It's great to see this kind of public process!!

How much will be allocated to DAC development?  How many Dacs will be selected, and what will the process be to prioritize the amount of resources allocated to each of them?

In case you can't tell, I'm interested in seeing a "smart" Canon Coin DAC being developed.

see: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/164/3

Upwards,

Brent Allsop

Having looked at the topics... Regarding questions like "is Jesus the Son of God?" (if that is a question that is derived from the topic "Jesus is the Son of God"): The truth you will find there will be 1000 perspectives always depending on your assumptions and the perspective from which you ask this question. The stated goal here should be exchanging perspectives / understanding each other and not finding the truth because the question as such is as such that there can not be an answer to it.
Also questions often imply a lot of assumptions already...
Those questions have been debated in scientific and in non scientific arenas and probably millions of pages worth reading have been written about it. So I would see such a project not as a means to finally come to a conclusion but it can serve to organize debates better (and show who has which financial ties etc. in order to put things in perspective) and make them more accessibly. If applied right there might be a scientific use. Something like: Summarizing papers I have written that answer a question and then put a link on the respective canonizer sub-page referring to this link.

Brilliant

The camps seem like a realistic approach to me that reflects the ambiguity of reality perception but labeling it as a sure way to finally find "the truth" doesn't reflect this realism

No!  I continuously point out that Canonizer.com has nothing to do with "the truth".  You quote that as if I said or "labeled" it as "the truth"?

The goal of Canonizer.com isn't to get to any "Truth".

Canonizer.com is only building and measuring for consensus, and for what people currently think they want, concisely, quantitatively, and how this changes in real time - nothing more.

Quote from: maqifrnswa on January 31, 2014, 05:10:43 am

Quote from: Kenof on January 31, 2014, 04:54:40 am

Quote from: drekrob on January 31, 2014, 12:18:57 am

to be honest i dont realy think, this is such a great idea and to many people would start using this. i have no idea of marketing and stuff like that though.

 

to your

The thing I love about this forum is that a lot of great minds come together and push us toward improving everything.   After debates on whether or not BitAssets even need interest I have concluded that they do not and that any interest will serve as a 'constant' offset in price.   Implementing interest will take extra time that I am sure someone will experiment with after the initial release.   

So given the fact that markets will find a way of undoing my 5% interest by adjusting prices elsewhere and the risk is so low due to collateral it seems best to simplify everything and just use 0% interest.   BitUSD will be on par with cash in your pocket or a gold coin in your hand.  You hold it because you want price stability not for its yield.

So I will ask Amazon to remove the meme and replace the with old school + 1 so that we can avoid confusion. 

This means this marketing meme is now over despite being very good and catchy.  It also seems to draw negative attention and scam accusations.

I do think it would be a fun experiment to implement interest in a chain, but at this point time getting something on the market with value is probably best.

I think that's brilliant.

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the feedback.  That helps.  And the following is just my current newbee opinion, so I would much enjoy any further feedback anyone may have.

Canonizer.com is just a small prototype, so yes, we haven't yet done much work to eliminate things like Sybil attack potentials.  But those kinds of things are fairly easy problems to solve.  For example Keyhotee IDs, integrated in the identity system would go a long way towards this, and there are other solutions.  It just hasn't been a problem or part of the minimum viable product yet.

Who the 'experts' are is determined by the users of Canonizer.com.  You do this by selecting the Canonizer algorithm on the side bar.  The goal is to give users the ability to configure, mix and match any canonizer algorithm they like.  The most popular 'expert' canonizers are the 'peer ranking' ones.  For example, all the "Mind Experts" are peer ranking each other for that Canonizer.  See: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/81 .  Canponizer.com is all about enabling everyone to recognize and trust the minority best experts as soon as possible.  It's about providing information to the experts and leaders about what the lagging crowd is still thinking, and why, and most importantly what will be required to convince them, so they can be more rapidly brought on board with the right thing to do.  That which you can measure, improves.

