0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: delulo on June 27, 2014, 06:28:46 pmxeroc, where do you have this graph from?It was linked on reddit .. main threadhttp://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/296uss/p2p_finance_counterparty_competitive_advantages/
xeroc, where do you have this graph from?
For a basic starthttp://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/296uss/p2p_finance_counterparty_competitive_advantages/
Quote from: tonyk on June 25, 2014, 03:15:50 pmQuote from: AdamBLevine on June 25, 2014, 03:08:04 pmYou realize that even you don't really know what you're talking about, and you're trying to write the wiki article. This is the problem.QuoteBitshares is a 100% proof of stake system so all the shares are pre-allocated and there is no need for the dilution of stakeIn the new paradigm that is likely not true, delegates must be paid and since no tokens were retained the best option now is to create an inflationary system where new tokens are created to pay the delegates. Alternatively, you rely on delegates doing it for very cheap which means you get only delegates whose time is not worth very much, which form the backbone of the network. Not big deal, but you lack some knowledge here he he Why should I believe I am wrong if you don't explain how? Not all of us can subsist on blind faith.
Quote from: AdamBLevine on June 25, 2014, 03:08:04 pmYou realize that even you don't really know what you're talking about, and you're trying to write the wiki article. This is the problem.QuoteBitshares is a 100% proof of stake system so all the shares are pre-allocated and there is no need for the dilution of stakeIn the new paradigm that is likely not true, delegates must be paid and since no tokens were retained the best option now is to create an inflationary system where new tokens are created to pay the delegates. Alternatively, you rely on delegates doing it for very cheap which means you get only delegates whose time is not worth very much, which form the backbone of the network. Not big deal, but you lack some knowledge here he he
You realize that even you don't really know what you're talking about, and you're trying to write the wiki article. This is the problem.QuoteBitshares is a 100% proof of stake system so all the shares are pre-allocated and there is no need for the dilution of stakeIn the new paradigm that is likely not true, delegates must be paid and since no tokens were retained the best option now is to create an inflationary system where new tokens are created to pay the delegates. Alternatively, you rely on delegates doing it for very cheap which means you get only delegates whose time is not worth very much, which form the backbone of the network.
Bitshares is a 100% proof of stake system so all the shares are pre-allocated and there is no need for the dilution of stake
Quote from: Empirical1 on June 25, 2014, 07:22:35 pmSome people felt strongly about not pointing out others weaknesses but focusing on our strengths, with valid reasons. What do you think about producing some kind of fair comparison chart between Bitcoin , NXT, Ethereum & BitShares? Would that be some sort of middle ground? You know like one of these type things below?With headers like mining, transaction fees, dividends, distribution, speed, security etc.. People love infographics. Especially newbies. Although a grid like that is more yes/no and not so much qualitative. It is hard to fit these traits in there.Forced inflation via mining / dividend system / block times below 30 seconds ... That sort of thing is hard to fit in a header. Hrmmm
Some people felt strongly about not pointing out others weaknesses but focusing on our strengths, with valid reasons. What do you think about producing some kind of fair comparison chart between Bitcoin , NXT, Ethereum & BitShares? Would that be some sort of middle ground? You know like one of these type things below?With headers like mining, transaction fees, dividends, distribution, speed, security etc..
