of BitShares, if EOS tokens can back trades/contracts of this kind then I think Dan will have a lot of explaining to do.



The security of BTS 2.0 is sole responsibility of the BTS 2.0 shareholders.
If an EOS token is required to secure the BTS 3.0 chain, then some control would be lost. Maybe so negligible that it most would say it "doesn't matter." But.

The 'slippery slope' phenomenon regarding citizens across the world losing their legal freedoms and legal privacy has been gradually chip chip chipped away.
Ever so slowly over decades so as for it to go unnoticed or ignored.

I don't want to see the 'merger' with EOS to be the first chip, the first slip, down a slippery slope.
My concerns might all be invalidated when the full story is released, but I want to say something now in the hopes that other shareholders will hold similar scepticism when they read/discuss the full details later.

BitShares Maximalism.

What a story it would be if Dan's EOS ended up directly competing against BitShares 2.0, battling it out. Creator VS Created.
I'm sure that will merely be a story for a fanfic novel written in the future

Is it public knowledge whether Dan is still a large BTS 2.0 shareholder or not?


====
Stan may be right, in that the best path will be to get BitShares 2.0 onto EOS via a direct 1:1 sharedrop from BitShares 2.0 shares >>> into EOS-BTS-shares.
To prevent somebody else doing it first.

But this doesn't necessarily mean that BTS 2.0 would die.
BTS 2.0 shareholders could/should buy the 'real estate' on EOS so that nobody else could set up shop there.
Then business as usual could continue on both platforms (although likely detached and unlinked except by community).

Setting up BTS 2.0 to run on EOS, and then sharedrop 1:1 to BTS 2.0 shareholders, is likely to require coding effort. The coder would then (correct me?) have to be trusted to perform the sharedrop properly.
Who can the BTS 2.0 reserve pool hire to perform this job?
Is loyalty to BTS 2.0 required?

How could this process remain trustless?

I am unfamiliar with the process of a new coin sharedropping on an existing chain. Is the sharedrop in the genesis block or something?

Regardless of whether these questions are invalid or have been answered before on these forums; I think it prudent to have answers to them here specifically in this thread.

EOS will become a busy subject of discussion on this forum once more information comes out, and the sooner noob-questions can be answered the sooner everyone is on a good level of understanding and can direct the discussion most efficiently to achieve consensus fastest.



What could an "unmerged" BTS 2.0 offer a customer of EOS?
That will be the question, and the answer may depend on the success of EOS.

Dan doesn't work for the BTS 2.0 shareholders anymore. His announcements and big-reveal may not necessarily address this community.
If EOS is a big new product, he and his partners will be looking to sell it to the wider cryptoworld and the mainstream investor.
Although I suppose BTS 2.0 is a $100MM company to target for investment now...

All those are good questions, but we did it before for BTS 0.9.3c to BTS 2.0.  It's called a "Pitch Fork"



Of course, that time the delegates voluntarily shut down the old network.  Nothing says that would happen this time, so there could be two - Just like Ethereum classic.  This doesn't appear to be a bad thing.

Will watch the video later.
It's so great to see well-informed lengthy content come out about bitshares and blockchains.

For ages and ages this forum seemed to be the only place to get indepth news.How many people can be bothered to crawl and internet forum to find the info?
Much less than the multitudes who can be bothered to watch youtube videos.
Excellent!

The guys doing the Hollywood Event are doing an impromptu sneak-preview Webinar today on Gameification, if you are interested:
https://thinkbig.lpages.co/gamification-training-w-mark-hoverson/

I also watched the entire 3 hr long video and agree it's  V E R Y  comprehensive well worth the time investment. I was up until 4:30AM Wed eve / Thu morrning working on Witness nodes and didn't get much sleep. And even tho I didn't start watching the video until midnight last night I was fully engaged and alert throughout the entire 3 hr video. I actually stopped to check the time at around 3AM and was shocked it was that late.

Not only does the video provide a well researched and widely documented perspective of why "The System" of modern institutions (gov/bank/media) do NOT consider the interests of individuals to be important in the first hour, it also provides an excellent review of blockchain technology.

