Quote from: tbone on March 28, 2016, 11:44:44 am

I would assume that buying OPENPOS is an investment in ECHO since the current Bitshares mobile wallet is clearly the precursor to ECHO (see below) and OPENPOS has funded development of the current wallet.

No, the ECHO project is costing us considerably more than the 19K OPENPOS project did. The OPENPOS project got the mobile wallet v1.0 for Android/iOS (apple is approving the iOS version as we speak) and Odoo POS built (and Tech Support(ed)). Odoo POS will be ready for their app store around April 1st, so just a few more days and we have more than completed that project (plus as you guys have seen we also used OPENPOS to fund the "standalone" Smartcoins POS system and also android v1.1 (thanx to the recent BTS price pump).
 
Hopefully we'll have another price pump and I can get the bitshareshelp, fiatramp and jobstar projects finished up too.
 
What inspired me to start building out the ECHO app is all the requests for a Bitshares trollbox, a chat service, a Dapp for voice/video, easy integration with third parties such as Uber, Lazooz, Alexandria, etc, loyalty/coupon programs and of course an actual decentralized, encrypted, censor-free version of Wechat/Whatsapp. Wechat (for example) has over 650 million users and is very popular in China, but it's censored up the wazoo. I am going to give those people and many more a better app. A material-design, native app (to iOS and Android of course) that implements all of the payment and communication features that we want (chat/voice/video) and none of the censorship, a pure open source "way out" for humanity, a way for us all (including the media) to communicate without fear of what we all fear right now.
 
Stay tuned to the OPENPOS thread for more videos and updates on the mobile wallets and POS systems.
 
Chris is meeting with more investors all this week and maybe we can even do another UIA seed round so the community here can share in the rewards on this one as well, but no promises, we need to evaluate the demands of the VC's first and foremost. Your word of mouth about BitShares Munich is what will help Chris and I the most right now, let the Dapp Devs out there know what we're bringing, get them savvy on the BitShares platform and all the cool stuff we can build on it!
Please and thanx, ken

@kenCode, of course you need more funding for ECHO.  But the initial funding came from the OPENPOS UIA.  So do another round of funding here or elsewhere.  Just don't leave your earliest backers out in the cold. 

Quote from: yvv on March 28, 2016, 06:54:54 pm

Quote from: Ben Mason on March 28, 2016, 06:26:12 pm

Agreed. In short there would need to be a consequence that prevents Yunbi from continuing their unilateral use of customer funds (without verifiable consent) or we need to innovate and adapt the platform so that similar exploits aren't possible or we need an alternative platform that has learned from these experiences and is more resilient.  I'm not saying for a minute that any of this is easy or without cost......trouble was inevitable from the outset.

From a slightly philosophical point of view, no human being on this planet has ever lived within a corruption resistant economy for any great period of time.  Even those currently fighting for an edge or tending towards greed for whatever reason may in fact prefer to live in a world that might  be possible should a platform like BitShares succeed. The confluence of old and new partly contributes to the problems all of crypto is currently facing. How do you convince someone who can exploit an edge today, in order to make a million, to sacrifice that edge in favour of something with integrity that helps many more than just himself? 

Apathy is one of the biggest challenges so the platform needs to provide all the support it can.....but then the platform must also be compelling enough to grow and gather network effect. It's this combination of issues that make continued innovation/development and integrity absolutely critical.

Such thing would not be possible with regular stocks, because there is a name attached to stocks certificate. There is no proof of ownership in bitshares. Possession means ownership.  If you give your funds away, even temporarily, you give your voting power away. Everybody just needs to realise this.

Sure. Perhaps awareness of the issue is all that is necessary to at least ensure that exchanges are forced to gather consent for their actions transparently. Or maybe heighten awarness of the fact that the owner of the key owns the funds. Certainly any other course of action requires a lot more work and uncertainty.....though may be more robust!

Perhaps we should start by trying to create awareness so people (not just BTS holders) can altogether avoid this unethical and despicable exchange.  Let's also consider specifically incentivizing BTS holders to get their BTS out of there and onto the DEX. 

And by the way, it's one thing to vote against all workers no matter what.  Such action can perhaps be chalked up to pure, unadulterated ignorance on the part of the "anti-dilution" crowd.  But it's another thing entirely to mount an attack by attempting to steal funds from the reserve pool.  For now, I'm not going to say what I think we should do about this if it continues.  But we should all should start thinking about it.  And we should think outside of the box. 

