BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: toast on January 07, 2015, 07:02:30 pm
-
I'm still not super clear on what these are all about, but they put BTS into a positive light and seems to take a cooperative approach.
https://medium.com/cyber-shares/why-we-created-cyber-shares-86f224fb0b02
-
I'm still not super clear on what these are all about, but they put BTS into a positive light and seems to take a cooperative approach.
https://medium.com/cyber-shares/why-we-created-cyber-shares-86f224fb0b02
CyberShares is a crypto platform using NXT\ETH\Maid\BTS as sharedrop instruments , to gain the maximum demographic of this four communities .
-
I'm still not super clear on what these are all about, but they put BTS into a positive light and seems to take a cooperative approach.
https://medium.com/cyber-shares/why-we-created-cyber-shares-86f224fb0b02
CyberShares is a crypto platform using NXT\ETH\Maid\BTS as sharedrop instruments , to gain the maximum demographic of this four communities .
ags and pts holders will still argue about the sharedrops :P
Well, it seems the path these new projects might take will be merging up together, bitshares, ethereum, etc. That would be awesome.
-
Hi guys! I am cyber•Fund founder and cyber•Shares creator. Happy to answer any questions and discuss proposed ideas.
-
welcome on board :)
-
Welcome on board :)
-
ags and pts holders will still argue about the sharedrops :P
AGS/PTS holders can argue only if they will use BitShares Toolkit :)
-
There are cybershares on Coinprism, NXT, Counterparty and etc. How do you plan to make them interchangeable? They naturally have different price so 1 cybershare on NXT is not equal to 1 cybershare on Coinprism or Counterparty.
-
I think cooperative work between these systems is a good thing. What will your sharedrop percentages be? And how will you track the success of these 2.0's; are you planning to hold a basket of shares or is this an index fund?
-
https://github.com/cyberFund/cyberShares/wiki
-
cyber•Shares distribution
10% to honor cyber•Shares founders
10% to honor cyber•Fund holders
10% to honor BitShares holders
10% to honor Ethereum holders
10% to honor MaidSafe holders
10% to honor Next holders
8% to honor leaders and inventors
10% to build system of distributed trusts
22% to genesis purchasers
-
I really love the idea of a merged coin honoring these four communities. Good choices of coins to sharedrop to as well, I see these as four of the five most promising cryptocurrencies (the other being Ripple, which while we all hate how centralized it is, we must admit that it has potential).
-
I'm still not super clear on what these are all about, but they put BTS into a positive light and seems to take a cooperative approach.
https://medium.com/cyber-shares/why-we-created-cyber-shares-86f224fb0b02
(https://camo.githubusercontent.com/be43e9f4179719dcf4d25fef4b90e976038b5861/687474703a2f2f637962657274616c6b732e6f72672f75706c6f6164732f64656661756c742f3130352f343764336435613337623130663234332e706e67)
-
https://github.com/cyberFund/cyberShares/wiki
Thanks for that link, which I'd missed before. So it's a wallet, a fund, ...? Still a bit fuzzy to me, but I like the combination of different 2.0's so far.
-
Looks like a promise the moon type coin/project then give yourself a healthy sharedrop. Like SuperNet, it'll do everything. Invest early and don't miss out on another game changer.
-
Looks like a promise the moon type coin/project then give yourself a healthy sharedrop. Like SuperNet, it'll do everything. Invest early and don't miss out on another game changer.
And they cut you in for 10%, so who's complaining? :-X
-
Looks like a promise the moon type coin/project then give yourself a healthy sharedrop. Like SuperNet, it'll do everything. Invest early and don't miss out on another game changer.
Guys, I am going to take a snapshot of BTS and the Ethereum genesis stake and create AwesomeCoin. The allocation is as follows: 49% to BTS, 49% to ETH, and 2% to me. What? What's the issue? BitShares and Ethereum together will be an unstoppable force with a superior network effect. What does it matter if both communities get 49% rather 50%? Don't squabble over minor percentage differences when we have order of magnitude gains in price to realize. And my stake of 2% isn't significant enough to compromise delegate voting or other stakeholder voting consensus.
:D
-
Looks like a promise the moon type coin/project then give yourself a healthy sharedrop. Like SuperNet, it'll do everything. Invest early and don't miss out on another game changer.
Guys, I am going to take a snapshot of BTS and the Ethereum genesis stake and create AwesomeCoin. The allocation is as follows: 49% to BTS, 49% to ETH, and 2% to me. What? What's the issue? BitShares and Ethereum together will be an unstoppable force with a superior network effect. What does it matter if both communities get 49% rather 50%? Don't squabble over minor percentage differences when we have order of magnitude gains in price to realize. And my stake of 2% isn't significant enough to compromise delegate voting or other stakeholder voting consensus.
