You may have helped them along by pointing out their flaws in public. If their system is flawed, you should've let them figure out the hard way. The consumer and the market will figure out very fast which is a better system. I do understand you are probably looking for more investments and attention but going on the attack before either of you have released your product only benefits the people already in your camp and may make the outsiders wait to see who survives before investing in the ideas. 

I also understand the ex CEO is on their team now and there may be bad blood between you guys. I think all focus should be on Bitshares release.  These pokes at the competitor may not be so becoming.

I disagree. It's not a case of Vitalik, going, 'dang! I didn't think of that, ha ha thanks!' These exchanges are for the benefit of us the audience. The weak spots are known to him. Personally I think it's about communicating and explaining that those are indeed weak spots and showing an audience that even when challenged with them directly, a satisfactory response is not forthcoming.

It's like central banking and the debt based money system. It's obviously a bad system, but confronting central bankers in a public exchange about it, wouldn't cause them to go - 'Oh, oops we made a mistake, thanks, let's go back to gold' - it would merely help to educate the public on it's flaws and demonstrate that they don't have satisfactory answers. Without these kind of exchanges, the public may use an inferior system simply because they don't understand how it is flawed/exploiting them.

Great video, I don't understand some technical aspects very well, so this might be a dumb question.

1. Exchanges are already running their own trading systems that only reference the bitcoin network when bitcoin are deposited or withdrawn from the exchange. So exchanges could in theory run their own separate blockchain which would be more transparent and verifiable while your funds are in the exchange system and only reference bitcoin when you withdraw or deposit bitcoin from that exchange/possibly future blockchain. Is this kind of how off-chain stuff could work?

As to why new dacs might attach to Ethereum...

2. Is ethereum's USP maybe that it's being done with Goldman Sachs involvement?

What if GS make Ethereum the only legal 'base' crypto and Goldman Sachs also give it the only legal Western crypto to fiat gateway/exchanges.

So the only legal Western exchanges are run by them and you can only trade fiat in and out of Ethereum. (They make laws so that the only Crypto Western online retailers can legally accept is  Ethereum as well.)

Then lots would tag onto ethereum because whatever virtual assets/dacs they create will have to be traded out into ethereum if people want to exchange them for fiat or buy stuff from large online businesses.

Quote from: Empirical1 on February 11, 2014, 12:39:05 am

I agree, it can bring about such positive change! 

The problem is however great the system is that someone designs, isn't the problem always going to be the fiat to crypto gateway?

This is kind of a re-quote from an article I read today...

"Due to the nature of its structure, banning crypto-currencies will of course not eradicate them. But what it will do is make it impossible for law-abiding individuals and businesses to use them — and thereby render them practically useless anyway."

Everything is legal somewhere.... this would certainly slow things down, but there are just too many benefits to society and individuals who use the coins to keep it down forever.

Yes that's true.

Bitshares can probably only go up in if it works well regardless.

But I think yes Bitcoin can be slowed down/lose a lot of its current value if the West decides to come down hard on it.

I like proof of burn.

There's always a lot of concern in the crypto-community about fairness. If something is perceived as pre-mined, or unfairly distributed it can really have problems. (Memorycoin, NXT, Mastercoin etc.)

The XCP guys didn't get any benefit from the funds, the only way they can make money is if they burn their own BTC and develop and deliver a product that is actually useful. XCP will always have the moral high ground now. This is very valuable.

In the medium term there's a big argument in favour of not wasting those initial funds and putting them towards maintaining and developing something. 

Personally I think Bitshares is likely to deliver the best product, when I view this forum I'm consistently impressed by Bytemasters responses and views, like others have said, don't know where he finds the time. 
I also prefer Proof of Stake and something independent of Bitcoin. Exciting few months ahead!

Yes that's a good one!

Expensive Asics, requiring constant cooling, got you down?



Then use Memorycoin!

While Bitcoin mining requires the use of expensive, specialized hardware, MemoryCoins are efficiently mined on ordinary computer hardware like PCs and laptops. Anyone can download a program and start mining MemoryCoin.

http://memorycoin.org/manifesto/

Cool stuff guys