BitShares Forum

Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: luckybit on April 17, 2014, 02:11:55 am

Title: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 17, 2014, 02:11:55 am
Dialog bellow from the Blackcoin community

If you want to kill BlackCoin, then merge with a stupid meme based coin like Doge. It will never be taken seriously as a form of currency it will forever be a gimmick.

I thought I was the only one who thought it was a horrendous idea.  Glad to see I'm not alone.

Would be too complex of a change to do and rollout to everyone anyways.. doubt this *can* happen.


The beautiful thing is that Blackdoge wouldn't actually require a change to BC or to DOGE.  It would be a completely new PoS coin but the initial distribution of coins would be based on each users holdings in DOGE and BC at widely-telegraphed point in the future.  Each user could claim their share of the premine for free using the private keys they already hold.  Users from DOGE and BC that do nothing automatically get piggybacked to Blackdoge.  If Blackdoge fails, no one loses.  If Blackdoge succeeds, both communities win because you've just made your coin more useful. 

This would be the first cryptocurrency blockchain merger in the world's history and would make the news all over the world!  In fact, it would probably go down in the history books.  Why would having a larger user base be a bad thing?

Thinks about your potential slogan.  Blackdoge: meaner, faster, pure proof of stake.  The future of cryptocurrency.


I think we could do better than "Blackdoge". Blackshares could be the name of a project to create an economic alliance between the Blackcoin community and Bitshares community.

I think these strategic alliances must be formed but it's a matter of how technically feasible it is to do it. If you're a supporter of forming a strategic alliance with the Blackcoin community this is the official thread for brainstorming.

Some suggested methods/tools on the table include

1. An airdrop of some kind of AGS and/or third party DAC shares onto the Blackcoin blockchain just as was done with Protoshares.

2. Hybrid multipool which mines profitable altcoins and gives a 50/50 payout in Bitshares and Blackcoin. This would distribute both in such a way that the users of this pool would obtain an equal stake in each community. The result would be resistance to forks as the network effect grows for both communities.

3. Airdrop into Keyhotee, put the Blackcoin wallet into Keyhotee and do the multipool in such a way that mining is built into Keyhotee. The payouts would be in Bitshares (Blackcoin community can negotiate to get Blackcoin put into Keyhotee and make it hybrid). This is of benefit because it strategically markets Keyhotee, Blackcoin and Bitshares.

These are the three ideas I could come up with. Since this is a brainstorm thread I'm asking the most creative problem solvers of the community to come up with some ideas to make this possible and list them here. I'm also asking for the technically inclined to offer some technical way to engineer it into reality.


Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: bitbro on April 17, 2014, 02:16:48 am
These people are mislead. Crypto currencies do not exist, there is only crypto equity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 17, 2014, 04:21:11 am
I am interested, but also curious about one thing:  just recently I was doing some reading and it made me wonder about how centralizing this is.  Can you give me a run-down?
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 17, 2014, 04:43:15 am
I am interested, but also curious about one thing:  just recently I was doing some reading and it made me wonder about how centralizing this is.  Can you give me a run-down?

As far as I know it's decentralizing. Because people who virtually mine for Bitshares/BC on the multipool and would receive them in a fair manner. Anyone could mine any coin by any algorithm so it's not like there is a bias to one cartel or another. Scrypt, ASIC, or whatever else. So if anything I would say the virtual mining would be very decentralizing for distribution if perfected.

Whether Blackcoin itself is fairly distributed I cannot say. If you have any information which can indicate what aspect would be centralizing let me know.

If you're saying it centralizes around certain communities then that would be the point. The community that came up with the idea and built Blackcoin can be rewarded for their success with an airdrop. In a way you could say "well it centralizes power around success", but that to me is way better than to blindly airdrop and reward thieves and hackers in Bitcoin.

The purposes would be both marketing, fork resistance, dump resistance, building the network effect and protecting the social consensus with that network effect based on the strategic alliances formed.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 17, 2014, 09:54:04 am
Could there form a "Multipool" cartel?
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 17, 2014, 11:26:58 am
Damn...
Upon reading more, this is even better than I initially thought.  http://www.reddit.com/r/blackcoin/comments/237l23/iama_st_gnu_lead_software_engineer_for_blackcoin/
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 17, 2014, 11:34:05 am
Could there form a "Multipool" cartel?

Depends on if ownership of the multipool is centralized or not. Since in this case it would be virtual mining I don't see what kind of cartel they could have. They can't launch a 51% attack and even if somehow that were possible it would take minimal effort to just make more multipool servers. I don't see the threat really.

Mining pools become a cartel when it's one kind of algorithm and everyone has to use the pool to mine like with ASICs or Scrypt. You cannot solomine and the way the pools were set up it was usually designed to be centralizing. This doesn't seem to be as much of a problem when you have all different algorithms and the most profitable coin from that algorithm being mined.

In theory its possible that a single multipool could get too big if they were the only pool but the way Blackcoin seems to be doing it is that they have several pools. Maybe I'm not seeing the treat and maybe you can explain to me how a multipool cartel could form in a virtual mining scenario.

We have to distinguish between "virtual mining" and Proof of Work mining. Blackcoin and Bitshares are Proof of Stake so there is no possibility of a 51% attack. A cartel would never be able to gain power over Bitshares or Blackcoin like what happened with Bltcoin because hashing power wouldn't be centralized around a chip maker. Maybe they could get a lot of mining fees but that would be worth it because Bitshares would be distributed to many more people.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: CLains on April 17, 2014, 01:27:53 pm
Faircoin community also, I believe. They are "Fair."
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Agent86 on April 17, 2014, 02:32:55 pm
Maybe I'm wrong, but it seemed to me that Blackcoin is just a clone of peercoin/novacoin with a short time before all POW coins were fully mined.  It doesn't seem that innovative to me, it seems like just another clone.  I would think we are better to work on our own vision (which to me is much more compelling) than spend time forging alliances with junk/clone coins.  I definitely don't think it should be a priority of bytemaster.  It's nice that BlackCoin is POS and they had a good idea with their mining pool (we could copy this idea), but overall it doesn't seem that interesting to me and is cloned code.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: clout on April 17, 2014, 05:10:20 pm
I don't see what bitshares has to gain from an association with blackcoin. The projects aren't even comparable.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: smiley35 on April 17, 2014, 05:38:36 pm
I don't see what bitshares has to gain from an association with blackcoin. The projects aren't even comparable.

I'm with you. Blackcoin is just the latest miner pump and dump. They have been doing this literally since ASICs came to bit coin. They are purely profiteers. What justification for there to airdrop to them.... because they exist and are currently pumping a new coin?
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Empirical1 on April 17, 2014, 06:28:33 pm
It's nice that BlackCoin is POS and they had a good idea with their mining pool (we could copy this idea), but overall it doesn't seem that interesting to me and is cloned code.

+5% I think a mining pool getting paid via POS BlackCoin was a good idea, but I can't see any value in joining them.

There may be some value though in creating a template/service to help non crypto based groups create something similar & list it, in exchange for shares in that new crypto-equity. I've tried to outline my basic thoughts here...  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4249.0

Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 17, 2014, 10:55:42 pm
I don't see what bitshares has to gain from an association with blackcoin. The projects aren't even comparable.

Blackcoin is Proof of Stake, promotes Proof of Stake, and captures the profitability from Proof of Work altcoins and feeds it into Proof of Stake through their multipool innovation.