Quote from: clout on June 23, 2014, 09:53:06 pmBitshares solves all the inherent problems of bitcoin:- slow transactions per second when compared to a major payment processor like visa (7 tps vs 10,000 tps)- wallets are machine readable not human readable (as a result something like 5% of btc have been irrevocably lost) - transactions are not anonymous - distribution model is inflationary, even if the argument can be made that the inflation has been priced in- price volatility (obviously this is the biggest deterrent when it comes to adoption as a major currency)- security of the network cost anywhere from $500 million to $1 billion annually depending on the bitcoin market capitalization- control of the network is proportional to hashing power not proportional to you relative bitcoin holdings- centralization of hashing power under the control of a single mining pool How Bitshares solves these issues:- DPOS reduces block production to 15-30 seconds and since computational resources are used for the purpose of transaction propagation and confirmation rather than pointless computational work, DPOS blockchains can scale to the transaction load of visa- Bitshares uses accounts that can be registered on the blockchain. Users no longer need to send money to an alpha numeric string that can be miscopied. Instead you send money as easily you would send an email and in the exact same fashion. It is very difficult to send to a wrong account. You can still send to public keys but its unnecessary and adds little advantage- Bitshares uses TITAN which automates the creation of stealth address using an accounts registered public key. No need for mixing or "masternodes." All transactions are inherently anonymous without the user needing to do anything- Bitshares is a 100% proof of stake system so all the shares are pre-allocated and there is no need for the dilution of stake- Bitshares X is a bank that allows people to hold deposits in whatever asset they want. This system allows investors with a higher risk tolerance to collateralize and trade virtual assets, to ensure that users who simply want to use crypto currencies as a stable medium of exchange can do so without risk due to the volatility of the networks main equity/currency. (That is to say that if you put $100 in the network your deposit always redeemable for $100 worth of bitshares, as a result of the free market peg of bitUSD to real USD) - The cost of securing the network is simply a fraction of the transaction fees accumulated by the network. Transaction fees are destroyed which acts as an implicit dividend to holders of bitshares and makes Bitshares truly deflationary.- Delegates compete for votes and the top 101 delegates produce blocks. The job of a delegate is simple include as many valid transactions in your given block and sign a single block. If a delegate signs multiple blocks they are immediately fired. If a delegate blocks transactions they will be voted out of office. Each round delegates are randomly assigned a block to produce thereby making it that much harder to coordinate a sustained attack on the network without 51% of the shares.- Shareholder votes are proportionate to the relative number of shares they own. The DAC is completely shareholder runBitshares solves all the problems of bitcoin and does not overcomplicate things in the way that Ethereum does. When you view these crypto currencies networks through metaphor of a company you realize how misinformed people are about how these networks should be designed. It is imperative that the developers of a crypto currency network have a solid understanding of economics and I believe that Dan Larimer and his team have the best economic perspective in the crypto currency space. To be honest if you truly evaluate the fundamentals ethereum is just not even comparable, both as a crypto network and as an investment. People need to stop buying into hype and do the necessary research before they invest.I translated this into Chinese. Hopefully it will help newbies in China to see the whole picture.https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=5290.0
Bitshares solves all the inherent problems of bitcoin:- slow transactions per second when compared to a major payment processor like visa (7 tps vs 10,000 tps)- wallets are machine readable not human readable (as a result something like 5% of btc have been irrevocably lost) - transactions are not anonymous - distribution model is inflationary, even if the argument can be made that the inflation has been priced in- price volatility (obviously this is the biggest deterrent when it comes to adoption as a major currency)- security of the network cost anywhere from $500 million to $1 billion annually depending on the bitcoin market capitalization- control of the network is proportional to hashing power not proportional to you relative bitcoin holdings- centralization of hashing power under the control of a single mining pool How Bitshares solves these issues:- DPOS reduces block production to 15-30 seconds and since computational resources are used for the purpose of transaction propagation and confirmation rather than pointless computational work, DPOS blockchains can scale to the transaction load of visa- Bitshares uses accounts that can be registered on the blockchain. Users no longer need to send money to an alpha numeric string that can be miscopied. Instead you send money as easily you would send an email and in the exact same fashion. It is very difficult to send to a wrong account. You can still send to public keys but its unnecessary and adds little advantage- Bitshares uses TITAN which automates the creation of stealth address using an accounts registered public key. No need for mixing or "masternodes." All transactions are inherently anonymous without the user needing to do anything- Bitshares is a 100% proof of stake system so all the shares are pre-allocated and there is no need for the dilution of stake- Bitshares X is a bank that allows people to hold deposits in whatever asset they want. This system allows investors with a higher risk tolerance to collateralize and trade virtual assets, to ensure that users who simply want to use crypto currencies as a stable medium of exchange can do so without risk due to the volatility of the networks main equity/currency. (That is to say that if you put $100 in the network your deposit always redeemable for $100 worth of bitshares, as a result of the free market peg of bitUSD to real USD) - The cost of securing the network is simply a fraction of the transaction fees accumulated by the network. Transaction fees are destroyed which acts as an implicit dividend to holders of bitshares and makes Bitshares truly deflationary.- Delegates compete for votes and the top 101 delegates produce blocks. The job of a delegate is simple include as many valid transactions in your given block and sign a single block. If a delegate signs multiple blocks they are immediately fired. If a delegate blocks transactions they will be voted out of office. Each round delegates are randomly assigned a block to produce thereby making it that much harder to coordinate a sustained attack on the network without 51% of the shares.- Shareholder votes are proportionate to the relative number of shares they own. The DAC is completely shareholder runBitshares solves all the problems of bitcoin and does not overcomplicate things in the way that Ethereum does. When you view these crypto currencies networks through metaphor of a company you realize how misinformed people are about how these networks should be designed. It is imperative that the developers of a crypto currency network have a solid understanding of economics and I believe that Dan Larimer and his team have the best economic perspective in the crypto currency space. To be honest if you truly evaluate the fundamentals ethereum is just not even comparable, both as a crypto network and as an investment. People need to stop buying into hype and do the necessary research before they invest.
