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.

Topics - teenagecheese

Pages: [1] 2

General Discussion / Sold all of my Bitshares

« on: March 04, 2015, 08:09:56 pm »

Hi everyone. I have lost hope in bitshares due to the extended failure of the community to come out with a good product. Repeatedly, I have seen a poor understanding of what makes a good business and a good product.

To save bitshares I think you need to focus on and come out with one, key, killer feature that will increase adoption and open the door to all the other features later. The feature I think you should focus on is making a true decentralized exchange, as I have said before. By true decentralized I mean an exchange you can send real bitcoins to (and other popular cryptos) and then immediately exchange them for other coins. No gateways, no bridges, at least not from the point of view of the user. Just directly to the client.

I saw a little bit of talk about this earlier and it got me excited that at least others are thinking the same thing. Devs, I hope you do this or something like this and I hope you do it soon or else someone else will. Yes, I know it's complicated to implement, but it is what is needed and bitshares is in the perfect position to bring it to the world because you are already on that track. I'll be watching. Good luck.

General Discussion / Fiat to bitUSD Gateways?

« on: February 09, 2015, 03:06:50 am »

Hi,

I've read about several potential fiat to bitUSD gateways over the past months and was wondering what their status is. Are any still being worked on? Any expected dates?

I assume Coinbase wouldn't want to integrate bitUSD until we (the client and the whole system of bitshares) are more stable because they are such a legit company. Any other's we could partner with? Any independent gateway projects of our own going on?

Please note I am specifically asking about FIAT directly to bitUSD with no intermediate steps. Thanks.

General Discussion / Management/Implementation Delegate Proposal

« on: February 07, 2015, 09:35:53 pm »

So it seems I've spurred some discussion about bitOIL and there appears to be interest, but it also seems like nothing is going to develop from this.

Maybe there is not enough of a demand for bitOIL, but whether it happens or not is not the point. How do we provide a mechanism to get actually put this, and any other ideas, into action?

This is a bigger discussion than bitOIL feeds. It is about improving the bitshares system to make it so things that are good and will increase the value get done. Currently they do not. I propose that we have an implementation/management delegate to choose ideas the community wants, find people to implement, and track, review, and announce their progress in a public forum (maybe bitsharesblocks?) so people can vote them out if they don't do it what they should, to motivate them to make progress.

General Discussion / Overall Plan and Schedule

« on: February 07, 2015, 08:14:33 pm »

As an investor in your company, I want to know the overall plan and schedule, and I'm sure everyone else does too. Don't say "we try not to give schedule predictions because people will get angry if we miss them." Well, I am angry now, so give it your best shot. I'll forgive you if you guess wrong, but I at least want to see that you have something to guess about.

You need a plan, and a good one. You need some leadership. You need a schedule. You need people to execute it. Show it to me.

Off the top of my head I want to know:

Light wallet
Light wallet with market engine
Integrated bitcoin wallet
Gateways
Some sort of marketing push about anything

Sorry for being so rude, but I am angry both that I am loosing my money and that this great vision is failing to come to life. Thank you.

General Discussion / Please Provide bitOIL Feeds!

« on: February 03, 2015, 09:11:39 pm »

I really really really want to buy bitOIL. Can some delegates step up and figure out how to do this. Do it and you will get yourself higher pay. That is how this works, show value and get paid for it.

This is the problem, it is the rare person that is self motivated enough to figure this out and do it on his own drive without anyone telling them to do it. But you don't have to have that person to make this work. Instead, we NEED someone managing to actively try to get things like bitOIL implemented. Come up with the idea, put up a bounty, and recruit to get a delegate to do it. Otherwise, stuff just keeps on not happening.

And COME ON bitOIL is such easy and obvious low hanging fruit to increase adoption. Do you realize how popular oil is right now to trade? Do you realize how hard it is and how much money it takes to trade it on the real market? A lot! Get a good market for this and advertise it to crypto traders and they will jump all over it. DO IT!

This is just one example of the several things that could easily happen, but are not. We need some management and recruiting here. I'm not saying bytemaster is not doing good at what he is doing, instead, that we need an additional person to do these things.

General Discussion / I'm Nervous, Please Reassure Me

« on: February 03, 2015, 07:35:12 pm »

Please tell me I'm wrong about all this so I don't have to sell my bitshares and give up on what seem like such an amazing concept.

I haven't heard much about marketing recently, what is the new team doing? Did Adam stop doing his "quick updates form Adam?" I suspect he is no longer working for bitshares as much, or maybe not at all. Please tell me I am wrong

On a related note, I am getting nervous. I am seriously questioning the management and organization of the bitshares team. Your idea was so great, but it really seems like you are failing to execute. You need better personnel, scheduling, and task management. Stop letting this be so incredibly open source, it needs fine guidance right now. Make a list of all the things that need to be done, choose people, hire people, and then manage them and push them to get it done.And get ALL of them done, there are so many things that can be done in parallel right now, but only a few are. You developed a freakin' system that lets you get paid by the blockchain! That's incredeble, use it! Do not waste that funding advantage.

This is a battle against time, many are working to implement better/different solutions than you as fast as they can, yet here we are six months later and the wallet still barely works and we just got a website. And from what I hear the light wallet will only have minimal functionality upon release...only able to send/recieve, no market, and don't put too much money in it because it has some problems, not good. The opportunity is all but gone.

