0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: bitbro on September 02, 2014, 01:19:10 amQuote from: charleshoskinson on September 02, 2014, 01:10:41 amLol, upvote the strawman anti-charles opinion. You guys are funny.Get relevantSent from my iPhone using TapatalkOh he will be relevant when Ethereum waits for all the crypto 2.0 out there to fund the technical leg work while they purchase political connections (that give them King-Making power) with their 25 Million USD from their "Non-IPO" through Switzerland. It is just too rich man....NSA is what I think, but who knows...he sure isn't saying.
Quote from: charleshoskinson on September 02, 2014, 01:10:41 amLol, upvote the strawman anti-charles opinion. You guys are funny.Get relevantSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Lol, upvote the strawman anti-charles opinion. You guys are funny.
Oh he will be relevant when Ethereum waits for all the crypto 2.0 out there to fund the technical leg work while they purchase political connections (that give them King-Making power) with their 25 Million USD from their "Non-IPO" through Switzerland. It is just too rich man....NSA is what I think, but who knows...he sure isn't saying.
Quote from: charleshoskinson on September 02, 2014, 01:10:41 amLol, upvote the strawman anti-charles opinion. You guys are funny.Get relevant
All these coins are going to fail. Bitshares being involved directly with any other coin besides BTSX and Bitshares ME is not a good idea. There will be only a handful of coins that retain any meaningful value. Why dilute the brand at this point just to see something go up and back down.What I am confused is why Charles said we have "IPO in a Box" and therefore to not pursue Music/DNS aka "low hanging fruit". Yet he loves the idea of yet another coin. Charles, any way to clarify for us what you see in creating yet another coin that has same functionality of an existing coin ?
Quote from: CoinHoarder on August 28, 2014, 05:51:23 amI'm not sure I see the point. Sure, we may get some new fans (Litecoin users), but wouldn't this just make competition for BitsharesX, and give Litecoin users a half stake in that competition for doing absolutely nothing? I don't think it would be fair to snapshot participants, or even people whom have bought since then.Forking BitsharesX at this point before the user base is mature seems like shooting yourself in the foot, and would reduce liquidity on both centralized exchanges and in the bitasset marketplace.On top of that, all of the Litecoin users could just dump on the market and it would be a risky investment for anyone that isn't a AGS/Protoshare/Litecoin investor. As it is now with BitsharesX, everyone has invested something to get their stake. Whether it be investing BTC/PTS in AGS, providing CPU processing power for (or investing in) PTS, or purchasing their BTSX on the free market, this all provides incentive for people not to dump BTSX on the market for less than what they put in and upholds the price. If you make a fork and give 50% of the money supply away for free, this incentive would not be as strong for the 50% who got it for free.BitsharesX is too small right now to try to fork the the community IMO.Did anyone read this? I feel like I had some good points... Replace Litecoin in the post with Bitcoin... Ripple.. Stellar... I still feel the same way. This is a business and creating competition for BitsharesX and giving a group of people equity for free is not a good idea at this time.
I'm not sure I see the point. Sure, we may get some new fans (Litecoin users), but wouldn't this just make competition for BitsharesX, and give Litecoin users a half stake in that competition for doing absolutely nothing? I don't think it would be fair to snapshot participants, or even people whom have bought since then.Forking BitsharesX at this point before the user base is mature seems like shooting yourself in the foot, and would reduce liquidity on both centralized exchanges and in the bitasset marketplace.On top of that, all of the Litecoin users could just dump on the market and it would be a risky investment for anyone that isn't a AGS/Protoshare/Litecoin investor. As it is now with BitsharesX, everyone has invested something to get their stake. Whether it be investing BTC/PTS in AGS, providing CPU processing power for (or investing in) PTS, or purchasing their BTSX on the free market, this all provides incentive for people not to dump BTSX on the market for less than what they put in and upholds the price. If you make a fork and give 50% of the money supply away for free, this incentive would not be as strong for the 50% who got it for free.BitsharesX is too small right now to try to fork the the community IMO.