The benefit to the Bitshares community is that Bitshares could benefit from their multipool technology, but also from their marketing capability. The Bitshares community sucks at marketing and Blackcoin is the best at it. If you don't believe me look at the charts and see for yourself.

It's nice that BlackCoin is POS and they had a good idea with their mining pool (we could copy this idea), but overall it doesn't seem that interesting to me and is cloned code.

+5% I think a mining pool getting paid via POS BlackCoin was a good idea, but I can't see any value in joining them.

There may be some value though in creating a template/service to help non crypto based groups create something similar & list it, in exchange for shares in that new crypto-equity. I've tried to outline my basic thoughts here...  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4249.0

If it's a good idea and successful, why not join/merge with them? Or do you believe the Bitshares community can market itself as well as Blackcoin because I don't think Bitshares can do it without joining forces with a community which is good at it. Corporations often merge with or buy out other corporations when they realize that their competitor has some expertise or novel technology that they cannot recreate in-house.

I'm convinced that the Bitshares community cannot do the kind of grass roots marketing Blackcoin is doing in-house just as the Blackcoin community doesn't have a technical wizard like Bytemaster who can do DPOS in house.

Whether or not you view Blackcoin as a pump and dump, they have perfected the process of pumping. Pumping is all about marketing, and if you want to see a lot of people acquire and use Bitshares then you will have to form alliances with the communities that are good at marketing to the demographics you want.

Blackcoin is the best at marketing to savers, investors, miners, they are so good at it in fact that they are in my opinion second only to Litecoin. They will eventually challenge Litecoin because their technology is superior to Litecoin.

Blackcoin is a great introduction to the merit of Proof of Stake and it's the first coin to actually market Proof of Stake to the Bitcoin community which traditionally only backs Proof of Work coins. For this reason the Blackcoin community has made history, and while the Bitshares community can simply copy the Blackcoin multipool idea and give them nothing in exchange for it, this will only create animosity between the two communities and make them into competitors rather than allies.

Without allies there will be no reason for anyone to notice Bitshares and Blackcoin could end up becoming the default Proof of Stake coin.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seemed to me that Blackcoin is just a clone of peercoin/novacoin with a short time before all POW coins were fully mined.  It doesn't seem that innovative to me, it seems like just another clone.  I would think we are better to work on our own vision (which to me is much more compelling) than spend time forging alliances with junk/clone coins.  I definitely don't think it should be a priority of bytemaster.  It's nice that BlackCoin is POS and they had a good idea with their mining pool (we could copy this idea), but overall it doesn't seem that interesting to me and is cloned code.

The community is more important than the code. If you're trying to do marketing having the best code is irrelevant. Anyone can fork Bitshares, give to a better community and we all lose.

For this reason Bitshares community has to form alliances with the best altcoin communities. Blackcoin is the best Proof of Stake community when it comes to marketing and it's charts don't lie.

Take a look at their charts. The last time something happened like this was with Dogecoin and Litecoin.

If what you say is true, that their code is cloned, not special, etc, but the Bitshares code is special, novel, etc, why isn't Bitshares as popular as Blackcoin? It's because the Bitshares community isn't as talented as the Blackcoin community at marketing (pumping).

I don't tihnk Blackcoin is a pump and dump either. If you look at the long trend of the chart it's been going up continuously and the multipool idea creates buy support which provides dump resistance. That dump resistance is a technical breakthrough because we haven't seen that happen before.

I think its a good idea to work with a community rather than compete against when you both have the same goal in mind. The goal of the Blackcoin community is to become a coin for investors, savers, miners, and to promote Proof of Stake. It's ultimate goal is to replace Litecoin and they are putting in place all the right incentives to do it.

1. Miners are attracted to it by incentives.
2. Savers are attracted to it by incentives.
3. Pool operators are attracted to it by incentives.
4. Virtual mining (which their community invented) is the best form of marketing for a Proof of Stake coin to date, and it solves the distribution and centralization problems as a side effect.

The case you can make is that why bother when the Bitshares community can just take their code and ideas and copy it. I would say the Bitcoin community could just take the code and ideas from the Bitshares community via forks. So it's all about the community and not the code as the code can be replicated via fork.

For this reason the merger or alliance between two communities is about aligning the incentives in such a way that they mutually benefit from the success of each other.

The point is to build a symbiosis between the two communities because competition with the Blackcoin community has a negative impact on Proof of Stake communities as a whole.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: biophil on April 17, 2014, 11:30:39 pm
Thanks for the thoughts, luckybit. I heartily agree. Objecting to a merger on the grounds that "bitshares is ours, we shouldn't give it away" seems misguided at best and fatal at worst.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 18, 2014, 01:23:57 am
Thanks for the thoughts, luckybit. I heartily agree. Objecting to a merger on the grounds that "bitshares is ours, we shouldn't give it away" seems misguided at best and fatal at worst.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

It is interesting though to talk about these things.  Nothing is ever required to be set in stone, but we are all treading in uncharted waters...

My main concern is doing anything that will significantly fracture relationships inside communities, so anything we ever do must have buy-in from all sides and have a long list of benefits that a large majority can agree upon. 
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 19, 2014, 07:48:01 am
The Blackcoin community can benefit from using Bitshares

This is a point which I expected to be obvious but I'll make it obvious. The Blackcoin community would benefit a lot from having BitAssets like BitUSD, BitBTC, and Bitshares in general. Imagine the power of a hybrid pool which let people mine and receive BitUSD if they chose to do so in a situation where Bitcoin is too volatile. Imagine if they receive both Blackcoin and Bitshares in the form of any BitAsset they choose?

Payouts in BTC don't make any sense anymore when you can payout in BitBTC. When BTC is being dumped you can switch your payout to any other BitAsset including BitUSD. Payout in BitUSD also would make tax calculations a lot easier for people.

And if it's hybrid payout with Blackcoin then they get to speculate on the rise of Blackcoin which gets pumped and dumped as some would say, but would be able to shield themselves using Bitshares instead of Blackshield technology which they are relying on now.


The Bitshares community benefits because the Bitshares trading exchange is built into the mining pool


This is the major benefit for Bitshares. It markets the technology precisely to the demographic most likely to demand it. They need Bitshares in order to speculate and trade, and Bitshares needs to be marketed to speculators and traders. The Lotto DAC, the Insurance DAC, all of these could be marketed as well through the strategic relationships and alliances formed.

The Bitshares community needs the marketing, the user base, the volume, all which the Blackcoin community has. The Blackcoin community also shares a lot of the views on the direction the technology should go with regard to Proof of Stake. They are making their coin the coin of investors, miners, day traders, etc, and the one thing they are missing is the one thing the Bitshares community has to offer which is world class innovative technology.

I hope people here can see the big picture and join forces as it wouldn't cost us anything. Anyone developing a DAC has 80% of the shares which they can use to form strategic alliances or for marketing. An air drop to the Blackcoin chain is a stroke of genius for strategic marketing and wouldn't take much effort at all.

Developers on the forum could meet with reps from the Blackcoin community who I brought here and come up with some relationship of mutual benefit, and then when Bitshares is released the announcement of it's release should be made simultanously in both communites. The Blackcoin community would then set up the first Bitshares/Blackcoin hybrid pool in exchange for receiving the airdrop.

Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: liondani on April 19, 2014, 01:38:51 pm
interresting
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: CLains on April 20, 2014, 09:39:18 am
Welcome to the club Decentralized Application.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 20, 2014, 01:17:38 pm
Welcome to the club Decentralized Application.
It's beginning, someone beat us to it.
https://www.altcoinalliance.org
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: MrJeans on April 20, 2014, 01:43:32 pm
I would like to exercise laws 4 and 6 of the 10 natural laws of the crypto-equity universe.
4. They will clone it if just to give it a better name.
6. They will clone it to better appeal to another group of stakeholders
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Empirical1 on April 21, 2014, 12:00:25 am
I like the multi-pool to BC payout idea, their new dump defence & the Blackcard thing is interesting and I would probably agree that their marketing is above average.

I've made good money riding the pumps and dumps so far, however given that 80%+ of BlackCoin's volume still comes from Mintpal, I'm not sure if they've had much success in developing a community outside the alt-coin miners?

& IMO alt-coin miners aren't really a community but more like a plague of locusts. They've put many mining pools over the 51% hashrate barrier. Even Bitcoin pools have had to increase their fees (BTC Guild) or stop new people joining their pool (Ghash.io) in the past to get their hashrates down. To me this shows alt-coin miners are the least 'community like' group out there. They don't even care if they kill their host in the process of swarming onto the most profitable coin or mining pool of the hour. (So the majority of BlackCoin holders are the antithesis of us and probably not a community we want to airdrop AGS directly too though I'm not completely against some other form of alliance.) I also therefore think that attracting alt-coin miners has little to do with marketing and more to do with just being the current most profitable alternative. Unfortunately BlackCoin  may have a limited shelf life in that respect, once it starts hitting 50-100 million, the alt-coin miners will likely be more profitable moving onto a lower CAP POS where their volume flow moves their share price more. 

Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Empirical1 on April 21, 2014, 12:35:00 am

Satoshi already invented the “uncrackable private key app.”  All Dan is doing is marketing it to the world.  Bitshares is a marketing company (community) that simply markets Satoshi’s ideas to the world.  When you are voting against marketing ideas, you are voting against yourself, and your own wallet, and your own community’s success.  You are effectively destroying your own community from within. You are effectively destroying your own community from within.  Know yourself, know your community, know what your community is supposed to accomplish.  Only that is the equivalent of taking the red pill, otherwise you will never decipher the matrix. 

Or just take the blue pill and continue to give away your million dollar ideas (fact proven by Blackcoin) to the “crypto top 40” for free.  The Blackcoin community among others thanks you. 

Above all else:

DO NOT GIVE AWAY DONATED BITSHARES TO ANYONE.


'All Dan is doing is marketing it to the world.'  Yeah, that's all he's doing...   

We can create lots of new DAC's or alliances, where we & partners are air-dropped shares in a new joint venture even funded with AGS! So there is very little reason to airdrop AGS & PTS directly. (Especially given that the whole premise is that AGS holders are proven savvy donors and PTS holders are proven savvy supporters.)

50% airdrops to unfocused communities have so far resulted in 99% shareholder losses from their highs. (Maza/Spain/Silicon/Aurora)
IMO once DAC's start being released the value of the focused proven supporter Bitshares community will really come to the fore. (Great vision from Stan & Dan on that one.) 

Apologies if this is rude, but as a member for 3 weeks, you've made 33 posts & 29 of them seem to have been desperate attempts to get Bitshares to Airdrop AGS directly (Literally to anyone for any reason.) Given the elaborate, lengthy, single mindedness of your posts, as a poker player, my best guess is that competitors in this space are starting to feel a little bit threatened...

(Edit: lengthened quote)
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: bitbro on April 21, 2014, 12:40:51 am


Satoshi already invented the “uncrackable private key app.”  All Dan is doing is marketing it to the world.  Bitshares is a marketing company (community) that simply markets Satoshi’s ideas to the world.  When you are voting against marketing ideas, you are voting against yourself, and your own wallet, and your own community’s success.  You are effectively destroying your own community from within.

DO NOT GIVE AWAY DONATED BITSHARES TO ANYONE.


'All Dan is doing is marketing it to the world.'  Yeah, that's all he's doing...   

We can create lots of new DAC's or alliances, where we & partners are air-dropped shares in a new joint venture even funded with AGS! So there is very little reason to airdrop AGS & PTS directly. (Especially given that the whole premise is that AGS holders are proven savvy donors and PTS holders are proven savvy supporters.)

50% airdrops to unfocused communities have so far resulted in 99% shareholder losses from their highs. (Maza/Spain/Silicon/Aurora)
IMO once DAC's start being released the value of the focused proven supporter Bitshares community will really come to the fore. (Great vision from Stan & Dan on that one.) 

Apologies if this is rude, but as a member for 3 weeks, you've made 33 posts & 29 of them seem to have been desperate attempts to get Bitshares to Airdrop AGS directly (Literally to anyone for any reason.) Given the elaborate, lengthy, single mindedness of your posts, as a poker player, my best guess is that competitors in this space are starting to feel a little bit threatened...

DA is a charade for sure, but let me spoil the fun so we don't waste breath; DA is dan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 21, 2014, 12:58:28 am
Question.  What is keeping us from "forking" ourselves and going down two separate paths at the same time?  We might not even need a vote for something like this because the holders get a stake in BOTH paths...

We have that power as a community do we not?  This will create competition in the space and each side will compete to see which is best, only this way we get to ACTUALLY SEE which one will work best. 

This conversation, imho, is based on a fallacy that we need to vote for really good ideas like these to avoid clones popping up and competing that do not honor the original investors...but at the same time, we can effectively clone the tech right now and honor old stakeholders along with whatever other communities would like an air drop.  Then let them compete along side the original community to bring value to the original stakeholders.

This would, in the end, make POS most likely gravitate toward implementation of DPOS as they fight amongst eachother to create the best version...and would effectively expand the user base by also giving a stake in all others.  It would also crowdsource much of the alpha and beta-testing as Bytemaster could follow the trends and change the original chain to fix issues other chains find first.  It ALSO has the side effect of increasing the attack surface for this tech on the whole.

Create bitShares-BC, bitShares-Doge and whatever the hell coin has a community we believe deserves a chance in the fight instead of letting those communities start deciding to adopt the model without honoring bitShares-PTS and AGS holders.  Or better yet, give altcoins a template to become part of the competition without our say (its going to happen whether we like it or not, anyway).

Our community needs others to compete directly with it or else we will simply think we can sit back and let Invictus do all the leg work.  One of the KEY points to their business model DEPENDS on strong community, so let other communities fight to contribute to the value of this tech.  I can't think of a way that this would cause problems...but I am interested in hearing opinions.  But as an Investor I would love to have my stake in all these projects given to me in addition to the original because it highly increases the chances of success for any one of them.  Of course, there is nothing saying any of these coins will use the template to honor original stakeholders, but this has been a beautiful experiment from the beginning...we all knew the risks and the risks don't go away by just ignoring future threats. 

This is a quick write-up as I am pretty busy today, so forgive me if some of this is not quite crystal clear, but let us think together, and think outside the box!

Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Troglodactyl on April 21, 2014, 01:09:55 am
Good thoughts there, fuz.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 21, 2014, 01:22:43 am
Good thoughts there, fuz.

Let us hope man.  I just want to make value for the fucking WORLD.  I imagine how RICH I will be when guy who got a piece of my stake goes out and cures an illness I might someday get and offer it for free over a decentralized platform.  Or some group of techno-hippies figure out a way to make Decentralized Autonomous structures that feed me for pennies on the dollar without use of GMO Monsanto bullshit...

