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.


Messages - oldman

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ... 38
391
General Discussion / Re: Lets see if it bounces.
« on: September 16, 2014, 05:33:24 pm »
Quote from: MeTHoDx on September 16, 2014, 12:33:08 am
Quote from: hughmanwho on September 16, 2014, 12:24:56 am
I'm still saying that the graph looks an awful lot like this:


It looks nothing like this. If anything, it looks more like the first bear trap before a huge rally.

Considering how long the market has been live I would suggest the price movements of BTSX to date are just noise in the stealth phase.

Those charts typically span years rather than weeks.

But then again, maybe a flood of Bitcoin FOMO wealth kicks off the exponential phase and it just keeps going....

392
General Discussion / Re: Reddit Post - Not Favourable - Community May Want to Engage
« on: September 16, 2014, 04:39:17 pm »
Quote from: joele on September 16, 2014, 11:25:38 am
If you bought bitcoin at >$600, you don't want to see post any crypto innovations better than bitcoin

I think the hostility/scepticism does result from feeling threatened; the Bitshares branding and DPOS tech are different from anything that has come before.

Folks sense intuitively that Bitshares is not another shitcoin pump and feel their 1.0 interests are may be at risk should a 2.0 platform to gain traction.

This is something the Bitshares community will have to be very cognizant of.

Given the reception Bitshares has received so far I am *very* surprised Brian & Co are not engaging the Bitcoin community in the forums when these sorts of posts come up.

Most (all?) of the other 2.0 platforms have devs/PR folks that are actively engaging the forums. The Storj/OB folks in particular stand out for doing an excellent job of communicating.

The need to keep marketing efforts on a low-boil while the development stage wraps up is understandable.

However, the cat is out of the bag and like it or not first-impressions are being formed right now.

A positive, respectful and consistent response to questions and concerns now will massively reduce the struggle to be 'not another shitcoin pump' during roll-out.

Huge thank-you to arhag, robrigo, methodx, fuznuts and all the other folks that responded. You did a great job providing measured and well-reasoned replies.



393
General Discussion / Reddit Post - Not Favourable - Community May Want to Engage
« on: September 15, 2014, 10:15:13 pm »
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2ghzfy/bitshares_plan_vs_bitcoin_to_use_our_edge_to_suck/

394
General Discussion / Re: Lets see if it bounces.
« on: September 15, 2014, 10:11:51 pm »
Price seems to be responding more to news, or lack thereof, than technicals.

The interesting thing is the volume and consolidation.

Next round of announcements could be interesting.




395
General Discussion / Re: Web of Trust + Account Feedback
« on: September 15, 2014, 08:37:34 pm »
Optional is a very good idea. Different accounts for different purposes.

I'm not sure Neg > Pos is a good idea; possibly create an inherent bias.

Could prevent bad actors from getting their due, particularly on low-level scams where folks might not want to pay a lot to provide negative feedback on a small loss.

Open Bazaar has quite a bit of technical documentation on the burn-for-rep mechanism. Seems to be well-grounded.




396
General Discussion / Re: 5% annual fee. What is the point?
« on: September 15, 2014, 07:17:23 pm »
Quote from: wmvatis on September 15, 2014, 06:44:21 pm
I really disagree with the above comment. It's likely only a minority of people will want hold bitshares for more than a year, so making those who want to hold long term storage move their funds once a year will only minorly impact voting. Plus, it will make them "vote," but it won't make them actually think about who they are voting for. Only the most involved users will ever make meaningful votes, let it stay that way.

The fee is an unnecessary inconvenience. Remove it.

I agree getting the average user to research and vote for 101 delegates is unrealistic.

However, with slates/reputation voting becomes much more realistic.

Voters can pick a slate assembled by someone with a high reputation, or perhaps a service/DAC that researches/builds slates. One click and you're done.

At this point the inconvenience is simply the cost of participation.

Quote from: MeTHoDx on September 15, 2014, 06:58:48 pm
Quote from: OldMan
Edit: I am a buy-and-hold investor with limited technical skills and am actively seeking ways to dump my BTSX into cold storage for 2-3 years. So the fee is a thorn in my side as well. But I also recognize that without the fees DPOS will eventually centralize and corrupt. So I'm hoping someone clever will come up with a cold storage solution that permits voting with BTSX off-line.