Quote from: xeroc on June 25, 2014, 08:04:38 amBAM:https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/wiki/WhyBitSharesexcellent. but I don't agree with the following italicized in the conclusion as they don't reflect the overall summary,"Bitshares solves some major problems of bitcoin and does not overcomplicate things in the way that Ethereum does.""To be honest if you truly evaluate the fundamentals ethereum is just not even comparable, both as a crypto network and as an investment.""People need to stop buying into hype and do the necessary research before they invest."that would be the conclusion of an opinionated essay on "why bitshares instead of ethereum" and is fine as a personal post, but not a wiki
BAM:https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/wiki/WhyBitShares
Can I copy that post (+layouting) to the bitShares wiki?
Quote from: Empirical1 on June 23, 2014, 07:41:13 pmQuote from: AdamBLevine on June 23, 2014, 07:09:38 pmI'd suggest focusing on the advantages and impressive features of your system rather than focusing on what makes all its competitors bad. That just looks defensive.IMO if Bytemaster succeeds we'll have very very fast reliable transactions at a very low cost, the advantages of the blockchain without many of the costs.It is fairly compelling, but it all hinges on Bytemasters ability to bring a new paradigm into reality. Ya'll should really focus on what you're doing rather than what everybody else is doing wrong, that's not a contest you want to get into right now lol.I think marketing anything requires communicating both your own strengths as well as the weaknesses of your competitor/s.It is dangerous and uneceesary to point out competitors weakness. If you successfully communicate your own strengths your audience will know your competitors weaknesses without you directly bringing attention to them.The strategy has occasionally succeeded - but more often failed.http://www.cbc.ca/undertheinfluence/season-3/2014/06/14/when-brands-mock-other-brands-1/
Quote from: AdamBLevine on June 23, 2014, 07:09:38 pmI'd suggest focusing on the advantages and impressive features of your system rather than focusing on what makes all its competitors bad. That just looks defensive.IMO if Bytemaster succeeds we'll have very very fast reliable transactions at a very low cost, the advantages of the blockchain without many of the costs.It is fairly compelling, but it all hinges on Bytemasters ability to bring a new paradigm into reality. Ya'll should really focus on what you're doing rather than what everybody else is doing wrong, that's not a contest you want to get into right now lol.I think marketing anything requires communicating both your own strengths as well as the weaknesses of your competitor/s.
I'd suggest focusing on the advantages and impressive features of your system rather than focusing on what makes all its competitors bad. That just looks defensive.IMO if Bytemaster succeeds we'll have very very fast reliable transactions at a very low cost, the advantages of the blockchain without many of the costs.It is fairly compelling, but it all hinges on Bytemasters ability to bring a new paradigm into reality. Ya'll should really focus on what you're doing rather than what everybody else is doing wrong, that's not a contest you want to get into right now lol.
Quote from: Empirical1 on June 23, 2014, 10:23:01 pmCan anyone explain or point to a good post explaining why DPOS is better than NXT POS? Knowing the order of the block producers makes it faster +https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4677.msg60191#msg60191
Can anyone explain or point to a good post explaining why DPOS is better than NXT POS?
Nxt Transparent Forging will allow Nxt to approach Visa/Mastercard rates of transactions. This is possible with Nxt because the transparency provided in the protocol will allow each user's client to determine which node will generate the next block. Other nodes can then send their transactions directly to that node. This also allows additional fees to be realized for immediate, priority transactions.
An equally important feature of Nxt Transparent Forging is a security mechanism to prevent forked chains from being forged by high-stake nodes. This prevents against even a 90% majority owner of all Nxt branching out and forcing a fork.
The Nxt Alias System translates alphaneumeric text into almost anything: Nxt account addresses, email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, SKU codes, and more.The Nxt Alias System has the ability to function as a Decentralized DNS system, and adds additional possibilities for mapping short names to other entities.
Nxt Arbitrary Messaging is a feature that Nxt users to send messages to each other through the decentralized network. Nxt Arbitrary Messaging can be used to send simple text, but it can also be used to build complex file-sharing services and other decentralized applications.