Humanity is far too intelligent for us to hold ourselves back because of a narrowed perception.  "Profit" here is honestly my secondary motivation.  I have seen war and famine and as shitty as it was, I wish everyone would see it--it has a way of changing what you value.  We can all come together to fight against this perceptual disease of "us against them", or we can let it overcome us from within. 
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Empirical1 on April 21, 2014, 01:26:19 am

This conversation, imho, is based on a fallacy that we need to vote for really good ideas like these to avoid clones...but at the same time, we can effectively clone the tech right now and honor old stakeholders along with whatever other communities would like an air drop. 

This would, in the end, make POS most likely gravitate toward implementation of DPOS as they fight amongst eachother to create the best version...and would effectively expand the user base by also giving a stake in all others. 

Create bitShares-BC, bitShares-Doge and whatever the hell coin has a community we believe deserves a chance in the fight instead of letting those communities start deciding to adopt the model without honoring bitShares-PTS and AGS holders. 


 +5%

I'm just against airdropping donated AGS directly because because AGS would no longer be 'proven donors'

But I think any new DAC that chooses to honour (airdrop) AGS/PTS & 'Whoever else' is good. Nothing wrong with a DAC that honours 50% BC holders and 50% Bitshares for example.

(The only caveat I can think of is that in the beginning while Bitshares is building a brand we should be a little selective where possible. Maybe get BTS X on the market. For example if I got shares in some really terrible partnerships, I'd probably sell and if everyone did the same it may reflect badly on the premise of AGS & PTS being supportive holders? )
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 21, 2014, 01:29:04 am

This conversation, imho, is based on a fallacy that we need to vote for really good ideas like these to avoid clones...but at the same time, we can effectively clone the tech right now and honor old stakeholders along with whatever other communities would like an air drop. 

This would, in the end, make POS most likely gravitate toward implementation of DPOS as they fight amongst eachother to create the best version...and would effectively expand the user base by also giving a stake in all others. 

Create bitShares-BC, bitShares-Doge and whatever the hell coin has a community we believe deserves a chance in the fight instead of letting those communities start deciding to adopt the model without honoring bitShares-PTS and AGS holders. 


 +5%

I'm just against airdropping donated AGS directly because because AGS would no longer be 'proven donors'

But I think any new DAC that chooses to honour (airdrop) AGS/PTS & 'Whoever else' is good. Nothing wrong with a DAC that honours 50% BC holders and 50% Bitshares for example.

(The only caveat I can think of is that in the beginning while Bitshares is building a brand we should be a little selective where possible. Maybe get BTS X on the market. For example if I got shares in some really terrible partnerships, I'd probably sell and if everyone did the same it may reflect badly on the premise of AGS & PTS being supportive holders? )

Well we could let these altcoins modify the template as they see fit, and they could use the Mumble server to reach out to ByteMaster two times a week to ask for advice on issues they encounter...this is another way to give back to them and help them along while also fostering the first-mover advantage for the PTS community. 

And really, in my opinion the altcoins that compete for the original community's attention and lose are probably going to get angry, but we are not trying to make everyone happy at the cost of destroying a technology that can uplift the entirety of humanity...right?

The key is giving anyone the ability to enter and compete if they think they can or have the drive to.  And they should all be competing for our support.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Empirical1 on April 21, 2014, 01:47:24 am


This conversation, imho, is based on a fallacy that we need to vote for really good ideas like these to avoid clones...but at the same time, we can effectively clone the tech right now and honor old stakeholders along with whatever other communities would like an air drop. 

This would, in the end, make POS most likely gravitate toward implementation of DPOS as they fight amongst eachother to create the best version...and would effectively expand the user base by also giving a stake in all others. 

Create bitShares-BC, bitShares-Doge and whatever the hell coin has a community we believe deserves a chance in the fight instead of letting those communities start deciding to adopt the model without honoring bitShares-PTS and AGS holders. 


 +5%

I'm just against airdropping donated AGS directly because because AGS would no longer be 'proven donors'

But I think any new DAC that chooses to honour (airdrop) AGS/PTS & 'Whoever else' is good. Nothing wrong with a DAC that honours 50% BC holders and 50% Bitshares for example.

(The only caveat I can think of is that in the beginning while Bitshares is building a brand we should be a little selective where possible. Maybe get BTS X on the market. For example if I got shares in some really terrible partnerships, I'd probably sell and if everyone did the same it may reflect badly on the premise of AGS & PTS being supportive holders? )

Well we could let these altcoins modify the template as they see fit, and they could use the Mumble server to reach out to ByteMaster two times a week to ask for advice on issues they encounter...this is another way to give back to them and help them along while also fostering the first-mover advantage for the PTS community.

That's a good idea. I would think that part of the value of Bitshares, for the first few years anyway, is some access & input from the talent at Invictus. So any ideas that let people do that without being too demanding on people like BM's valuable time are good IMO.

I'd even like to see someone employed who is almost like a help desk for any technical issues, and who answer questions & clears up technical misunderstandings (which I often have)  on various bitcoin/reddit/our forums.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 21, 2014, 04:16:38 am
Question.  What is keeping us from "forking" ourselves and going down two separate paths at the same time?  We might not even need a vote for something like this because the holders get a stake in BOTH paths...

We have that power as a community do we not?  This will create competition in the space and each side will compete to see which is best, only this way we get to ACTUALLY SEE which one will work best. 

This conversation, imho, is based on a fallacy that we need to vote for really good ideas like these to avoid clones popping up and competing that do not honor the original investors...but at the same time, we can effectively clone the tech right now and honor old stakeholders along with whatever other communities would like an air drop.  Then let them compete along side the original community to bring value to the original stakeholders.

This would, in the end, make POS most likely gravitate toward implementation of DPOS as they fight amongst eachother to create the best version...and would effectively expand the user base by also giving a stake in all others.  It would also crowdsource much of the alpha and beta-testing as Bytemaster could follow the trends and change the original chain to fix issues other chains find first.  It ALSO has the side effect of increasing the attack surface for this tech on the whole.

Create bitShares-BC, bitShares-Doge and whatever the hell coin has a community we believe deserves a chance in the fight instead of letting those communities start deciding to adopt the model without honoring bitShares-PTS and AGS holders.  Or better yet, give altcoins a template to become part of the competition without our say (its going to happen whether we like it or not, anyway).

Our community needs others to compete directly with it or else we will simply think we can sit back and let Invictus do all the leg work.  One of the KEY points to their business model DEPENDS on strong community, so let other communities fight to contribute to the value of this tech.  I can't think of a way that this would cause problems...but I am interested in hearing opinions.  But as an Investor I would love to have my stake in all these projects given to me in addition to the original because it highly increases the chances of success for any one of them.  Of course, there is nothing saying any of these coins will use the template to honor original stakeholders, but this has been a beautiful experiment from the beginning...we all knew the risks and the risks don't go away by just ignoring future threats. 

This is a quick write-up as I am pretty busy today, so forgive me if some of this is not quite crystal clear, but let us think together, and think outside the box!
+5% +5% +5%
Now you are seeing the strategy I'm promoting. Blackshares can easily be a Bitshares chain with different commodities in it and which honors AGS and PTS stakeholders with 50% and Blackcoin holders the other 50%.