:D
...I would totally support AwesomeCoin. :P
But more seriously, if this cyberShares is taking a significant %age of the total (which they are), they need to be adding a LOT of value through development work, marketing, integration, etc. Are they? If they are, this coin could be good, though it does seem pretty weighted in favor of giving its devs coins.
-
But more seriously, if this cyberShares is taking a significant %age of the total (which they are), they need to be adding a LOT of value through development work, marketing, integration, etc. Are they?
Exactly. But more importantly we now have a way to pay for devs, marketing, etc. without having to allocate a huge stake initially to some group of people. If they want to work for the new DAC they can get elected as delegates and get paid for their services. If the stakeholders don't like what they are doing, they can vote them out and they no longer receive any extra funds. Allocating a significant percentage of the stake to them for the promise that they are going to add value in the future is no longer necessary IMO.
-
There are cybershares on Coinprism, NXT, Counterparty and etc. How do you plan to make them interchangeable? They naturally have different price so 1 cybershare on NXT is not equal to 1 cybershare on Coinprism or Counterparty.
That is the most hard issue of the project and to be honest i still don't know the right answer inspite of the fact that upcoming DApps industry with or without cyber•Shares should solve it. I have assumptions for solution. There could be 2 approaches:
(1) Fixed supply. Works for real word cases with security placements. This approach will get different prices. It is not harmful for cyber•Shares itself, but it is not the best solution for startups which will use crosschain community for promoting. Nobody wants the fragmented price across logically same entity. Thus, any DApp developer who want use crosschain approach anyway will need flexible supply.
(2) Flexible supply. There is 2 cases to understand:
(2.1) Alice wants to move token from NXT (fixed supply by design) to Open Assets (OA) (flexible supply by design). She sends NXT token to contract. Contract lock NXT token, issue OA token and send to Alise.
(2.2) Alice wants to move token from OA to NXT. She sends OA token to contract. Contract destroy OA token, take token from locked and send to Alice.
I forsee Proof-of-Origin as set of tools which will make possible entities to effectively regulate supply of tokens across protocols. So cyber•Shares start from ready to use fixed supply, but after Ethereum launch will implement trustless (now its not) Proof-of-Origin.
Update: typofixes
-
What will your sharedrop percentages be? And how will you track the success of these 2.0's
You can check droproadmap :-) of cyber•Fund team here (http://cybershares.net/). We cannot and would not setup percentages. There is better "market" solution. Founders will define this in any particular case. Similar to Adwords - more you drop - more attention. You can test, but it costs and confuse. You can ask(!). There will be tools to analyse and measure.
Are you planning to hold a basket of shares or is this an index fund?
We already do, but that is not about cyber•Shares. cyber•Fund (http://cyber.fund) will work as index with quasi decentralized principle. Investors do not touch assets, but there is proof of reserve. cyber•Pie (http://cyber.fund/pie) will work as trustless personal one-click portfolio which will overperfom Bitcoin.
-
Looks like a promise the moon type coin/project then give yourself a healthy sharedrop. Like SuperNet, it'll do everything. Invest early and don't miss out on another game changer.
We do not like SuperNet for:
- Centralised accounts which hold reserves
- James, who don't timely hold promises
We do like SuperNet for:
- James, who in fact first who begin to utilise digital assets creating rich internal economy of network. BitShares still don't understand the power of internal economy created through UIA.
- Pace, vision and passion - guys try to do and personally i believe that some of their efforts will reach success. Its hard to be the first.
it'll do everything.
We don't plan to do everything. We will build basic infrastructure in terms of digital marketing to make possible efficient and measurable resource allocation. Nobody do it now. But here is potential and its stupid do not to use it.
-
Guys, I am going to take a snapshot of BTS and the Ethereum genesis stake and create AwesomeCoin.
:D
Do it. Do it better. If you solve upcoming industry problems better - we will join. Everybody will.
But please don't confuse snapshot and sharedrop. Snapshot != Sharedrop. Problem with snapshot is that you wont get 100% conversion rate. With sharedrop you will. Snapshot is cheaper (almost free). Sharedrop costs fees. Snapshot require time and expertise (You still dont understand that this is the biggest problem?) for people. Sharedrop is native and cost nothing to people. No time, no costs, no expertise. You just receive it and that is it. You can destroy asset, sell, hold, try to forget it. But anyway you'll touch.
