BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: bytemaster on December 29, 2015, 05:09:36 pm
-
http://bytemaster.github.io/update/2015/12/29/Why-Vision-Matters/
-
+5%
-
I think you are way off base with this whole mutual aid society idea, especially when the dex is not completed. This is another 180 degree turn just like the merger, only this one is not necessary. Perhaps this is something to look into later once the dex is successful, but not now.
Its best to focus on these 4 things in 2016 to get the dex and smartcoin technology bootstrapped:
1) Stealth
2) Maker
3) Lending (Bond) market
4) Prediction market
This could probably all be achieved in 2016. Whether through worker proposal, FBA, outside investment, or some other type of funding, this needs to happen. Even if it has to be done through worker proposal and market cap takes a hit, it needs to be done. Doing nothing or pivoting 180 degrees would be worse.
-
It's an interesting challenge.
I fully agree with your perspectives regarding vision statements. Mission statements are similar.
I say your blog is challenging b/c it causes me to ask the question, how?
I myself am living below the poverty line (by American standards), yet I find ways to help others mostly by investing my time and skills, since I have very little actual capital. I am rich in many other ways however.
BitShares is in a similar position, in that our ecosystem is poor (in terms of marketcap) but rich in others ways, such as the strength of our human community. Fuzzy exemplifies the spirit of BitShares giving back to individuals in the community, empowering them by matching their individual skills they have to offer with a potential source of revenue from the blockchain.
I think we need to stay focused on helping people help themselves through improving their skill sets and economic understanding of what it means to be an entrepreneur. If it's possible to teach people how to spot economic opportunities and how to apply their skills to capitalize on them, it's like teaching them how to fish and prepare them to eat as opposed to buying them a meal.
I am opposed to general welfare and grants of charity as an ongoing "solution" to poverty. Socialism doesn't work, the evidence for that has numerous examples. Yet many people expect a free lunch, a savior to "bail them out".
There's nothing wrong with short term help, financial or otherwise to help people overcome unforeseen circumstances that may lead them into a pit they can't get out of. Such help must only be seen as temporary and focused on getting the person back to a productive, self sufficient existence.
So again I ask, how will we help the average Joe get "back on his feet"? Vision statements are great to set high level goals, but we also need "lessor gods" to translate the vision into actionable reality.
-
MAS is one more reason to leave bitshares. I will leave if MAS is worked on before bond market and orediction markets. It's highly theoretical and will take more funding and resources than you estimate. Why? cause it's a reoccurring theme here when bitshares tries to implement somethjng anew and untested.
-
I agree a vision is important and it's nice to see some examples and explanations of where MAS could go.
It seems premature to take what will be seen as another change on an untested idea and trying to mould BitShares around that vision. Similar to Vote DAC, it's an area you're personally passionate about so I think have some confirmation bias when you receive a bit of positive feedback
If it's fairly simple to implement a basic one, I know some members have already expressed a willingness to make a financial commitment to it. So I would recommend attempting to launch a basic version and based on its popularity perhaps work some of those concepts more into a future vision.
As Xeroc pointed out even though it's titled 'BitShares vision' it's your personal vision and perhaps should be titled as such.
Articulating an overarching vision for BitShares may be a valuable exercise for some of the reasons you pointed out but it would be good if there was community involvement in creating something to that effect so that it has more community buy-in, resonates & is likely to be more widely popular.
-
I agree a vision is important and it's nice to see some examples and explanations of where MAS could go.
It seems premature to take what will be seen as another change on an untested idea and trying to mould BitShares around that vision. Similar to Vote DAC, it's an area you're personally passionate about so I think have some confirmation bias when you receive a bit of positive feedback
If it's fairly simple to implement a basic one, I know some members have already expressed a willingness to make a financial commitment to it. So I would recommend attempting to launch a basic version and based on its popularity perhaps work some of those concepts more into a future vision.
As Xeroc pointed out even though it's titled 'BitShares vision' it's your personal vision and perhaps should be titled as such.
Articulating an overarching vision for BitShares may be a valuable exercise for some of the reasons you pointed out but it would be good if there was community involvement in creating something to that effect so that it has more community buy-in, resonates & is likely to be more widely popular.
http://www.paulgraham.com/bias.html
https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2015/paul_grahams_bias_test.html
Initiating confusion, in 3,..2..1
-
I agree a vision is important and it's nice to see some examples and explanations of where MAS could go.
It seems premature to take what will be seen as another change on an untested idea and trying to mould BitShares around that vision. Similar to Vote DAC, it's an area you're personally passionate about so I think have some confirmation bias when you receive a bit of positive feedback
If it's fairly simple to implement a basic one, I know some members have already expressed a willingness to make a financial commitment to it. So I would recommend attempting to launch a basic version and based on its popularity perhaps work some of those concepts more into a future vision.
As Xeroc pointed out even though it's titled 'BitShares vision' it's your personal vision and perhaps should be titled as such.
Articulating an overarching vision for BitShares may be a valuable exercise for some of the reasons you pointed out but it would be good if there was community involvement in creating something to that effect so that it has more community buy-in, resonates & is likely to be more widely popular.
This is a crucially important point aimed at you @bytemaster which I think you really need to meditate on. In another post you wrote you were not going to invest any more of your own money going forward in uncertain concepts. You contrasted your "new" perspective with the old, "If I build it they will come" attitude. That sounds like growth to me. This MAS seems like the old you calling you back.
I also think Empirical's admonition about differentiating the vision of Dan Larimer vs. BitShares is spot on as well. I love that you give us insight into your personal perspective, and I hope you don't stop. However, it should be categorized as separate and I think the dividing line gets blurred too often, which sends mixed signals to investors and those looking at BitShares for the first time.
Consider that input towards your new marketing "focus".
-
It's an interesting challenge.
I fully agree with your perspectives regarding vision statements. Mission statements are similar.
I say your blog is challenging b/c it causes me to ask the question, how?
I myself am living below the poverty line (by American standards), yet I find ways to help others mostly by investing my time and skills, since I have very little actual capital. I am rich in many other ways however.
BitShares is in a similar position, in that our ecosystem is poor (in terms of marketcap) but rich in others ways, such as the strength of our human community. Fuzzy exemplifies the spirit of BitShares giving back to individuals in the community, empowering them by matching their individual skills they have to offer with a potential source of revenue from the blockchain.
I think we need to stay focused on helping people help themselves through improving their skill sets and economic understanding of what it means to be an entrepreneur. If it's possible to teach people how to spot economic opportunities and how to apply their skills to capitalize on them, it's like teaching them how to fish and prepare them to eat as opposed to buying them a meal.
I am opposed to general welfare and grants of charity as an ongoing "solution" to poverty. Socialism doesn't work, the evidence for that has numerous examples. Yet many people expect a free lunch, a savior to "bail them out".
There's nothing wrong with short term help, financial or otherwise to help people overcome unforeseen circumstances that may lead them into a pit they can't get out of. Such help must only be seen as temporary and focused on getting the person back to a productive, self sufficient existence.
So again I ask, how will we help the average Joe get "back on his feet"? Vision statements are great to set high level goals, but we also need "lessor gods" to translate the vision into actionable reality.
+5%
-
MAS is one more reason to leave bitshares. I will leave if MAS is worked on before bond market and orediction markets. It's highly theoretical and will take more funding and resources than you estimate. Why? cause it's a reoccurring theme here when bitshares tries to implement somethjng anew and untested.
Did BM ask you to fund it?
I am sure if you can fund the development for prediction markets CNX will hire more devs and get it done
-
I think you are way off base with this whole mutual aid society idea, especially when the dex is not completed. This is another 180 degree turn just like the merger, only this one is not necessary. Perhaps this is something to look into later once the dex is successful, but not now.
Its best to focus on these 4 things in 2016 to get the dex and smartcoin technology bootstrapped:
1) Stealth
2) Maker
3) Lending (Bond) market
4) Prediction market
This could probably all be achieved in 2016. Whether through worker proposal, FBA, outside investment, or some other type of funding, this needs to happen. Even if it has to be done through worker proposal and market cap takes a hit, it needs to be done. Doing nothing or pivoting 180 degrees would be worse.
Adding new applications to the BitShares platform does not constitute any kind of a turn.
1) Stealth
2) Maker
3) Lending (Bond) market
4) Prediction market
5) MAS
We now have 5 and may well have a dozen such candidate businesses by this time next year.
In the mean time, each candidate needs a champion willing to raise or supply the cash to develop it.
Having considered all the others, MAS seems like the best fit for our personal investment. Who can say otherwise?
We have a team of very capable business developers who are incentivized and perfectly capable of finding (or being) champions for the others. As champions emerge, these features will get the attention they deserve.
-
Seems like some people are really hell bent in making Bitshares into another 'me too' platform. As though making it just like everywhere else with a few little Bitshares extras will make a world of difference.
If you REALLY believe it, then get it funded! We got FBAs now where you can have your cake and the whole pie too!
These idle threats over one persons attempt at creating a different business on Bitshares is just a lot of jaw-jacking.
Why compete in spaces with market share elsewhere when you can create a whole new segment?
-
Adding new applications to the BitShares platform does not constitute any kind of a turn.
I Can think of many things to get done before MAS
1) Stealth
2) Maker
3) Lending (Bond) market
4) Prediction market
5) Vanilla options market
6) Futures Market
7) Think or Swim / metatrader style interface
.
.
.
.
.
.
100) MAS
Building a next generation exchange is not trivial and it's nowhere close to being done. I doubt shareholders will approve anything not related to the dex.
-
Building a next generation exchange is not trivial and it's nowhere close to being done. I doubt shareholders will approve anything not related to the dex.
Agreed. We first need to finalize DEX and make it profitable. Without any profit from our product, we cannot be sustainable.
-
OMG! More ideological BS. Stop dreaming and make a decent exchange which could be used by merchants.
-
OMG! More ideological BS. Stop dreaming and make a decent exchange which could be used by merchants.
If you look it another way it might not be such a bad idea.
MAS is simple easy to grasp idea ( helping poor, suffering, unfortunate people, by simple click of a button)
MAS has strong underlying emotion ( it is very easy to enter into that feeling, and it is fairy easy overwhelming)
MAS has sophisticated advertising tool thru social networks (this is basic model for informing and calling people for help, and all people doing there all the time is hanging around and gossip, so information is spreading by speed of light)
MAS has strong yet easy to assemble entrepreneurial model suitable for wide variety of solution for easy money. (use imagination, there are many examples there in the wild)
It could also mean a lot from general Bitshare marketing prospective being visible to tons of ordinary people relating Bitshares to something noble and positive. Every other idea from that source would be accepted much more readily and with greater attention.
Only drawback I could see so far is withdrawal of donations for average Joe.Yes and making donations also ;D
-
Good blog post BM. I agree with you in saying that Bitshares need to pivot, otherwise it is at risk in fading into obscurity.
To those of you insisting BM focus on the DEX before moving onto other projects...
I insist you consider the following:
- I recently brought up the fact that the DEX has a lot of competition from Nushares/Nxt in a recent thread (pivot, copy, or die). The DEX market is hotly contested at the moment. MAS' is uncontested territory at the moment, and will bring a ton of PR to Bitshares if done correctly. Which will in turn (ironically) help bootstrap the DEX.
- BM brought up the good point in his blog that even if the DEX was successful, it would not be a big money maker and will not attract a ton of users simply due to the economics of the cryptocurrency exchange ecosystem.
- There is no reason why development regarding the DEX cannot continue in parallel with BM's development of Stealth transfers and a MAS feature. We as a community need to prioritize what is most important regarding other development needs, locate developers that can get the jobs done, and figure out a solution to pay them (dilute, FBA, donations, etc..) I agree with BM that it is in Bitshares' best interest to allow BM to focus on Stealth/MAS and allow the community to organize other projects surrounding the DEX/GUI/etc... It is time that we fully utilize Bitshares' features and figure this out as a community of stakeholders without relying on BM to save the day and hold our hand throughout the process.
-
OMG! More ideological BS. Stop dreaming and make a decent exchange which could be used by merchants.
If you look it another way it might not be such a bad idea.
