301
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.
302
General Discussion / Re: Slogans?
« on: November 11, 2014, 09:05:29 pm »
Are the Sex Pistols well known globally? I hope so!
Heard of their album "Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's The Sex Pistols"? It's brilliant and worth a listen...
Anyway, how about:
Never Mind the Banks, Here's BitShares
Perhaps we could even use the artwork to a degree?
Edit: I love the fact that 'Banks' takes the place of 'Bollocks' (which is British word for testicles, used to mean crap/shitty). And 'Bitshares' replaces 'Sex Pistols' - the punk band!
Heard of their album "Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's The Sex Pistols"? It's brilliant and worth a listen...
Anyway, how about:
Never Mind the Banks, Here's BitShares
Perhaps we could even use the artwork to a degree?
Edit: I love the fact that 'Banks' takes the place of 'Bollocks' (which is British word for testicles, used to mean crap/shitty). And 'Bitshares' replaces 'Sex Pistols' - the punk band!
303
General Discussion / Re: What's your confidence level at for Bitshares success (1+ billion market cap)?
« on: November 11, 2014, 08:34:34 pm »No chance. Think about it, a lot of people that understand bitcoin very well do not even understand most of bitshares and are confused. The vast majority of the world population has either never heard of or has no understanding of bitcoin and its been 6 years now. What makes you think everyone is going to suddenly "get" bitshares and pour their life savings into it in only 5 years?
You don't need to understand how something works in order to understand how to use it... Bitshares is a more useful platform that provides solutions to people other than crypto-anarchists.
It's functions should suit crypto-analysts too me thinks.
304
General Discussion / Re: What's your confidence level at for Bitshares success (1+ billion market cap)?
« on: November 11, 2014, 08:10:36 pm »Answering 100% is very silly.
There are plenty of reasons why bitshares could fail, mostly, we could fail to acheive network effect and then be beaten to the punch by a competitor.
Of course, I believe in Bitshares, and I think it is greatly undervalued. At a $40M market cap, it is as if the market is saying we have a 4% chance of getting to a billion, and I think the probability is much higher than that.
I'd like to stay conservative and say there's a 50/50 chance it reaches 1billion market cap.
If it doesn't reach that market cap, it won't be because of a lack of groundbreaking technological/economical advances made by the product. It will be because average Joe is too dumb to even realize the current financial system is flawed, and our inability as a community to make this product accessible to the masses.
I think what makes the 1 billion market cap possible/plausible is the focus of marketing on getting average Joe to use bitUSD just because it has more advantages than regular USD. Remmitances will also increase adoption, but won't have much network effect on the masses.
And when 1 billion is reached, if everything is properly aligned, network effect will take over. Getting the 1st billion in market cap will be the hardest (and longest) part imo.
It's like all self made millionaires say: Getting your first million dollar is the hardest part. Afterwards getting more millions is much easier --- Same here with market cap, but in billions.
I pretty much agree with yous.
I would just like to add that potatoes are poisonous until they're cooked! HA HA! (Not intended to be offensive)
305
General Discussion / Re: Should we kill the DACronym?
« on: November 10, 2014, 09:44:55 pm »Besides, the anacronym DAZ has more pizzazz!
I don't want to detract from your post, but "DAZ" reminded me of "The DAZ Doorstep Challenge" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeO0AhKPW5Y
Sorry...a bit of light relief
306
General Discussion / Re: Google's 8 Innovation Principles
« on: November 10, 2014, 09:32:04 pm »
Wooooooo!!!!! This is, like, pretty much, like, what's been going on around here!!! 
"Agility—nimbleness—is a key discriminator against the large and linear" BitShares vs Bitcoin
We'll soon be at a good point to start acting more on solid data gained from proper feedback as the marketing tests kick off.
"Agility—nimbleness—is a key discriminator against the large and linear" BitShares vs Bitcoin
We'll soon be at a good point to start acting more on solid data gained from proper feedback as the marketing tests kick off.
307
General Discussion / Re: Should we kill the DACronym?
« on: November 10, 2014, 09:03:08 pm »Just call it Decentralized Application or DApp. Everybody is using apps on iPhone or Android so they should get this quickly.
Distributed Application for Consensus
308
General Discussion / Re: Should we kill the DACronym?
« on: November 10, 2014, 08:59:01 pm »- Dispersed Automated Consortium
- Distributed Automated Collaboration
(I prefer the latter)
309
General Discussion / Re: Should we kill the DACronym?