General Discussion / Dev Hangout Recordings

« on: January 23, 2015, 10:55:44 pm »

I want to listen the Beyond Bitcoin Dev Hangouts recordings, but there is a long delay until they are posted to soundcloud. Can this be done faster somehow, or does anyone have links to the raw recordings (specifically the most recent ones)? I've seen a few but can't find them now. Thanks

General Discussion / Bitshares Exchange Should Accept REAL Bitcoin

« on: January 21, 2015, 11:18:10 pm »

Have I been reading correctly that the bitshares protocol is similar enough to bitcoin's to accept and transfer real BTC? If it is, why don't we make it so the bitshares client can accept actual BTC so users can trade it on the bitshares exchange.

This would eliminate a whole step of getting money into the bitshares ecosystem and would make bitshares exchange even more useful. You could even accept other popular cryptos in the same way (or not, but at least BTC), then it would be even an even more functional decentralized exchange.

This seems like a no brainer to me, am I missing something?

General Discussion / Can Bitshares incorporate an ACTUAL decentralized exchange?

« on: January 09, 2015, 07:33:20 pm »

I've heard a lot of talk about how Bitshares is a decentralized exchange, which it is in one form, but this made me wonder. Could it be made to work like a real exchange where you can send your actual cryptocurrency, not an IOU, and exchange it for another? You could have IOU's working within the client and backed by Bitshares somehow, but from a user experience point of view it would just be like using BTER or Cryptsy or whatever.

Yes, I realize this is probably technically very difficult. But, if you did this obviously that would bring HUGE adoption. Nobody likes trusting the current centralized exchanges.

I suppose the most difficult part would be getting around the need for the user's client to have multiple blockchains. Maybe this could be solved in the same way the BTS lightweight client is? Curious to hear devs' thoughts.

General Discussion / When will the full wallet work better?

« on: January 05, 2015, 03:40:28 pm »

I know the focus is on the lightweight wallet, but what about the current full wallet? Is is being worked on? When will it be better, any approximate timeline?

For me at least, the full wallet is full of bugs, constantly loses connection, and takes a very long time to sync. It's nearly unusable and I want to use it to trade. This is not a good user experience for a first time user and it makes it much harder to provide liquidity.

General Discussion / Make Functionality of the Full Wallet a Priorty?

« on: December 28, 2014, 04:23:38 am »

As an early adopter (I've been into PTS>BitShares for over a year) I am having a seriously hard time being an early adopter (that sentence was not a typo). I have been trying to sync my newly updated wallet for over a day now to send my friend BitShares that I bought for him. I know from past experience that eventually I will get it synced, but this is unacceptable. Disclaimer: I am computer literate, the software really doesn't work well.

In addition to just being annoying, this is actually detrimental. Why? Because if early adopters (the critical main user base, I'm sure you know the concept already) can barely use the software even if they really want to, you will have less people spreading the word, as well as less people providing precious liquidity.

I know the light wallet is supposed to be fast and easy and bla bla, but my theory is that a significant portion of early adopters (as opposed to the general public that the light wallet targets) want the full functionality and security of the full wallet. I know I do.

Bitcoin's QT wallet wasn't pretty, but at least it worked.

Sorry if this sounded aggressive, I don't want to retype it. I meant it to be a call for discussion on the proposed theory of the priority of the full wallet as opposed to the light wallet. Curious to hear your thoughts.

General Discussion / Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?

« on: December 28, 2014, 03:59:31 am »

Abraham Lincoln; I googled that quote...anyway, I was thinking a primary focus of BitShares should be to partner with all of these semi-centralized "bit__" companies, e.g., bitreserve, bitgold.com, etc. Get them to work with us instead of against us. If the utility they offer alone was not already enough of an incentive, their name is actually a blessing in disguise.

Doing so would strengthen the peg by offering a path to actual reserves of bitassets, yet would not compromise the fundamental decentralized foundation of BitShares.

Any thoughts? Is this already happening and I just missed it? Anyone (maybe a potential delegate, hint hint a good way to get elected) interested in doing this?

General Discussion / We should have two types of "delegates"

« on: November 30, 2014, 06:24:49 pm »

We have discussed this before some, but I still don't understand the reasoning behind the current situation. Why does someone who is for example, a marketer, have to run a block signing delegate to get voted for and paid by the system?

I feel that this is an unnecessary distraction and makes it more difficult for worthy, non-technical people, to be "hired" by the bitshares DAC.

If you say it is because technical network reasons (i.e., more delegates means a slower network), I say that is not a good excuse. You could easily have a separate set of non-signing delegates or "employees" that only get voted on or paid or whatever, say once a day, instead of once every ten seconds. They are not securing the network so they only have to interact with it infrequently.

Why is this a bad idea? It seems like the obvious choice to me, and I don't understand why there has been resistance to implement it.

Muse/SoundDAC / How Does bitUSD work on Peertracks?

« on: November 30, 2014, 06:15:27 pm »

How does bitUSD work on Peertracks?

-Is it a different bitUSD from bitshares bitUSD?
-Does it have to maintain it's own real USD peg?
-How will it interact with bitshares bitUSD (fungible, exchangeable)?

I'm worried that Peertracks bitUSD is a separate bitUSD and that it will have to maintain its own peg to the dollar. I feel like bitshares is the exchange and everything would be more efficient, intuitive, and beneficial to the system as a whole if all bitshares toolkit projects, including peertracks worked off the bitUSD established by bitshares. Splitting up bitUSD is splitting up network effect and making each peg weaker.

General Discussion / Method for Stronger BitUSD Peg

« on: November 14, 2014, 07:21:35 pm »

I noticed the BitUSD peg is currently not working so well and I feel like that will keep happening, especially when people expect bitshares price to change rapidly.

Could you just code it so that BitUSD trades can only be executed within $.01 (or whatever) of the price feed, that way people are always guaranteed within 1% of the dollar?

Maybe I'm missing something, please comment.