0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: xeroc ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ on March 10, 2015, 12:17:07 pmhttp://www.reddit.com/r/counterparty_xcp/comments/2y0apx/contract_news/I hope Vitalik and Daniel keep up their talks, they have such complementary natures.
http://www.reddit.com/r/counterparty_xcp/comments/2y0apx/contract_news/
this summer
Quote from: teenagecheese on March 04, 2015, 10:18:56 pmI am still investing, just not in bitshares, at least not now.Yes, these things do take time and I do have patience. I waited over a year. They also cannot move too slowly because innovation happens fast in the tech world. Bitshares is going too slow, has changed direction too many times, and has STILL not figured out the right direction.Teenage cheese is aged cheese, it is mature, that is the point of name.What do you think of Ethereum?
I am still investing, just not in bitshares, at least not now.Yes, these things do take time and I do have patience. I waited over a year. They also cannot move too slowly because innovation happens fast in the tech world. Bitshares is going too slow, has changed direction too many times, and has STILL not figured out the right direction.Teenage cheese is aged cheese, it is mature, that is the point of name.
Quote from: sittingduck on March 08, 2015, 02:51:30 pmQuote from: wasthatawolf on March 08, 2015, 02:23:50 pmQuote from: delulo on March 08, 2015, 08:17:12 amThere for sure is a balance / trade off between voting/forging participation and decentralization in any POS system.As you lose decentralization, you diminish the value proposition of the Bitshares network.That depends on whether or not the network already has too much decentralization. I would argue the network has significant value even if it is completely centralized in the hands of a single delegate. Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkWhat's the value in using a single delegate Bitshares system over something like Ripple or a centralized exchange?
Quote from: wasthatawolf on March 08, 2015, 02:23:50 pmQuote from: delulo on March 08, 2015, 08:17:12 amThere for sure is a balance / trade off between voting/forging participation and decentralization in any POS system.As you lose decentralization, you diminish the value proposition of the Bitshares network.That depends on whether or not the network already has too much decentralization. I would argue the network has significant value even if it is completely centralized in the hands of a single delegate. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: delulo on March 08, 2015, 08:17:12 amThere for sure is a balance / trade off between voting/forging participation and decentralization in any POS system.As you lose decentralization, you diminish the value proposition of the Bitshares network.
There for sure is a balance / trade off between voting/forging participation and decentralization in any POS system.
Quote from: delulo on March 07, 2015, 05:38:39 pmQuote from: lil_jay890 on March 07, 2015, 12:43:42 pmQuote from: cube on March 07, 2015, 08:04:54 amQuote from: wasthatawolf on March 06, 2015, 04:11:00 pm...It has become obvious through the recent happenings on these forums that a large bulk of Bitshares in circulation are held by a somewhat small group of investors who have successfully gagged the developers ...No investor like a coin that is controlled by a small group of people. The fact has to be verified. If this is true, there needs to be transparency on when this control is over.I believe it actually the opposite and investors love when whales take positions. Look at how stocks react when Icahn or other big hedge funds take a large position. Most rocket up when the reports come out. Most investors feel comfort when they follow a whaleAll moralizing judgments aside (economics and psychology of envy) having large stakeholders is good for a DPOS system because the higher the stake the more motivated the parties are to vote and the more secure and competitive is the network/blockchain. So be happy about the few that take the risk and put in the work. It's the same for (NXT like) POS but there it would additionally be beneficial / necessary if the large stakeholders had all (roughly) the same stake size so not only one / the biggest stakeholders would produce blocks.Not sure I follow your logic. If security becomes greater the larger the stakeholder, inevitably, this would mean the most secure DPOS system is where a single stakeholder owns most if not all Bitshares. The super stakeholder would then be the most motivated party to vote to keep control of the network.
Quote from: lil_jay890 on March 07, 2015, 12:43:42 pmQuote from: cube on March 07, 2015, 08:04:54 amQuote from: wasthatawolf on March 06, 2015, 04:11:00 pm...It has become obvious through the recent happenings on these forums that a large bulk of Bitshares in circulation are held by a somewhat small group of investors who have successfully gagged the developers ...No investor like a coin that is controlled by a small group of people. The fact has to be verified. If this is true, there needs to be transparency on when this control is over.I believe it actually the opposite and investors love when whales take positions. Look at how stocks react when Icahn or other big hedge funds take a large position. Most rocket up when the reports come out. Most investors feel comfort when they follow a whaleAll moralizing judgments aside (economics and psychology of envy) having large stakeholders is good for a DPOS system because the higher the stake the more motivated the parties are to vote and the more secure and competitive is the network/blockchain. So be happy about the few that take the risk and put in the work. It's the same for (NXT like) POS but there it would additionally be beneficial / necessary if the large stakeholders had all (roughly) the same stake size so not only one / the biggest stakeholders would produce blocks.