Quote from: bitbro on August 28, 2014, 01:55:22 pmCharles -If you say you will be leaving crypto, then leave crypto.We don't need to your wonky, slanted, subversive outsider ideas here. Get with the objectives or get lost. Obviously this type of share drop code fork thing will happen. However, coming from you, it's clear your ego problems are all over this.Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkFor everyone that doesn't remember, we are trying to start a company here. We need to act accordingly.Charles is a jaded scientist with no vested interest in our project. Taking leadership from him would be counter productive. I advise others to tell him to get lost just as the many projects in recent months have.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Charles -If you say you will be leaving crypto, then leave crypto.We don't need to your wonky, slanted, subversive outsider ideas here. Get with the objectives or get lost. Obviously this type of share drop code fork thing will happen. However, coming from you, it's clear your ego problems are all over this.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
QuoteI 100% agree with you on this actually. The only problem is that it fails to speak to the underlying point. How does Charles find himself in all these different countries...roaming the world, making deals in Switzerland while "on vacation from crypto"? Who funds his ventures? How does his pet project end up being promoted via video commercials on youtube before funding even began? How does he so easily get onto mainstream media outlets to endorse said project (without even having a product) when most all other "coins" don't even make it onto the radar? Literally all these questions require answering. Otherwise it is silly for Charles to think any action he wants to take to "help" the community will be trusted. Trust is earned...Hard work Fuz. A lot of hard work. Literally every day I'd get up at 6-7 AM and work until 11 at night sometimes even longer. Also leverage networks properly. This is one of my best talents and what's been missing from Bitshares since my departure in October. But don't worry Bitbrio will be here soon enough to discount my contributions As for getting on TV, it's not hard if you have the right branding, marketing and time the news cycle. MSM wants to talk about high tech cool new stuff.
I 100% agree with you on this actually. The only problem is that it fails to speak to the underlying point. How does Charles find himself in all these different countries...roaming the world, making deals in Switzerland while "on vacation from crypto"? Who funds his ventures? How does his pet project end up being promoted via video commercials on youtube before funding even began? How does he so easily get onto mainstream media outlets to endorse said project (without even having a product) when most all other "coins" don't even make it onto the radar? Literally all these questions require answering. Otherwise it is silly for Charles to think any action he wants to take to "help" the community will be trusted. Trust is earned...
Quote from: luckybit on August 28, 2014, 04:34:54 amQuote from: jae208 on August 28, 2014, 04:28:51 amIf we surpass them on coinmarket cap that is when the idea of a fork would make sense to discuss in my opinion. Also we should know what we are doing because without us to maintain the pegs it would be completely useless.What we do agree on is calling it Liteshares. That is a badass name.
Quote from: jae208 on August 28, 2014, 04:28:51 amIf we surpass them on coinmarket cap that is when the idea of a fork would make sense to discuss in my opinion. Also we should know what we are doing because without us to maintain the pegs it would be completely useless.What we do agree on is calling it Liteshares. That is a badass name.
If we surpass them on coinmarket cap that is when the idea of a fork would make sense to discuss in my opinion. Also we should know what we are doing because without us to maintain the pegs it would be completely useless.What we do agree on is calling it Liteshares. That is a badass name.
The DIY innovator doesn't need any "scientific credentials. " We are all born scientist unfortunately our educational system just teaches usTo memorize facts and squashes curiosity. In a different time and place this worked well but not anymore.I'm just trying to say that Charles doesn't need to have scientific credentials to run this experiment. It would be like saying Dan needs to have a PHD in economics in order for him to run the experiment that is Bitshares.