It covers these topics quite thoroughly:
1) History of money (why "The System" is screwed up)
2) Gamification in Marketing
3) Blochchain technology
4) Web-based VR technologies

It also describes and offers a grand plan to bring blockchain to the mainstream, being kicked off from LA Studios soundstage (a $1M expense) via a LIVE broadcast of a pilot program intended to be a bi-weekly live event. It will be in the form of a "shark tank" like competition where $50M will be dispensed to worthy entrepreneurs that use will use blockchain tech and tools and expertise CRS describes to reach the mainstream.

Only 200 attendees were invited to this event on May 26 - 28 in LA, and @Stan our "Godfather of BitShares & Steem" is one of them. He is playing a very prominent role regarding blockchain technology in this major media event.

Details are sketchy regarding how to tune in this live event to be broadcast from the soundstage on May 26, but as we approach that date they will be revealed once all the legalities are finalized.

Nice Summary!

what's the plan?
how many will you spent,
how many time will you use,
how many people will you hire,
or just another great idea will bring us to the moon?

I have shared access to the golden goose with everyone.
But I'll hold off on sharing what I plan to do with my eggs.

 

https://steemit.com/bitshares/@Stan/hollywood-heros

Quote from: yvv on May 11, 2017, 10:19:00 pm

Quote from: biophil on May 11, 2017, 08:56:21 pm

I don't think it's likely that HERO will pay effective returns of 5%. If you look very closely, HERO can only offer a maximum of 5% return; if it consistently trades above the price feed, it will offer lower returns. Sadly, if it trades above the price feed, it isn't 100% backed by BTS in collateral, which destroys one of its main value propositions.

Stan is talking like this thing is a free lunch (cue him telling me that he's not; judge for yourself), but it's rarely that simple. I don't frequent this forum much any more, but I've been posting about HERO over on Steemit:

https://steemit.com/bitshares/@biophil/will-hero-work-or-can-you-brute-force-the-free-market
https://steemit.com/bitshares/@biophil/who-will-pay-the-interest-on-hero

Here is an example when a person got completely confused by "5% return" claim. There is not 5% return, 1 HERO will always stay 1 HERO. 5% is a rate of increase of underlying peg index relative to USD.

I'll assume you didn't read my articles. I do understand the distinction, hence the word "effective." I'm arguing that HERO is very unlikely to average 5% appreciation, because it will probably ​trade at a large premium (on average) to the price feed. Simultaneously, if it trades at a large premium to the price feed, it will be subject to unpredictable price swings because the smartcoin mechanism only stabilizes price effectively when you're close to the feed. If HERO shorters aren't careful with Stan's bullish language, they're going to lose a lot of money while they're wondering why the price of HERO won't fall.

If you're bullish about HERO, you should read my articles and tell me why I'm wrong. I welcome the feedback!

Thanks for your thoughtful analysis.
I commented on them in your articles on Steemit.

Stan invoking Jesus Christ to incite FOMO...

Pretty extreme even by Stan's standards

Actually, no.  That was my mini sermon for the day. 
50% of my posts on Steemit over the past year are on that far more important topic, not BitShares. 

Could somebody clarify how HERO actually works?

If HERO will be worth 5% more next year than what it is today, where does this 5% of wealth come from?

Cheers

Best explanation is a Xeroc's wiki: hero.global.
http://docs.hero.global/en/master/peg.html

An excerpt:

Who pays the interest?

The shorters do! Those that are willing to lock BTS away as collateral for the HERO need to ensure that the value of their collateral grows by more than 5% every year. Since the minimum collateral ratio is 200%, most shorters speculate on the value of BTS to grow by at least 2.5% after a year which would covers their obligation to top up the collateral sufficiently.

Of course, the BTS token will still be volatile! Basically, by shorting HERO with 200% collateral and issuing a new token with face-value (together with margin calls and settlements) establishes a system in equilibrium.

One the one side, there is 200% of the volatility, while on the other side, there is none. This is the general concept behind market-pegged assets, or smartcoins. Those on the short side experience the volatility and epxect the collateral to rise in price, while those on the long side enjoy the stability of their token.

The HERO does the same, except that it forces the shorters to also hand over a fixed interest per year to the long side of the trades. Independent of the shorters making profit at all, they will need to provide the interest to the long position.

Thus, the HERO represents a Peer-2-peer free currency where shorts and longs are provided by individual traders across the planet with no central entity having control over the issuance process.