Quote from: cube on March 07, 2015, 08:04:54 amQuote from: wasthatawolf on March 06, 2015, 04:11:00 pm...It has become obvious through the recent happenings on these forums that a large bulk of Bitshares in circulation are held by a somewhat small group of investors who have successfully gagged the developers ...No investor like a coin that is controlled by a small group of people. The fact has to be verified. If this is true, there needs to be transparency on when this control is over.I believe it actually the opposite and investors love when whales take positions. Look at how stocks react when Icahn or other big hedge funds take a large position. Most rocket up when the reports come out. Most investors feel comfort when they follow a whale
Quote from: wasthatawolf on March 06, 2015, 04:11:00 pm...It has become obvious through the recent happenings on these forums that a large bulk of Bitshares in circulation are held by a somewhat small group of investors who have successfully gagged the developers ...No investor like a coin that is controlled by a small group of people. The fact has to be verified. If this is true, there needs to be transparency on when this control is over.
...It has become obvious through the recent happenings on these forums that a large bulk of Bitshares in circulation are held by a somewhat small group of investors who have successfully gagged the developers ...
teenagecheese, I suppose the virtue of patience comes with age. When you become agedcheddar, you will look back on this day wondering what it would have been like if you had done things differently.I hope you all the best in your future endeavors.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGblsNXkJog
Hi everyone. I have lost hope in bitshares due to the extended failure of the community to come out with a good product. Repeatedly, I have seen a poor understanding of what makes a good business and a good product.To save bitshares I think you need to focus on and come out with one, key, killer feature that will increase adoption and open the door to all the other features later. The feature I think you should focus on is making a true decentralized exchange, as I have said before. By true decentralized I mean an exchange you can send real bitcoins to (and other popular cryptos) and then immediately exchange them for other coins. No gateways, no bridges, at least not from the point of view of the user. Just directly to the client.I saw a little bit of talk about this earlier and it got me excited that at least others are thinking the same thing. Devs, I hope you do this or something like this and I hope you do it soon or else someone else will. Yes, I know it's complicated to implement, but it is what is needed and bitshares is in the perfect position to bring it to the world because you are already on that track. I'll be watching. Good luck.
Quote from: Helikopterben on March 05, 2015, 09:24:17 pmYou sold at the bottom. $0.01 per bts is ridiculously cheap. Is it? Calling the bottom here is pretty bold as far as I can tell. Bitshares competitors (NXT, NuShares, Counterparty) are all trading well below the current $25 million market cap. It has become obvious through the recent happenings on these forums that a large bulk of Bitshares in circulation are held by a somewhat small group of investors who have successfully gagged the developers from speaking their minds on this forum. Whether the developers did this voluntarily (which I think is most likely the case because they are also large holders) is irrelevant. The results are the same. This is not the formula for a healthy ecosystem and is starting to result in people losing interest (the value of the individual user in the network should not be underestimated). Recent developments in the bitcoin ecosystem (http://www.nasdaq.com/article/the-first-bitcoin-etf-offers-easy-way-to-profit-from-virtual-currency-gbtc-cm450589) will likely have people questioning the value of maintaining an unproven Bitshares position. I've also decided to sit on the sideline for a while to see how this all plays out.
You sold at the bottom. $0.01 per bts is ridiculously cheap.
Quote from: alexkravets on March 05, 2015, 04:54:45 amBitshares has done many things right, perhaps even most NECESSARY things right. However for its potential to be realized it has not done the SUFFICIENT thing yet ... which is achieve high liquidity of trading and ease of inbound and outbound flows ... The great lesson to be learned form Ripple Labs is as follows: ONLY after they pivoted to target BANK settlement and NOT consumers Ripple adoption has taken off:TL;DR: Liquidity liquidity liquidity ... onramps, onramps, onramps ... offramps, offramps, offramps :-)Cheers Right on point. This is why the work Gentso1 is doing is so important. We need 5 more of him.
Bitshares has done many things right, perhaps even most NECESSARY things right. However for its potential to be realized it has not done the SUFFICIENT thing yet ... which is achieve high liquidity of trading and ease of inbound and outbound flows ... The great lesson to be learned form Ripple Labs is as follows: ONLY after they pivoted to target BANK settlement and NOT consumers Ripple adoption has taken off:TL;DR: Liquidity liquidity liquidity ... onramps, onramps, onramps ... offramps, offramps, offramps :-)Cheers
To sell now when this project is so young is beyond my comprehension but whatever.
I think we're on the cusp of something huge.
I have lost hope ...
To save bitshares I think you need to ...
I saw a little bit of talk about this earlier ...
I hope you do it soon or else someone else will ...