I would suggest getting a separate laptop with linux as the OS and storing all your funds in THAT wallet. Open the laptop every 6 months and click the blue vote button. Backup the wallet .json file on USB key(s) and hide in two secret locations. Trying to get any more secure than this is a waste of time IMO, even if you have millions of dollars worth of BTSX. What I'm recommending here is extremely secure.

This is excellent advice and I have implemented a very similar protocol. Works!

Would still prefer the peace of mind of a complete air-gap between my funds and the rest of the world.

I suspect as BTSX increases in market cap more and more folks are going to be looking for similar peace-of-mind.

Also, big money isn't going to jump in without simple/air tight security protocols.

Secure storage is an issue that needs to be addressed thoroughly.


397
General Discussion / Re: 5% annual fee. What is the point?
« on: September 15, 2014, 06:26:03 pm »
Quote from: Gentso1 on September 14, 2014, 02:13:56 pm
Quote from: sumantso on September 13, 2014, 09:18:18 pm
Quote from: gamey on September 13, 2014, 07:55:07 pm


As a point of data/use case. 

My sister invested some $$ in BTSX after reading some promotional material.  I was happy to help her, because I'd just keep her funds with mine.

Then her bf who I don't particularly like told her he wanted to invest.  Well...  I wouldn't mind but this whole 5% thing means that I have to teach him something and someone has to maintain it.  I can't just help him buy it and put it in cold storage with a few copies of the private key and instructions.  So I basically told her I really didn't want to mess with it.

To argue for the other side, BTSX is not just like holding some shares. You are expected to take part in maintaining the network health, and if you can't take the trouble then we don't want you.

For multisig cold wallets, I think there might be an option where you can sign that address to show that you are still the owner of it and still active. I think we need some feature like that anyway so that I can show my balance to somebody if I want; its currently not possible due to TITAN.

Off topic, but I would like an armory type wallet, which I can keep on an unconnected laptop for ever.
This is a good point. We want holders of btsx to be active and participate in DPOS so if they can't participate then we kinda don't really want them. What good is a board of directors if they aren't around to vote? I have changed my stance, btsx should keep a inactivity fee bit the rest of bit assets should be allowed to store at will.

Voting is critical to the long-term viability of DPOS.

If users are not incentivized to vote, they won't.

Look at voter participation rates in current democratic systems. Awful.

Voter apathy is the reason democracies decay into corruption, centralization and cronyism.

Imaging how different the world would be if US citizens had to vote in order to access essential services... or if they were taxed at a higher rate for not voting.

The fee is an excellent way to return dead funds but more importantly - it will get people to vote.

If they don't want to vote, let them hold bitAssets.

I vote for keeping the fee. It is the best assurance of DPOS survival.

Edit: I am a buy-and-hold investor with limited technical skills and am actively seeking ways to dump my BTSX into cold storage for 2-3 years. So the fee is a thorn in my side as well. But I also recognize that without the fees DPOS will eventually centralize and corrupt. So I'm hoping someone clever will come up with a cold storage solution that permits voting with BTSX off-line.

398
General Discussion / Re: Watch: BitShares X - Intergalactic Starship Construction
« on: September 15, 2014, 06:16:28 pm »
 Amazing! +5%

399
General Discussion / Re: "What Is BitShares?" infographic -- your is input appreciated.
« on: September 15, 2014, 05:39:19 pm »
Quote from: AJ on September 14, 2014, 03:53:19 pm
I like this :)

 +5%

Quote from: cass on September 02, 2014, 11:01:46 pm


Hey did you noticed this here?

This is excellent and should be splashed.

Note: Swiss to be capitalized. And while I understand the common perception of privacy in Swiss banking, Swiss banks are no longer private in the sense most believe them to be.

