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.


Messages - Empirical1

Pages: 1 ... 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59
856
MemoryCoin / Re: Silly memorycoin/guerilla marketing ideas, feel free to contribute...
« on: January 20, 2014, 07:12:07 pm »
Trouble studying for exams?



Use Memorycoin! To buy the answers from someone else...

Seriously, Memorycoin is the first coin that is committed to keeping mining decentralised, combined with a payment system to attract the best developers and a voting system to keep them honest. 

857
MemoryCoin / Re: Silly memorycoin/guerilla marketing ideas, feel free to contribute...
« on: January 20, 2014, 07:03:12 pm »
Don't let Satoshi's vision be erased!



Use Memorycoin!

(Because it has a commitment to keep mining decentralised and voting system to vote off compromised developers. :) )

858
MemoryCoin / Silly memorycoin/guerilla marketing ideas, feel free to contribute...
« on: January 20, 2014, 07:01:43 pm »
I've discovered a fatal technical flaw with MemoryCoin.

Mathematical Proof

1. Elephants never forget. Fact! - So elephant's don't need Memorycoin!

2. The biggest land animal in the world is an elephant. Fact!




Therefore the biggest market in the world won't use memorycoin!  :o

859
MemoryCoin / Re: The Pre-Mine Questions FreeTrade Won't Answer (Ongoing)
« on: January 19, 2014, 09:59:34 pm »
To the person who said dev's get far less than they deserve - For the work and risk they take, absolutely. Also I believe a truly decentralised crypto-currency will really help mankind. FreeTrade has put some ideas in place that move Satoshi's vision in that direction, I honestly think FreeTrade can look in the mirror at night and be proud of the work he's done and is doing.

That doesn't change the problem that now exists, I'm only trying to bring it to your attention because I believe FreeTrade deserves more than what the situation he's put himself in will end up giving him.

Last attempt -

I don't care who got what and why in the pre-mine. I only care how it was perceived by the market.
Was it 'perceived' as transparent and fair? Because if it wasn't, I know new investors will stay well clear.

The memorycoin swtich over looks like it was done selectively

Quote
dilute anyone who wasn't voting, or just voting to share the grants out amongst the winning voters. So the fork rewarded people who were really engaged and trying to make the project work, but still kept balances for everyone.

You also did not disclose your pre-mine stake for ages, you tried to avoid & deflect it. 

Unfortunately, my conclusion is, no matter what responses you give now/try to justify it, I'm pretty certain the MemoryCoin2.0 launch is perceived by the market as having an unfair and un-transparent pre-mine. 

____________________________________________________________

If you don't understand how human psychology works, it's hard to help here, but I'll try.

1. Humans would rather lose money than support something where they feel someone has got an unfair/un-transparent share even if they deserve it!  (This is why being completely equitable and transparent if there's a pre-mine is so important.)
2. Case in point - You are a human too and you would also rather lose money then take a reduced share, even though the reduced share is FAR more valuable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-ougCMz7Nk

You're now living in the above Game-show.
Investors feels like you've taken A, when you should have taken B and you've been deceptive about it.
You feel like you've taken B when you actually deserved A and now people are trying to ask you to take C.

Unfortunately the result of this game-show is often the same, everybodies share ends up being worth 0. 

(To Newmine, you repeatedly say the same argument, you come across quite trollish.)

860
MemoryCoin / Re: The Pre-Mine Questions FreeTrade Won't Answer (Ongoing)
« on: January 19, 2014, 05:07:08 pm »
Quote from: bppsp1 on January 19, 2014, 04:53:32 pm

Personally I think this could all be taken care by simply splitting all the premine coins he allocated to himself across all network generated addresses equally. Sure some coins would go to non-used wallets and effectively end up in /dev/null but this way he would distance himself completely from what seems to be a big issue and causing unneccesary friction.


I'm not sure what the best solution is but something needs to be corrected. You guys in it can talk your book as much you like. Personally I'd like to have 50 000 of something than 160 000 of nothing.

I did give you kind of a positive shout on the Bitcoin forums..

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=415138.80

Quote
The successor to Bitcoin needs 2 things...