In fact that is exactly how a merger of this sort could work and what I was trying to get at so thanks for using far better words than I could have.

We wouldn't lose anything. We would have 50% in an alt Bitshares chain and the Blackcoin community would have 50%. This would make it so the Blackcoin community would have no reason to use a fork (fork resistance achieved). It would also give us a chain with new types of commodities which aren't in the default chain.

Win/win for both communities and an economic alliance would be sealed. But I think that is perhaps a major step which the Bitshares community isn't prepared to take which is why I am saying we should brainstorm first. There are some smaller steps we could take first to send the necessary market signal to the Blackcoin community to hold on to their "shares".

I think Dogeshares and the other Proof of Work coins should be avoided for now as we should focus on true Proof of Stake currencies with a track record of success.

We are a Proof of Stake community and any coin which has inflation is not supporting our values. Additionally their marketing tactics wont really help us any because they are a different species. In time we will be able to use this merger process with Proof of Work coins as well though and I suggest we consider doing it only when it's for a strategic gain.

Dogeshares makes a lot of sense in the future but not based on the Bitshares chain unless the Dogeshares community votes for it.

The one thing that the Bitshares community has is innovative code, crypto-equity, and a priceless community of minds. Other communities are better at marketing than us and we should not be afraid to admit that the Blackcoin and Dogecoin community are better at it.

But we have something they all want and that is state of the art next generation technology with the combined ability to understand how to use it. Anyone can make a fork but they will not be able to actually upgrade the code in any useful way. Anyone can have the same code but not be able to think about DACs in the right metaphor to make use of it.

I'm advocating that we turn BlackCOINS into BlackSHARES with the tacit support of the Blackcoin and Bitshares community. If necessary it could be done without a vote and without support but I believe we should be fair and at least get a general consensus.

At this point in time the general consensus has sided in favor of the idea so it's much more likely to happen. Now we need to get the Blackcoin developers and community manager to agree to sit down with Dan and work out a plan to implement the fork. The timing of something that ambitious would have to be right so the hybrid multipool idea would be where to start the alliance so that the Blackcoin community can be introduced to the Bitshares community without a sudden shock. I also think the Bitshares initial chain needs some time for testing so the multipool could be in testing at the same time while the Blackshares fork could be prepared for launch.

Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 21, 2014, 04:37:16 am
Here are some lessons we can take from the discussion so far.

1. Proof of Stake coins are shares. (Blackcoins are actually Blackshares in disguise and the holders don't know the true value of their Blackcoins yet). Once it is known that Proof of Stake alliances exist, no one is going to want to dump their shares.

2. Proof of Work coins are a different species. They are something which can be seen as shares but not every Proof of Work community wants to see their coins as shares. The Bitcoin community and core developers for example want their coin to be a currency and don't want the share metaphor for their community. We should not push it on them either because Bitcoin would be called Bitshares if it was supposed to be treated that way.

3. The fact that we can do crypto-mergers is ground breaking. We can be the first or among the first communities to ever do a crypto-merger between two DACs. I propose the Blackcoin community because Blackcoin is the coin with the third highest volume, it's true Proof of Stake not a hybrid, and it has a passionate community willing to do the marketing it takes to make it a success.

4. The crypto-merger or DAC merger is as simple as creating a new Bitshares chain and splitting it 50/50 between our community and the community we want to merge with. It would cause us to lose absolutely nothing in the process because we'd get half of the chain, but we'd also get the support of a new community.

It's anyone's guess what sort of commodity pairs could be in the Blackshares chain, but with their marketing ability whatever is in there would probably be pumped causing the price to skyrocket. Both communities would then win.

I don't think the Doge community is as open to Dogeshares as they position themselves to be a currency and have adopted inflation into their system. But if Blackshares were successful enough then other DACs besides Bitshares could merge with Dogecoin.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 21, 2014, 04:49:14 am
Can we set up a time to all discuss this in a hangout/mumble type format?  We could tape this and then send it out to Blackcoin's community (and any others) with an invitation to stop by for another scheduled meetup. 

I don't yet have time to completely read over your posts (I skimmed over them) because I am still working on a pretty big school project, but couldn't we offer an invitation to all POS-based coins? I know for certain the peercoin community is working hard to try to make peershares, which shows they already want a system similar to this.  I am also pretty sure that if we opened this up to other POS-based coins after the initial Blackcoin run that we would gain even more competition--which is precisely what we want. 

Picking winners and losers (even if one of the winners is proving themselves like Blackcoin) is rarely a good idea.  Of course there should be no reason why Blackcoin couldn't get the first opportunity and be the first mover along with us, then the bitShares and blackShares communities would be able to effectively create the pinnacle template that others can replicate for and use to compete.   

This will be my last post tonight, but I'll be on mumble while working on this damned active directory stuff (not my forte) in case someone wants to grab a few minutes of time and chat about this. 
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 21, 2014, 04:57:20 am
Can we set up a time to all discuss this in a hangout/mumble type format?  We could tape this and then send it out to Blackcoin's community (and any others) with an invitation to stop by for another scheduled meetup. 

I don't yet have time to completely read over your posts (I skimmed over them) because I am still working on a pretty big school project, but couldn't we offer an invitation to all POS-based coins? I know for certain the peercoin community is working hard to try to make peershares, which shows they already want a system similar to this.  I am also pretty sure that if we opened this up to other POS-based coins after the initial Blackcoin run that we would gain even more competition--which is precisely what we want.

I brought the community manager from the Blackcoin community to the Bitshares community. If you can get him to meet and discuss the details would be great. Also the developers behind Blackcoin should be part of the discussion as well. I think the volume and marketing success of Blackcoin are good metrics to use to choose it, the winners and losers pick themselves by being successful or not at achieving high market cap and volume for a long enough period of time (just like how exchanges select certain coins) or let them vote on it in the future and pay for a chain.

I think the focus should be on one community at a time. At this point I think we would just need Dan and representatives from the Blackcoin community to agree to go down this road.

If an agreement is reached then they can both make an announcement thread along with a "Blackshares" section of the forum in the crypto-merger or DAC merger category. From there the community manager of Blackcoin and Stan from Bitshares could prepare announcements to be spread viral with a url in each announcement to each forum.

Peercoin/Peershares chain could be great, but their problem right now is that Peercoin is hybrid PoS rather than pure PoS. It does seem their community wants it though so the demand is probably there to do it.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 21, 2014, 05:32:55 am
Can we set up a time to all discuss this in a hangout/mumble type format?  We could tape this and then send it out to Blackcoin's community (and any others) with an invitation to stop by for another scheduled meetup. 

I don't yet have time to completely read over your posts (I skimmed over them) because I am still working on a pretty big school project, but couldn't we offer an invitation to all POS-based coins? I know for certain the peercoin community is working hard to try to make peershares, which shows they already want a system similar to this.  I am also pretty sure that if we opened this up to other POS-based coins after the initial Blackcoin run that we would gain even more competition--which is precisely what we want.

I brought the community manager from the Blackcoin community to the Bitshares community. If you can get him to meet and discuss the details would be great. Also the developers behind Blackcoin should be part of the discussion as well. I think the volume and marketing success of Blackcoin are good metrics to use to choose it, the winners and losers pick themselves by being successful or not at achieving high market cap and volume for a long enough period of time (just like how exchanges select certain coins) or let them vote on it in the future and pay for a chain.