-
Guys, I am going to take a snapshot of BTS and the Ethereum genesis stake and create AwesomeCoin.
:D
Do it. Do it better. If you solve upcoming industry problems better - we will join. Everybody will.
But please don't confuse snapshot and sharedrop. Snapshot != Sharedrop. Problem with snapshot is that you wont get 100% conversion rate. With sharedrop you will. Snapshot is cheaper (almost free). Sharedrop costs fees. Snapshot require time and expertise (You still dont understand that this is the biggest problem?) for people. Sharedrop is native and cost nothing to people. No time, no costs, no expertise. You just receive it and that is it. You can destroy asset, sell, hold, try to forget it. But anyway you'll touch.
My definition of snapshot and sharedrop are identical. What is your definition of a sharedrop?
How could you possibly guarantee a 100% conversion rate? That is impossible. Nothing prevents the previous owners from continuing the old blockchain while also taking advantage of the new tokens you gifted them (see our recent example with PTS for evidence).
-
How I understand the terms, you take a snapshot (or possibly multiple snapshots of multiple chains) when you are doing a sharedrop.
snapshot = the freeze-frame of a chain-state, where balances at a particular blockheight are recorded
sharedrop = a new token allocated to a single snapshot or collection of snapshots
-
And they cut you in for 10%, so who's complaining? :-X
With all honour i don't understand this logic. We don't use toolkit. We invest in fact our personal money, time and expertise to do something we believe is useful for EVERYBODY. We don't ask your money, time or something else. Take it. Use it. Do whatever you want.
There is funny fact. 10% from nothing is nothing. 10% from something to complain is already your valuation. If there is valuation so value added. Our team is voluntary, full time and take all risks don't asking nobody, nothing. And, of course, want to be rewarded. Is it bad?
I understand we logic behind Ander
But more seriously, if this cyberShares is taking a significant %age of the total (which they are), they need to be adding a LOT of value through development work, marketing, integration, etc. Are they? If they are, this coin could be good, though it does seem pretty weighted in favor of giving its devs coins.
I want to remember that this is a project, not the state. 10% for building project at this point of competitiveness we perceive as fair and almost any project operate it.
What about revolver?. We are happy to fairly share 10% of devs bag with everybody who join. Really. We need it.
If you join would you vote for 7%, 5%? If there will be the case - ok. We will change terms. Anybody want to offer better way to produce fair dev's bag? Welcome.
-
How I understand the terms, you take a snapshot (or possibly multiple snapshots of multiple chains) when you are doing a sharedrop.
snapshot = the freeze-frame of a chain-state, where balances at a particular blockheight are recorded
sharedrop = a new token allocated to a single snapshot or collection of snapshots
Yes.
-
And they cut you in for 10%, so who's complaining? :-X
With all honour i don't understand this logic. We don't use toolkit. We invest in fact our personal money, time and expertise to do something we believe is useful for EVERYBODY. We don't ask your money, time or something else. Take it. Use it. Do whatever you want.
There is funny fact. 10% from nothing is nothing. 10% from something to complain is already your valuation. If there is valuation so value added. Our team is voluntary, full time and take all risks don't asking nobody, nothing. And, of course, want to be rewarded. Is it bad?
I understand we logic behind Ander
But more seriously, if this cyberShares is taking a significant %age of the total (which they are), they need to be adding a LOT of value through development work, marketing, integration, etc. Are they? If they are, this coin could be good, though it does seem pretty weighted in favor of giving its devs coins.
I want to remember that this is a project, not the state. 10% for building project at this point of competitiveness we perceive as fair and almost any project operate it.
What about revolver?. We are happy to fairly share 10% of devs bag with everybody who join. Really. We need it.
If you join would you vote for 7%, 5%? If there will be the case - ok. We will change terms. Anybody want to offer better way to produce fair dev's bag? Welcome.
Here is my recommendation:
But more seriously, if this cyberShares is taking a significant %age of the total (which they are), they need to be adding a LOT of value through development work, marketing, integration, etc. Are they?
Exactly. But more importantly we now have a way to pay for devs, marketing, etc. without having to allocate a huge stake initially to some group of people. If they want to work for the new DAC they can get elected as delegates and get paid for their services. If the stakeholders don't like what they are doing, they can vote them out and they no longer receive any extra funds. Allocating a significant percentage of the stake to them for the promise that they are going to add value in the future is no longer necessary IMO.