// The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks
Quote from: Gentso1 on August 28, 2014, 08:12:44 pmDon't get involved with the actual forking, if they do it let them do it on their own. IF they do it and IF they honor the social contract (the higher the percent the more incentive of course) then we should support it. The toolkit is free so why not get something out of it.I find it odd that many crypto types don't look at other crypto's for what they are: Competitors : someone who is trying to win or do better than all others especially in business or sports : someone who is competing : b : one selling or buying goods or services in the same market as anotherWe are all in the same market. Many of us have the same broad goals. No one wanted to make friends or partner with us in any meaningful way until we made a splash. We should make strategic alliances and help dev's of coins that help us other then that....... I say lets bleed the market cap of every non-innovative coin out their. Its a crypto war so let the best technology win.“Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”― H.L. Mencken, Prejudices: First Series Forks are fine but blatant copies are not. Honestly we shouldn't be pushing for a fork until we know how to use what we have. What is the true wealth of what we have with the Bitshares toolkit? What untapped ideas do we have which can be used creatively with the Bitshares toolkit?I always push for 50/50 split between AGS PTS and the community we want to sharedrop to. I also push for added value to both communities. To create value you have to figure out something people couldn't do efficiently before and find a way to empower people to do it in a DAC.I think you can have a new Bitshares X chain but we don't need it right now. We need more DACs though to spread DPoS.
Don't get involved with the actual forking, if they do it let them do it on their own. IF they do it and IF they honor the social contract (the higher the percent the more incentive of course) then we should support it. The toolkit is free so why not get something out of it.I find it odd that many crypto types don't look at other crypto's for what they are: Competitors : someone who is trying to win or do better than all others especially in business or sports : someone who is competing : b : one selling or buying goods or services in the same market as anotherWe are all in the same market. Many of us have the same broad goals. No one wanted to make friends or partner with us in any meaningful way until we made a splash. We should make strategic alliances and help dev's of coins that help us other then that....... I say lets bleed the market cap of every non-innovative coin out their. Its a crypto war so let the best technology win.“Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”― H.L. Mencken, Prejudices: First Series
I fully support anyone planning to do this but I think it will be a spectacular failure. No AGS resources should be committed to this.
QuoteQuotewhat are your scientific credentials again?New World Order academy for a few years and then went on to the Illuminati group for while. You know they do a lot of human experiments
Quotewhat are your scientific credentials again?New World Order academy for a few years and then went on to the Illuminati group for while. You know they do a lot of human experiments
what are your scientific credentials again?
I should have been more clear. I expect "it" to be a failure in the sense that it will demonstrate that sharedrops on random crypto-equities will not cause value transfer like they do for PTS. From the perspective it being an experiment there is of course no way to "fail" - I'm saying I think it's not worth even trying, we won't learn enough.
I expect "it" to be a failure in the sense that it will demonstrate that sharedrops on random crypto-equities will not cause value transfer like they do for PTS
QuoteI fully support anyone planning to do this but I think it will be a spectacular failure. No AGS resources should be committed to this.Jesus christ. Alright one last time and then I'm done trying to explain what I'm discussing. This has NOTHING TO DO WITH CREATING A PARTICULAR ALTCOIN. It's a question about how to measure and transfer the value of a given cryptocurrency. I am arguing that price and liquidity alone are poor measures of the actual value of the network. So I'm asking how to structure an experiment to actually validate a measure hypothesis as well as examine how transfer works. I am conjecturing that Litecoin is the best testbed for the experiment. The goal is to understand this in general and not make a fucking altcoin.You guys seem to have this enormous mental block.
No that's not what I said and if you don't understand then I don't have time to explain it I'm sorry. This has nothing to do with creating a coin as an end goal. I've created too many coins already.