I think the focus should be on one community at a time. At this point I think we would just need Dan and representatives from the Blackcoin community to agree to go down this road.

If an agreement is reached then they can both make an announcement thread along with a "Blackshares" section of the forum in the crypto-merger or DAC merger category. From there the community manager of Blackcoin and Stan from Bitshares could prepare announcements to be spread viral with a url in each announcement to each forum.

Peercoin/Peershares chain could be great, but their problem right now is that Peercoin is hybrid PoS rather than pure PoS. It does seem their community wants it though so the demand is probably there to do it.

Damnit...I should close this window.  Lol...

I see no reason why Dan and the team should not go down this avenue.  It goes right along with his philosophy of only changing things when it will give more to the investors in this project.  And lets face facts, with the work Invictus is doing, someone is going to eventually come along and fork this anyway...with NONE of the funding/effort we put into bringing this to fruition--and they'll only honor their investors, completely cutting the community out.  At least this way we can get them to continue supporting this new ecosystem. 

As far as only Blackcoin...though I understand and appreciate your intentions, this is open source.  As such, I do not see how attempting to make this exclusive will do anything but push others to fork it without honoring the community.  Maybe I'm missing something, but in my opinion the more inclusive we are...the more good will, competition and value we bring to the entire ecosystem.  It also serves to remind all investors in both Blackcoin and bitShares to remember that it is not just us against them or us against all other altcoins, we are ALL part of the same community.  The key is finding a model that reminds them all of this fact...

This will also have the wonderful side-effect of undermining the "whales" who just push out another "new" coin with slight parameter alterations to Pump and Dump in unison to gain more stake in the BTC ecosystem.  In my opinion, these people need to be kicked in the ass by a caring community forming around tech that essentially makes their attempts at monopoly far more difficult. 

Now seriously lucky...I'm friggin out of this conversation until my work is done at A+ quality (though somehow I feel doing an active directory project is not nearly as important in the grand scheme of things as this conversation).
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Agent86 on April 21, 2014, 06:18:58 am
Why would we spend time on this before bitshares XT is even released?  It makes no sense to me.  I think there may be some risk in going around to a bunch of altcoin clone communities giving them the idea to clone our code too before we've even done our release.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 21, 2014, 07:48:07 am
Why would we spend time on this before bitshares XT is even released?  It makes no sense to me.  I think there may be some risk in going around to a bunch of altcoin clone communities giving them the idea to clone our code too before we've even done our release.

No offense intended but the code is not ours.

The code belongs to the world. What we are is a community and it's up to us to work to promote the best use of the code in a way which is mutually beneficial between our community and other communities. One way to market Bitshares is to create community specific chains which honor our community and theirs 50/50. Code can be replicated very easily but the members of this community cannot be replicated so the value is actually in that. Bytemaster will still be developing for our community and his chains will be 100% honored to Bitshares XT holders, and some of the best innovators, thinkers, and overall grand vision will still come from this community.

We should promote the proper use of the code and help bootstrap communities with similar values as our own. Thinking you can somehow keep the code closed, or patent it, or protect it, is counter productive and the wrong way of thinking. Bitshares is going to be forked just like every other similar valuable technology is forked so it's about the communities behind the technology in the end and the relationships. The community brings value to an asset and that is what you have to always remember that this is about.

Altcoin communities such as Blackcoin are part of the true Proof of Stake community which is a subset of the greater Proof of Stake community which includes hybrids like Peercoin. All cryptocurrencies are part of the greater decentralization community.

So if you want Bitshares to have any value ever then you have to figure out how to give the technology away in a way which benefits holders from Bitshares XT community (since we are all from this initial community snapshot). I've offered methods of doing this which would provide a net benefit to the Bitshares community in the form of a completely new Bitshares chain with new commodities to play with split evenly by providing a 50/50% ownership split in Blackshares with the Blackcoin community.

If you'd rather try to fight with yourself then the community which is willing to cooperate with other communities will peel off members from this community onto theirs. I would rather holders of Bitshares XT benefit from the growth and activity of the Blackcoin community. I would rather the Bitshares community form the alliances rather than see Mastercoin, Ethereum and other communities doing it while we keep talking like our precious source code is all that will be necessary to grow an industry.

If Bitshares is a DAC and we are all employees with the job of promoting Bitshares and giving it value then how are you going to do that? One way to do that is to increase the size and expertise of the marketing team overnight by merging with the Blackcoin community.

If the Blackcoin community really is good at pumping then all that pump would go into Blackshares which we'd own 50% of. And since we would own 100% of Bitshares the Blackcoin community might want to interact with that as well if the commodities are different in each chain.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 21, 2014, 11:25:12 am
Sorry for the type-o on that last thread, the correct Riddle is:

What will you do if someone drops free "Bitshare" clones on you (not Bitcoin clones, we all know what to do if that happens).

Seriously, think about this question deeply, and gain some insight into yourself and your market.  Help me help you.

Why would you need to donate Bitshares when you can just create unique altchains which are split 50/50? I'm not willing to donate any Bitshares I don't see see why anyone else should.

The Blackshares chain could have different assets to the Bitshares XT chain for example giving us the incentive to use both. These chains could also test new features. It's not like we only will have one Bitshares chain.

Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: toast on April 21, 2014, 01:56:10 pm
DA... never stop
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 21, 2014, 02:01:15 pm
Sorry for the type-o on that last thread, the correct Riddle is:

What will you do if someone drops free "Bitshare" clones on you (not Bitcoin clones, we all know what to do if that happens).

Seriously, think about this question deeply, and gain some insight into yourself and your market.  Help me help you.

Why would you need to donate Bitshares when you can just create unique altchains which are split 50/50? I'm not willing to donate any Bitshares I don't see see why anyone else should.

The Blackshares chain could have different assets to the Bitshares XT chain for example giving us the incentive to use both. These chains could also test new features. It's not like we only will have one Bitshares chain.

I honestly do not mind donating to the other option (though I am near certain I am in a very small minority)--and it is understandable why this fact is so frustrating (because it is obvious it would only increase the value of bitShares over time).  These are both good ways to do it, but I also have no clue how we can protect from other coins' devs and communities simply taking the source code once it has been tested--all bugs fixed--and cloning it with slight alterations (even improvements).  Not completely convinced that even strategic airdrops to keyhotee/blackcoin/bitcoin/mastercoin/ether will protect us from that. 

Bytemaster is a genius...this is a certainty.  But this does not mean he is a god and that another dev team might not find a way to improve upon the bitShares code and release it wholly as their own (to the detriment of our community) either.  Or better yet, they could launch an altchain and give all bitShares to Bitcoin holders.  If this happens, we need to have a far greater adoption of bitShares than these other chains can hope to get.  This is a big if...especially considering severely lacking support from the crypto-community outside our little watering hole here. 

Trust me when I say I am here for the betterment of the community at large too...and I think my efforts are proving it (Thank god I have a wife who understands my motivations and has patience with my ridiculous altruistic nature--or I'd be divorced for my constant juggling of items between here and my real life). 

With that said, the simple fact that people are bringing this up means that these ideas are wanting to be tested.  This, to me, means we are already at a point where fracturing can (and likely will) occur at some point in the future.  I know for certain that NoirShares is being worked on because of rifts that grew (which is ok).  For the life of me, I have a hard time understanding how we can seem to get upset when ideas are flourishing.  This is not a bad thing!  Decentralization wants to be decentralized! 