Instead of arbitrarily deciding a percentage to reward yourself for the integration/development/marketing work you are planning on doing and wondering if you picked the right number to not piss too many people off, you let the stakeholders themselves decide who to pay and how much for the value that they add. You campaign as delegates to work on the new coin and the stakeholders vote for you if they think you can do a good job. If it turns out some of you are doing a poor job, the stakeholders vote you out.
If you allocate 10% to a group and it turns out they do a bad job, the stakeholders don't have a way of getting that stake back from you. They either have to accept being "robbed" of their value or they just give up and dump the coin and try with again with another coin by another group.
Of course, this doesn't solve all the issues. You still need to arbitrarily decide which projects to sharedrop on and how to allocate the percentages between them. There will always be disagreement with that as well. I don't know of a nice solution to that problem however. And once again, nothing guarantees that the projects you sharedrop on are going to give up on their original token and use your new one. They just as likely might dump the tokens you gift to them and use it to buy more of the ones that you sharedropped on.
-
Instead of arbitrarily deciding a percentage to reward yourself for the integration/development/marketing work you are planning on doing and wondering if you picked the right number to not piss too many people off, you let the stakeholders themselves decide who to pay and how much for the value that they add. You campaign as delegates to work on the new coin and the stakeholders vote for you if they think you can do a good job. If it turns out some of you are doing a poor job, the stakeholders vote you out.
If you allocate 10% to a group and it turns out they do a bad job, the stakeholders don't have a way of getting that stake back from you. They either have to accept being "robbed" of their value or they just give up and dump the coin and try with again with another coin by another group.
Of course, this doesn't solve all the issues. You still need to arbitrarily decide which projects to sharedrop on and how to allocate the percentages between them. There will always be disagreement with that as well. I don't know of a nice solution to that problem however. And once again, nothing guarantees that the projects you sharedrop on are going to give up on their original token and use your new one. They just as likely might dump the tokens you gift to them and use it to buy more of the ones that you sharedropped on.
Thanks for recommendation. Campaigns are good. Really good. Then you have cohesive and engaged community who know then, where and how to push buttons. But that wont work on the "almost idea" idea stage. Founders just will loose time to gather votes begging for resources. I love decentralized approach. But should be concentrated point of energy to make fire. Reach fast and efficient consensus inside 5-10 guys is much more simple than for 40k. There is good and proved tool from real life - revolver. Simple game. Everybody welcome to "devs". Devs define percentage and reach consensus concerning it across community. Devs control and decide how bag will be splited inside bag. There could be several "devs" so they could compete. But that should be defined (not flexible - that is not transactional model) once to make possible full-time longterm commitment. Otherwise - no boiling point, problems with funding of brainchild, no motivation - that is also harmful and risky and in fact black side of the moon.
-
How could you possibly guarantee a 100% conversion rate? That is impossible. Nothing prevents the previous owners from continuing the old blockchain while also taking advantage of the new tokens you gifted them (see our recent example with PTS for evidence).
Don't confuse DAC and DApp based on UIA. Okey. Near to 100% - sometimes password lost happens. UIA is native and you'll see it in our wallet like bitUSD.
We don't want to reinvent DAC approach. It is already cool. BitShares at this point of time is so efficient. We want to utilise UIA feature of every network. DAC is monolith. But cyber•Shares approach is flexible and good for reach audience. NEM on the horizon? Be sure - cyber•Shares will be there. NXT died - cyber•Shares still alive.
-
I'm still not super clear on what these are all about, but they put BTS into a positive light and seems to take a cooperative approach.
https://medium.com/cyber-shares/why-we-created-cyber-shares-86f224fb0b02
The founder contacted me about that at some point on the forum. I don't know exactly what CShares are fully but I did look at the offering. Cybershares are trading on the Bitshares network as a user issued asset.
-
BitShares still don't understand the power of internal economy created through UIA.
Welcome!
Could you expand on this? I'm presently trying to learn more about the potential of UIAs.
-
BitShares still don't understand the power of internal economy created through UIA.
Welcome!
Could you expand on this? I'm presently trying to learn more about the potential of UIAs.
Let me give simple metaphor to explain.
Imagine that any cryptocurrency system | DAC is a state, and UIA's are companies or SPVs which exist because there is underlying transaction system.
I suppose that best user case of UIA is products which extensively use BitShares blockchain and has own domain.
Domain itself is able to generate traffic and thus create additional value. Any services provided by domain could be charged in UIA tokens (from user point of view it could be BTC or BTS or BitUSD) creating essential demand. Depending on nature of provided services tokens could go to revenue centre controlled by entity's management or directly to customer making him shareholder. Proposed model:
- add value to underlying DAC as any UIA create demand on transactions.
