BM，I warn you that your feckless decisions have already impaired a lot of stakeholders greatly and the market vigorously gives the result! Why does people love BTC? Radically because the amount can not be manipulated by such financial organizations as U.S. Federal Reserve and our fortune cannot be diluted. So in my view, any idea like hard fork or dilution is extremely stupid!
[x] compare BitShares with Bitcoin
[ ] get the difference of both
BM，I warn you that your feckless decisions have already impaired a lot of stakeholders greatly and the market vigorously gives the result! Why does people love BTC? Radically because the amount can not be manipulated by such financial organizations as U.S. Federal Reserve and our fortune cannot be diluted. So in my view, any idea like hard fork or dilution is extremely stupid!Code: [Select][x] compare BitShares with Bitcoin
[ ] get the difference of both
The essence is similar! For BitShares, the share capital is diluted and the price of shares falls.
For the sake of completeness, you may compare bitUSD with BTC .. which has no dilution!
OP: Wrong. Delegate positions are for talented individuals who can be trusted to increase the market cap more than they consume. If that is the case, then there is no problem. The only problem is with people's perceptions.
You can vote for delegates that wont inflate for their salary. If the market determines that the cost is not worth it, they will vote low cost delegates
Hard fork or dilution should be the taboo!A taboo on hard forks results in a non-developing blockchain! .. your stuck in version 1.0!
Hard fork or dilution should be the taboo!A taboo on hard forks results in a non-developing blockchain! .. your stuck in version 1.0!
and I have a feeling still don't understand what the dilution is good for ..
For the sake of completeness, you may compare bitUSD with BTC .. which has no dilution!
BitGold which has no dilution. The FED can print USD
My interpretation in this case wasFor the sake of completeness, you may compare bitUSD with BTC .. which has no dilution!
that’s wrong!
BM，I warn you that your feckless decisions have already impaired a lot of stakeholders greatly and the market vigorously gives the result! Why does people love BTC? Radically because the amount can not be manipulated by such financial organizations as U.S. Federal Reserve and our fortune cannot be diluted. So in my view, any idea like hard fork or dilution is extremely stupid!
BM，I warn you that your feckless decisions have already impaired a lot of stakeholders greatly and the market vigorously gives the result! Why does people love BTC? Radically because the amount can not be manipulated by such financial organizations as U.S. Federal Reserve and our fortune cannot be diluted. So in my view, any idea like hard fork or dilution is extremely stupid!
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
How many times does it have to be written before people will understand?
BM，I warn you that your feckless decisions have already impaired a lot of stakeholders greatly and the market vigorously gives the result! Why does people love BTC? Radically because the amount can not be manipulated by such financial organizations as U.S. Federal Reserve and our fortune cannot be diluted. So in my view, any idea like hard fork or dilution is extremely stupid!
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
How many times does it have to be written before people will understand?
BTS currently has less dilution than Bitcoin. Bitcoin's is fixed ours can be changed.
I think the competition between DAC (BTS) and DAC+Crypto-currency (BTSX) is tougher than people think. With enough shares set aside BTSX could fund a lot of development as a hard cap. So while a pure DAC can perhaps engage in more innovation, development & marketing...
1. Unlike a real company, everything a pure DAC spends a fortune developing is open source, no intellectual property, so a crypto-currency+DAC can cheaply copy it.
2. The crypto market, the libertarian market and the world may gravitate to & trust a DAC+crypto-currency with fixed initial rules like 'gold' more than a pure DAC more like 'Goldman Sachs' (That will be the detractor/competitors marketing angle.)
Some feel mainstream won't care about BitShares much on the back-end. I'm not so sure. Interesting times.
BM，I warn you that your feckless decisions have already impaired a lot of stakeholders greatly and the market vigorously gives the result! Why does people love BTC? Radically because the amount can not be manipulated by such financial organizations as U.S. Federal Reserve and our fortune cannot be diluted. So in my view, any idea like hard fork or dilution is extremely stupid!
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
BTS has less dilution than Bitcoin.
How many times does it have to be written before people will understand?