Can someone explain why is it a bad thing to have multiple versions of this tech go out 50/50 as "air drops" that also give all current stakeholders a stake in them?  I mean if something happens to bitShares (*knocks on wood*), but I have a 50% equal stake in the blackShares, peerShares, dogeShares or whatever other coin communities sign on...I will sure be glad I had the insurance that came from the good will between these "separate" communities.  I'll also be glad when another community with a talented marketing team finds a way to produce a series on DACs that my bitShares will benefit from (as a general audience grows more well-versed in the tech because of their videos)--wouldnt these efforts trickle up to benefit the bitShares community without ever requiring the use of AGS funds to pay for it?

How can creating sidechains that honor other altcoins hurt the community if those communities want to honor bitShares holders in return for support by our community and (genius) devs?  We forget how valuable BM's brain will be considered to other cryptocommunities once they start getting an equal stake in a chain that Bytemaster's code enhanced in ways they never could have conceived.  In this way, instead of stealing his brilliant ideas they are more likely to become part of a broader community that enhance eachothers' ability to innovate, which can then be adopted by all other forks, and even later improved upon by Dan and his team..

I do not pretend to have all the answers, and PLEASE TELL ME where my reasoning is faulty.  I truly believe we can figure these things out...but we need to really WEIGH the positives and negatives of the options we see as opposed to saying "just shoot me now" (which was wonderful comic relief, btw).

P.S.  Lets try to compile a list of downsides and upsides for the Air Drop to Keyhotee/Bitcoin/Blackcoin/Mastercoin/Ether compared to forging new DACs that enhance POS coins.  Lets make this productive...and most of all, lets remember this has been one of the coolest experiments in the history of equities and we are lucky enough to all be in the position to even worry about these things.  I know that, personally, I feel blessed to have been a part of this up to this point...even if I don't always agree with the friends I have made here. 


*final note*--screw the Nay-Sayers...and lets not focus on the negative FUD they try to spread, it is precisely the variations of ideas that will strengthen our ecosystem over time against the threats we may someday face (perfect example here:  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4284.msg53910#msg53910). Most of these people do not even have a clue what the hell POS is let along DPOS.  Their unwillingness to research is their fault, not ours.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 21, 2014, 02:12:41 pm
DA... never stop

 +5%
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Stan on April 21, 2014, 02:32:18 pm
DA... never stop

 +5%


+5%  There is so much high-octane thinking in there, some of it simply has to be right!   :) 
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 21, 2014, 02:38:21 pm
DA... never stop

 +5%


+5%  There is so much high-octane thinking in there, some of it simply has to be right!   :)

No place I'd rather be...
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: bytemaster on April 21, 2014, 03:13:08 pm
(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/c8/c800a4e76547f1870685b9bbd12406acb3c0f6d724bdddd39a19e0261da295a7.jpg)
And with that cryptic response I will get back to work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 21, 2014, 05:09:10 pm
There is another..,.

And with that cryptic response I will get back to work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

LOL...
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Empirical1 on April 21, 2014, 05:19:09 pm

Lets get you all caught up on the facts:

I'm not sure who started talking about donating AGS/PTS to airdrop, but I have not mentioned it in any of my 33 posts.  What we are proposing in the shortest term is donating (PERSONALLY NOT COMMUNALLY) Bitshares to airdrop on several communities (blockchians) because the product that we are next worried about getting forked is Bitshares, and since it is launching soon without any fork protection against immediate free re-distribution, then we should purchase a little forking insurance. 


Bitshares is AGS & PTS.  (Bitshares AGS and Bitshares PTS) & you seemed to be talking about donating it via airdrop, it's only when that wasn't gaining traction that you switched to a charity faucet.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4146.msg52678#msg52678

Quote
My sincerest apologies for starting a thread that assumed that our Bitshares community would support the general idea behind providing a Bitshares Faucet. We obviously can't conceive the potential financial benefit of gaining the trust of the market through a public display of generosity.

I apologize to entrepreneurs who are trying to decide weather or not to honor PTS/AGS shareholders with your intellectual property. My chief regret is not that I was unable ...

Quote
Therefore we are creating the:

Bitshares Forced Faucet (Airdrop) donation fund thread

Unless in all your previous posts and now you are specifically referring to Bitshares X (The Bank & Exchange DAC) & not Bitshares in general?

Edit: I'm not against the charity faucet for Bitshares X. I think people can do what they like with their shares.


x = 8.3% is the worst percentage crash that Bitshares can lose while giving away 5% of your Bitshares to an airdrop like Auroracoin...

It is basically free money at this point.  If I vote against the airdrop because I know that the price is going to go down relative to the USD, then did I vote against receiving free money?

By voting against the airdrop, you are voting to restrict adoption of Bitshares plus you are saying “no” to a free one time 8.3% trading gain.

The Bitshares community is voting against allowing people to donate to a fund that will cause the value of their investment to gain 8.3% (BitUSD) upon launch (guaranteed by Auroracoin math) (based upon the number that everybody loves to tout (the 83% Auroracoin decline)).

If you do not agree that this BitUSD bet would pay off, then you support the theory that the airdrop worked, and that the Bitshares market cap would actually grow because of the airdrop.

How would you feel if you came into work one day and everybody told you:

“Hey, Empirical, we all voted “NO” on an 8.3% one-time pay bonus.

What's the matter, scared you might make 8%?


Remember Le Chiffre in Casino Royale trying to blow up the plane while shorting the airline stock? (At least that was another companies plane, personally I don't think we should try blow up our own plane for a small trading gain...)

I agree with your 5-10% decline based on Aurora estimate and if that was also the general consensus of the community we definitely shouldn't do it. The negative blowback from being perceived to deliberately create an event that would likely allow us as Bitshares XT shareholders to profit from shorting Bitshares XT would far outweigh any goodwill gains.

Sorry for the type-o on that last thread, the correct Riddle is:

What will you do if someone drops free "Bitshare" clones on you (not Bitcoin clones, we all know what to do if that happens).

Seriously, think about this question deeply, and gain some insight into yourself and your market.  Help me help you.

I would thank them for the free advertising.

SiliconValleyCoin achieved a high of $20 million and is now $1650 (99.9%+ Shareholder loss)
AuroraCoin achieved a high of $800 million and is now $1 million... (99%+ Shareholder loss)
SpainCoin achieved a high of $80 million and is now $20 000...  (99.9% Shareholder loss)
MazaCoin achieved a high of $6 million and is now $200 000...  (96% Shareholder loss)

Letting people try/sample the product for free with reduced fees for a period or with demo version where they're not risking their money is good advertising. Giving potential customers shares in an underlying company, not so much  :)

I am concerned about competitors in this space who have some talent, marketing & a focused community as a result I have small positions in NXT, Mastercoin, CounterParty and may even get a small hedge in Ether but they are dwarfed by my position in Bitshares.

But no I'm not concerned about someone doing a major drop with a clone onto the Bitcoin Blockchain for example. But that's just my own opinion.

 
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 21, 2014, 05:36:05 pm
(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/c8/c800a4e76547f1870685b9bbd12406acb3c0f6d724bdddd39a19e0261da295a7.jpg)
And with that cryptic response I will get back to work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

@Dan, I think you need to understand that this entire thread is based off of the knowledge that DPOS and its future iterations are going to be a GIFT to the entirety of POS coins.  If it works like it seems like it could, we are looking at a frigging game-changer.  I do not have all the answers, and just because I pose my own often-misled theories they are only there for people to think over.  Hell, 1 out of approximately every 1000 actually get used! 