MAS is simple easy to grasp idea ( helping poor, suffering, unfortunate people, by simple click of a button)
MAS has strong underlying emotion ( it is very easy to enter into that feeling, and it is fairy easy overwhelming)
MAS has sophisticated advertising tool thru social networks (this is basic model for informing and calling people for help, and all people doing there all the time is hanging around and gossip, so information is spreading by speed of light)
MAS has strong yet easy to assemble entrepreneurial model suitable for wide variety of solution for easy money. (use imagination, there are many examples there in the wild)
It could also mean a lot from general Bitshare marketing prospective being visible to tons of ordinary people relating Bitshares to something noble and positive. Every other idea from that source would be accepted much more readily and with greater attention.
Only drawback I could see so far is withdrawal of donations for average Joe.Yes and making donations also ;D
+5% +5% +5% +5% Good points.
-
I really get a kick out of all the people here who are so afraid of 1. An idea, and 2. Bytemaster in a leadership capacity... I hope the irony is not lost on anyone. :-\
Going into 2016 I would like to see a renewed focus on community and vision. Our community is the product we are selling so let’s give people a reason to join our community rather than offering them a service they can pay for like a customer. Lets focus on helping one another and being a place where others would like to be rather than being self-centered individuals complaining about how the breadcrumbs are divided. Let’s adopt an attitude of abundance and love rather than one of scarcity. As our attitude changes so will our community and the value of BTS will grow to give us the abundance our combined society can generate.
This has been my feeling from the beginning. I heartily 2nd the push for such a renewed focus and happy to see it being expressed by you here @bytemaster.
To those of you who have such reactionary fear over these ideas... whoa.. slow down and breathe! These ideas aren't competing with the DEX, or even challenging it, they are in a whole other complimentary domain. I understand the desire for focus, but there are a lot of us here, with different talents, and collectively we should have more than enough focus to advance on several fronts simultaneously.
For me personally, I can sell a movement, I can bring the masses into a movement. What's hard for me is selling a DEX. So when you fight against these ideas you're fighting against potential allies, and current allies such as me, who can access new demographics for BitShares in ways we never could with just a DEX. The DEX is great, don't get me wrong, but it's got around .003% sex appeal, intrigue, and excitement to anyone outside of the crypto space.
-
In the short term we have the addition of privacy features to BitShares. Privacy is something that is a critical component of any disruptive system.
Shortly after that I wish to add support for the creation of Mutual Aid Socieites. This idea is perceived as niche today, but within living memory once involved the majority of the population. MAS fell appart due to government regulation and the creation of health insurance, life insurance, homeowners insurance, renters insurance, unemployment insurance, disability insurance and welfare.
I'm worried about this statement. Please don't leave DEX incomplete.
IMO, DEX is almost complete. What it only needs is percentage based fee system (+ very low order creation fee) and market making bots (several people are already working on it).
I do not insist to develop advanced exchange features, such as margin trading, maker/taker flag, etc. What we need is "basic" exchange features that can generate sound profit for BitShares. Once basic DEX is completed, third-party services can grow based on the system.
Does BSIP 4 take long? If not, please do it first, before developing MAS.
-
MAS is one more reason to leave bitshares. I will leave if MAS is worked on before bond market and orediction markets. It's highly theoretical and will take more funding and resources than you estimate. Why? cause it's a reoccurring theme here when bitshares tries to implement somethjng anew and untested.
Did BM ask you to fund it?
I am sure if you can fund the development for prediction markets CNX will hire more devs and get it done
you sure ?
I'm not sure , because as they said , development is not exact science , you can't predict time and cost to get it done .
-
Lets have a bigger vision with a focus on helping other people. A vision that the average Joe can benefit from and get behind. A blockchain is a means to an end, it isn’t an end in itself. While everyone else is busy creating advanced “smart contracts” and new “privacy solutions” and attempting to partner with banks that want nothing to do with them we can actually start helping people.
=======================
so does that mean no banking partners anymore ?
-
Lets have a bigger vision with a focus on helping other people. A vision that the average Joe can benefit from and get behind. A blockchain is a means to an end, it isn’t an end in itself. While everyone else is busy creating advanced “smart contracts” and new “privacy solutions” and attempting to partner with banks that want nothing to do with them we can actually start helping people.
=======================
so does that mean no banking partners anymore ?
The banks want to develop their own blockchains. IMO they don't like having little control and not having a large piece of the pie.
-
Lets have a bigger vision with a focus on helping other people. A vision that the average Joe can benefit from and get behind. A blockchain is a means to an end, it isn’t an end in itself. While everyone else is busy creating advanced “smart contracts” and new “privacy solutions” and attempting to partner with banks that want nothing to do with them we can actually start helping people.
=======================
so does that mean no banking partners anymore ?
The banks want to develop their own blockchains. IMO they don't like having little control and not having a large piece of the pie.
Ripple negotiates with banks for 2 years or so. The result: interledger. Screw previous goals. Main reasons: banks need privacy; banks don't like to rely on tokens like XRP. Check ripple forums for more details.
-
The DEX is "done" except for perhaps the MAKER proposal which isn't even necessary. SVK and CASS are working on improving the User Interface of the DEX. Michael is working on improving the API to be similar to poloniex.
The key to bootstrapping any exchange is having UNIQUE assets to trade. This is something that FBA and new business models will have.
I haven't forgotten the DEX, it is a critical component. I have just learned through experience that selling a DEX is a hard niche market.
Banking partners are telling all blockchain companies the same thing: "we don't want your chain, we want our own". Anyone holding out for banking partners getting on board any existing public chain in a meaningful way needs a wakeup call.
BitShares needs to provide VALUE to the average joe. A DEX doesn't provide that value on its own. A bond market doesn't provide that value on its own.
Selling people "peace of mind" and an opportunity to "change the world" and "fight the empire" and "fight Obamacare" is a much easier sell in my own market research.
Please, someone tell me the market value of Poloniex.. how much is their exchange worth? How much is BitStamp worth? BitFinex? The combined revenue of all crypto currency exchanges is less than $25 million per year. If we assume these exchanges operate with a 50% profit margin then that means $12 million per year in profit. Based upon a 5% dividend, this would put the combined value of all exchanges in the cryptocurrency space at $240M dollars and my guess is that is very high.
So if BitShares grew to become the only exchange in the entire market it would be worth at most 24x its current valuation.
Bitcoin is valued because of the COMMUNITY of freedom activists that are using it and promoting it. It has no revenue based valuation. A DEX doesn't inspire a community following like Bitcoin has.
Lets gain some perspective before calling for the DEX to be "finished" as if that will magically make BTS grow in value 10x.
-
Selling people "peace of mind" and an opportunity to "change the world" and "fight the empire" and "fight Obamacare" is a much easier sell in my own market research.
HAHAHAA!!! You have have to come up with something better than this bullshit. Try selling a place in Paradise in afterlife. Many crooks do it successfully.
-
The DEX is "done" except for perhaps the MAKER proposal which isn't even necessary. SVK and CASS are working on improving the User Interface of the DEX. Michael is working on improving the API to be similar to poloniex.
Why do you ignore the percentage based fee? (BSIP 4) I think this is much more important than MAKER, because it can increase profits.
As an active trader (you can see I'm on the top 10 list of trading in DEX), I don't care about maker/taker system. Liquidity can be improved by market making bots. But without percentage based fee (and order creation fee should be lowered just to prevent spam), DEX cannot be profitable.
-
Selling people "peace of mind" and an opportunity to "change the world" and "fight the empire" and "fight Obamacare" is a much easier sell in my own market research.
HAHAHAA!!! You have have to come up with something better than this bullshit. Try selling a place in Paradise in afterlife. Many crooks do it successfully.
You're arguing against yourself now since you are just reaffirming that you can indeed use ideology to sell, oftentimes against all reasonings of self interest, as you've just pointed out with your wonderful example. =)
PS. Still trying to figure out what you mean by this riddle of yours...
That's ok. You are free to do whatever you want. Just don't forget, being determines consciousness, not vice versa.
-
Lets gain some perspective before calling for the DEX to be "finished" as if that will magically make BTS grow in value 10x.
If we don't finish the DEX and move to MAS, BTS value may decrease 10x...
Because people will think that BitShares has no roadmap and focus, just dreaming bigger things without making any decent products.
Regardless of the value of exchange, we should finish up "basic" DEX, that can generate income, first.
What's the major income source of exchanges? Percentage based fees (BSIP 4).
If BSIP 4 does not require significantly great efforts, please go to this first.
-
I think BM is right here. I did not agree at first, but think about it for a second - look at StartCoin that max keiser started. StartJoin is all about helping young people start a business with community backing. Its taking off because of the idea behind it and look at the multiple aspects to it that are all professionally done.
-
The DEX is "done" except for perhaps the MAKER proposal which isn't even necessary. SVK and CASS are working on improving the User Interface of the DEX. Michael is working on improving the API to be similar to poloniex.
The key to bootstrapping any exchange is having UNIQUE assets to trade. This is something that FBA and new business models will have.
I haven't forgotten the DEX, it is a critical component. I have just learned through experience that selling a DEX is a hard niche market.
Banking partners are telling all blockchain companies the same thing: "we don't want your chain, we want our own". Anyone holding out for banking partners getting on board any existing public chain in a meaningful way needs a wakeup call.
BitShares needs to provide VALUE to the average joe. A DEX doesn't provide that value on its own. A bond market doesn't provide that value on its own.
Selling people "peace of mind" and an opportunity to "change the world" and "fight the empire" and "fight Obamacare" is a much easier sell in my own market research.
Please, someone tell me the market value of Poloniex.. how much is their exchange worth? How much is BitStamp worth? BitFinex? The combined revenue of all crypto currency exchanges is less than $25 million per year. If we assume these exchanges operate with a 50% profit margin then that means $12 million per year in profit. Based upon a 5% dividend, this would put the combined value of all exchanges in the cryptocurrency space at $240M dollars and my guess is that is very high.
So if BitShares grew to become the only exchange in the entire market it would be worth at most 24x its current valuation.
Bitcoin is valued because of the COMMUNITY of freedom activists that are using it and promoting it. It has no revenue based valuation. A DEX doesn't inspire a community following like Bitcoin has.
Lets gain some perspective before calling for the DEX to be "finished" as if that will magically make BTS grow in value 10x.
"Bitcoin is valued because of the COMMUNITY of freedom activists that are using it and promoting it. "
Bitcoin is valued simply because big speculative capital (including the ones owns big mining operations) have enough capital to hold it .
freedom activists have zero money to lead bitcoin this far . They're insignificant . However , they speak things people likes to hear , so they become the main role in front of media .
Bitcoin's rise is not a result of promotion , usage . Bitcoin is a perfect speculative object for capitals to gain profit , the basic rules can not be changed , it doesn't controlled by single person , that's perfect for capital to speculative on it .
If you can't see that , no matter how many different community you try to attract , you will never copy the same success of Bitcoin .
-
BTW GoFundMe was a tremendous success... WePay piggy-backed off GoFundMe from what I understand, but WePay had incredible fraud detection technology so they were a good fit for each other. For a two-sided marketplace with everyday donors/funders and high potential for fraud we need a strong reputation or web of trust system. Anyways there's a lot of potential for a system like this and you can probably use multisig accounts for tighter controls as well.... you also can have blockchain accountability for larger projects...
A project similar to GoFundMe would be great.
-
The dex is finished.
-
The dex is finished.
No. Until it has decent profit model (percent based fee system) it is not finished.
-
The dex is finished.
No. Until it has decent profit model (percent based fee system) it is not finished.
I dont think he meant "completed" .
-
I thought Bytemaster had a roadmap for protecting freedom.... is that changing now. he needs a roadmap to make money?
-
The dex is finished.
No. Until it has decent profit model (percent based fee system) it is not finished.
There are percentage based fees.
-
OMG! More ideological BS. Stop dreaming and make a decent exchange which could be used by merchants.
What are some of those merchants , could you name a few ?
-
The DEX is "done" except for perhaps the MAKER proposal which isn't even necessary. SVK and CASS are working on improving the User Interface of the DEX. Michael is working on improving the API to be similar to poloniex.
The key to bootstrapping any exchange is having UNIQUE assets to trade. This is something that FBA and new business models will have.
I haven't forgotten the DEX, it is a critical component. I have just learned through experience that selling a DEX is a hard niche market.