QuoteWhat I am confused is why Charles said we have "IPO in a Box" and therefore to not pursue Music/DNS aka "low hanging fruit". Yet he loves the idea of yet another coin. Charles, any way to clarify for us what you see in creating yet another coin that has same functionality of an existing coin ?Lot of straw man in your paragraph soup here. There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding in what I'm asking so let me try again. After the recent spike in Bitshares price, I started thinking about what market cap really is measuring considering there are so many factors unique to this space in the price of a token like BTS or BTC. Mastercoin is worth several million as a network, but has roughly 500-1000 dollars in trading volume effectively meaning the tokens can never really be sold. So price and liquidity are both required. In reality, what I'm looking for is the notion of incumbency value of the entire network, which probably is best measured as the sum of nodes in the network given each node has at least the following characteristics:1) Network resources contributed for a given time interval2) Virality of the node3) Some measure of the cost to move the node to a new network (its stickiness)4) The overall wealth of the node's controller5) The willingness of the node to contribute resources from his wealth to the network or to enhance network functionality I am certain there are more factors to identify, but in any event, what I'm looking for is a metric to appraise how valuable a particular coin is given its node set as well as the cost of moving the node set to a new network. Then we could more accurately price the value of a coin without referencing a meaningless fiat benchmark that ripple can manipulate at any time for example. Also you can price the cost of node acquisition (and no it's not the market price of the tokens they hold because you want people not tokens, tokens can be conjured at any time with a fork click).Litecoin seems to me to be the perfect testbed for experimentation as the network is poorly maintained, has a large population, and there is a lot of potential incumbency value there. As for using the code base of Bitshares, there is no way I'd ever attempt to maintain a full C++ codebase. It's like asking to take care of an 800 pound bull with diabetes and anger management issues. Finally, I'll mention cryptoequities. They are completely different from cryptocurrencies in that they are attached to a real entity directly or indirectly. If I want to have an IPO, then I currently have to go to Goldman Sachs and kiss the golden ring. With an IPO toolkit, you could have a custom sale connected to any terms and conditions and enforce them in the real world via Unidroit and also all the exchange mechanisms necessary to avoid having to use a traditional stock market. AGS honoring in exchange for maintenance and support of the custom chains would potentially a very profitable model. You just have to worry about fungibility of the Bitassets between chains (google's BitUSD needs to be worth as much as overstock's) or at the very least there needs to be a bridge mechanism for market makers to even prices via arbitrage strategies (ripple is using this approach for gateway IOUs).QuoteThink strategically people! This is a business that will DEPEND on strategic partnerships and forking code to increase our brand recognition, portfolio diversification, positive marketing by forcing altcoin value to be based off of valuable dev-driven innovation--hard to beat bitshares here!--is the only way to move forward. Why do you think Ethereum is trying to get all platforms to work under their common umbrella? I think people here have more fun labeling me a jaded scientist that should be avoided at all costs. You are correct in the umbrella strategy. There needs to be effective heterogeneity in the cryptoscape.
What I am confused is why Charles said we have "IPO in a Box" and therefore to not pursue Music/DNS aka "low hanging fruit". Yet he loves the idea of yet another coin. Charles, any way to clarify for us what you see in creating yet another coin that has same functionality of an existing coin ?
Think strategically people! This is a business that will DEPEND on strategic partnerships and forking code to increase our brand recognition, portfolio diversification, positive marketing by forcing altcoin value to be based off of valuable dev-driven innovation--hard to beat bitshares here!--is the only way to move forward. Why do you think Ethereum is trying to get all platforms to work under their common umbrella?
I think people here have more fun labeling me a jaded scientist that should be avoided at all costs. You are correct in the umbrella strategy. There needs to be effective heterogeneity in the cryptoscape.
Quote from: fuznuts on August 28, 2014, 06:49:45 pmCouldn't agree more (except I see room for 1000's of valuable "coins" when coupled with a BitShares Toolkit-built infrastructure). Invictus should have NO place in ever forking any of their code. They should only be available to give feedback to devs wanting to do so themselves (and only if they have guaranteed to sufficiently honor PTS/AGS).The problem is these 1000s of coins don't serve unique services or value anymore if they're just more forks muddying up the ecosystem.
Couldn't agree more (except I see room for 1000's of valuable "coins" when coupled with a BitShares Toolkit-built infrastructure). Invictus should have NO place in ever forking any of their code. They should only be available to give feedback to devs wanting to do so themselves (and only if they have guaranteed to sufficiently honor PTS/AGS).