« on: November 10, 2014, 08:51:17 pm »I think it's a mistake to "officially" drop the company metaphor. If Satoshi described Bitcoin as "p2p money", BitShares can be described as a "p2p company". It's a decentralized company on a blockchain that's censorship resistant and cannot be controlled by governments.
I fail to see why dropping the company metaphor is at all useful.
It's only useful in that it doesn't immediately draw attention from the governments claiming to be resistant against. You can call it a "company" or a "community", use "tokens" or something instead of "shares" and "distribution" instead of "dividend", "rewards" instead of "interest" etc... but a duck is a duck. Pretty wimpy move IMO. Also a major flip flop of what has been marketed and constantly pushed since bitshares started.
Actually with the SEC what you call it matters more than what it is... I originally adopted the company metaphor based upon the "duck is a duck" mentality... but sadly that is not the case with regulators. They care about whether or not you are attempting to use terms the public places trust in to persuade others to part with their money. If you can convince someone to part with their money for a stake in a community then it is very different than selling a share in a company despite the economic result being the same.
Why do we care about the SEC? Bitshares is a decentralized worldwide platform which they cannot really stop.
Why must we conform to their regulations?
If we want BitShares' usefulness and userbase to be as wide as possible, then the ability to opt in to conforming to regulations matters a great deal. This doesn't mean that all uses and users within BitShares will have to conform to regulations however (I imagine)...
310
General Discussion / Re: Should we kill the DACronym?
« on: November 10, 2014, 08:04:44 pm »
Just thought of Distributed Automated Chronicle
chron·i·cle
ˈkränək(ə)l/
noun
noun: chronicle; plural noun: chronicles
1.
a factual written account of important or historical events in the order of their occurrence.
chron·i·cle
ˈkränək(ə)l/
noun
noun: chronicle; plural noun: chronicles
1.
a factual written account of important or historical events in the order of their occurrence.
311
General Discussion / Re: Should we kill the DACronym?
« on: November 10, 2014, 07:44:47 pm »I think we should keep using DAC.
Keep calling the C community, if we cannot be a company.
This community invented 'DAC', we shouldnt kill it off.
This is a good point... we should probably tweak the words we use for DAC but keep DAC.
Distributed is better than decentralized
Automated is better than autonomous or automatic
C* - all of the above apply from various perspectives.
Does it matter if it doesn't work as a noun? For example, would these be considered?:
- Distributed Automated Consensus
- Decentralized Approved Consensus
- Decentralized Achievement of Consensus
- Distributed Approval Consensus
By the way, if these were potentially viable, I think my previous suggestion of changing 'Decentralized' to 'Distributed' can be reconsidered!
312
General Discussion / Re: Should we kill the DACronym?
« on: November 10, 2014, 07:17:11 pm »
"BitShares is a platform for Decentralized Approved Consensus"
or "Distributed Approved Consensus"
DAC is hard to use as a noun in this instance
or "Distributed Approved Consensus"
DAC is hard to use as a noun in this instance
313
General Discussion / Re: Should we kill the DACronym?
« on: November 10, 2014, 05:55:43 pm »Great feedback everyone... I don't see any clear solution, but perhaps we can find a different word for the "A" ..
Decentralized Automated C* - I think Automated better describes things than autonomous.
I agree with your reasoning in favor of 'Automated'.
Similarly we could consider 'Distributed' as a replacement for 'Decentralized'.
But does 'Distributed Automatic C*' sound worse than 'Decentralized Automatic C*'?
314
General Discussion / Re: Does this describe your BitShares process?
« on: November 09, 2014, 07:29:43 pm »Oh bollocks!
I'm disappointed with you lot!
You were supposed to motivate me to buy some NXT!
Why would we do that.
We already had to deal with a couple NXT supporters intentionally spreading untrue FUD about bitshares and telling people to buy NXT.
Because I keep failing at a task I've set myself, and was hoping for some support! [Where's the emoticon for 'tongue in cheek'?)
I can get close to buying NXT, but every time I fall at the last hurdle and end up with more BTSX.
OK - I'll give up on my whimsical and self-imposed goal of getting a load of NXT. I'll go with my head, heart, intestines and soul...
315
General Discussion / Re: Does this describe your BitShares process?
« on: November 09, 2014, 07:06:06 pm »
Oh bollocks!
I'm disappointed with you lot!
You were supposed to motivate me to buy some NXT!
Now I may have to buy more BTSX!
I'm disappointed with you lot!
You were supposed to motivate me to buy some NXT!
Now I may have to buy more BTSX!