1. Central Bank proof mining         (Central banks may already control >51% of Bitcoin hashing power.)
2. Central Bank proof developers   (See Mike joining circle to sit with Goldman Sachs.)

The closest coin I've come across so far is memorycoin 2.0 they have a constant commitment to keeping mining decentralised and voting system that allows compromised developers to be replaced.

Unfortunately there's a bit of pre-mine scandal re: that coin, so personally I can't see the vision of Satoshi being transferred to something built on a questionable foundation, but I do think the coin that takes over from Bitcoin will have a lot of those features.

861
MemoryCoin / Re: The Pre-Mine Questions FreeTrade Won't Answer (Ongoing)
« on: January 19, 2014, 03:13:45 pm »
Just wanted to give you guys the point of view of a potential investor...

On the positive side, MMC2 has the attributes of what I think the Bitcoin Beating coin will have.

1. They need central bank proof mining. (They may already control Bitcoin network.)
2. Central Bank proof developers. (Most core devs are already compromised.)

Your coin addresses this. It has a commitment to keeping mining distributed and you have a voting system that allows suspected compromised individuals to be voted out.

I was really excited, it's exactly what the successor of Bitcoin needs, but of course then we get to the pre-mine scandal.

The fact that you gave yourself 160k coins is not a big deal, the fact that this lets you influence the voting in the beginning is actually a good thing. (Personally I would have had the voting system only kick in after 6 months so it gives the founding team the ability & incentive to develop the coin and prove themselves, and only if we feel they're compromised, eg. by joining circle, or they are not up to task then they would be voted off.)

Unfortunately what is a big deal is that you thought you were entitled to some priivacy regarding the pre-mine!? Pre-mining etc. is very controversial anyway and if it is done it needs to be as clear and transparent as possible. The way you avoided, deflected and justified not answering the questions is SO disappointing. Even the tongue in cheek/humorous way you finally addressed it was wrong and paragraphs like this are still very dubious...

Quote
fork all the balances from the old coin, but dilute anyone who wasn't voting, or just voting to share the grants out amongst the winning voters. So the fork rewarded people who were really engaged and trying to make the project work, but still kept balances for everyone.

People in crypto are literally waiting for a coin that has the ability to stay true to the vision Satoshi created, I believe that coin will look a lot like MemoryCoin, but I can't see anything of substance being built on such a shaky foundation.

At the moment my conclusion is that MemoryCoin has managed to snatch defeat from the Jaws of victory.

It's a pity because if it wasn't for this I would have bought a boat-load. 

But good luck, you never know. If you can re-lay the foundation you might still be able to build something, but I doubt it.

862
General Discussion / Re: Bitshares release speculation.
« on: January 12, 2014, 11:09:20 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on January 11, 2014, 05:50:02 am
The release date could be affected by what the minimal viable product (MVP) could be.   Obviously creating and implementing a blockchain and centralized validation with command line wallet / trading system would be the MVP that could enable successful trading on the network.   Then Ripple style consensus, Qt GUI, Web Wallets, could be added after this MVP.   

Some may claim that a "centralized" command line system is not what was promised, on the other hand it could be a valuable stepping stone toward a full system that would maximize shareholder value in the short term and allow speculation on real BTS while we build out the rest of the infrastructure.   

So release date is really subject to whether we need a full Qt GUI to launch.   What are your thoughts?

+10 for a MVP.

I also liked reading your other post on where you see the competitors at the moment.

If you can effectively eliminate traditional mining that would be great. Nothing pisses me off more than looking at the Bitcoin hashrate distribution and seeing Ghash.io has up to 45% sometimes.

863
General Discussion / Re: Proposal for Angelshares Investment in a DAC Trading Platform
« on: January 12, 2014, 10:58:16 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on January 12, 2014, 07:15:42 am
If your VC can fund $7 million as you say, then there is little need for $100K from the AGS fund. 

AGS is supposed to be used to develop DACs.  You have stated a plan to implement a DAC in 18 months, at that time AGS funding may be appropriate. 