持有LTC的人得到你给的Litecoinshares之后抛售欲望会非常强烈,毕竟是赠送的0成本的,他们想的更多的可能是在发布前多买些LTC,这样有助于LTC的涨价。这个跟PTS/AGS持有者不一样,大多数的持有者都是对BTSX或者其他DACS都有兴趣积极参与测试和社区讨论。“社会共识”就是需要参与者真正参与进来,而不是简单的买卖。再者,FORK之后是自主创新呢还是跟着I3的技术走,如果是一直跟着走,将会非常被动。产值也会非常低效。不过还是很欢迎你这么做,这样可以推广DPOS,顺便让更多人参与DACS的建设。
Just so it is clear. I don't care if a third party does this. It will happen eventually almost guaranteed. I do object to I3 spending any significant resources supporting this outside of basic developer support/bugs.If you go out and you talk to bitcoin people, you hear scam coin ! just a way to get money ! a scam ! blah blah. And you know what? They're partially correct. There are a ton of guys making coins out there that really do very little if anything innovative. The innovation itself is spread so thin that few if any of the coins stand out. (Anyone know which ones?)There will not be many coins that live on. There just isn't much need for them and they all damage each other's adoption. So only a few coins will survive and have real use outside of niche crypto-markets. I don't see why I3 needs to lower itself to that game. Let someone else do it and don't have the Bitshares name tarnished as another money grabber scammer by being directly involved in creating more coins just because they can.
I'm really asking about notion of transfer of incumbency value.
This is a business and creating competition for BitsharesX and giving a group of people equity for free is not a good idea at this time.
Sure, sharedrop everybody....no need to wait until theres a stable release on all platforms, lets just give them our bugs
For everyone that doesn't remember, we are trying to start a company here. We need to act accordingly.Charles is a jaded scientist with no vested interest in our project. Taking leadership from him would be counter productive. I advise others to tell him to get lost just as the many projects in recent months have.
I don't see any reason to fork BitSharesX, but I do think a generic DPOS coin sharedropped onto Litecoin would be a very interesting experiment. I would suggest 10% PTS 10% AGS and 80% LTC. As bitshares supporters we already have a reason to want this chain to succeed. The bigger danger would be litecoiners dumping it IMO. I say lets give them 80% and call it exactly what it is. It is a gift of superior technology.
Quote from: donkeypong on August 28, 2014, 05:45:07 amThis one sounds mostly like an academic exerciseExactly. And BitsharesX is a company so we should approach this as a business decision. Would sharedropping add value to BitsharesX? If so can that same value be achieved another way for cheaper?IMO BitsharesX brings more value to Litecoin than Litecoin brings to BitsharesX. The academic exercises can can be done for cheaper using other less expensive chains.. in fact, that same exercise could be done with PTS conversion.Sharedropping for valuable tech like gateways or Ethereum would be a different story..
This one sounds mostly like an academic exercise
QuoteI also think it is pointless experiment right now.It was a good idea to do it before BTS X launch, just to test the DPOS. Maybe drop not only on Litecoin, but probably on the top 20 + BTC(with some scaling down).I disagree. As with many in this community, you seem to be caught up in the "how does it make bitshares more awesome or make me more money" thought process. I'm considering the notion of transfer of incumbency value from one chain to another. If there will be a heterogeneous ecosystem of chains floating around in the cloud, then it seems like a good idea to understand how value can be transferred as an aggregate unit from one chain to another.Litecoin is an ideal candidate because there is significant incumbency value, a healthy community and rather poor maintenance of the code of the project. Data collected from a whole chain value transfer would prove invaluable in strategizing how to do so with bitcoin itself.
I also think it is pointless experiment right now.It was a good idea to do it before BTS X launch, just to test the DPOS. Maybe drop not only on Litecoin, but probably on the top 20 + BTC(with some scaling down).
What benefit does sharedropping LTC add that launching bitLTC couldn't?
20% AGS and 80% LTC I'd rather have 20% of something valuable than 50% of something not as as valuable. In terms of supply I think it should be like 81,000,000,000 and the fork can be called Liteshares or something.as far as features go.... Idk something Bitshares doesn't have I guessEven faster transaction times if possible?
If someone was to hypothetically sharedrop a bitshares inspired fork of Litecoin, then what features would you like to see? What should the ideal AGS/LTC distribution be?