Nxt is "forged" with a small program that can be installed on a regular computer. It is "forging" for transaction of currency that already exists and does not require the extensive mining systems of Proof of Work currencies like Bitcoin and altcoins. The power efficiency of using an average PC makes Nxt more friendly to the environment.Nxt Account Leasing allows an account to lease its forging power to another account for a fixed period of time. There is no requirement to send coins anywhere allowing for the creation of secure forging pools.
ounterparty proof of burn just robbed the project and investors of development funds. Imagine investing in a company by everyone getting together and awarding shares based on how much cash you throw in a bonfire, it makes just about that much economic sense.
At the Inside Bitcoin conference in Las Vegas the CEO of Butterfly Labs did a presentation on “The Future of Mining”. In his presentation he pointed out that about 5 people collectively control 75% of the hashing power behind Bitcoin and 2 people control over 51%. He then made the case that this centralization was good for Bitcoin because it means they could coordinate to rapidly resolve unexpected forks such as the one that occurred in March 2013. According to Sonny Vleisides, without this centralization in mining Bitcoin would have died 9 months ago as decentralized clients would have been unable to reach a consensus on which fork to follow in a timely manner. Whether or not you agree that Bitcoin would have died, Sonny Vleisides has effectively admitted that Bitcoin has become centralized, that a small handful of powerful pool operators can unilaterally decide which block chain fork is the “official” fork, that they all know each other and that they effectively vote on which chain to support. The session ran out of time before I had an opportunity to publicly ask the following question: “If a small handful of self-appointed people have taken it upon themselves to decide which chain to officially support, then why should the Bitcoin ecosystem spend $1 billion dollars per year in electric costs to provide the same effective security as having 2 or 3 signatures on every block that costs next to nothing while providing infinitely more security?” Whether signatures or hashing power, the regular Bitcoin user has no more control over the official block chain policy than the regular Federal Reserve Note user has over official monetary policy. Their only way to ‘vote’ is to switch to another currency which will have a smaller network with fewer exchanges, products, and services available to it. The fact that mining results in centralization should not have been a surprise to those who understand economies of scale. Mining profitability is a function of efficiency and large centralized mining farms powered by the latest capital-intensive ASICs packaged and cooled in an industrial setting will eventually push all profitable mining into the hands of a single player. Effectively, mining means that consensus is defined by an organization that can derive profits from alternative revenue streams such as taxation, tainted coins, or limiting transactions to privileged players. It means that in the name of ‘progress’, these large miners will support other changes to the protocol that also benefit from economies of scale such as reducing block intervals, increasing block sizes, and offering instant transaction validation services. We have come to the conclusion that there is no traditional proof-of-work system that can provide security and decentralization at the same time. A new approach is needed.
What are you upset with Swarm about? They haven't even launched yet.
I found this thread, which, along with the threads it links to, seem like a good starting point for an argument about why bitshares > ethereum.https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2280.0if we can organize all the information we can find about this subject here in this thread maybe I could whip up some arguments that you could spoon-feed your drinking buddy, PP
Our technical team has evaluated the Ethereum proposal and design and have concluded the following:1) Mining means the DAC will be operating at a loss or break-even at best. No dividends.2) Scripts will require more blockchain space and bandwidth resulting in lower transaction volume for the same level of decentralization.3) We do not believe the scripts can efficiently implement a BitShares like market matching with automatic margin calls at scale. 4) Merged mining would be required to secure parallel chains... this has its own challenges. 5) Mining will result in centralization one block at a time, something very bad for chains that implement markets.6) Finding GPU developers is hard enough, defining a new dedicated language for this purpose will be even harder.7) If you eliminate mining, then the cost of launching a new DAC is near 0 and you can simply use C++ to encode your contracts starting from a 'shell DAC' and launch without having to overload everyone not interested in your contract. NO 'competitor' thus far is willing to admit that multiple parallel blockchains will be required to handle the order of magnitude greater transaction volume an exchange experiences vs Bitcoin and this is for a SINGLE currency pair. Imagine attempting to have every tradable market on one chain! This will rapidly be centralized into trusted supernodes that can handle the bandwidth requirements. 9) You think bitcoin verification times have trouble scaling, imagine executing an interpreted language! Conclusion: We believe Ethereum is an interesting computer science project with little compelling advantage in developing new DACs and many drawbacks. We wish them well and if their scripting language and contract design proves useful as a means for very special purpose contracts then we suspect we will be able to adapt it to a more efficient, profitable, AGS honoring DAC.