BTS currently has less dilution than Bitcoin. Bitcoin's is fixed ours can be changed.
I think the competition between DAC (BTS) and DAC+Crypto-currency (BTSX) is tougher than people think. With enough shares set aside BTSX could fund a lot of development as a hard cap. So while a pure DAC can perhaps engage in more innovation, development & marketing...
1. Unlike a real company, everything a pure DAC spends a fortune developing is open source, no intellectual property, so a crypto-currency+DAC can cheaply copy it.
2. The crypto market, the libertarian market and the world may gravitate to & trust a DAC+crypto-currency with fixed initial rules like 'gold' more than a pure DAC more like 'Goldman Sachs' (That will be the detractor/competitors marketing angle.)
Some feel mainstream won't care about BitShares much on the back-end. I'm not so sure. Interesting times.
Can someone calculate how many years it will be until the Bitcoin inflation rate is less than 3%?
Its 2021:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply
Its 2021:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply
Great... an enshrined constitution that stipulates an dilution rate strictly less than BTC's inflation rate would "tie our hands" and should be carefully considered, but from a marketing perspective there is a strong case.
Its 2021:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply
Great... an enshrined constitution that stipulates an dilution rate strictly less than BTC's inflation rate would "tie our hands" and should be carefully considered, but from a marketing perspective there is a strong case.
Its 2021:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply
Great... an enshrined constitution that stipulates an dilution rate strictly less than BTC's inflation rate would "tie our hands" and should be carefully considered, but from a marketing perspective there is a strong case.
You are changing almost all essential elements in the original consensus!!!
If the original consensus allows the dilution rate, I am sure that most holders did not buy btsx shares in the past! Particularly, the benefit caused by the future dilution will be not for minority shareholders， but only for delegates ! Now I cann't see at all the meaning of decentralization. Your opinion is just the decision! right? That's the reason why some chinese are asking for the help of the authority to forbid btsx trades on BTC38!
Great... an enshrined constitution that stipulates an dilution rate strictly less than BTC's inflation rate
NO!! I realize Bitcoin is the 800lb gorilla in the room right now but that may not always be the case. If we are going to enshrine anything it cannot be tied to an existing tech. That just assures BTS' place as a second class citizen.
"Less % than bitcoin" is the marketing version, to sell the idea.
The real version is "50 BTS per block cap". Nothing in the code about bitcoin.
Its 2021:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply
Great... an enshrined constitution that stipulates an dilution rate strictly less than BTC's inflation rate would "tie our hands" and should be carefully considered, but from a marketing perspective there is a strong case.
You are changing almost all essential elements in the original consensus!!!
If the original consensus allows the dilution rate, I am sure that most holders did not buy btsx shares in the past! Particularly, the benefit caused by the future dilution will be not for minority shareholders， but only for delegates ! Now I cann't see at all the meaning of decentralization. Your opinion is just the decision! right? That's the reason why some chinese are asking for the help of the authority to forbid btsx trades on BTC38!
BitGold which has no dilution. The FED can print USD
ＢＴＳ must like BTC only 2100W
If we can with the new BitShares on Nov 5th have a some kind of constitution with an unchangeable maximum dilution rate (competitive with Bitcoin), enshrined as the first rule/principle, I personally believe that would be superior to a maximum flexibility DAC.+5%
To the thread title I have to say: Who is going to pay for all this?
As a campaigning IT delegate I have real expenses. VPS services are not free. DDOS protection is not free. My time is not free.
I can sit on my BTS stash and wait for "them" to do the work but you don't have to go very far up the food chain before you run out of "them" and realize it's either do it yourself or it doesn't get done.
NO!! I realize Bitcoin is the 800lb gorilla in the room right now but that may not always be the case. If we are going to enshrine anything it cannot be tied to an existing tech. That just assures BTS' place as a second class citizen.
"Less % than bitcoin" is the marketing version, to sell the idea.
The real version is "50 BTS per block cap". Nothing in the code about bitcoin.