Partnering with existing exchanges would probably be far more profitable for AGS holders and then using $100K to fund the development of integration with Open Transactions based exchange integration may be a more compelling and DECENTRALIZED solution.   Also spending $100K for development of cross-chain trading and options trading / coordination systems that work with the block-chain provided hooks may provide more value. 

I really believe that your initial VC funding should get you to a deployed product and our $100K plus-up should be focused merely on integrating advanced features not available on other exchanges.

You have our moral support, but to qualify for AGS funding I think you need to prove your ability to reach the same threshold of other USD/BTC exchanges.  Once there we can begin working with you to take it one step further and give you a competitive edge over the competition.

+1

864
General Discussion / Re: How do you predict bitshares catching on?
« on: January 10, 2014, 03:41:24 pm »
Hi delulo I agree with most things you wrote especially about forming useful partnerships at the early stages.

Quote from: delulo on January 09, 2014, 11:32:11 pm
Who uses Proof of burn?

Counterparty (XCP) They released a working (but buggy) smart property system out of the blue in the new year with NO funding. They're now issuing their currency but they're using 'proof of burn', so to receive XCP you send BTC to an un-owned address. They've also remained anonymous I think. Pretty impressive stuff, very 'Satoshi-esque'

865
General Discussion / Re: Marketing Idea: Double Dip PTS to AGS days?
« on: January 09, 2014, 10:22:42 pm »
Cool I appreciate the responses and I guess I agree that it's best not too mess with it at this stage.

Quote
If, as a rule, your long term predictions are almost always changed to improve them than it is not worthwhile to participate early

But the opposite has occured. On the date of the AGS/Bitshares announcement and up to the start of the issuance PTS was 0.027-0.031 now it's as low as 0.016-18. New announcements that wipe 45% off share prices in 9 days are usually not welcome, while a change that corrects that might not be as negative as you suggest.


Quote
Also, if you plan to have fewer PTS days because you still want to have 2,000,000 total BTS awarded for PTS, then this is even more useless because you are only temporarily inflating the price of PTS against BTC until PTS days stop but BTC days continue.

I wouldn't have fewer PTS days. I would have suggested decreasing the length of the issuance period.

Quote
Disagree. Assume (like you are assuming) that an equilibrium will be reached quickly for AGS between PTS dollar value per day and BTC dollar value per day. By increasing the AGS to PTS payout by say, 1.25x on average, you are increasing the value of each PTS by 1.25x. People who are DCAing their investments into AGS they would dump 12.5% of their protoshares in favor of bitcoin, because they would get more AGS per dollar by rebalancing.

Again, I think if you adjust the example to the ridiculous the point becomes apparent.

If you had 100 000 AGS per day for PTS and only 80 AGS per day for BTC, It would only take 1 BTC donated that day to make each AGS in that fund cost $10 but it would take a lot PTS to make each AGS $10.

So personally I still believe, the greater the discrepancy between the funds in favour of PTS, the more likely it is that new demand would find better value using BTC to buy PTS than for PTS holders to sell for BTC.


 


 

866
General Discussion / Re: Marketing Idea: Double Dip PTS to AGS days?
« on: January 09, 2014, 07:57:26 pm »
Believe me you are preaching to the converted about hurting I3's credibility.

I posted this when they first considered Angelshares -

Quote
We now need centralised Angelshares? Have you decided on a later date for 'Godshares' yet...   :)

Mastercoin really got a terrible reputation after their centralised issuance. Now you're going to do it too & worse, you're doing it after you already went the route of PTS funding first! Now I've seen it all!  :)

To be constructive though, despite the hiccup at the start, people probably feel that Protoshares have been issued in a fairly decentralised way. You would probably be able to decrease the stated Bitshare issuance thereby increasing the value of Protoshares as long as you only made such a huge market moving move ONCE...


Quote from: toast on January 09, 2014, 07:18:13 pm
This doesn't change the incentive structure one bit.

If you set it up so that you know at the start of the day that it's a double reward day, then people will just rebalance their contribution back towards protoshares on those days.

Um no, I don't thinks so. Part of the problem is that there isn't enough new demand for the BTC to AGS fund. It's about what 50 BTC a day at the moment? Given the fall in PTS price, I think most people have reached the conclusion that some of those BTC's are coming from PTS holders selling PTC for BTC when the ratio is more lucrative than PTS-AGS.