- add value to UIA as any domain itself able to generate essential search and social traffic.
- make internal DAC's economy more visible: you can understand valuation and economics of any infrastructure and service product.
- add possibilities for UIA (domain) entities to fund itself, deal, etc.
-
OK so let me see what I understand as oppose to what I don't.
You are proposing a share drop of 10% to maidsafe,ethereum,bitshares and nxt. Is their an actual date set when these sharedrops will happen?
Then 22% for purchaser's-I am assuming this is the UIA across each platform? Is the amount of User issued assets equal on each platform? what happens if you sell out on next but have a surplus on bitshares?
What are these other groups that are listed?
Distributed trust10%
Founders 10%-I get who this group is but can you reveal everyone in the projects name that is apart of this group?
Cypher Fund 10%-This is the actual money that is used to buy assets across the 4 exchanges? Will the holding amounts be public? Who picks how much of a asset you hold and where?
Inspirer's 8%- Who is included in this group (names) and how do they fit in?
How does a buyer of the UIA profit from this?
-
Lord Almighty, I thought I understood the basics from scanning the whitepaper. Now after reading these explanations, I realize I don't understand a freaking thing about what this is or how it works.
-
Lord Almighty, I thought I understood the basics from scanning the whitepaper. Now after reading these explanations, I realize I don't understand a freaking thing about what this is or how it works.
If they're going to enable cross-trading somehow, then this is more than a hedge fund or wallet.
-
You are proposing a share drop of 10% to maidsafe,ethereum,bitshares and nxt. Is their an actual date set when these sharedrops will happen?
We don't set exact dates. There is sharedrop roadmap here (http://cybershares.net/sharedrops). We will do your best to follow it timely.
Then 22% for purchaser's-I am assuming this is the UIA across each platform? Is the amount of User issued assets equal on each platform?
Initial purchasing already happens and unfortunately didn't get enough attention. Check BTT thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789798.0;all). Amount is fixed in the beginning and flexible in future. Actual state is verifiable here (http://cybershares.net/explorer).
what happens if you sell out on next but have a surplus on bitshares?
I suppose that i've already answered similar question to vlight. Let me cite myself:
There are cybershares on Coinprism, NXT, Counterparty and etc. How do you plan to make them interchangeable? They naturally have different price so 1 cybershare on NXT is not equal to 1 cybershare on Coinprism or Counterparty.
That is the most hard issue of the project and to be honest i still don't know the right answer inspite of the fact that upcoming DApps industry with or without cyber•Shares should solve it. I have assumptions for solution. There could be 2 approaches:
(1) Fixed supply. Works for real word cases with security placements. This approach will get different prices. It is not harmful for cyber•Shares itself, but it is not the best solution for startups which will use crosschain community for promoting. Nobody wants the fragmented price across logically same entity. Thus, any DApp developer who want use crosschain approach anyway will need flexible supply.
(2) Flexible supply. There is 2 cases to understand:
(2.1) Alice wants to move token from NXT (fixed supply by design) to Open Assets (OA) (flexible supply by design). She sends NXT token to contract. Contract lock NXT token, issue OA token and send to Alise.
(2.2) Alice wants to move token from OA to NXT. She sends OA token to contract. Contract destroy OA token, take token from locked and send to Alice.
I forsee Proof-of-Origin as set of tools which will make possible entities to effectively regulate supply of tokens across protocols. So cyber•Shares start from ready to use fixed supply, but after Ethereum launch will implement trustless (now its not) Proof-of-Origin.
-
What are these other groups that are listed?
Distributed trusts - 10%
Described in paper (https://github.com/cyberFund/cyberShares/wiki#formating-distributed-trusts). You can think of them as teams with focused expertise. In fact these are long going plans. Now we've acquired the most sweetest domains in .fund TLD and i assume it is not difficult to set up good investment funnels and gather small, but efficient teams in one year time frame. To understand better the system look on my working shit sheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1s_NQMvLR6yZYNUTlrTGbCa2LrQQzdNTpfKcK32pSiuM/edit?usp=sharing).
What are these other groups that are listed?
Founders 10%-I get who this group is but can you reveal everyone in the projects name that is apart of this group?
Yes. That is not the secret. You can check names and history here (https://docs.google.com/a/cyberfund.io/spreadsheets/d/1rks92sn8Ft_GU41q7P6VSrUHUJ5NKllYnCn4jsAuYL8/edit#gid=287148363)
Some explanations.
Me - There is fashion to be chief scientist now. In fact i'am not. I think more in business terms so i am responsible for architecting all this stuff.