Banking partners are telling all blockchain companies the same thing: "we don't want your chain, we want our own". Anyone holding out for banking partners getting on board any existing public chain in a meaningful way needs a wakeup call.
BitShares needs to provide VALUE to the average joe. A DEX doesn't provide that value on its own. A bond market doesn't provide that value on its own.
Selling people "peace of mind" and an opportunity to "change the world" and "fight the empire" and "fight Obamacare" is a much easier sell in my own market research.
Please, someone tell me the market value of Poloniex.. how much is their exchange worth? How much is BitStamp worth? BitFinex? The combined revenue of all crypto currency exchanges is less than $25 million per year. If we assume these exchanges operate with a 50% profit margin then that means $12 million per year in profit. Based upon a 5% dividend, this would put the combined value of all exchanges in the cryptocurrency space at $240M dollars and my guess is that is very high.
So if BitShares grew to become the only exchange in the entire market it would be worth at most 24x its current valuation.
Bitcoin is valued because of the COMMUNITY of freedom activists that are using it and promoting it. It has no revenue based valuation. A DEX doesn't inspire a community following like Bitcoin has.
Lets gain some perspective before calling for the DEX to be "finished" as if that will magically make BTS grow in value 10x.
"Bitcoin is valued because of the COMMUNITY of freedom activists that are using it and promoting it. "
Bitcoin is valued simply because big speculative capital (including the ones owns big mining operations) have enough capital to hold it .
freedom activists have zero money to lead bitcoin this far . They're insignificant . However , they speak things people likes to hear , so they become the main role in front of media .
Bitcoin's rise is not a result of promotion , usage . Bitcoin is a perfect speculative object for capitals to gain profit , the basic rules can not be changed , it doesn't controlled by single person , that's perfect for capital to speculative on it .
If you can't see that , no matter how many different community you try to attract , you will never copy the same success of Bitcoin .
well said. +5% +5% +5%
I don't believe a person in crypto world for over five years didn't recognize this.
-
The dex is finished.
No. Until it has decent profit model (percent based fee system) it is not finished.
There are percentage based fees.
Only for UIAs now.
-
The DEX is "done" except for perhaps the MAKER proposal which isn't even necessary. SVK and CASS are working on improving the User Interface of the DEX. Michael is working on improving the API to be similar to poloniex.
The key to bootstrapping any exchange is having UNIQUE assets to trade. This is something that FBA and new business models will have.
I haven't forgotten the DEX, it is a critical component. I have just learned through experience that selling a DEX is a hard niche market.
Banking partners are telling all blockchain companies the same thing: "we don't want your chain, we want our own". Anyone holding out for banking partners getting on board any existing public chain in a meaningful way needs a wakeup call.
BitShares needs to provide VALUE to the average joe. A DEX doesn't provide that value on its own. A bond market doesn't provide that value on its own.
Selling people "peace of mind" and an opportunity to "change the world" and "fight the empire" and "fight Obamacare" is a much easier sell in my own market research.
Please, someone tell me the market value of Poloniex.. how much is their exchange worth? How much is BitStamp worth? BitFinex? The combined revenue of all crypto currency exchanges is less than $25 million per year. If we assume these exchanges operate with a 50% profit margin then that means $12 million per year in profit. Based upon a 5% dividend, this would put the combined value of all exchanges in the cryptocurrency space at $240M dollars and my guess is that is very high.
So if BitShares grew to become the only exchange in the entire market it would be worth at most 24x its current valuation.
Bitcoin is valued because of the COMMUNITY of freedom activists that are using it and promoting it. It has no revenue based valuation. A DEX doesn't inspire a community following like Bitcoin has.
Lets gain some perspective before calling for the DEX to be "finished" as if that will magically make BTS grow in value 10x.
"Bitcoin is valued because of the COMMUNITY of freedom activists that are using it and promoting it. "
Bitcoin is valued simply because big speculative capital (including the ones owns big mining operations) have enough capital to hold it .
freedom activists have zero money to lead bitcoin this far . They're insignificant . However , they speak things people likes to hear , so they become the main role in front of media .
Bitcoin's rise is not a result of promotion , usage . Bitcoin is a perfect speculative object for capitals to gain profit , the basic rules can not be changed , it doesn't controlled by single person , that's perfect for capital to speculative on it .
If you can't see that , no matter how many different community you try to attract , you will never copy the same success of Bitcoin .
well said. +5% +5% +5%
I don't believe a person in crypto world for over five years didn't recognize this.
That's what scares me . Maybe he truly din't recognize this.
-
I can't wait to see how excited people are about this proposal when bitshares market cap is sub 4 million... As we just got confirmation from cnx that the value of bts is no longer a priority. Becoming a charity while fighting obamacare is now the main goal.
Also don't forget about the fba's adding constant selling pressure to bts. You get to pay for all these "features" indirectly even if you don't support them. It's truly incredible how bitshares shareholders are raked across the coals.
-
I can't wait to see how excited people are about this proposal when bitshares market cap is sub 4 million... As we just got confirmation from cnx that the value of bts is no longer a priority. Becoming a charity while fighting obamacare is now the main goal.
Also don't forget about the fba's adding constant selling pressure to bts. You get to pay for all these "features" indirectly even if you don't support them. It's truly incredible how bitshares shareholders are raked across the coals.
How exactly, do you think, are "fba's adding constant selling pressure to bts"?
And your mis-characterization of "the main goal" is juvenile sophistry, unworthy of informed debate.
What is your objective?
-
visions and dreams are important to move on, but we must not forget the reality in the process.
-
That 240M valuation of exchange market is so stupid. OMG you worked in exchange for years and this calculation is what you have? Bitcoin has value because of freedom activitist? You can't be more stupid, seriously can't. Ur own market research told you "change the world" is easier to sell? Stupidity will laugh at you. You are too over.
-
So if BitShares grew to become the only exchange in the entire market it would be worth at most 24x its current valuation.
You should also factor in the $1.2 trillion global derivatives market... and bts collateral needed to make that happen. Right now bitshares is the only working chain with derivative-based assets. If liquidity is not entering the system, then we need to change market rules or parameters, implement maker, lending, or some other change that may help, not just give up and say it is finished. If you pivot away or even divert your attention then you risk becoming a jack of all trades and master of none.
-
I can't wait to see how excited people are about this proposal when bitshares market cap is sub 4 million... As we just got confirmation from cnx that the value of bts is no longer a priority. Becoming a charity while fighting obamacare is now the main goal.
Also don't forget about the fba's adding constant selling pressure to bts. You get to pay for all these "features" indirectly even if you don't support them. It's truly incredible how bitshares shareholders are raked across the coals.
With friends like this, who needs enemies?
Straw men aside, all of you trolling a discussion on "Why Vision Matters" hoping that for all the world your bleak worldview isn't just the cloudy mirror of your own jaded hearts, my sympathies.
To those who think that passion is not the driving force in world history and the impulse of every creative endeavor, ever, sleep on.
We don't build bridges except to cross chasms, and we cross chasms to connect with one another. With this as our goal we will not easily succumb to the phantoms of division and fear wailing below.
We will continue to create ever more adaptable and effective systems to advance the universal enterprise of liberty.
There is no dam which can contain the tides of humanity striving for their natural freedoms on this living earth.
BitShares is a protean force of oceanic dimensions, and we may be fishers upon these waters.
So weave, or cut nets... either way, the sea is rising.
-
Hey, what happened to that Vote DAC\FollowmyVote game change crap from over a year ago? Is this another issue du jour to distract you and the koolaid drinkers from actually attaining any inkling of what was in that original white paper near 2 and a half years ago?
I am actually wondering if money is the issue or if BM is one of those people who never sees things through? Perhaps afraid of failure, so everything is always in a state of perpetual alteration. Or maybe a self saboteur and he doesn't realize it?
Nah, its all about the money as usual. Cant keep collecting if the product is finished.
Banking partners are telling all blockchain companies the same thing: "we don't want your chain, we want our own". Anyone holding out for banking partners getting on board any existing public chain in a meaningful way needs a wakeup call.
Wow. Weren't you guys the ones selling that idea 6 months ago and keeping a big secret about it? That CNX was talking to a bank, but woukdntnsay which or what about. Care to disclose that information since it is no longer even a viable idea? Or was another spew of misinformation to rally the troops a bit longer? Kind of like, marketing, Votes secret sauce, Overstock, Kevin Harrington, the merger, identabit, both lottoshares..... I wonder when Bts2.0 and 100,000 tps falls into that same list?
-
The DEX is "done" except for perhaps the MAKER proposal which isn't even necessary. SVK and CASS are working on improving the User Interface of the DEX. Michael is working on improving the API to be similar to poloniex.
The key to bootstrapping any exchange is having UNIQUE assets to trade. This is something that FBA and new business models will have.
I haven't forgotten the DEX, it is a critical component. I have just learned through experience that selling a DEX is a hard niche market.
Banking partners are telling all blockchain companies the same thing: "we don't want your chain, we want our own". Anyone holding out for banking partners getting on board any existing public chain in a meaningful way needs a wakeup call.
BitShares needs to provide VALUE to the average joe. A DEX doesn't provide that value on its own. A bond market doesn't provide that value on its own.
Selling people "peace of mind" and an opportunity to "change the world" and "fight the empire" and "fight Obamacare" is a much easier sell in my own market research.
Please, someone tell me the market value of Poloniex.. how much is their exchange worth? How much is BitStamp worth? BitFinex? The combined revenue of all crypto currency exchanges is less than $25 million per year. If we assume these exchanges operate with a 50% profit margin then that means $12 million per year in profit. Based upon a 5% dividend, this would put the combined value of all exchanges in the cryptocurrency space at $240M dollars and my guess is that is very high.
So if BitShares grew to become the only exchange in the entire market it would be worth at most 24x its current valuation.
Bitcoin is valued because of the COMMUNITY of freedom activists that are using it and promoting it. It has no revenue based valuation. A DEX doesn't inspire a community following like Bitcoin has.
Lets gain some perspective before calling for the DEX to be "finished" as if that will magically make BTS grow in value 10x.
I knew diluting for the DEX wasn't worth giving up a growing crypto-currency for & I also knew banks would want their own blockchain so saw limited value in Identabit.
As for valuations Coinbase was valued at $400 million, early 2015 with revenues >$10 million
https://veritaseum.com/index.php/learn/tag/Coinbase
The DEX is quite different as it allows Bitcurrencies, commodities and stocks. The market potential for the most widely adopted decentralised BitUSD is potentially larger than BTC in 5 years, so this is what I personally think has value.
BTC usage increases drastically in countries experiencing capital controls/banking problems/rapid devaluations. In these scenarios BTC becomes favourable despite its volatility but a strong BitUSD is even better suited to this task. (BitUSD is better for trade too.)
Uphold (Formerly BitReserve) would be better to look at, they offer centralised BitAssets, they started after BTS. The were valued at $90 million early 2015 but they're already 'supposedly' the fastest growing money platform in the world, with over '$600 million in transfers. So they're probably looking more towards a PayPal, $45 Billion future on the back of their BitAsset & payments platform than just a crypto-currency exchange. I think the future for the decentralised BitAsset leader is even brighter.
Today they just announced they accept China UnionPay
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/uphold-now-accepts-china-unionpay-000000459.html
(Also BTC has very little to do with freedom activists that are promoting it imo. A limited globally accessible currency fills a real market need in countries with capital controls, banking problems and rapid devaluations. It was also useful for more private trade, gambling and to a lesser degree remittances and payments & also attracts a lot of speculative capital and has currency safe haven in SHTF scenarios like gold but can be moved across borders. Due to first mover advantage it became the most widely used and accepted crypto-currency so continues to suck up the majority of new demand up until a major flaw is exploited or a vastly superior competitor like BTSX with BitUSD comes along.)
-
"For riches, don't you see, are not a little more or a little less money. They are bread for the hungry, clothes for the naked, fuel to warm you, oil to lengthen the day, a career open to your son, a certain portion for your daughter, a day of rest after fatigue, a cordial for the faint, a little assistance slipped into the hand of a poor man, a shelter from the storm, a diversion for a brain worn by thought, the incomparable pleasure of making those happy who are dear to us. Riches are education, independence, dignity, confidence, charity; they are progress and civilization. Riches are the admirable civilizing result of two admirable agents, more civilizing even than riches themselves — labor and exchange."