By using some mechanism to skew the total AGS issuance slightly in favour of the PTS-AGS fund. You should end up stimulating demand for PTS and help the price to recover.

(If that doesn't make sense to you, think of the extreme scenario where there would only be a PTS-AGS fund, any new demand would have to purchase PTS with their BTC to get AGS thereby driving up the price of PTS during the issuance period, my solution just adjusts that balance slightly, to help PTS regain pre-announcement value and gives an interesting marketing angle but I do share peoples concerns about messing with the format.) 

867
General Discussion / Re: How do you predict bitshares catching on?
« on: January 09, 2014, 06:26:40 pm »
I would also employ the services of a professional marketing/branding company if the funds were available.

When I think Bitshares, I should thinking - 'Well funded, proven track record, simple, clear, exciting, user-friendly' as opposed to how I think Bitshares/AGS may now appear to newbies which is 'exciting, interesting' but also 'slightly confusing, muddled, complicated, lagging behind'

868
General Discussion / Re: How do you predict bitshares catching on?
« on: January 09, 2014, 06:15:59 pm »
I think Bitshares should focus on marketing, implementing and delivering one asset at first 'Bit-Gold'. 

Most crypto-currency enthusiasts want something outside the banking system, (free from confiscation) that is limited.
Bitcoin serves this purpose but it is very volatile.

Most crypto suppporters also own gold, however gold can be confiscated, is hard to move over borders and is difficult to transact in.

If a bit-asset can be created that holds the $ value of gold whether Bitcoin is worth $10 or $10 000 the store of value and transactional market will be HUGE.

(As lots of people will be skeptical that a digital asset can reference the value of a real commodity, it may be worth allocating some of the AGS funds raised to buy real gold to be held in a 'Goldmoney' account. In the beginning when these Bit-Gold Shares have low liquidity, many doubters and a few competitors.  Bitshares will be able to stand out from the competition, with this USP which will create confidence that for the initial allocation of Bit-gold at least, that even if you doubt Bitshares or the value holding mechanism you are guaranteed that a Bitshares-Gold ounce can be redeemed for a real gold ounce for the first 6 months or something. Once there is a strong market, proof of concept and confidence, then the gold can be sold and the funds put back into the constant development of Bitshares.) 

This is also something the competitors using POB (Proof of Burn) atm, (which I like) will not be able to compete with. 




869
General Discussion / Marketing Idea: Double Dip PTS to AGS days?
« on: January 09, 2014, 04:02:16 pm »
I think a lot of people incl. myself have written about the fact that the PTS price could be suffering because of the BTC to AGS fund for numerous reasons. (Of course it is a short term speed bump, if Bitshares proves successful - whether your PTS cost you $15/$25 will be pretty irrelevant.) However I believe this was an unintended consequence that can be easily addressed...

Double/Triple Dip PTS to AGS Days

It will decrease the issuance period slightly but if you do some provably random thing each morning that has a 1/7 chance of hitting, where if it 'hits' then that day will be a double/triple dip PTS to AGS day. (So instead of the usual 5000 AGS awarded that day there will be 10/15000 in the PTS to AGS fund)

Why: A random double/triple dip promotion specifically for the PTS to AGS fund will be a great marketing hook for Bitshares to create excitement, demand & daily interest for AGS over the relatively long issuance period. While at the same time encouraging holders of PTS not to sell and encourage new investors to dip their toe into PTS, while having very little negative impact on the BTC to AGS fund.

I also think people who are interested in Bitshares-AGS will be encouraged if they see Bitshares-Protoshares rising in value as opposed to dropping 35%+ in the first week of the new year.

Thoughts?




870
General Discussion / Re: Announcing Angel Shares & BitShares Allocation
« on: January 09, 2014, 01:09:08 am »
Will only Bitshares 1.0 (which will constitute 16 assets) be split 50/50 between AGS & PTS?

I.e so Bitshares 2.0 or the next group assets will have reduced allocations?

Pages: 1 ... 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 20 queries.