286
General Discussion / Re: drltc is joining the BitShares team
« on: October 21, 2014, 04:20:02 pm »
Congratulations drltc
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.
From the day I read the first Invictus web pages....the ones with the knight and the windmill....I completely bought into the idea that some incredibly clever people cared about the principals I value and were going to use Satoshi's invention and their ingenuity to build technology and networks that would manifest Satoshi's dream. I believe the dream was to forever alter the structure of humanity by providing a tool that resists corruption over time and enables our societies to completely reorganize our resources and priorities, unfettered by a corrupting influence.Thanks Ben Mason for putting your thoughts in writing
What will this accomplish? It's almost unimaginable. Appropriate allocation of capital, preservation of finite resources, unlimited innovation, new levels of education, a breakdown of tribal societal structures, no more war......
I genuinely couldn't care less what allocation I get if Bitshares can move us even a small way towards that goal. I trust BM to be as fair as possible. I promise right now that I will not complain regardless of the final decision. I will not look back and analyse what might have been. I feel honoured to be even the tiniest part this. I want our children to grow up in peace and explore the universe.
What we build today in Bitshares could literally echo through eternity and for once, that echo might fill our progeny with pride and love.
I thought that would necessarily be the case anyway.There is risk that one bug could rue them all, but don't forget if all developers are together than it is easier to fix the bug rather than if they are separate.
I wonder it would not be practical for DNS = NOTE = VOTE = BTSX. Those others are assets within BTS.
The risk is simply having those on one chain.. one bug could rue them all.
Then the other issue is putting PTS/AGS into BTS or put that separate.
The mere presence of this thread is proof that you know exactly that this share dilution proposal is a bad thing, and you just want to cover up that fact.Once it is implemented and coinmarketcap doubles soon after it will not matter what we call it as all names will be good ones .
It is share dilution, so just call it what it is.
Quote from freemarket
The choice is yours: Fear or Love
However as I've said before my BitShares investment is primarily an investment in Bytemasters grand vision. BitAssets also have a short window of opportunity to take their shot at the world. So the sooner we get things resolved and push forward the better.My thoughts exactly
This might be one for the stupid questions thread.Yes
But since it's a DAC, anybody can come up with a dilution proposal right?
It doesn't necessarily have to be Invictus issuing new shares, as long as they get enough votes.
*************************** They are running a sale on bts and its probably going to be the last one we see for a long time. Buy low sell highThere is no need to use such a rude language on the forum.
Don't you guys have a board of your own? If you're going to post here try and put some English in.
If they're posting here it's because they feel their voices are not being heard there.
A lot of the stuff happens on the English forums even though China are currently the main market.
If they want to, they can post here in Chinese whenever they want imo.
for wise StanThese are the kind of changes you don't make after a launch. It's way too much change for the market to handle and it's not the kind of change anyone wants. The market is speaking.
In my opinion if you want unity then network the DACs using technical means. Don't change the names, don't change the internal structures or centralize it. Allow all DACs to pay a fee to join this network of DACs and use that network as a sort of support network for all the DACs.It is a company.
It is competing in a ruthless Darwinian evolutionary environment.
It must continuously adapt or die.
Arguments against change are arguments against adapting.
The dinosaurs already tried that.
Once Bytemaster & his trusted mates discovered the "secret sauce recipe" and realized how to gain orders of magnitude faster penetration into the market by exploiting certain opportunities that have recently appeared, it became clear that the opportunities had to be seized.
By now people should know that what they are investing in is the products of a very agile team that will stay ahead of the competition chiefly because of that agility. We make no apologies for playing to that strength. Those that are able to HODL will be rewarded. Those who can't will fall off at the hairpin turns. We will always have people who have climbed on board for the wrong reasons and they are the ones who will eject during the high-G maneuvers. Buy when they sell.
If you want slow and steady, invest in Coca Cola.
1) BTSX hard cap of 2 billion is going to limit its growth potential.
Now I'm confused? It is up to shareholders to determine if BTSX has a "hard cap of 2 billion". If shareholders deem it necessary they can vote in delegates that support delusion, right?
From the "How much is a new user worth?" thread (https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9603.0) it seems like +60% of the people are for delusion as long as there is a good plan. And many of the people who were against it change their minds and some even said it should be done if need be but only as a last resort.
So BTSX doesn't have a hard cap and doesn't have limited growth potential. Or at least I think it should be left up to shareholders to decide if it does.
Or have I missed something???