What is Money, F. Bastiat. http://bastiat.org/en/what_is_money.html
-
Adding new applications to the BitShares platform does not constitute any kind of a turn.
1) Stealth
2) Maker
3) Lending (Bond) market
4) Prediction market
5) MAS
We now have 5 and may well have a dozen such candidate businesses by this time next year.
In the mean time, each candidate needs a champion willing to raise or supply the cash to develop it.
Here is the manipulation, Stan: the above list is purely theoretical at this stage.
You pretend we have a choice but actually we don't.
As long as CNX is the only player capable of implementing changes affecting BitShares protocol - this is a one-man show.
DPOS and shareholders voting on worker proposals is pure fiction at this stage.
We (the shareholders) did not have a choice between Stealth and Maker. We were offered Stealth or nothing. So we chose Stealth.
Now again the same thing is happening: we do not have a choice between DEX and MAS. We are offered MAS or nothing.
So my appeal to CNX is this: be fair and offer us a choice. You are welcome to propose a vision but do not force this vision upon us (the shareholders).
And to have a choice we must wait till there is at least one more development team in the ecosystem capable of offering worker proposals as complex as Prediction Markets or Maker.
Then CNX will have every right to propose MAS as an alternative to DEX and let the shareholders actually choose between MAS and DEX (or choose to finance both).
I don't want to have developers who have a vision.
I want developers who are happy to be paid for implementing the vision of the shareholders.
As we have it now, it got all mixed up: we have developers and vision creators as one entity.
Which leaves us with this "choice": share their vision or sell.
-
Building a next generation exchange is not trivial and it's nowhere close to being done. I doubt shareholders will approve anything not related to the dex.
Agreed. We first need to finalize DEX and make it profitable. Without any profit from our product, we cannot be sustainable.
Agreed. Stay focused Dan, please.
Also, there are a ton of spelling and grammar errors on that post, just fyi. Not that it matters really, it was just kind of distracting.
-
I haven't forgotten the DEX, it is a critical component. I have just learned through experience that selling a DEX is a hard niche market.
Please, someone tell me the market value of Poloniex.. how much is their exchange worth? How much is BitStamp worth? BitFinex? The combined revenue of all crypto currency exchanges is less than $25 million per year. If we assume these exchanges operate with a 50% profit margin then that means $12 million per year in profit. Based upon a 5% dividend, this would put the combined value of all exchanges in the cryptocurrency space at $240M dollars and my guess is that is very high.
So if BitShares grew to become the only exchange in the entire market it would be worth at most 24x its current valuation.
For me the DEX itself has never been the actual product that I've been trying to sell people. I fully agree that there is only a handful of people who are interested in trading cryptocurrencies and that really is a small niche market.
Instead I've tried to sell all those financial instruments that the DEX enables or could enable in the future. Smartcoins are great for average Joe, they can have all the benefits that bitcoin has with price stability. With bond market, UIAs, FBAs, etc. they can eventually move pretty much all of their own personal economy to the Bitshares blockchain.
The next financial crisis is coming. Instead of just trying to help people who will suffer from it, we should be focusing on building a better financial platform. We have to be ready to welcome millions of people who will be betrayed by their banks and governments. IMO that is a lot more effective way of helping than just giving some money to suffering people.
For me Bitshares has been the best way to make profitable financial revolution. I hope it will remain like that in the future too.
I think somebody here has said "go big or go home". That's the thinking I'd like to apply to the DEX. Let's not get stuck into that what it could do right now for the cryptotraders, but let's try to use it for something much bigger financial instruments. Morpheus mentioned the derivatives market, I also consider it as the gold mine.
Just look at this infographic (http://money.visualcapitalist.com/all-of-the-worlds-money-and-markets-in-one-visualization/).
Bitcoin is valued because of the COMMUNITY of freedom activists that are using it and promoting it. It has no revenue based valuation. A DEX doesn't inspire a community following like Bitcoin has.
Nope. I have to strongly disagree here.
While I still hang out with bitcoinists and agree that there are lots of good people there, I think the whole community sucks. Just look at how they are debating right now about blocksize. Full of arrogant people who can't reach a consensus on a civilized manner (of course a big deal here is that Bitcoin doesn't actually have any mechanisms to make decisions on the blockchain level like Bitshares has, that makes this whole thing more difficult).
And most of Bitcoin's value comes from people who don't care about freedom, they just want to get rich. They are waiting for price to go up. If you remove all these investors and speculators, Bitcoin will lose most of it's value immediately.
This is why I think Bitshares also needs people who just want to get rich. If we build a community that consists of only freedom fighters, it will be very small and poor community.
My initial reaction to this new vision is that you are shifting away from making the blockchain and businesses around it profitable to build some kind of hippiestyle "peace & love, let's help each others" community.
You have to also remember that building a community (mainly) for libertarians is really hard. Libertarians are like cats, it's almost impossible to herd them.
-
wow, nice post @Samupaha +5% +5% +5%
-
I haven't forgotten the DEX, it is a critical component. I have just learned through experience that selling a DEX is a hard niche market.
Please, someone tell me the market value of Poloniex.. how much is their exchange worth? How much is BitStamp worth? BitFinex? The combined revenue of all crypto currency exchanges is less than $25 million per year. If we assume these exchanges operate with a 50% profit margin then that means $12 million per year in profit. Based upon a 5% dividend, this would put the combined value of all exchanges in the cryptocurrency space at $240M dollars and my guess is that is very high.
So if BitShares grew to become the only exchange in the entire market it would be worth at most 24x its current valuation.
For me the DEX itself has never been the actual product that I've been trying to sell people. I fully agree that there is only a handful of people who are interested in trading cryptocurrencies and that really is a small niche market.
Instead I've tried to sell all those financial instruments that the DEX enables or could enable in the future. Smartcoins are great for average Joe, they can have all the benefits that bitcoin has with price stability. With bond market, UIAs, FBAs, etc. they can eventually move pretty much all of their own personal economy to the Bitshares blockchain.
The next financial crisis is coming. Instead of just trying to help people who will suffer from it, we should be focusing on building a better financial platform. We have to be ready to welcome millions of people who will be betrayed by their banks and governments. IMO that is a lot more effective way of helping than just giving some money to suffering people.
For me Bitshares has been the best way to make profitable financial revolution. I hope it will remain like that in the future too.
I think somebody here has said "go big or go home". That's the thinking I'd like to apply to the DEX. Let's not get stuck into that what it could do right now for the cryptotraders, but let's try to use it for something much bigger financial instruments. Morpheus mentioned the derivatives market, I also consider it as the gold mine.
Just look at this infographic (http://money.visualcapitalist.com/all-of-the-worlds-money-and-markets-in-one-visualization/).
Bitcoin is valued because of the COMMUNITY of freedom activists that are using it and promoting it. It has no revenue based valuation. A DEX doesn't inspire a community following like Bitcoin has.
Nope. I have to strongly disagree here.
While I still hang out with bitcoinists and agree that there are lots of good people there, I think the whole community sucks. Just look at how they are debating right now about blocksize. Full of arrogant people who can't reach a consensus on a civilized manner (of course a big deal here is that Bitcoin doesn't actually have any mechanisms to make decisions on the blockchain level like Bitshares has, that makes this whole thing more difficult).
And most of Bitcoin's value comes from people who don't care about freedom, they just want to get rich. They are waiting for price to go up. If you remove all these investors and speculators, Bitcoin will lose most of it's value immediately.
This is why I think Bitshares also needs people who just want to get rich. If we build a community that consists of only freedom fighters, it will be very small and poor community.
My initial reaction to this new vision is that you are shifting away from making the blockchain and businesses around it profitable to build some kind of hippiestyle "peace & love, let's help each others" community.
You have to also remember that building a community (mainly) for libertarians is really hard. Libertarians are like cats, it's almost impossible to herd them.
+5%
I fully agree with this.
If CNX does not want to offer worker proposals for developing DEX, we need to attract another blockchain company that will be able to do that.
This way we can have *real* choice between DEX and MAS.
-
I really get a kick out of all the people here who are so afraid of 1. An idea, and 2. Bytemaster in a leadership capacity... I hope the irony is not lost on anyone. :-\
Going into 2016 I would like to see a renewed focus on community and vision. Our community is the product we are selling so let’s give people a reason to join our community rather than offering them a service they can pay for like a customer. Lets focus on helping one another and being a place where others would like to be rather than being self-centered individuals complaining about how the breadcrumbs are divided. Let’s adopt an attitude of abundance and love rather than one of scarcity. As our attitude changes so will our community and the value of BTS will grow to give us the abundance our combined society can generate.
This has been my feeling from the beginning. I heartily 2nd the push for such a renewed focus and happy to see it being expressed by you here @bytemaster.
To those of you who have such reactionary fear over these ideas... whoa.. slow down and breathe! These ideas aren't competing with the DEX, or even challenging it, they are in a whole other complimentary domain. I understand the desire for focus, but there are a lot of us here, with different talents, and collectively we should have more than enough focus to advance on several fronts simultaneously.
For me personally, I can sell a movement, I can bring the masses into a movement. What's hard for me is selling a DEX. So when you fight against these ideas you're fighting against potential allies, and current allies such as me, who can access new demographics for BitShares in ways we never could with just a DEX. The DEX is great, don't get me wrong, but it's got around .003% sex appeal, intrigue, and excitement to anyone outside of the crypto space.
Loved your words here....
-
Adding new applications to the BitShares platform does not constitute any kind of a turn.
1) Stealth
2) Maker
3) Lending (Bond) market
4) Prediction market
5) MAS
We now have 5 and may well have a dozen such candidate businesses by this time next year.
In the mean time, each candidate needs a champion willing to raise or supply the cash to develop it.
Here is the manipulation, Stan: the above list is purely theoretical at this stage.
You pretend we have a choice but actually we don't.
As long as CNX is the only player capable of implementing changes affecting BitShares protocol - this is a one-man show.
DPOS and shareholders voting on worker proposals is pure fiction at this stage.
We (the shareholders) did not have a choice between Stealth and Maker. We were offered Stealth or nothing. So we chose Stealth.
Now again the same thing is happening: we do not have a choice between DEX and MAS. We are offered MAS or nothing.
So my appeal to CNX is this: be fair and offer us a choice. You are welcome to propose a vision but do not force this vision upon us (the shareholders).
And to have a choice we must wait till there is at least one more development team in the ecosystem capable of offering worker proposals as complex as Prediction Markets or Maker.
Then CNX will have every right to propose MAS as an alternative to DEX and let the shareholders actually choose between MAS and DEX (or choose to finance both).
I don't want to have developers who have a vision.
I want developers who are happy to be paid for implementing the vision of the shareholders.
As we have it now, it got all mixed up: we have developers and vision creators as one entity.
Which leaves us with this "choice": share their vision or sell.
Cnx may have given up the licensing portion of bitshares, but they didn't give up control.
Good post jakub
-
There is a lot of good reflexions in here !
What is very shocking is that nobody here seems to understand what is BitShares and how to explain it to someone.
If we are unable to clarify this point in our very community, it's not surprising that the outside world is completely confused about it.
If think most of the confusion comes from the fact that BitShares is a plateform made to support all kind of projects. Each project with its own philosophy, with its own public target, ect ...
It seems to me very hard to define the philosophy of BitShares with something else than very wide concept as "freedom" "respect" "independance" ... (these are just random words to make my point)
<just an idea>
Maybe the reflexion would be easy comparing ourself to an operating system (and not to a software).
# What is the philosophy of windows, IOS, Android, Linux and other operating system ? Do they have a philosophy ?
# How could we sell Windows to a random guy if there is not any program running on it ?
# How could we motivate entrepreneur to build on our plateform when we don't have user ?
# How most successful OS have done that in the past?
# Is BitShares blockchain the OS or is the DEX ?
# ...
</just an idea>
How could we become what we want to become if we don't know what we want to be ?
There is a lot smart poeple here, this thread should continue during 50 pages until we figure it out.
As I see it, the purpose of the BM article is to gather the community, to make it more united. Let's help him (and us) out and gather our reflexions to define better what we are, what we do, our goals and where we are going. It's not an easy task but we need it. It should be, as a smart community, our nº1 priority before anything else.