Quote from: Samupaha on March 27, 2016, 12:22:46 pm

Quote from: Empirical1.2 on March 27, 2016, 10:32:12 am

Personally I think the best way to offer a POS minting reward that removes BTS from current supply is by offering yield on SmartCoins.
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,21597.msg286581.html#msg286581

It will also create demand for SmartCoins and because BitUSD is less volatile than crypto, the yield required to attract BitUSD demand is much lower.

Yeah, this would be probably good idea, but it might take some time until we reach a consensus about exact model and implement it. In the mean time I think we could still do something simpler that even the antidilution gang can understand and accept.

Quote from: abit on March 27, 2016, 10:59:43 am

Isn't free market the best idea?

What do you mean?

Bitshares is a DAC, so it's like a company. Shareholders want to see the value of their investment to go up. We should consider all possibilities how this can be achieved, whether it is offering products and services to customers, incentivizing smartcoin liquidity or locking BTS away from markets.

Dash is a case that proves that it is possible to raise the price of core token by locking it away from liquid markets. Is there any good reason why we shouldn't do the same?

I mean focus more on products and less on the (price of) shares.

Just some random thoughts here.

It's risky to have shares be a part of products (like what we did).

Once we have side chains, it's best to use SIDE.BTC etc as default collateral of all smart coins, or create new smart coins, let market select the best ones. After then, dumping and pumping of shares (BTS) won't impact liquidity of products (smart coins), and perhaps no price feeding is needed at that time. A new era, BitShares 3.0.

The goal of a company is to increase shareholder value.  If you want to focus on products, then in our case you have to realize the only way to fund development is through dilution.  So that means increasing share price is critical, especially when a large segment of the community is woefully ignorant and only understands "anti-dilution". 

Your suggestion to use only SIDE.BTC (instead of BTS) as collateral for BitAssets is off base.  First, you assume BTC will be stable.  But in fact BTC will likely NOT be stable.  Also, if BTC would be stable, then price-stable cryptocurrency wouldn't be one of the big use cases for fiat BitAssets.  And finally, as @Empirical1.2 already pointed out, adoption of BitAssets will increase demand for the collateral.  Why would we want to transfer that demand from BTS to BTC?

Quote from: tbone on March 26, 2016, 04:32:29 pm

Quote from: Akado on March 26, 2016, 02:01:17 pm

Quote from: tbone on March 26, 2016, 10:20:39 am

Tell me, why on god's green earth would Graphene be trending on Github?  What other crypto project code base is trending?  Unless I'm missing something, there aren't any.  So what is the point of this thread?  And @Thom, I'm sure some of your points are valid.  But why are you giving credibility to this bogus thread.  What am I missing?

I believe he's just comparing it with Ethereum. It has many devs working, each on their own stuff while on BitShares we have only a handful of people.

Just comparing it with Ethereum.  Ok.  So we'll just wait for @luckybit to show us where Ethereum is "trending on Guthub".  This should be interesting.

IPFS is doing well. It is very popular and not for technical reasons.

https://github.com/ipfs?page=2
https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs

The question is why is it so popular?

Please show us where Ethereum or any other crypto currency/platform codebase is trending on Github.  Thanks.

Tell me, why on god's green earth would Graphene be trending on Github?  What other crypto project code base is trending?  Unless I'm missing something, there aren't any.  So what is the point of this thread?  And @Thom, I'm sure some of your points are valid.  But why are you giving credibility to this bogus thread.  What am I missing?

Quote from: roadscape on March 23, 2016, 01:41:19 pm

@tbone @cylonmaker2053 currently the scoring bonus is linear: 100% bonus @ the midpoint, and 0% bonus at 5% off. This could be scaled to a wider range, and we could also use a curve instead of a line (creating a "long tail") for the bonus.

yes, wider margin (like 20%+) would be the most important change. linear is fine as long as the margin is wider, but curved with weights trailing off towards the tails would be best.

I agree with these points.

ZERO-FEE transactions


Moto:
ZERO-FEE are FREE !!!

How about [NO FEE transactions]?  It's a little easier to say.  Either that or simply [FREE transactions].