Good to see Dan blogging. The most effective thing he could do is learn to write well and explain BitShares to the general Bitcoin user/investor. I think there is a temptation for a developer to think that if he adds just one more killer feature, it'll be the one where everyone finally recognizes how good the product is and investors will pile in. I think the opposite. BitShares is too much of a moving target for investors. Stop innovating, tidy up the loose ends, call it finished, and explain what the heck it is.
Well said. Dan's blogging was the thing that got me interested in Bitshares. It's quite effective way of marketing, at least to bring some intelligent people onboard.
We also need to finish the platform so it can start to live fully without dependency on Cryptonomex. For example, the GUI for committee is still missing, which is a big reason for so few committee members. If we look at the whole system, we can see where the problems are:
- Witnesses are working well, no problems so far there.
- Committee needs more members, preferably economists and/or blockchain specialists. The point is to get intelligent people to make wise decisions on blockchain parameters, not just reduce the power of Bytemaster for the sake of decentralization.
- More qualified workers. How to attract them?
- FBA is still just an idea. We need to formalize and document the process so that anybody can learn how to produce a new feature with FBA. Cryptonomex has a "monopoly" on FBAs because nobody else knows how to use them.