-
# What is the philosophy of windows, IOS, Android, Linux and other operating system ? Do they have a philosophy ?
# How could we sell Windows to a random guy if there is not any program running on it ?
# How could we motivate entrepreneur to build on our plateform when we don't have user ?
# How most successful OS have done that in the past?
# Is BitShares blockchain the OS or is the DEX ?
# ...
the purpose of the BM article is to gather the community, to make it more united. Let's help him (and us) out and gather our reflexions to define better what we are, what we do, our goals and where we are going. It's not an easy task but we need it. It should be, as a smart community, our nº1 priority before anything else.
Beautiful +5% +5% +5%
-
There is a lot of good reflexions in here !
What is very shocking is that nobody here seems to understand what is BitShares and how to explain it to someone.
If we are unable to clarify this point in our very community, it's not surprising that the outside world is completely confused about it.
If think most of the confusion comes from the fact that BitShares is a plateform made to support all kind of projects. Each project with its own philosophy, with its own public target, ect ...
It seems to me very hard to define the philosophy of BitShares with something else than very wide concept as "freedom" "respect" "independance" ... (these are just random words to make my point)
<just an idea>
Maybe the reflexion would be easy comparing ourself to an operating system (and not to a software).
# What is the philosophy of windows, IOS, Android, Linux and other operating system ? Do they have a philosophy ?
# How could we sell Windows to a random guy if there is not any program running on it ?
# How could we motivate entrepreneur to build on our plateform when we don't have user ?
# How most successful OS have done that in the past?
# Is BitShares blockchain the OS or is the DEX ?
# ...
</just an idea>
How could we become what we want to become if we don't know what we want to be ?
There is a lot smart poeple here, this thread should continue during 50 pages until we figure it out.
As I see it, the purpose of the BM article is to gather the community, to make it more united. Let's help him (and us) out and gather our reflexions to define better what we are, what we do, our goals and where we are going. It's not an easy task but we need it. It should be, as a smart community, our nº1 priority before anything else.
Wonderful EstefanTT....
-
That 240M valuation of exchange market is so stupid. OMG you worked in exchange for years and this calculation is what you have? Bitcoin has value because of freedom activitist? You can't be more stupid, seriously can't. Ur own market research told you "change the world" is easier to sell? Stupidity will laugh at you. You are too over.
To be fair, I was asking the question and making rough estimates based only on volume and a valuation of 20x profits. If coinbase was valued at 400M all by itself that tells me that the market is pricing in a lot of speculative value about future volume and probably using lower multiples.
Bitcoin has value because of network effect and speculators. It had network effect first! Speculators second. I was around with Bitcoin in the beginning and so I know how it got started and the type of people who were early adopters and why.
I am not attempting to sell "change the world", I am attempting to sell a MAS to the target market of gofundme.
Obviously I haven't communicated everything I have in mind. It is a VISION for a better world.
-
# What is the philosophy of windows, IOS, Android, Linux and other operating system ? Do they have a philosophy ?
# How could we sell Windows to a random guy if there is not any program running on it ?
# How could we motivate entrepreneur to build on our plateform when we don't have user ?
# How most successful OS have done that in the past?
# Is BitShares blockchain the OS or is the DEX ?
# ...
the purpose of the BM article is to gather the community, to make it more united. Let's help him (and us) out and gather our reflexions to define better what we are, what we do, our goals and where we are going. It's not an easy task but we need it. It should be, as a smart community, our nº1 priority before anything else.
Beautiful +5% +5% +5%
Bitshares is an OS aimed to protect life, freedom & property. That's cool and easy to understand.
Bitshares is an OS where different apps can coexist. That's also cool.
Only 4-5 people in the whole world are capable to build an app for BitShares OS. That sucks.
Clearly such an OS is an unfinished product.
To be clear: I want the product finished but I don't expect to get it for free - I want to pay well for making it complete.
And for me it is finished when this condition is met: there are at least two different companies competing with worker proposals that address a roadmap defined by the shareholders.
So if we treat BitShares is an OS, we don't need Stealth or Maker or Prediction Markets or Bonds to call our OS complete.
All we need is a practical ability to acquire those features via worker proposals.
-
Here is the manipulation, Stan: the above list is purely theoretical at this stage.
You pretend we have a choice but actually we don't.
As long as CNX is the only player capable of implementing changes affecting BitShares protocol - this is a one-man show.
DPOS and shareholders voting on worker proposals is pure fiction at this stage.
We (the shareholders) did not have a choice between Stealth and Maker. We were offered Stealth or nothing. So we chose Stealth.
Now again the same thing is happening: we do not have a choice between DEX and MAS. We are offered MAS or nothing.
Honestly I am surprised. Surprised that you are so close to the truth,. Actually you just need one more step in the right direction and you will see the whole picture - the whole picture loudly screaming at you.
Actually @lil_jay890 did it for you (and everybody else) and last night posted (one of the, if not the) greatest post on this forum. He went on to delete it unfortunately...
I was thinking of posting a thread "The great Future of BTS as a Ponzi scheme" for some time now, but actually his description is better "BTS a personal charity for the benefit of a business called CNX". The consequences and the future should be clearer, having realized that.
Here you all have it.... consider yourself warned!!!!.
-
Here is the manipulation, Stan: the above list is purely theoretical at this stage.
You pretend we have a choice but actually we don't.
As long as CNX is the only player capable of implementing changes affecting BitShares protocol - this is a one-man show.
DPOS and shareholders voting on worker proposals is pure fiction at this stage.
We (the shareholders) did not have a choice between Stealth and Maker. We were offered Stealth or nothing. So we chose Stealth.
Now again the same thing is happening: we do not have a choice between DEX and MAS. We are offered MAS or nothing.
Honestly I am surprised. Surprised that you are so close to the truth,. Actually you just need one more step in the right direction and you will see the whole picture - the whole picture loudly screaming at you.
Actually @lil_jay890 did it for you (and everybody else) and last night posted (one of the, if not the) greatest post on this forum. He went on to delete it unfortunately...
I was thinking of posting a thread "The great Future of BTS as a Ponzi scheme" for some time now, but actually his description is better "BTS a personal charity for the benefit of a business called CNX". The consequences and the future should be clearer, having realized that.
Here you all have it.... consider yourself warned!!!!.
We must find a competition for CNX in 2016 or there is no bright future for BitShares.
Without true competition among developers BitShares will be reduced to an experimental lab for CNX, where the bill for all unsuccessful experiments is paid by the BitShares shareholders.
CNX might have the best intentions, I have no doubt about it.
But this situation is pathological and it will end badly.
EDIT: I don't blame CNX for not coming forward with worker proposals for DEX if they now believe MAS is the future.
So the problem is not CNX. The problem is lack of competition.
And IMO lack of competition mainly stems from the lack of documentation and educational resources about Graphene.
-
Here is the manipulation, Stan: the above list is purely theoretical at this stage.
You pretend we have a choice but actually we don't.
As long as CNX is the only player capable of implementing changes affecting BitShares protocol - this is a one-man show.
DPOS and shareholders voting on worker proposals is pure fiction at this stage.
We (the shareholders) did not have a choice between Stealth and Maker. We were offered Stealth or nothing. So we chose Stealth.
Now again the same thing is happening: we do not have a choice between DEX and MAS. We are offered MAS or nothing.
So my appeal to CNX is this: be fair and offer us a choice. You are welcome to propose a vision but do not force this vision upon us (the shareholders).
And to have a choice we must wait till there is at least one more development team in the ecosystem capable of offering worker proposals as complex as Prediction Markets or Maker.
Then CNX will have every right to propose MAS as an alternative to DEX and let the shareholders actually choose between MAS and DEX (or choose to finance both).
I don't want to have developers who have a vision.
I want developers who are happy to be paid for implementing the vision of the shareholders.
As we have it now, it got all mixed up: we have developers and vision creators as one entity.
Which leaves us with this "choice": share their vision or sell.
Then you need to find developers who think your way.
Are you asking us to quit being visionaries?
If we had to give up being developers or give up being visionaries, which do you think we would choose? :)
Here's what we have done:
We have made the results of all our efforts open source for others to build on.
We have encouraged a host of other entrepreneurs to build their own businesses.
We have provided several funding mechanisms (referrals, workers, FBAs, etc.) to make that easier for them than it has ever been.
We have offered to build whatever entrepreneurs want to fund.
What else can we do?
Are you asking that we go create some more developer companies for you, so you will have a choice?
Well, we think the best way to cause more developers to come into existence it to create more opportunities for them.
This means attracting more users to generate demand for BitShares to increase the purchasing power to hire them or at least inspire them.
Users will attract entrepreneurs who will hire plain, non-visionary, developers and tell them what to develop.
If they hire us, we will dutifully build what they want - just like we are now doing for Onceuponatime.
If we hire us with our own money, then naturally we will decide what we want to spend it on.
If you want to set the direction instead of CNX, the best way to do that is to raise funding for your vision.
Then you will have lots of developers standing in line. (Probably us too.)
Right now we are paying our own bills, so we get to set our own vision.
And we have (very fairly) left the door wide open for others to do the same.
Here's the way it works now for everyone:
1. Decide what you want.
2. Find like minded individuals who want what you want.
3. Work with them to raise funds to pay for what you want.
(Tap your piggy bank, propose a worker, do a FBA raise, build a community....)
4. Use those funds to hire developers to build what you want.
BitShares is a platform designed to make those four steps as easy as possible for everyone.
-
Adding new applications to the BitShares platform does not constitute any kind of a turn.
1) Stealth
2) Maker
3) Lending (Bond) market
4) Prediction market
5) MAS
We now have 5 and may well have a dozen such candidate businesses by this time next year.
In the mean time, each candidate needs a champion willing to raise or supply the cash to develop it.
Here is the manipulation, Stan: the above list is purely theoretical at this stage.
You pretend we have a choice but actually we don't.
Honestly I think this too... It seems it's already set up for MAS to be the next thing.
I'm also under the impression that the goal of having something profitable is slowly fading away. I feel we're turning more into a charity project. There's no problem helping others, but to successfully do that, I'm of the strong opinion you need to be rich first. If there's no money where are you going to get the resources?
I thought BitShares was supposed - above everything - to be profitable just like any other company. But I just don't see that ambition any more. Instead of being pragmatic, start somewhere and have a clear objective, BitShares seems like it's lost in the desert not knowing where to go.
What if crypto exchanges are not a big market globally? First, we need to start somewhere. We are already a niche so we must please that niche. Meaning we should aim to be the number one exchange. It's all about building a brand. Then once established we could move onto other things like real non crypto exchanges, etc. Isn't the derivatives market huge? Well if we want that (which I think we dont anymore), we need to start somewhere. Have goals. Have milestones. Once we're established as a nice exchange other exchanges would join, adding more and more volume until we absorb all the ones we can. That should be our first milestone imo. Second, crypto is growing so sooner or later the crypto exchange bizz will grow huge and could even replace others. Now guess what, if you're ahead in the exchange stuff, we would always be one of the top choices.
Then we would move onto other things. Bigger things with bigger markets! Expand to new stuff. But then, we could actually have the luxury of doing that because we have an established and acknowledged brand. We would be a reference, be profitable and shareholders would have something much more valuable in their hands at that point. Meaning they would finally have more money to invest in new and bigger stuff.
I strongly believe only by being wealthy can you truly create awesome and revolutionary stuff, because that takes money. You can have 1001 of the best ideas someone ever had but you can't do them, practically. That's unfortunate but it's true when you're dealing with new technology and competing with tons of people at the same time. You just need it.
Maybe that's because the way I am and I respect that because we are all different and see things differently but I see BitShares with lack of ambition and turning soft. Not chasing the money it needs. But unfortunately there seems to be the lack of man power so we're "stuck" with CNX and they can't do everything alone even if they wanted. But like I said, different people think different ways and have different approaches... Can't really do anything about that other than trying to set a path to follow.
-
Here's what we have done:
We have made the results of all our efforts open source for others to build on.
We have encouraged a host of other entrepreneurs to build their own businesses.
We have provided several funding mechanisms (referrals, workers, FBAs, etc.) to make that easier for them than it has ever been.
We have offered to build whatever entrepreneurs want to fund.
What else can we do?
Very simple: you can offer a worker proposal aimed at creating robust documentation for Graphene so that the outside developers can get on a level playing field with CNX developers.