Have you done the math? My current remuneration for the hours I've spent maintaining a delegate: frequent releases, vps costs and setup, helping other delegates get up and running, maintaining price feeds, etc. Has so far been around $2 a month. At one point during the high price days I almost cleared $4 a month.
If that is greedy than I'm not sure what to say.
Keep in mind this is all open source. If you feel this strongly you can clone the project and make your own DAC with no dilution. The hard part will be finding the staff that'll work for transaction fees.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Have you done the math? My current remuneration for the hours I've spent maintaining a delegate: frequent releases, vps costs and setup, helping other delegates get up and running, maintaining price feeds, etc. Has so far been around $2 a month. At one point during the high price days I almost cleared $4 a month.
If that is greedy than I'm not sure what to say.
Keep in mind this is all open source. If you feel this strongly you can clone the project and make your own DAC with no dilution. The hard part will be finding the staff that'll work for transaction fees.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
If you think you have a big loss as delegate, please give up the delegate position！Ok？I will serve btsx holders for free！
In nature， you donot take the delegate as the honorary role！
What you said is nonsense!一派胡言Have you done the math? My current remuneration for the hours I've spent maintaining a delegate: frequent releases, vps costs and setup, helping other delegates get up and running, maintaining price feeds, etc. Has so far been around $2 a month. At one point during the high price days I almost cleared $4 a month.
If that is greedy than I'm not sure what to say.
Keep in mind this is all open source. If you feel this strongly you can clone the project and make your own DAC with no dilution. The hard part will be finding the staff that'll work for transaction fees.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
If you think you have a big loss as delegate, please give up the delegate position！Ok？I will serve btsx holders for free！
In nature， you donot take the delegate as the honorary role！
Nothing is more dangerous than someone in a financial system who has great power claiming that "he does not need money , just serve the people ".
Because a pure good person like that would have go to the third world country and help the poor people already instead of playing a major role in a financial system .
What you said is nonsense!一派胡言Have you done the math? My current remuneration for the hours I've spent maintaining a delegate: frequent releases, vps costs and setup, helping other delegates get up and running, maintaining price feeds, etc. Has so far been around $2 a month. At one point during the high price days I almost cleared $4 a month.
If that is greedy than I'm not sure what to say.
Keep in mind this is all open source. If you feel this strongly you can clone the project and make your own DAC with no dilution. The hard part will be finding the staff that'll work for transaction fees.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
If you think you have a big loss as delegate, please give up the delegate position！Ok？I will serve btsx holders for free！
In nature， you donot take the delegate as the honorary role！
Nothing is more dangerous than someone in a financial system who has great power claiming that "he does not need money , just serve the people ".
Because a pure good person like that would have go to the third world country and help the poor people already instead of playing a major role in a financial system .
What you said is nonsense!一派胡言Have you done the math? My current remuneration for the hours I've spent maintaining a delegate: frequent releases, vps costs and setup, helping other delegates get up and running, maintaining price feeds, etc. Has so far been around $2 a month. At one point during the high price days I almost cleared $4 a month.
If that is greedy than I'm not sure what to say.
Keep in mind this is all open source. If you feel this strongly you can clone the project and make your own DAC with no dilution. The hard part will be finding the staff that'll work for transaction fees.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
If you think you have a big loss as delegate, please give up the delegate position！Ok？I will serve btsx holders for free！
In nature， you donot take the delegate as the honorary role！
Nothing is more dangerous than someone in a financial system who has great power claiming that "he does not need money , just serve the people ".
Because a pure good person like that would have go to the third world country and help the poor people already instead of playing a major role in a financial system .
Well, you can't be everything to everyone. In your world people work for free for the benefit of everyone. In my world I either pay my mortgage or the bank takes my house.
Gotta play the hand I'm dealt.
Btsx system is still far from robustness and now delegates like you begin to attempt to eat the fortune of btsx system step by step！ All the distribution of interests should have been in the original consensus. I don't understand why you didn't raise this point originally. But anyway, if you think you couldn't be qualified for the delegate role， you can give it up. I think many candidates are very willing to take over your position！
What you said is nonsense!一派胡言Have you done the math? My current remuneration for the hours I've spent maintaining a delegate: frequent releases, vps costs and setup, helping other delegates get up and running, maintaining price feeds, etc. Has so far been around $2 a month. At one point during the high price days I almost cleared $4 a month.
