Quote from: lord_potatoe on November 10, 2014, 08:31:06 pm

Quote from: MeTHoDx on November 10, 2014, 08:03:27 pm

I think it's a mistake to "officially" drop the company metaphor. If Satoshi described Bitcoin as "p2p money", BitShares can be described as a "p2p company". It's a decentralized company on a blockchain that's censorship resistant and cannot be controlled by governments.

I fail to see why dropping the company metaphor is at all useful.

It's only useful in that it doesn't immediately draw attention from the governments claiming to be resistant against. You can call it a "company" or a "community", use "tokens" or something instead of "shares" and "distribution" instead of "dividend", "rewards" instead of "interest" etc... but a duck is a duck. Pretty wimpy move IMO. Also a major flip flop of what has been marketed and constantly pushed since bitshares started.

Actually with the SEC what you call it matters more than what it is... I originally adopted the company metaphor based upon the "duck is a duck" mentality... but sadly that is not the case with regulators.   They care about whether or not you are attempting to use terms the public places trust in to persuade others to part with their money.  If you can convince someone to part with their money for a stake in a community then it is very different than selling a share in a company despite the economic result being the same.

Apparently it assigned me a name beginning with "untitled"... oh well no big deal.
But it does seem strange that I was told that I would be charged 0.5 DNS (I think) and then it charged me 1000x what I expected (500 DNS).

Hey Cube (or anyone),

Can you deposit a little more.  The faucet is dry and I need to get my dns out of BTC38.  Thanks!

that did it!  Thank you cube

Do we focus on BTS or NOT? Common guys !!!
Let's contribute all on bitshares, because if we divide to a couple of projects I am afraid  we will get the biggest joke in crypto-world after the "merge"!

Quote from: amencon on November 02, 2014, 12:41:03 am

I support this initiative.  The worst that happens is that this spinoff of DNS DAC is out-competed by BTS.  If some innovation is created with this new DNS DAC and BTS copies it, then all the better.  I'd imagine many people will be invested in both anyway.

Put me on whatever list or mailings you plan if this does move forward.

Thanks.

As I see it, the value proposition can go MUCH farther.  Imagine, for instance, that a talented group of developers decide to fork DNS to make a new chain with different innovations (or to make it more friendly to a certain jurisdiction).  Those Devs essentially snapshot current ownership in the forked chain with a large %, can give themselves a small stake or allot a small % for a crowd sale to gain funding to test their metal against other chains' devs.  Those who are successful have NOW MADE A NAME for themselves to the degree where if BTS doesn't pick them up, another SuperDAC will.  If not, the task of simply building on the DNS fork (or even PTS, VOTE...etc for that matter) will likely have made them capable of building their own SuperDAC to rival others. 

Think bigger guys and girls!  This is a potential Multi-Trillion Dollar Industry!  Imagine being sharedropped on 10 different DNS forks, holding them all for 10 years and 2-3 of them ending up reaching valuations of 1+ Billion Dollars, just to be bought out by a SuperDAC (or maybe even more than 1).  Then you have made off QUITE nicely.  If this game is played right and developers know that supporting the community with significant sharedrops is a viable means by which they can earn attention and work to attain legitimacy in the industry...we have essentially made a very positive feedback loop that also protects us with the power of a diversified marketplace while protecting from corruption and also potentially making original holders very wealthy.... 

People see this as bad but I think that is just fear and impatience talking. I see this as potentially one of the best things I could ever imagine.  Sure, it MIGHT take a very small portion of the BTS valuation (initially) but it will spread the word that the bitshares ecosystem is evolving and not just settling into one static, microsoft-like existence.  Think of it as cheap advertising...

When this market can support literally hundreds of forked chains with their own special attributes (like altcoins have), we will know we have made it to where we all want this to go...the moon.  Let's consider these forks as Wormholes that force us to ask "which moon? There are sooooo many!"

...
I do realise that SEC concerns might have led to an itchy trigger finger on this announcement and that they ultimately might necessitate us having to re-imagine everything as a 'Digital Autonomous Community' or something similar rather than calling it a 'Digital Autonomous Company'. I really hope not, but maybe we do have to act here. If that is the case then the message from Dan needed to be more along the lines off 'Hey look guys we're gonna get screwed by the SEC if we don't rethink the language we use surrounding BitShares.
...

This thread and the accusations fuzzy has leveled at Rune, i think, are jointly responsible for today's sell off. By the way I'm not saying that fuzzy is wrong, but Rune seems genuine to me when I ask my gut what it thinks. I get the impression he's young, very intelligent, very excitable and perhaps a little naive in thinking that one day BitShares will take over the world. I think he's is probably going to turn out to be a huge asset to this community in the long run. I hope I'm proved right.