Currently only one man (@xeroc) is working on this and AFAIK what he produces is not meant to be a technical documentation for Graphene developers.
For me good documentation would be one that includes a guide describing how to write, test and deploy a modification affecting the BitShares protocol.
Are you asking that we go create some more developer companies for you, so you will have a choice?
All I am asking is to hold off changing your vision every 6 months until we can honestly say that BitShares is open to third-party development (including modifications affecting the protocol).
Otherwise the shareholders have only this choice: they can either follow your vision or sell.
I'd like to give them a third option: vote for an alternative vision.
-
This means attracting more users to generate demand for BitShares
...
hire developers to build what you want.
Bingo. ..and BINGO.
1. The BitShares Wallet for Android/iPhone will be released on Jan 4th.
2. The OPENPOS token pays the developers AND rewards its Hodlers.
3. Smartcoins POS attracts the users you mentioned, AND supermarkets.
Join us in the Beyond Bitcoin mumble this friday the 1st!
Details: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20762.0/all.html
-
Here is the manipulation, Stan: the above list is purely theoretical at this stage.
You pretend we have a choice but actually we don't.
As long as CNX is the only player capable of implementing changes affecting BitShares protocol - this is a one-man show.
DPOS and shareholders voting on worker proposals is pure fiction at this stage.
We (the shareholders) did not have a choice between Stealth and Maker. We were offered Stealth or nothing. So we chose Stealth.
Now again the same thing is happening: we do not have a choice between DEX and MAS. We are offered MAS or nothing.
Honestly I am surprised. Surprised that you are so close to the truth,. Actually you just need one more step in the right direction and you will see the whole picture - the whole picture loudly screaming at you.
Actually @lil_jay890 did it for you (and everybody else) and last night posted (one of the, if not the) greatest post on this forum. He went on to delete it unfortunately...
I was thinking of posting a thread "The great Future of BTS as a Ponzi scheme" for some time now, but actually his description is better "BTS a personal charity for the benefit of a business called CNX". The consequences and the future should be clearer, having realized that.
Here you all have it.... consider yourself warned!!!!.
I see a genuine and sincere struggle against a myriad of challenges. There has been an aggressive need for innovation and adaptation. Your bitterness is palpable tonyk, but there is no need to give in to self-pity and blame the people who are trying hardest to bring success to BitShares.
For anyone that is feeling frustrated or let down in some way, we have the power to make things right for you. All it requires is for us to galvanise our efforts, support each other....especially our devs, unify behind a common purpose, finish what we started and extend the hand of hope and friendship to everyone else.
-
Maybe that's because the way I am and I respect that because we are all different and see things differently but I see BitShares with lack of ambition and turning soft. Not chasing the money it needs. But unfortunately there seems to be the lack of man power so we're "stuck" with CNX and they can't do everything alone even if they wanted. But like I said, different people think different ways and have different approaches... Can't really do anything about that other than trying to set a path to follow.
I think there is a HUGE misunderstanding about MAS.
It was selected as something to consider for our next internal investment because we think it represents the best opportunity to make money and grow BitShares in the near term.
People are reacting to the "sales pitch" to MAS users (which is necessarily warm and fuzzy) rather than the "pitch deck" to MAS investors (which is hard nosed profit oriented).
Let me try to clear that up for you.
Sales pitch to MAS users: "Hey, in addition to donating to help people in your favorite cause and getting a tax deduction, why not also get insurance for yourself as an added benefit? We can offer the lowest overhead charity in the world that delivers peer to peer help where you can confirm that the people you wanted to help actually got the money AND you become eligible to receive the same help from others in the future."
Sales pitch to MAS investors: "BitShares holders, MAS FBA holders, and referrers get to share a small cut of all donations made for all causes which constitutes our only overhead."
Given the size of the donation business, a perhaps 5% cut is very profitable, generates funds for BTS and CNX, and increases the demand for BTS and the number of people signing up for BTS accounts. It gives our affiliate marketers something concrete and easy to understand to sell, which has been the biggest limitation to their ability to use the BTS referral program so far.
The forums for each MAS type (BM suggested several) are not this forum and they can each have their own philosophical ideals - without imposing them on BitShares.
BitShares remains a profit motive oriented platform for building many businesses that may be either economically or ideologically driven (or both).
And people who want to focus on the DEX can take great pleasure in all the new users who come there to buy and sell their MAS tokens. (And thereby discover all the other insanely great products and services the DEX can offer.)
-
Here's what we have done:
We have made the results of all our efforts open source for others to build on.
We have encouraged a host of other entrepreneurs to build their own businesses.
We have provided several funding mechanisms (referrals, workers, FBAs, etc.) to make that easier for them than it has ever been.
We have offered to build whatever entrepreneurs want to fund.
What else can we do?
Very simple: you can offer a worker proposal aimed at creating robust documentation for Graphene so that the outside developers can get on a level playing field with CNX developers.
Currently only one man (@xeroc) is working on this and AFAIK what he produces is not meant to be a technical documentation for Graphene developers.
For me good documentation would be one that includes a guide describing how to write, test and deploy a modification affecting the BitShares protocol.
Are you asking that we go create some more developer companies for you, so you will have a choice?
All I am asking is to hold off changing your vision every 6 months until we can honestly say that BitShares is open to third-party development (including modifications affecting the protocol).
Otherwise the shareholders have only this choice: they can either follow your vision or sell.
I'd like to give them a third option: vote for an alternative vision.
"All you are asking" is for us to not use the platform we worked so hard on for its intended purpose - to build new businesses that make money - for six months.
Anybody can write that worker proposal and hire us or anybody else to do that work.
Every entrepreneur is also welcome to hire us to do consulting to get them up to speed.
Why does everyone have to wait for us to act on what they want to see?
You simultaneously demand alternatives to CNX and yet wait for CNX to make the first move on everything.
Why not write a proposal for what you want, offer to manage it, sell it to the community and recruit us or someone else to do the work?
-
I agree that we need more devs than CNX. Nobody has ever debated that.
You don't think there hasn't been some interest?
Did it ever occur to members of this community that they may have came and went after they saw the cheapskate and abusive treatment that have been delivered non-stop from people in this forum towards current devs?
Why would ANYBODY of any caliber of skill want to waste their time with any of that when there are others who will treat them with respect and pay them what they are worth?
You all point the finger at CNX, but the truth is we don't have more devs here because of in part how you carry on here.
If you want to attract more worker bees, consider using honey instead of big sticks.
Regardless of this, I can see more devs coming into light in 2016 by way of private hires that will not participate in this forum. It's the only way to protect their careers, and will get things done that are being talked about.
I digress because this is way off from where the thread started. :)
The vision is fine. A great vision. I will do what I can to support it in its execution. In the end that's all that will matter.
Might I suggest those that wish to see more dev in the DEX or other self interest features to start other threads to better organize execution on elements that they would like to see.. get community support.. and get a worker proposal going. If you would like some help with that I would be happy to assist in any way.
Ideas and bitching mean nothing; execution is everything.
-
@Akado - I will never drop the goal and requirement of profitability. Profit is the key to sustainability which was outlined in my vision. Everything I do is focused on PROFIT, but I want to make doing the RIGHT THING profitable. If we make helping others profitable then it will help us help more people.
-
Why not write a proposal for what you want, offer to manage it, sell it to the community and recruit us or someone else to do the work?
You know quite well that this is absurd.
This documentation has to come from one of the top developers, probably BM himself.
Me (or anybody else) being a middle man in this process is pointless as there is no value added in my attempting to manage BM.
I understand that CNX has much more motivation to pursue a business opportunity like MAS than to create documentation and open up true competition against itself.
However CNX needs to make this altruistic (yet paid) effort or otherwise DPOS is pure fiction.
You got my message so I'll shut up now.
-
Why not write a proposal for what you want, offer to manage it, sell it to the community and recruit us or someone else to do the work?
You know quite well that this is absurd.
This documentation has to come from one of the top developers, probably BM himself.
Me (or anybody else) being a middle man in this process is pointless as there is no value added in my attempting to manage BM.
I understand that CNX has much more motivation to pursue a business opportunity like MAS than to create documentation and open up true competition against itself.
However CNX needs to make this altruistic (yet paid) effort or otherwise DPOS is pure fiction.
You got my message so I'll shut up now.
Not absurd at all.
90% of the deep technical documentation already exists in the code as Xeroc has testified.
Layers of abstraction above that could be done by a suitably organized team of technical writers.
BM would be available to answer questions from the writers or any independent developer.
But you are right about one thing, we are not going to tie up a resource like BM doing the bulk of that remaining work.
That leaves the field wide open for someone like you to organize the effort - including when to expend some silver bullets to get occasional consultation from BM on the fine points.
-
Why not write a proposal for what you want, offer to manage it, sell it to the community and recruit us or someone else to do the work?
You know quite well that this is absurd.
This documentation has to come from one of the top developers, probably BM himself.
Me (or anybody else) being a middle man in this process is pointless as there is no value added in my attempting to manage BM.
I understand that CNX has much more motivation to pursue a business opportunity like MAS than to create documentation and open up true competition against itself.
However CNX needs to make this altruistic (yet paid) effort or otherwise DPOS is pure fiction.
You got my message so I'll shut up now.
So that's it, you're just going to sit on your hands now? You've expressed a clear desire to get this documentation executed, but now what will come of it? You're going to wait for someone else to take action? You think making your point about the need for documentation in a thread about VISION is enough?
All that energy you just expended in trying to argue a point, it's like you're really trying to see a boogey man, but I just see excuses. I see A LOT of room for you, or someone, to be a middle man here -- aren't you one of the fabled project managers we've been waiting for? If the community wanted to fund this effort, (and I think we should) I believe you will find the 'top developers' more than willing to participate. It's the perfect fit for a project manager, someone needs to ride point until it gets done. Who will step up and do that?
Start a thread, lead a conversation, galvanize the community, get a worker proposal going... please for the love of God everyone stop with the hostage act... your hands are not tied, you're not wrestling with demons... There's plenty of room to work here, and people willing to collaborate with you. Whatever it is we need to achieve, we can do it together.
-
@Akado - I will never drop the goal and requirement of profitability. Profit is the key to sustainability which was outlined in my vision. Everything I do is focused on PROFIT, but I want to make doing the RIGHT THING profitable. If we make helping others profitable then it will help us help more people.
Sure, but that doesn't mean that's necessarily the best/easiest/more profitable path first. I'm all for it, if we have the resources, which we seem no to have atm...
-
Start a thread, lead a conversation, galvanize the community, get a worker proposal going... please for the love of God everyone stop with the hostage act... your hands are not tied, you're not wrestling with demons... There's plenty of room to work here, and people willing to collaborate with you. Whatever it is we need to achieve, we can do it together.
+5% +5% +5% +5%
-
I'm so sick of the cop out answer of "do it yourself". News flash, no one is "doing it themselves" for a variety of reasons. Also people need to realize that bts investors are INVESTORS. When's the last time you heard of a public company saying their investors need to start developing products for the company?? Never.
and the argument being made that this community is "scaring away other devs" is completely false. Other dev's would be here if they saw that there was an actual way to make money with bitshares. They don't care about their reputation on a forum.
The only way bitshares succeeds is:
-CNX hits a homerun on some project in which BTS gets rewarded... (FBA's do not accomplish this. Also not likely since CNX is the primary benefactor of the charity also known as bitshares).
-CNX promotes competition against itself. To really make bts successful CNX should act more like a foundation than a company.
-CNX loses the ability to take over the committee and make rapid forks and changes.
-CNX leaving the table would also give bitshares a much better shot at growth. I believe this would bring China back to the table. They left after being smashed by I3 in the merger and are wisely avoiding that outcome again.
Bottom line, CNX has both the intellectual power and stake power to control the direction BTS indefinitely. Until at least 1 of those is given up, bts growth will be inhibited and the centralized drum beat will continue. You, the shareholder, are supporting this by keeping the price stable. The only way I see out of this is a collapse in bts price or one of the above scenarios.
-
I'm so sick of the cop out answer of "do it yourself". News flash, no one is "doing it themselves" for a variety of reasons. Also people need to realize that bts investors are INVESTORS. When's the last time you heard of a public company saying their investors need to start developing products for the company?? Never.
and the argument being made that this community is "scaring away other devs" is completely false. Other dev's would be here if they saw that there was an actual way to make money with bitshares. They don't care about their reputation on a forum.