If that is greedy than I'm not sure what to say.
Keep in mind this is all open source. If you feel this strongly you can clone the project and make your own DAC with no dilution. The hard part will be finding the staff that'll work for transaction fees.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
If you think you have a big loss as delegate, please give up the delegate position！Ok？I will serve btsx holders for free！
In nature， you donot take the delegate as the honorary role！
Nothing is more dangerous than someone in a financial system who has great power claiming that "he does not need money , just serve the people ".
Because a pure good person like that would have go to the third world country and help the poor people already instead of playing a major role in a financial system .
Well, you can't be everything to everyone. In your world people work for free for the benefit of everyone. In my world I either pay my mortgage or the bank takes my house.
Gotta play the hand I'm dealt.
Btsx system is still far from robustness and now delegates like you begin to attempt to eat the fortune of btsx system step by step！ All the distribution of interests should have been in the original consensus. I don't understand why you didn't raise this point originally. But anyway, if you think you couldn't be qualified for the delegate role， you can give it up. I think many candidates are very willing to take over your position！
I think if we're using the company metaphor, it's probably a good idea to pay delegates who offer valuable services. Riverhead certainly qualifies for that. Free is only going to motivate the absolute die hards with too much time on their hands. Even Bitcoin has a hard time finding developers who can work on it full time. So far it only seems to be independently wealthy developers + Gavin who's being paid 200k / year by the foundation. Top companies attract top talent with high pay and a compelling company philosophy. That said, it might be best to operate at a loss in the early days but that shouldn't be where we end up a year from now.
So I deeply doubt his dubious motivation!
Btsx system is still far from robustness and now delegates like you begin to attempt to eat the fortune of btsx system step by step！ All the distribution of interests should have been in the original consensus. I don't understand why you didn't raise this point originally. But anyway, if you think you couldn't be qualified for the delegate role， you can give it up. I think many candidates are very willing to take over your position！
I think if we're using the company metaphor, it's probably a good idea to pay delegates who offer valuable services. Riverhead certainly qualifies for that. Free is only going to motivate the absolute die hards with too much time on their hands. Even Bitcoin has a hard time finding developers who can work on it full time. So far it only seems to be independently wealthy developers + Gavin who's being paid 200k / year by the foundation. Top companies attract top talent with high pay and a compelling company philosophy. That said, it might be best to operate at a loss in the early days but that shouldn't be where we end up a year from now.
I really enjoy your compelling company philosophy. But again, is there all such distributions of interests in the original consensus? No! He should have made that point one year ago！Do you think he is not capable of predicting it？ If he is incapable, you think he is qualified for the delegate role? I dont think so! So I deeply doubt his dubious motivation!
Btsx system is still far from robustness and now delegates like you begin to attempt to eat the fortune of btsx system step by step！ All the distribution of interests should have been in the original consensus. I don't understand why you didn't raise this point originally. But anyway, if you think you couldn't be qualified for the delegate role， you can give it up. I think many candidates are very willing to take over your position！
I think if we're using the company metaphor, it's probably a good idea to pay delegates who offer valuable services. Riverhead certainly qualifies for that. Free is only going to motivate the absolute die hards with too much time on their hands. Even Bitcoin has a hard time finding developers who can work on it full time. So far it only seems to be independently wealthy developers + Gavin who's being paid 200k / year by the foundation. Top companies attract top talent with high pay and a compelling company philosophy. That said, it might be best to operate at a loss in the early days but that shouldn't be where we end up a year from now.
I really enjoy your compelling company philosophy. But again, is there all such distributions of interests in the original consensus? No! He should have made that point one year ago！Do you think he is not capable of predicting it？ If he is incapable, you think he is qualified for the delegate role? I dont think so! So I deeply doubt his dubious motivation!