The goal of Canonizer.com isn't to get to any "Truth".  One goal is simply to enable large crowds to politely communicate, concisely and quantitatively, about controversial and painful topics.  With Canonizer.com Instead of heated debates, edit wars, and flame threads people just join and help wiki a camp, end of argument.  The nature of forums that talk about consciousness or any other controversial topic dramatically changes once Canonizer.com is introduced.  The crowd finally starts making progress instead of just eternal demoralizing arguments that drive everyone away.  Diversity in the crowd can then be valued and drive things forward instead of feared because it always drives everyone apart.

Canonizer.com is the most powerful consensus building system out there.  No matter how much agreement people have, they always find less important things to disagree and focus on.  Everyone gets hurt, nothing gets done and consensus is destroyed.  But Canonizer.com completely avoids this problem by enabling such lesser issues to be pushed out of the way to lower sub camps, where they are not lost or censored.  Such is valued, concisely and quantitatively measured.  This enables the focus to remain on what is most important, what everyone needs to be on board, and what the consensus needs to be about so the crowd can move forward and act, decisively and quickly.

As things progress, the more this crypto currency war will depend on the intelligence and agility of the competing currencies.  Dumb currencies that can't change will be weeded out very quickly when faced with currencies able to act more intelligently and rapidly.  Hierarchically managed currencies will be more intelligent, but the intelligence of any hierarchy is an extreme bottleneck, to say nothing of how this crowd will reject any such.  Leaders that aren't interested in knowing, concisely, quantitatively, and in real time, what everyone wants, will make many more mistakes driving away ever more potential supporters.

Right now, there are lots of people that think that a dumb hard coded can't change rate of introduction of the currency into the economy is a good thing.  So all those people will tend to flock to dumb flash in the pan currencies, avoiding more intelligent and agile ones able to make such drastic changes.  My prediction is that many currencies will continue to flash, crash and burn, with the holders of such loosing lots of money, till the crowd recognized the importance of intelligent and agile currencies.

Intelligent people will flock to the currencies that will win, long term, and make lots of money doing so.  Currencies that are able to attract and help amplify the wisdom of their holders in a consensus building leaderless way will do far better than the short term flash in the pan losers.  And if a currency can amplify and leverage that wisdom, to be far more intelligent than any hierarchy.  If a currency can train it's potential holders to build consensus and learn from and trust the wisdom of the crowd, faster and more completely than the holders of its competitors, Such a currency will ultimately be the final winner, easily blowing away all less intelligent competitors.

Upwards,

Brent Allsop

Hi Stan,

Thanks for all the help with this.  I thought this was a simple question, but it's much more complicated.

So when new DACS are created, what determines who get's the initial shares.  It looks like it will be different for each DAC?

And is there a list of possible DACS, possibly prioritized, which AGS and PTS owners will get in on?

Brent Allsop

I hear and understand all the pros for removing uncertainty.

But don't forget that you'll have troubles motivating people to get involved in a test that doesn't count.  I'd have troubles getting motivated to be involved, and there is no way it would be anywhere close to the real thing test.

Another problem is, if one person makes the decision to start all over, you'll surely make some people mad, and lose their trust, and possibly their participation.

If you used a canonization survey process to find out, concisely and quantitatively, what everyone thinks, and let everyone provide input if they wanted, all crowd sourcing informing an expert decision of whether you should restart, or not, you could not only find out concisely and quantitatively, just how many people you'll piss off, and why, but you'll significantly reduce the number of people that would be pissed off, because everyone would better know, sooner, why a particular decision was being made.

Heck, it may take more than one restart to get things right.  And if the entire crowd agrees that a 3rd restart was better for everyone, making such a decision would be all the more easy.

Folks,

I've created a new "What is the best currency" survey topic camp for Invictus Innovations Bitshares:

http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/150/7

And I've started a publicly editable wiki Google doc to produce the first draft of a statement:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGswp7QM7GgCLxMkjBxlmP82_qK5ct-LIcb1WpqVWCU/edit?usp=sharing

and seeded it with a few of the crude ideas that make it one of the best currencies for me.

I'm hopping some of you experts can help significantly improve the first version of the statement.

And I hope more of you will support the camp at Canonizer.com so we can communicate to the world the significance of this.

Brent Allsop