The only way bitshares succeeds is:
-CNX hits a homerun on some project in which BTS gets rewarded... (FBA's do not accomplish this. Also not likely since CNX is the primary benefactor of the charity also known as bitshares).
-CNX promotes competition against itself. To really make bts successful CNX should act more like a foundation than a company.
-CNX loses the ability to take over the committee and make rapid forks and changes.
-CNX leaving the table would also give bitshares a much better shot at growth. I believe this would bring China back to the table. They left after being smashed by I3 in the merger and are wisely avoiding that outcome again.
Bottom line, CNX has both the intellectual power and stake power to control the direction BTS indefinitely. Until at least 1 of those is given up, bts growth will be inhibited and the centralized drum beat will continue. You, the shareholder, are supporting this by keeping the price stable. The only way I see out of this is a collapse in bts price or one of the above scenarios.
I understand CNX have a lot of influence, but still, don't we or didn't we have chinese whales? Weren't the chinese always blamed for the pump and dumps in the past? I'm sure they have a huge voting weight too, nothing keeps them from doing something.
I honestly would like to see worker proposals coming from them so we know the solutions they've come up with. But proposals to introduce features, not just changing parameters. China is huge can't the "whales" find any devs?
-
CNX leaving the table would also give bitshares a much better shot at growth. I believe this would bring China back to the table.
This is an interesting point. So many people are focusing on CNX when really it would be best to focus on the individual producers themselves. I for one would definitely start voting if Workers like Xeroc, Valentine, Ben, James, SVK, Mindphlux and others (sorry if I don't name everyone) went freelance. I hire the best Devs from all over the world and these guys would definitely get Workers voted in bar none. Each of them should have their own trade-able token too.
-
I'm so sick of the cop out answer of "do it yourself". News flash, no one is "doing it themselves" for a variety of reasons. Also people need to realize that bts investors are INVESTORS. When's the last time you heard of a public company saying their investors need to start developing products for the company?? Never.
and the argument being made that this community is "scaring away other devs" is completely false. Other dev's would be here if they saw that there was an actual way to make money with bitshares. They don't care about their reputation on a forum.
The only way bitshares succeeds is:
-CNX hits a homerun on some project in which BTS gets rewarded... (FBA's do not accomplish this. Also not likely since CNX is the primary benefactor of the charity also known as bitshares).
-CNX promotes competition against itself. To really make bts successful CNX should act more like a foundation than a company.
-CNX loses the ability to take over the committee and make rapid forks and changes.
-CNX leaving the table would also give bitshares a much better shot at growth. I believe this would bring China back to the table. They left after being smashed by I3 in the merger and are wisely avoiding that outcome again.
Bottom line, CNX has both the intellectual power and stake power to control the direction BTS indefinitely. Until at least 1 of those is given up, bts growth will be inhibited and the centralized drum beat will continue. You, the shareholder, are supporting this by keeping the price stable. The only way I see out of this is a collapse in bts price or one of the above scenarios.
CNX has a moronic attitude towards the BTS price (aka the hand that feeds them). So yes I totally see them driving the price to 1 mil ish before waking up for what they have done and even considering any of your choses above... although they also tend to abandon anything that does not work by itself at 75% finished level... so them just walking away completely after hitting the above 'target' is the most likely scenario.
-
@Akado - I will never drop the goal and requirement of profitability. Profit is the key to sustainability which was outlined in my vision. Everything I do is focused on PROFIT, but I want to make doing the RIGHT THING profitable. If we make helping others profitable then it will help us help more people.
Can you explain how exactly you plan to make MAS profitable in 2016? As I have said before, I think it will require massive amount of work. I highly suspect that it wont bring any meaningful profits for Bitshares for a long time.
-
I'm so sick of the cop out answer of "do it yourself". News flash, no one is "doing it themselves" for a variety of reasons. Also people need to realize that bts investors are INVESTORS. When's the last time you heard of a public company saying their investors need to start developing products for the company?? Never.
There's plenty of room to work here, and people willing to collaborate with you. Whatever it is we need to achieve, we can do it together.
I never said do it yourself, I said let's do it together, I said collaborate. It's not a cop out, it's the way it is. If you are uncomfortable with the way this 'company' operates, either help it to operate more to your liking, fund those who will, offer constructive input, be quiet, or leave... I think comparing BitShares to a traditional "public company" reveals a strange disconnect with the nature of this project.
and the argument being made that this community is "scaring away other devs" is completely false. Other dev's would be here if they saw that there was an actual way to make money with bitshares. They don't care about their reputation on a forum.
So you say. I think you cannot see how toxic and hostile the forums can be at times. We have a lot of gems here, but there is a vocal crowd of people, who do more to sew dissent, complain, rage against the phantoms instead of seeking solutions or supporting those who do. I recognize many have 'lost' an investment they hoped would be more mobile than it is currently, but that's no excuse.
This is oftentimes an unwelcoming place for newcomers, devs or otherwise, to enter, because of so much needless fear, uncertainty, and doubt, being spun better than any Fox news anchor... I think this is less attributable to malice and more to ignorance, but also I see there is some malice here as well.
Bottom line, CNX has both the intellectual power and stake power to control the direction BTS indefinitely. Until at least 1 of those is given up, bts growth will be inhibited and the centralized drum beat will continue. You, the shareholder, are supporting this by keeping the price stable. The only way I see out of this is a collapse in bts price or one of the above scenarios.
CNX has a moronic attitude towards the BTS price (aka the hand that feeds them). So yes I totally see them driving the price to 1 mil ish before waking up for what they have done and even considering any of your choses above... although they also tend to abandon anything that does not work by itself at 75% finished level... so them just walking away completely after hitting the above 'target' is the most likely scenario.
Are you suggesting that Bytemaster gets a lobotomy and CNX gives all their (minimal compared to any other cypto-project) stake away?
Yes, this is clearly the answer, i see it now! Thank you lil jay, for helping me to realize that failure will bring success, that down is the new up!
DOWN IS THE NEW UP! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kawTKVK3p68)
-
@Akado - I will never drop the goal and requirement of profitability. Profit is the key to sustainability which was outlined in my vision. Everything I do is focused on PROFIT, but I want to make doing the RIGHT THING profitable. If we make helping others profitable then it will help us help more people.
Can you explain how exactly you plan to make MAS profitable in 2016? As I have said before, I think it will require massive amount of work. I highly suspect that it wont bring any meaningful profits for Bitshares for a long time.
Agreed.
-
I'm so sick of the cop out answer of "do it yourself". News flash, no one is "doing it themselves" for a variety of reasons. Also people need to realize that bts investors are INVESTORS. When's the last time you heard of a public company saying their investors need to start developing products for the company?? Never.
There's plenty of room to work here, and people willing to collaborate with you. Whatever it is we need to achieve, we can do it together.
I never said do it yourself, I said let's do it together, I said collaborate. It's not a cop out, it's the way it is. If you are uncomfortable with the way this 'company' operates, either help it to operate more to your liking, fund those who will, offer constructive input, be quiet, or leave... I think comparing BitShares to a traditional "public company" reveals a strange disconnect with the nature of this project.
and the argument being made that this community is "scaring away other devs" is completely false. Other dev's would be here if they saw that there was an actual way to make money with bitshares. They don't care about their reputation on a forum.
So you say. I think you cannot see how toxic and hostile the forums can be at times. We have a lot of gems here, but there is a vocal crowd of people, who do more to sew dissent, complain, rage against the phantoms instead of seeking solutions or supporting those who do. I recognize many have 'lost' an investment they hoped would be more mobile than it is currently, but that's no excuse.
This is oftentimes an unwelcoming place for newcomers, devs or otherwise, to enter, because of so much needless fear, uncertainty, and doubt, being spun better than any Fox news anchor... I think this is less attributable to malice and more to ignorance, but also I see there is some malice here as well.
Bottom line, CNX has both the intellectual power and stake power to control the direction BTS indefinitely. Until at least 1 of those is given up, bts growth will be inhibited and the centralized drum beat will continue. You, the shareholder, are supporting this by keeping the price stable. The only way I see out of this is a collapse in bts price or one of the above scenarios.
CNX has a moronic attitude towards the BTS price (aka the hand that feeds them). So yes I totally see them driving the price to 1 mil ish before waking up for what they have done and even considering any of your choses above... although they also tend to abandon anything that does not work by itself at 75% finished level... so them just walking away completely after hitting the above 'target' is the most likely scenario.
Are you suggesting that Bytemaster gets a lobotomy and CNX gives all their (minimal compared to any other cypto-project) stake away?
Yes, this is clearly the answer, i see it now! Thank you lil jay, for helping me to realize that failure will bring success, that down is the new up!
DOWN IS THE NEW UP! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kawTKVK3p68)
My posts do offer solutions... Sorry they are not the ones you like.
I see CNX as the problem, obviously you do not. But go ahead, keep taking my posts out of context and jabbing me personally.
-
@Akado - I will never drop the goal and requirement of profitability. Profit is the key to sustainability which was outlined in my vision. Everything I do is focused on PROFIT, but I want to make doing the RIGHT THING profitable. If we make helping others profitable then it will help us help more people.
Can you explain how exactly you plan to make MAS profitable in 2016? As I have said before, I think it will require massive amount of work. I highly suspect that it wont bring any meaningful profits for Bitshares for a long time.
I'm also interested in this:
The Samaritan society will help anyone who follows our core values and experiences an unexpected and undeserved expense.
Who (and how) will distinguish between expected and unexpected / deserved and undeserved expenses?
This looks like a huge and complex issue for a blockchain-based solution.
EDIT: The answer to this question can be found here:
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/blob/master/bsip-0009.md
When a member experiences an unexpected burden they request help from their society. Members of the society will then vote to approve or reject the request. If the request is approved then individuals with pre-committed funds may choose to give to their cause. The more you give to a society, the more it will give back to you many times over.
-
My posts do offer solutions... Sorry they are not the ones you like.
I see CNX as the problem, obviously you do not. But go ahead, keep taking my posts out of context and jabbing me personally.
Oh?
Ok.. magically you got your wish. CNX is literally GONE. They sold all their stake and they were taken up by Google with explicit instructions to never be involved in Bitshares ever again.
Where and how exactly does this leave Bitshares in a better position in this distopia you you seem to wish for? Hows that market cap doing now following this event? Who is doing all the dev work now? All of this seems predicated on some far reaching wishful thinking that someone China players will come back into the mix. When that doesn't happen, who's head do you want to lop off next as your 'solution' ?
-
My posts do offer solutions... Sorry they are not the ones you like.
I see CNX as the problem, obviously you do not. But go ahead, keep taking my posts out of context and jabbing me personally.
Oh?
Ok.. magically you got your wish. CNX is literally GONE. They sold all their stake and they were taken up by Google with explicit instructions to never be involved in Bitshares ever again.
Where and how exactly does this leave Bitshares in a better position in this distopia you you seem to wish for? Hows that market cap doing now following this event? Who is doing all the dev work now? All of this seems predicated on some far reaching wishful thinking that someone China players will come back into the mix. When that doesn't happen, who's head do you want to lop off next as your 'solution' ?
How bitshares would be in a better position without CNX according to your loaded questions:
-Removal of uncertainty from quick random hardforks and setting changes. CNX can push through and do anything they want.
-Market cap has already fallen over 90% from the highs in fiat and is at an all time low vs bitcoin. At the same time we have alienated some of the bigger names in crypto because they didn't believe in Dan's vision. I believe the market would actually see CNX leaving as a positive since bts would become more predictable and stable.
-I'm not sure if you read anything from @btswildpig but he was one of the main contacts with the chinese community. He reported that many of the chinese investors left because of the how much of a wild card Dan and Stan are. No business can be built because the rules constantly change.
-The whole point of this is to create a system where there is no head to lop off. Then bts will truly be decentralized and can attract developers who have an even playing field and predictable rules.
Listen, I never said CNX should disappear from bts. I just don't want them to be the dominant player in both bts knowledge and bts stake. That is centralization.
No developer, company, or person should be able to hold a DECENTRALIZED chain hostage. That is exactly what CNX has the ability to do. And that's why bts can't attract outside devs and why the market cap has been slashed.
