0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I agree that PTS could continue to add value as a proto-DAC doing proto-dac things which it could not do on btsx. I would want to use this to build the smart contracting platform and prototype mechanisms for other DACs
Quote from: Pheonike on October 02, 2014, 09:36:25 pmI think it should be it's own separate dpos block chain. What's the point of an on ramp to a freeway you are already driving on?Fine for you and me. But #10 on coinmarketcap is going to get some other peoples' attention and serve as an on-ramp for outsiders. It's one heck of an advertisement that would just disappear, ensuring that the only people who find out about it are those who know about BitShares X, trust it, and are willing to participate in it.
I think it should be it's own separate dpos block chain. What's the point of an on ramp to a freeway you are already driving on?
This demeans PTS and will make the price drop as it is now dependent on another chain instead of being diversified from risk by being its own separate chain.
Putting PTS on BTSX will subject BTSX to PTS's snapshot announcment/commencment volatility... Not a good idea imo.
It seems that how to implementation the no-mining PTS is still very controversy, why don't we start a poll? Personally, I prefer integrating PTS inside of BTSX. It will be the first valuable user issued asset, and will add value to BTSX wallet too, because at least there are more needs to open your wallet. The reason that I don't like DPOS PTS is: 1\The value of PTS will be lower and lower as more snapshots of interesting DACs are conducted, and eventually will approach zero, if there is no new DAC for a period of time. It's not wise to invest on such stuff, even the cost of DPOS is not high; 2\ No PTS shareholder like their shares being diluted when only delegates benefit from it.
PTS and AGS aren't really DACs but more just the ledger itself. In the worst case scenario if something bad happened to BitShares X (which would be horrible for the entire BitShares ecosystem by the way), PTS/AGS just become temporarily frozen (much like AGS is currently) until we took a snapshot of their latest state from the failed BitShares X blockchain and put it into its own DAC. Furthermore, there are good reasons to not put it on its own separate DPOS chain: its low market cap, especially as further snapshots erodes its value further, can hurt the security of DPOS against 51% stake attacks; it becomes more difficult (requires atomic cross-chain trading) to trade it against BTSX and the BitUSD most people will want to use (the one on the BitShares X DAC). And we all know that it makes no sense to let it continue as a POW coin.
What if the rest of it was added to the pot to give BitAssets a more attractive yield?
I'm ambivalent on this as well. I'm not really comfortable with the idea that the intermediary for all DACs will become locked into this single DAC-experiment. To me it feels a bit like making the free-market less free. I'd rather not see PTS be a subsidiary of one single DAC. I'd like a more modular solution, where even bitsharesx could fail, but not take down the entire ecosystem.
Quote from: arhag on October 01, 2014, 09:48:47 pmHere is a variation of my previous proposal. What if I3 did the work to release the PROTO user-issued asset on BitShares X (and covered all necessary fees to make that possible)? And in return, the community accepts scaling the PTS snapshot to 1.8 million shares (still a better deal than wasting all remaining 0.27 million shares to POW miners), leaving the other 0.2 million shares as a gift to I3 to compensate them for their effort and as extra funds to help their continued efforts in supporting the BitShares ecosystem. If the community were to accept this proposal, would I3 accept the offer?What if the rest of it was added to the pot to give BitAssets a more attractive yield?
Here is a variation of my previous proposal. What if I3 did the work to release the PROTO user-issued asset on BitShares X (and covered all necessary fees to make that possible)? And in return, the community accepts scaling the PTS snapshot to 1.8 million shares (still a better deal than wasting all remaining 0.27 million shares to POW miners), leaving the other 0.2 million shares as a gift to I3 to compensate them for their effort and as extra funds to help their continued efforts in supporting the BitShares ecosystem. If the community were to accept this proposal, would I3 accept the offer?