Kostya Lomashuk - responsible for pushing everything forward.
Vitalik Lvov - responsible for investment operation of cyber•Fund and providing expertise to cyber•Shares community.
Dima Sadovnichiy - responsible for development. Contracts development in future.
Max Uvarov - leading digital marketing expert in Russia. Didn't commit full-time to project yet, but his advices are valuable for us.
Marina Guryeva and Vova Savin are early investors who believe in us from the very begin. Initially Vova was responsible for mining (hardware), but now we don't believe in mining as it exist today, so he think about engaging in some future hardware engineering.
Early Believers - FFF (friends, family, fools). Small group. So we already pass this stage.
Category of founders is a way to to honour people who make this all happens. This category exist and doesn't mean nor work, nor responsibility.
What are these other groups that are listed?
cyber•Fund 10% - This is the actual money that is used to buy assets across the 4 exchanges? Will the holding amounts be public? Who picks how much of a asset you hold and where?
cyber•Fund is in fact operational team which is committed to follow up. cyber•Fund holds 10% as a way to financing operational activities. All holdings of cyber•Fund are possessions of cyber•Fund holders (https://www.coinprism.info/asset/AbhBFwWFpZzFMsBakZbDzUTYv67t9rThaK/owners). Transaction model is impossible for cyber•Shares so this 10% will work as revenue motivation. This mean that cyber•Fund is motivated to hold this bag and provide profitability of this bag to perform it's operational activities. cyber•Fund wont have any plans to sell it in any visible future. Think of cyber•Fund for cyber•Shares as delegates for BitShares. But this way is more flexible as long as any other team could compete and | or complement cyber•Shares ecosystem. To be honest i want to make this 10% flexible and adjustable by cyber•Shares holders, but do not see easy and ready to use crosschain solution at this moment.
What are these other groups that are listed?
Inspirer's 8%- Who is included in this group (names) and how do they fit in?
Initially i supposed to distribute this to top-20 guys like Adam Back, Vitalik Buterin, Dan Larimer etc. But afterwards i realised that this is not easy to do. For now i've send 0.5% to Flavien Charlon - invented Open Asset protocol, develop colored core, implemented web and mobile free-of-charge applications. Also i use this bag for introduction bounty on cyber•Talks - 10 cyber•Shares. Others are subject for discussion. Proof of honour?
How does a buyer of the UIA profit from this?
He define himself as right audience to sharedrop. So he benefit from revenue in form of colored dividends. The suppose that only in 2015 there will be 1000 DApps and, who knows, - 1 mln. in 7 year time frame. Leading appstores already there. That is a huge opportunity for sharedrop market. So in case of cyber•Shares success that will be make sense revenue flow on the daily basis.
We assume that DApps wouldn't be able to directly compete with DACs and should tend to find different from transaction fee model.
In fact cyber•Shares is evolution of Dan's idea of protoshares. We want to focus on this feature, be chain agnostic, implement solution for communities collaboration, develop infrastructure and bring expertise for DApps developers and attract more investments to industry.
-
I am very interested. Specifics are nice.
I saw you mention proof of honor.. proof of origin.. any other proofs of something?
-
Me - There is fashion to be chief scientist now. In fact i'am not. I think more in business terms so i am responsible for architecting all this stuff.
Kostya Lomashuk - responsible for pushing everything forward.
Vitalik Lvov - responsible for investment operation of cyber•Fund and providing expertise to cyber•Shares community.
Dima Sadovnichiy - responsible for development. Contracts development in future.
Max Uvarov - leading digital marketing expert in Russia. Didn't commit full-time to project yet, but his advices are valuable for us.
Marina Guryeva and Vova Savin are early investors who believe in us from the very begin. Initially Vova was responsible for mining (hardware), but now we don't believe in mining as it exist today, so he think about engaging in some future hardware engineering.
Early Believers - FFF (friends, family, fools). Small group. So we already pass this stage.
Category of founders is a way to to honour people who make this all happens. This category exist and doesn't mean nor work, nor responsibility.
Ok so who is going to develop the wallet and all these cool features you are talking about?
-
Lord Almighty, I thought I understood the basics from scanning the whitepaper. Now after reading these explanations, I realize I don't understand a freaking thing about what this is or how it works.
Would you try to ask particular questions?
Ok. I'll try to decompose al the stuff.
In general crosschain applications make possible a lot of things. Like blockchain make possible decentralised transactions systems, proof-of-origin make possible a loooot of interesting things. cyber•Shares basic - mailing list. But once this mailing list will work, that fact open the doors for efficient collaborative reengineering of the Internet. I was try to imaging all this stuff and put it on paper. That is it... everything is open and waiting for improvement / discussion.