Edit: I do find it interesting that supposed crypto/decentralized people here use the "Your nothing without us!" argument...
-
Listen, I never said CNX should disappear from bts. I just don't want them to be the dominant player in both bts knowledge and bts stake. That is centralization.
Why don't we fund a worker proposal for employing for 2-3 months a C++ developer with these goals:
- thoroughly learn Graphene and its API,
- document it by expanding the existing documentation,
- create working examples of "hello world" smart contracts and operations,
- launch a test network,
- and for the next 2-3 months afterwards play the role of an "ask me anything" expert at our disposal
-
Listen, I never said CNX should disappear from bts. I just don't want them to be the dominant player in both bts knowledge and bts stake. That is centralization.
Why don't we fund a worker proposal for employing for 2-3 months a C++ developer with these goals:
- thoroughly learn Graphene and its API,
- document it by expanding the existing documentation,
- create working examples of "hello world" smart contracts and operations,
- launch a test network,
- and for the next 2-3 months afterwards play the role of an "ask me anything" expert at our disposal
Estimated budget?
-
Listen, I never said CNX should disappear from bts. I just don't want them to be the dominant player in both bts knowledge and bts stake. That is centralization.
Why don't we fund a worker proposal for employing for 2-3 months a C++ developer with these goals:
- thoroughly learn Graphene and its API,
- document it by expanding the existing documentation,
- create working examples of "hello world" smart contracts and operations,
- launch a test network,
- and for the next 2-3 months afterwards play the role of an "ask me anything" expert at our disposal
Estimated budget?
I think it needs to be at least 40k-50k BTS per day (USD 4k-5k per month) to attract a good talent.
So in total it would cost us around 4M BTS (for 3 months). Maybe more.
But I think it's worth it, if it means laying a solid foundation for ending CNX monopoly.
-
Listen, I never said CNX should disappear from bts. I just don't want them to be the dominant player in both bts knowledge and bts stake. That is centralization.
Why don't we fund a worker proposal for employing for 2-3 months a C++ developer with these goals:
- thoroughly learn Graphene and its API,
- document it by expanding the existing documentation,
- create working examples of "hello world" smart contracts and operations,
- launch a test network,
- and for the next 2-3 months afterwards play the role of an "ask me anything" expert at our disposal
Estimated budget?
Awesome... I like to see something actionable. Thank you!
@jakub, would you be willing to start a new thread exploring the worker proposal idea you have sketched out above? And we can perhaps let this thread return to vision(ing)... which is still a worthy topic in its own right imo.
C++ Dev, 80k-ish / year full time salary?
http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Skill=C%2b%2b/Salary#by_Years_Experience
So a 3 month contract for a new (independent of CNX) dev to get under the hood and completely map out all the terrain, what.. 20K?
-
Could be another wave of 'The blockchain is hiring' meme... :)
-
Awesome... I like to see something actionable. Thank you!
@jakub, would you be willing to start a new thread exploring the worker proposal idea you have sketched out above? And we can perhaps let this thread return to vision(ing)... which is still a worthy topic in its own right imo.
You're right, we've gone off topic. I'll start a new thread for this.
-
I think it needs to be at least 40k-50k BTS per day (USD 4k-5k per month) to attract a good talent.
good lord. I don't.
I can get expert coders out of Latvia for $900 month who will work on average 10-12 hour per day (because they WANT to) and will produce typically DOUBLE what any of my American coders ever could. Also, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine are about the same rates. I still have an expert python/C++ guy in India too but his rate is close to American salaries these days, India just isn't as competitive anymore.
Think outside the borders. You guys want to get out of this mess? Talk to me.
-
I think it needs to be at least 40k-50k BTS per day (USD 4k-5k per month) to attract a good talent.
good lord. I don't.
I can get expert coders out of Latvia for $900 month who will work on average 10-12 hour per day (because they WANT to) and will produce typically DOUBLE what any of my American coders ever could. Also, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine are about the same rates. I still have an expert python/C++ guy in India too but his rate is close to American salaries these days, India just isn't as competitive anymore.
Think outside the borders. You guys want to get out of this mess? Talk to me.
Then what about having a worker proposal for something useful if you can get a team that cheap and competent?
-
I think it needs to be at least 40k-50k BTS per day (USD 4k-5k per month) to attract a good talent.
good lord. I don't.
I can get expert coders out of Latvia for $900 month who will work on average 10-12 hour per day (because they WANT to) and will produce typically DOUBLE what any of my American coders ever could. Also, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine are about the same rates. I still have an expert python/C++ guy in India too but his rate is close to American salaries these days, India just isn't as competitive anymore.
Think outside the borders. You guys want to get out of this mess? Talk to me.
Then what about having a worker proposal for something useful if you can get a team that cheap and competent?
Let's not hijack this topic.
I've created another one here:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20823.0.html
-
What an amazing thread! In my time here I don't think I've seen one quite like this. It seems to me that almost everybody in the community is involved in this discussion, and the issues herein are VERY IMPORTANT!
Why not write a proposal for what you want, offer to manage it, sell it to the community and recruit us or someone else to do the work?
You know quite well that this is absurd.
This documentation has to come from one of the top developers, probably BM himself.
Me (or anybody else) being a middle man in this process is pointless as there is no value added in my attempting to manage BM.
I understand that CNX has much more motivation to pursue a business opportunity like MAS than to create documentation and open up true competition against itself.
However CNX needs to make this altruistic (yet paid) effort or otherwise DPOS is pure fiction.
You got my message so I'll shut up now.
Adding new applications to the BitShares platform does not constitute any kind of a turn.
1) Stealth
2) Maker
3) Lending (Bond) market
4) Prediction market
5) MAS
We now have 5 and may well have a dozen such candidate businesses by this time next year.
In the mean time, each candidate needs a champion willing to raise or supply the cash to develop it.
Here is the manipulation, Stan: the above list is purely theoretical at this stage.
You pretend we have a choice but actually we don't.
As long as CNX is the only player capable of implementing changes affecting BitShares protocol - this is a one-man show.
DPOS and shareholders voting on worker proposals is pure fiction at this stage.
We (the shareholders) did not have a choice between Stealth and Maker. We were offered Stealth or nothing. So we chose Stealth.
Now again the same thing is happening: we do not have a choice between DEX and MAS. We are offered MAS or nothing.
So my appeal to CNX is this: be fair and offer us a choice. You are welcome to propose a vision but do not force this vision upon us (the shareholders).
And to have a choice we must wait till there is at least one more development team in the ecosystem capable of offering worker proposals as complex as Prediction Markets or Maker.
Then CNX will have every right to propose MAS as an alternative to DEX and let the shareholders actually choose between MAS and DEX (or choose to finance both).
I don't want to have developers who have a vision.
I want developers who are happy to be paid for implementing the vision of the shareholders.
As we have it now, it got all mixed up: we have developers and vision creators as one entity.
Which leaves us with this "choice": share their vision or sell.
Jakub, you are one of my proxies for good reason, you see things similarly to me in terms of getting things done.
I also see Stan's rhetoric as more hype than real, practical substance much of the time. More marketing than reality.
Here's my perspective:
1) I STRONGLY believe documentation and management are MAJOR reasons we can't attract more devs
2) CNX can't stay focused to complete major features through a complete deployment cycle
3) The DPoS governance model is great in concept, but the rough edges will never be resolved without focus
4) The pattern of management that CNX / Stan / Dan continue is too rich in vision and too lean in carrying it out
5) Leadership is more than a vision; it definitely starts there but practical results and management also matter greatly
I was going to elaborate on each of those points but I am only going to do so for item 1. I have lost the will to continue repeating myself when CNX seems hell bent on moving in their own direction, ignoring the community's input and repeating the same old mistakes AGAIN! I'm tired of this meandering management. Oh wait, it's New Years, Dan is going thru his yearly goals assessment. Watch out BitShares, another pivot may be coming your way!
-1- Pointing to exceptional people like xeroc as examples of how "anyone" can just look at the code and understand it are indeed ABSURD. How the fuck can you understand how to get shit done when things change ALL THE TIME? There is NO STABILITY HERE! Efforts aren't finished here! I've seen my share of code in my career and it's very rare that code of any significant complexity can be understood by new devs well enough to implement major functionality without some form of big picture guidance AS WELL AS the nuances of understanding the API at the low level. Look at all the time wasted by various non-core dev teams when the skills and knowledge they learned under BitShares 1 was thrown out the window unilaterally and without ANY warning! Do you think the management genius that let that happen is endearing and appealing to devs, or does it convey just the opposite attitude?
The DEX is "done" except for...
Well then, IT'S NOT DONE, so stop saying it is. If it's "done" why can't devs code liquidity bots? The API is inconsistent, the docs are minimal and you expect devs to "figure it all out" on their own, especially when it's in a constant state of flux? That's delusional. It's simply not practical to expect anyone outside of the core dev team or other highly experienced DPoS coders (and just how many of those are there?) to be able to or want to act as tech writers to bring documentation up to a level that learning the BitShares API is possible quickly for any outside dev proficient in C++.
Enough already. CNX, stop this constant shifting, and stop disrupting focus. I see you going back to your Bytemaster Blog, that's nice, I truly enjoy reading them. Just be sure you are clear about where the CNX team focus is. Put some detailed thought into that and come up with a solid plan worthy of your intellect. Find a way to stick to it, change only when it's necessary after weighing the pros, cons and costs, on community, investor / shareholder morale.
There are many of us here who are true believers in the original vision of a decentralized monetary system based on DPoS blockchain tech, but it's really tough to keep seeing the same mistakes in and shortcomings in CNX management. You have accomplished a great deal, but it's not enough. When it is, it will be obvious to you and everyone else.
-
Dan and CNX are trying to do their best. That being said, I have not always agreed with their direction. However, investors must be responsible for performing their own due diligence. Investors must re-evaluate often. Once the project deviates from your investment projections then YOU must decide what to do. Either cash out and move on or accept the new risks. But, if you invested more than you were willing to lose, that is your fault and not Dan's or CNX.
I know it may be a painful lesson for some (I too have lost money). Risk is something every investor must accept and learn to manage. It is not specific to Bitshares.
-
-1- Pointing to exceptional people like xeroc as examples of how "anyone" can just look at the code and understand it are indeed ABSURD. How the fuck can you understand how to get shit done when things change ALL THE TIME? There is NO STABILITY HERE! Efforts aren't finished here! I've seen my share of code in my career and it's very rare that code of any significant complexity can be understood by new devs well enough to implement major functionality without some form of big picture guidance AS WELL AS the nuances of understanding the API at the low level. Look at all the time wasted by various non-core dev teams when the skills and knowledge they learned under BitShares 1 was thrown out the window unilaterally and without ANY warning! Do you think the management genius that let that happen is endearing and appealing to devs, or does it convey just the opposite attitude?
The DEX is "done" except for...
Well then, IT'S NOT DONE, so stop saying it is. If it's "done" why can't devs code liquidity bots? The API is inconsistent, the docs are minimal and you expect devs to "figure it all out" on their own, especially when it's in a constant state of flux? That's delusional. It's simply not practical to expect anyone outside of the core dev team or other highly experienced DPoS coders (and just how many of those are there?) to be able to or want to act as tech writers to bring documentation up to a level that learning the BitShares API is possible quickly for any outside dev proficient in C++.
Enough already. CNX, stop this constant shifting, and stop disrupting focus. I see you going back to your Bytemaster Blog, that's nice, I truly enjoy reading them. Just be sure you are clear about where the CNX team focus is. Put some detailed thought into that and come up with a solid plan worthy of your intellect. Find a way to stick to it, change only when it's necessary after weighing the pros, cons and costs, on community, investor / shareholder morale.
How is it unstable? The BitShares store I built worked just fine through BTS 0.9x, and in fact converting it to 2.0 only took a few hours. API changes are pretty infrequent, and most changes are additions. Are you talking about the the C++ code? ..or the API? Are you building something?
Generally the hard part is building the app itself.. for most apps BitShares will simply be a distributed & crypto-secure database backend. IMO the bottlenecks are time & money, not bitshares itself.
I was under the impression that the market maker devs were missing cancel_order and that's been implemented now. I saw maqifrnswa submitted the pull request well over a month ago and it was available publicly as a patch.