400
General Discussion / Re: Lets see if it bounces.
« on: September 15, 2014, 05:32:31 pm »
Quote from: jokb235 on September 15, 2014, 04:52:11 pm
Quote from: xeroc on September 15, 2014, 04:31:54 pm
once you have all your sh*** in coldstorage you learn to no longer care about hourly and daily :-)

Yeah. I'm not worried about this. It'll just allow me to buy more BTSX at a lower price.

Or perhaps short bitUSD... because you can.

401
General Discussion / Re: Marketing Proposal - Our Unfair Advantage
« on: September 15, 2014, 05:30:31 pm »
Stealth phase; marketing push will come when client is stable, trading platform is implemented and pegs have solidified.

Agree that Brian & Co. have not engaged the community as well they as they might have.

However, marketing could be a huge distraction to a community that needs to focus on development.

There is a method to these folks' madness.

Have faith. Good things come to those who wait.










402
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares Bazaar (decentralized market)
« on: September 15, 2014, 05:14:37 pm »
Quote from: bitcoinerS on September 15, 2014, 04:03:19 pm
Quote from: MeTHoDx on September 15, 2014, 03:59:09 pm
This needs to be done. It seems such a natural fit for DPoS.

Not only DPOS, but the coming web-of-trust and account rep features are a natural fit for this purpose.

Open Bazaar has a fair bit of documentation on the mechanics of burn-for-reputation.

Bitshares/Open Bazaar devs should really be having a conversation; OB appears to be an excellent DAC/DPOS/TITAN candidate.

403
General Discussion / Re: Price feeds for Gold, Siver, Euro, Pound, Oil, Litecoin, Peso, Franc, etc.
« on: September 12, 2014, 06:46:04 pm »
My vote goes with holding off until the client is stable and the yield is sorted.

Having one/two assets (bitUSD/bitBTC) to focus on speeds this process up.

Once there is one solid peg in place the other assets can be bootstrapped very quickly.

404
General Discussion / Re: Is Anyone Still Holding Bitcoin?
« on: September 12, 2014, 05:17:10 pm »
Quote from: xeroc on September 12, 2014, 04:41:48 pm
Quote from: OldMan on September 12, 2014, 04:26:29 pm
Would love to take 80-90% of my holdings offline for next two or three years.
not recommended due to:
- missed yield (1 year max)
- inactivity fee of 5% every year after 365 days

Yes, valid points. Assets in cold storage would have to be rotated periodically.

A watch-only set up would not really work because a transaction needs to be made.

This is going to need to be addressed before serious money starts to move in.

A permanent hot wallet is not going to cut it for any substantial amount of wealth.

Hate to see it go third party/centralized/fee based. ie. SecureCo charging fees slightly less than inactivity.

405
General Discussion / Re: Web of Trust + Account Feedback
« on: September 12, 2014, 04:37:45 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on September 12, 2014, 04:11:17 pm
We are preparing to add some new features to help reduce fraud / errors from accounts that look like bter. 

1) You can now "burn" shares for or against an account while posting an optionally signed message on the "wall" of the account. 
2) You can now link two accounts with arbitrary meta data, ie:  the account "bytemaster" can link to "bter-com" and define various properties such as trust-level.

So now users have a way of flagging accounts for both good/bad behavior, leaving anonymous or signed messages on accounts, and build an arbitrary web-of-trust among the accounts.

These features also provide the basis of future features including:
1) Allowing Overstock to issue shares
2) Paying dividends on User Issued Assets
3) Identity authorities for voting

The purpose of this thread is to discuss these features and their implications.

This could be a critical component of the delegate selection mechanism, both for individual delegates and slates.

Also escrow and commerce per Xeroc.

Is there any way to integrate this into the avatars? To be simplistic, BM gets five gold stars, throwaway123 gets none...

Using a combination of standardized colours/shapes to signify various level of trust/reputation.

Perhaps using the Bitshares logo; accounts with no rep have an empty logo, logo slowly fills in section by section as the account builds more trust/rep.

BM gets a full logo, I get one wedge, etc.

Getting one's 'diamond' (very top of the logo) could be a significant event.

Yes, holy shit. The I3 team continues to knock it out of the park. First yield, now rep.  +5%

Off to buy more BTSX...

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ... 38

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 22 queries.