Consensus can change at any time. The only real authority in the system are the stakeholders and their elected delegates. If you think you can mobilize more than half of actively voting stakeholders to prevent the BTS merger and the implementation of delegate dilution, then go ahead and do so - you will be able to prevent dilution from happening. Any arguments to authority or prior promises are meaningless because the only thing that matters (as you correctly put it) is consensus. But it's not the past consensus, it's the consensus of the present.
Joke!!! who voted for the merging? how many shakeholders did vote? we dont know at all! Maybe one among you registers a lot of accounts here! Many Chinese shakeholders do not come here at all! do you think it is the veritable consensus?Btsx system is still far from robustness and now delegates like you begin to attempt to eat the fortune of btsx system step by step！ All the distribution of interests should have been in the original consensus. I don't understand why you didn't raise this point originally. But anyway, if you think you couldn't be qualified for the delegate role， you can give it up. I think many candidates are very willing to take over your position！
I think if we're using the company metaphor, it's probably a good idea to pay delegates who offer valuable services. Riverhead certainly qualifies for that. Free is only going to motivate the absolute die hards with too much time on their hands. Even Bitcoin has a hard time finding developers who can work on it full time. So far it only seems to be independently wealthy developers + Gavin who's being paid 200k / year by the foundation. Top companies attract top talent with high pay and a compelling company philosophy. That said, it might be best to operate at a loss in the early days but that shouldn't be where we end up a year from now.
I really enjoy your compelling company philosophy. But again, is there all such distributions of interests in the original consensus? No! He should have made that point one year ago！Do you think he is not capable of predicting it？ If he is incapable, you think he is qualified for the delegate role? I dont think so! So I deeply doubt his dubious motivation!
Consensus can change at any time. The only real authority in the system are the stakeholders and their elected delegates. If you think you can mobilize more than half of actively voting stakeholders to prevent the BTS merger and the implementation of delegate dilution, then go ahead and do so - you will be able to prevent dilution from happening. Any arguments to authority or prior promises are meaningless because the only thing that matters (as you correctly put it) is consensus. But it's not the past consensus, it's the consensus of the present.
Joke!!! who voted for the merging? how many shakeholders did vote? we dont know at all! Maybe one among you registers a lot of accounts here! Many Chinese shakeholders do not come here at all! do you think it is the veritable consensus?
There was no need to vote for the proposal because of the giant selloff that happened when BM proposed it. That clearly indicated that the market took his proposal as being fully accepted by the majority already. The majority of those who are against it have already voted with their feet and are out of the market. If you think this is wrong, and that a majority of stakeholders still oppose it, then the burden of proof is on you to get 51 anti-merger delegates who will reject BM's hardfork when it comes. That is the only way you can prevent the merger from happening - everything else you do is completely futile and a waste of time.+5%
Truth is, the merger and paid delegates are a huge advantage, bigger than anything else BTSX had, and anyone who understands how to run a company will agree with this. The whales who disagree have sold off, and the whales who are left stand behind it.
Joke!!! who voted for the merging? how many shakeholders did vote? we dont know at all! Maybe one among you registers a lot of accounts here! Many Chinese shakeholders do not come here at all! do you think it is the veritable consensus?
There was no need to vote for the proposal because of the giant selloff that happened when BM proposed it. That clearly indicated that the market took his proposal as being fully accepted by the majority already. The majority of those who are against it have already voted with their feet and are out of the market. If you think this is wrong, and that a majority of stakeholders still oppose it, then the burden of proof is on you to get 51 anti-merger delegates who will reject BM's hardfork when it comes. That is the only way you can prevent the merger from happening - everything else you do is completely futile and a waste of time.
Truth is, the merger and paid delegates are a huge advantage, bigger than anything else BTSX had, and anyone who understands how to run a company will agree with this. The whales who disagree have sold off, and the whales who are left stand behind it.
There's nothing wrong with delegates being paid for their services .
There's a mechanism in place for this which is fees.
The problem is delegates creating money out of thing air - eg. dilution. Dilution/inflation has been the death currencies since Roman times.