I wonder if this was one of the reasons for bytemasters recent push to allow a DAC to self fund itself. Would make an awful lot of sense through that lens.
Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.
Yes... self funding DACs was heavily motivated by regulatory issues with crowd funding.
Im confused - BitShares was funded by crowd funding via AngelShares. So how does Peter Todd's tweet not apply to us?
And I also dont get what sidechains has to do with regulation.
It does seem ironic that a key person in decentralized currency would want the SEC to come in and squash competition.
Not crowd funding as it has come to be defined.
Nothing was sold. Nothing was purchased.
Just no-strings-attached donations to fund a common vision.
And the hope that independent developers would want to voluntarily honor the donor demographic.
That vision has worked. It's realization has arrived.
And now we can all enjoy the fertile ground it creates for us as it continues with a life of its own.