-
Me - There is fashion to be chief scientist now. In fact i'am not. I think more in business terms so i am responsible for architecting all this stuff.
Kostya Lomashuk - responsible for pushing everything forward.
Vitalik Lvov - responsible for investment operation of cyber•Fund and providing expertise to cyber•Shares community.
Dima Sadovnichiy - responsible for development. Contracts development in future.
Max Uvarov - leading digital marketing expert in Russia. Didn't commit full-time to project yet, but his advices are valuable for us.
Marina Guryeva and Vova Savin are early investors who believe in us from the very begin. Initially Vova was responsible for mining (hardware), but now we don't believe in mining as it exist today, so he think about engaging in some future hardware engineering.
Early Believers - FFF (friends, family, fools). Small group. So we already pass this stage.
Category of founders is a way to to honour people who make this all happens. This category exist and doesn't mean nor work, nor responsibility.
Ok so who is going to develop the wallet and all these cool features you are talking about?
Vitalik, Kostya, Dima and me. Of course we will do everything to expand the team.
-
I saw you mention proof of honor.. proof of origin.. any other proofs of something?
Sarcasm? ;-) I am collecting all the methods here http://cybertalks.org/c/formal-agreements. Proof-of-existence, proof-of-activity, proof-of-burn... Proof-of-born? Proof-of-fuck! Nothing to proof future.
-
Me - There is fashion to be chief scientist now. In fact i'am not. I think more in business terms so i am responsible for architecting all this stuff.
Kostya Lomashuk - responsible for pushing everything forward.
Vitalik Lvov - responsible for investment operation of cyber•Fund and providing expertise to cyber•Shares community.
Dima Sadovnichiy - responsible for development. Contracts development in future.
Max Uvarov - leading digital marketing expert in Russia. Didn't commit full-time to project yet, but his advices are valuable for us.
Marina Guryeva and Vova Savin are early investors who believe in us from the very begin. Initially Vova was responsible for mining (hardware), but now we don't believe in mining as it exist today, so he think about engaging in some future hardware engineering.
Early Believers - FFF (friends, family, fools). Small group. So we already pass this stage.
Category of founders is a way to to honour people who make this all happens. This category exist and doesn't mean nor work, nor responsibility.
Ok so who is going to develop the wallet and all these cool features you are talking about?
Vitalik, Kostya, Dima and me. Of course we will do everything to expand the team.
awesome, last question I promise :)
Do you guys have linked in profiles or can you point me toward past work that shows you can complete a project of this scope?
-
Lord Almighty, I thought I understood the basics from scanning the whitepaper. Now after reading these explanations, I realize I don't understand a freaking thing about what this is or how it works.
If they're going to enable cross-trading somehow, then this is more than a hedge fund or wallet.
That is true. If cyber•Shares will live as UIA inside leading cryptosystems and will solve all upcoming issues remaining coherent this side effect could make cyber•Shares alternative medium of moving value from one chain to another.
There are more side effects of successful proof-of-origin implementation.
cyber•Shares is basic mailing PDApp with social consensus feature.
But imagine that you want to develop simple Instagram DApp. You decide to choose BitShares (fast and efficient) blockchain for storing records and StorJ for storing pictures. But you want coherent tokens of your PDApp to implement efficient business model of your PDApp. How would you'll implement this? I see two very different approaches:
1. Issue DApp tokens on BitShares and buy volumes you need to cover Storj crypto fuel.
2. Issue some PDApp tokens on BitShares and some on Storj (they don't declare this feature yet? To be autonomous and efficient they should do it).
So you can cover the cost of crypto fuel "inside" BitShares and Storj more natively without a lot of crosschain movement.
But i don't want to think about all this rocket science now. Its better to concentrate on easy to use buttons to make possible measurable sharedrops. Any crypto startup do sharedrop now. I do believe that this have tremendous potential and market opportunities.
-
Thanks, guys for your support!
(http://cybertalks.org/uploads/default/138/a1b8116c25b13b4e.png)
-
Daily volumes close to CNY! And $700k valuation. Wow!
To be honest i'd wouldn't buy in before sharedrop... impossible to predict price behaviour.
-
awesome, last question I promise :)
Do you guys have linked in profiles or can you point me toward past work that shows you can complete a project of this scope?