Quote from: gamey on October 01, 2014, 08:12:14 pmThis is an interesting discussion.Just realize that if you make it into an asset, then there will never be a top 10 PTS crypto-coin. It will always be an asset from here on out.Also, it now relies on people to download and become involved with BTSX first, when BTSX was the product of PTS. In some ways this could be good, but overall not so much.I'm ambivalent about the whole thing in general.I'm ambivalent on this as well. I'm not really comfortable with the idea that the intermediary for all DACs will become locked into this single DAC-experiment. To me it feels a bit like making the free-market less free. I'd rather not see PTS be a subsidiary of one single DAC. I'd like a more modular solution, where even bitsharesx could fail, but not take down the entire ecosystem.
This is an interesting discussion.Just realize that if you make it into an asset, then there will never be a top 10 PTS crypto-coin. It will always be an asset from here on out.Also, it now relies on people to download and become involved with BTSX first, when BTSX was the product of PTS. In some ways this could be good, but overall not so much.I'm ambivalent about the whole thing in general.
Quote from: toast on October 01, 2014, 03:31:28 pmGo for it then, the OP is telling the people who keep insisting it needs a DPOS upgrade how to get started.Maybe you can beat them to it as a user issued asset, or duke it out in this thread.It would be really great to get all of the balances in the BitShares X blockchain at once though, say during one of the future hard forks. If that is not possible, then I guess people will have to donate some BTSX to pay for all the transaction fees necessary and quickly transfer all of the issued assets (I am going to name them PROTO in this post) to the appropriate addresses. Then trusted members of the community would have to look through the unspent transaction outputs to ensure they comply with the snapshots (or just have someone really trusted by the community, like toast or bytemaster, do the asset distribution in the first place). And only after the green light has been given by these trusted members would it be safe to start trading the PROTO assets on the BitShares X decentralized exchange. During this whole process from PTS snapshot until the green light has been given, all PTS trades everywhere would have to stop. After a successful transition PTS would become worthless (centralized exchanges can get rid of it, although the nice exchanges would credit people with PROTO IOUs just like they credited BTSX IOUs, and all PTS mining would stop for good).So, who wants to help make this possible?Edit: Also, PTS supply would be scaled up to 2 million in the snapshot for a total PROTO asset supply of 4 million (AGS + scaled PTS). Or rather, scale to something a tiny bit smaller than 2 million with the rest given to the PROTO asset issuer in order to repay the people who donated the BTSX to cover the fees of this process.
Go for it then, the OP is telling the people who keep insisting it needs a DPOS upgrade how to get started.Maybe you can beat them to it as a user issued asset, or duke it out in this thread.
Quote from: clout on October 01, 2014, 03:19:07 pmIs it not technically feasible to add PTS as an asset on BitShares X and have individuals import their wallets to claim those PTS?Seriously. It makes far more sense to make it a user-issued asset with maxed out supply on the BitShares X blockchain (if technically possible).And while your at it, mix in the AGS snapshot too to have a united AGS/PTS protoshare that future DACs can credit by at least 20%.
Is it not technically feasible to add PTS as an asset on BitShares X and have individuals import their wallets to claim those PTS?
Quote from: toast on October 01, 2014, 03:27:37 pmWhy does it make far more sense?Less workNo need for another executable to run.No need to manage a new set of delegates to vote for.Better DPOS security because of the higher market cap of BTSX.
Why does it make far more sense?
I will switch to helping launch PTS on DPOS (doing the actual toolkit changes you need) when:* There is a dedicated PTS2 repository * We can reliably make a PTS snapshot at any time * The GUI is reskinned for PTS * Unmined PTS policy is decided (I suggest inflating for delegates according to mining schedule - use some for bounties required for transition)\* ALL third-party services that use PTS are notified, especially: * Exchanges * Block explorers * Mining Pools* Clear PR guidelines * What to do for upgrade processExpect this list to grow as people get their hands dirty
Quote from: clout on October 01, 2014, 03:19:07 pmIs it not technically feasible to add PTS as an asset on BitShares X and have individuals import their wallets to claim those PTS?Seriously. It makes far more sense to make it a user-issued asset with maxed out supply on the BitShares X blockchain (if technically possible).