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.
Is that idea I saw a couple weeks back with the free BTS transactions, where you get a number of them per time period based on your stake, going to happen? That idea was pretty awesome and made me have hope for Bitshares again.
good job talking to 300+ people on social networks ..!
Quite easy when your profile is a woman
thank you for playing so many words to explain
read this page replies, I most want to say is: please do not use China, the United States, Europe to divide our community, and should be the point of view A, B, C. We came here not because of the geographical location, but for some ideals and goals.
do it!!! 
I think this depends on the point of view. The ones who say "Dilution" try thinking about this. Bitcoin, Ethereum and every single coin has it at the moment. Some in form of PoW. You only need to see this as PoW, because if you think about it, it is. Instead of the work being done is mining blocks, the work is development and improvement of our own blockchain with people who can actually code.
Bitcoin, PoW, dilution via miners.
BitShares, in a sense, PoW too because dilution is done via worker proposals, real work improving the blockchain for the better.
So instead of having random people mining, you have coders with skills to improve the blockchain. Imo it's much more fair because you have actual job and improvement done, plus everyone can vote if they want it or not.
If you look at it that way, our model is better assuming it can maintain the same level of security. It's just a matter of perception. The problem here is knowing when and if worker proposals and the job done to improve the blockchain is worth the "dilution" it caused.
Show me at least one worker who take responsibility for the shareholder,please.
proposal like:"I will develop a function,one year after this function launch,the market cap will be twice to now,or I won't get any bts as payment.
no one now are willing to take this responsibility, right.They just happy to to see shareholder surffer and grad USD for themselves.
"I have written so many many document! BTS will go to die without our work!just give me 100K bts a day! "(So what?We have only 10% left of our investment thanks to your "hard work" since 2014 )
I could have a high pay job outside! (So again,why are you still here?Strongly doubt that you can get a serious job outside.)
Somebody still think these amazing inflation work can raise the market cap base on 2013-2016,huh,wow.
Where are the Chinese developers? What makes it ok to constantly scream that people are not doing something for you free, but then do little development from what I have heard?
US job market is going great right now, real developers are rare. There are tons of shitty developers who decided to get into it because it pays well. The type of developer needed for blockchain type work is one of these "rare" developers. They would have to be screwed up socially in a very very strange way, have a criminal records, or unwilling to relocate etc to not be able to get a job. You are so clueless to think guys who can fix BItShares couldn't find a good job. You are on a different planet.
If you are going to insult someone, insult Dan Larimer who made all the decisions unilaterally but with input. I don't know why you think developers owe you more. It makes more sense for them to get a job, then wait and invest their money in BTS or not.
If someone was to "take accountability" and only be paid if the marketcap doubled, how do they know what thousands of quasi-irrational people are going to do ? It would be foolish to take such a deal without asking to be paid far FAAARRRR above market rates when the market cap doubles. No one would like that either.
I am not commenting on the past, but startups can blow through cash like crazy. That is not going on currently. If you want to win, you need to advance. Not sit around fingers cross hoping and praying for some magic to occur.
Here folks we are experiencing one of cryptos greatest wonders, the Ander pump...
Legend has it that whenever this scholar promoted an early crypto currency, a curse was put on it that retarded all market cap growth. In most cases, the cursed currency became a mere shell of itself, never surpassing its pre pump high...
Historians are still debating the death of what some call the anti predictor. But it's commonly accepted that he was run over by a bus of a developer of a coin he pumped that inherently failed. Though his passing was sad, crypto innovation began to bloom once the fear of the death pump was gone.
If it's possible, what I'm talking about would not be difficult at all. Probably far simpler than what you're talking about. Besides, I'm just asking a question. And you're not the best person to determine whether it's possible or what the cost would be. So please dispense with the sweeping proclamations.
I'm sorry, but you can't compare this to Liquid. Liquid is a federated sidechain of centralized services (BitFinex, Kraken, BTCC, Xapo, Unocoin). To begin with, the users of these services have to trust those companies. On top of that, the Liquid sidechain depends on the participating companies trusting each other. So you really can't compare that to what we're trying to accomplish here.
By the way, it looks like you modified your post before I got a chance to respond. But since you were wondering why I wasn't taking your explanation at face value, it's because you're not the expert. So I continue to address @bytemaster with my questions since he IS the expert. And I asked for @abit's opinion since he is a developer and, for all we know, he could be the one to code this up ultimately. Surely you can understand where I'm coming from.
In any event, I'm really not sure, but something tells me that what I'm proposing is very much doable. It would be great if @bytemaster would speak to it specifically. If it can't be done, please explain why. Thanks!
please notice what I saythen please explain to me what alt / baozi is doing just now. I certainly does not recognize any value brought to the ecosystem.
why not after you do good effort and wait btser to vote . I think if you do really useful work to bts, they must vote support to your worker.
If this goes on .. and more shareholders support him .. he could essential force the network to stand still in development ..
I thought that was the exact assurance when BM introduced the dilution : If shareholders do not like the inflation rate , they can vote against it .
On a side note , false development is no development at all . ( dilution and tons of AGS fund has funded a lot of things in 1.0 , and none of it was worth it because by the dev's own word ------1.0 was not usable to users . And graphene was paid by the developer's own dime. ) False development meaning development that just for "workers' sake" instead of those work that's really needed and will have lasting effect on the project instead of every work that has been paid and then be abandoned and move on to another new direction .
I guess he has just seen false development funded by dilution too much .
But then again , the doubt is bound to happen after failing to see result generated from dilution after one year whose effect has been devastating on the marketcap . "Marketcap will rise if you let us dilute and keep developing" , which was also the only reason that the stakeholders allowed changing the allocation schedule and ruined the reputation of BitShares in the first place . So ........ Is this objection really that surprising to you ?
Here folks we are experiencing one of cryptos greatest wonders, the Ander pump...
Legend has it that whenever this scholar promoted an early crypto currency, a curse was put on it that retarded all market cap growth. In most cases, the cursed currency became a mere shell of itself, never surpassing its pre pump high...
Historians are still debating the death of what some call the anti predictor. But it's commonly accepted that he was run over by a bus of a developer of a coin he pumped that inherently failed. Though his passing was sad, crypto innovation began to bloom once the fear of the death pump was gone.