Team due diligence - ;-) Right thing
- My LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/starodubcev)
- Dima's Stackoverflow (http://stackoverflow.com/users/1279005/dmitry-sadovnychyi)
- Vitalik's LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/pub/vitaly-lvov/12/595/849)
- Kostya's LinkedIn (http://ru.linkedin.com/in/lomashuk/en)
Me and Vitalik have proven experience of firing up middle size (from 30 to 1.5k employees) retail company as top-level employees and managing innovation efforts of 10 mln+ city.
I have digital marketing experience as employee for e-commerce rised $2 mln.
In terms of web projects and entrepreneurship efforts we fail twice:
- Kidlabs.ru - ecommerce toys store (lack of digital marketing experience)
- Btchub.com - bitcoin exchange in early 2011 (no losses, lack of digital marketing experience).
Proven experience to forsee opportunities:
- 0.5% of Bitcoin mining power in May 2011 - in fact our group was one of the biggest investors to mining power at the moment.
- Invested: PTS, AGS, Ethereum, MaidSafe, NXT (almost at genesis). Full positions picture check here (https://docs.google.com/a/cyberfund.io/spreadsheets/d/1s_NQMvLR6yZYNUTlrTGbCa2LrQQzdNTpfKcK32pSiuM/edit#gid=119274898).
Kostya is very talented entrepreneur and own some retail stores.
Not the perfect set of skills and obvious lack of dev experience.
Instead we know how make things work, deep understanding of digital marketing, passion for development and hate of legacy governmental system.
-
This really confuses me. What is your product?
-
Since they plan on sharedropping 10% to BTS, I am talking to them about potentially setting up occasional hangouts with our community so they can provide updates and answer questions.
Since it is only 10% and only to BTS, I am not certain I would like to set these hangouts up to be done as often as I would for, say, PLAY, MUSIC and other chains that have sharedropped more on our holders, but I would like everyone's feedback as we plan to move forward.
-
Since they plan on sharedropping 10% to BTS, I am talking to them about potentially setting up occasional hangouts with our community so they can provide updates and answer questions.
Since it is only 10% and only to BTS, I am not certain I would like to set these hangouts up to be done as often as I would for, say, PLAY, MUSIC and other chains that have sharedropped more on our holders, but I would like everyone's feedback as we plan to move forward.
The support on this thread looks quite lukewarm, rather than piping hot. If they were dropping 30% on us, maybe more people would be excited. But they are dividing this amongst these 2.0 communities. I'm guessing many readers still don't understand this much better than I do & I'm not convinced the developers have their idea fully developed. Occasional hangouts may be the way to go.
-
It is a interesting idea for sure and I love that they are trying to bring the 2.0 crowd together but I wonder about the development of the product also. Mumble would be good I would like to hear more.
-
Since they plan on sharedropping 10% to BTS, I am talking to them about potentially setting up occasional hangouts with our community so they can provide updates and answer questions.
Since it is only 10% and only to BTS, I am not certain I would like to set these hangouts up to be done as often as I would for, say, PLAY, MUSIC and other chains that have sharedropped more on our holders, but I would like everyone's feedback as we plan to move forward.
The support on this thread looks quite lukewarm, rather than piping hot. If they were dropping 30% on us, maybe more people would be excited. But they are dividing this amongst these 2.0 communities. I'm guessing many readers still don't understand this much better than I do & I'm not convinced the developers have their idea fully developed. Occasional hangouts may be the way to go.
Thats because I have no idea what they are supposed to be selling, as well as how the sharedrop is going to happen. Does my BTS on exchanges get something?
-
Only skimmed the whitepaper, but I'm thinking this might consist of:
- Airdropped UIA shares in several systems that support UIA-like tokens.
- Atomic "cross-chain teleportation protocol" where anyone can e.g. burn UIA shares on the BTS chain and create an equal number of UIA shares on the Ripple chain.
If you can make it so the cross-chain teleportation is truly atomic, I'm sure there would be some value in this functionality.
The details would be incredibly tricky.
-
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113769/cyber-fund-report-daos-will-reach-mass-adoption-disrupt-politics-and-religion-by-2025
no mention to BitShares... ?
-
http://cointelegraph.com/news/113769/cyber-fund-report-daos-will-reach-mass-adoption-disrupt-politics-and-religion-by-2025
no mention to BitShares... ?
If you go through their slid show you can tell they think very highly of us. http://cyber.fund/cyberep (http://cyber.fund/cyberep)
:-\ I am not sure what they are trying to do though and how they plan to get their.
-
What happened with this project? Is this still alive?
-
Have I missed a sharedrop?
What am I missing?
Please give us some updates ;)