If anything, you should consider this thread a testament to how absolutely powerful we think this innovation will be...that we actually think POS altcoins will jump at the chance to compete for its implementation on altchains should tell you that your hard work and perpetual problem solving means something.  Do I know how it will ultimately manifest?  Hell no, but I do know that there are as many distros of linux as you can shake a stick at...its just the nature of the beast.  And I know that the "threats" to investors are pretty difficult to predict.  Even well thought out solutions seem like shots in the dark to a certain extent.  I for one like contemplating it, though I'm sure you want to bang your head against the wall at times :)

Oh, and btw, I have never once redacted the volunteerd 10% of my stake (though I am sure I am a little guy compared to some who will likely choose to donate nothing to the cause). 
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Empirical1 on April 21, 2014, 05:40:24 pm
in why is it a bad thing to have multiple versions of this tech go out 50/50 as "air drops" that also give all current stakeholders a stake in them?  I mean if something happens to bitShares (*knocks on wood*), but I have a 50% equal stake in the blackShares, peerShares, dogeShares or whatever other coin communities sign on...I will sure be glad I had the insurance that came from the good will between these "separate" communities.  I'll also be glad when another community with a talented marketing team finds a way to produce a series on DACs that my bitShares will benefit from (as a general audience grows more well-versed in the tech because of their videos)--wouldnt these efforts trickle up to benefit the bitShares community without ever requiring the use of AGS funds to pay for it?

I don't think it's a bad thing at all. If an entrepeneur/developer wants to set it up and handling most of the technicalities for 5% of the shares or something, I'm all for that. I wouldn't suggest Invictus actively get too involved in the process though because it could perhaps suggest they don't have faith in their own community/Bitshares Brand enough to stand on its own.

I doubt they (DogeShares/BlackShares etc.) will get much traction though, my thinking goes something like this..

Bitshares XT is already distributed among a few thousand investors. As soon the XT is tradeable I'd imagine it would have a $10-25 million CAP. It would still take a little while for the actual working release, during which time, anyone in the alt-coin community who liked the idea could invest, giving us a few hundred/thousand more investors and if everything goes smoothly I wouldn't be surprised to see a $40-60 million CAP pre-launch. If it's released and it all works pretty well then our market CAP and our community size would quickly be !!!  8) ????

That would really be the soonest anyone could fork and airdrop a clone, (personally I'm not concerned with overly large airdrops anyway) but I also think in this case we'll also already be too dominant for a clone to have much of a shot at that stage. (Then the momentum just builds, a successful Bitshares X will bring even more people into Bitshares in general and future DAC's and so on...)

But yes there's no harm in making new chains than honour 50/50 with other communities or 45/45 and 10 for whatever developer & or entrepreneurs want to give it a go.  imo.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: bytemaster on April 21, 2014, 05:47:01 pm
(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/c8/c800a4e76547f1870685b9bbd12406acb3c0f6d724bdddd39a19e0261da295a7.jpg)
And with that cryptic response I will get back to work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

@Dan, I think you need to understand that this entire thread is based off of the knowledge that DPOS and its future iterations are going to be a GIFT to the entirety of POS coins.  If it works like it seems like it could, we are looking at a frigging game-changer.  I do not have all the answers, and just because I pose my own often-misled theories they are only there for people to think over.  Hell, 1 out of approximately every 1000 actually get used! 

If anything, you should consider this thread a testament to how absolutely powerful we think this innovation will be...that we actually think POS altcoins will jump at the chance to compete for its implementation on altchains should tell you that your hard work and perpetual problem solving means something.  Do I know how it will ultimately manifest?  Hell no, but I do know that there are as many distros of linux as you can shake a stick at...its just the nature of the beast.  And I know that the "threats" to investors are pretty difficult to predict.  Even well thought out solutions seem like shots in the dark to a certain extent.  I for one like contemplating it, though I'm sure you want to bang your head against the wall at times :)

Oh, and btw, I have never once redacted the volunteerd 10% of my stake (though I am sure I am a little guy compared to some who will likely choose to donate nothing to the cause).

I am making no direct judgement on this thread... merely hinting that I have another approach that will gain the attention of these other POS coin holders in a way that is much cheaper. 

I think that we need to carefully consider all ideas.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 22, 2014, 12:41:26 am
I honestly do not mind donating to the other option (though I am near certain I am in a very small minority)--and it is understandable why this fact is so frustrating (because it is obvious it would only increase the value of bitShares over time).  These are both good ways to do it, but I also have no clue how we can protect from other coins' devs and communities simply taking the source code once it has been tested--all bugs fixed--and cloning it with slight alterations (even improvements).  Not completely convinced that even strategic airdrops to keyhotee/blackcoin/bitcoin/mastercoin/ether will protect us from that. 
I explained how.

Each chain should offer something different. We should help communities make a custom chain and that would mean new BitAssets, slightly different tweaks, new untested features and innovations which get tested out on these custom chains.

The Bitshares is like a family of DACs. Blackshares would be like a step son, the offspring of the Bitshares community and the Blackcoin community. It would be based on Bitshares but more than a mere cut and paste clone.

Anyone can cut and paste a clone. I could cut and paste a clone. Anyone could change a few parameters around and act like it's something new. That is not good for the PoS community and I'm thinking of something better than that.

We can only fit 16 different assets give or take into each chain. This means we need a diversity of different chains to test out more assets. Blackshares with different assets in it and some unique surprise innovations would be enough to get our community interested in trying it out and since we'd own 50% of it we'd use it. The Blackcoin community would own the other 50% and the assets in their chain would be the assets they choose just as long as it's not the same set of assets that are in the original Bitshares chain it's win/win.

The PoS community needs to be encouraged to use DPoS. We can do this by these strategic mergers where we split the profit from it 50/50 and co-develop custom Bitshares chains with input from the best minds of both communities. Then both communities test these chains out and also the size of the DPoS community grows with each of these merger operations.

Airdrops are best to be used to get people to use Keyhotee and for future DACs like Lotto. I think with the Dogecoin community they might appreciate something like the DogeLotto which is a rebranded and customized chain of Bitshares Lotto. Both of these chains could co-exist but before you can convince people to want a DogeLotto you should try the Airdrop method because that method is the most cost effective.

We could Airdrop the Dogecoin community 10% of the Bitshares Lotto DAC for example with the intention of giving them a taste of what it's like to cooperate with our community. Once they see how profitable cooperation can be they'll want to go 50/50 with us on a future DAC co-developed using feedback from both communities.
Bytemaster is a genius...this is a certainty.  But this does not mean he is a god and that another dev team might not find a way to improve upon the bitShares code and release it wholly as their own (to the detriment of our community) either. 
But this is about as unlikely as someone releasing a better Bitcoin client than Satoshi and the core developers could release. It's possible in theory but it's not like you can just learn how DPoS works overnight when it keeps changing.

I think Bytemaster is the only man right now who can make it all work. Other developers can read the code, and improve on it in certain ways, but Bytemaster understands the economics. There is an authenticity that you gain by having official support from Bytemaster, and from the Bitshares community. I'm convinced at least for now that Bytemaster with the support of the rest of us have a significant advantage just because we're a community focused on these topics already while another community would have to start from scratch. Six months or a year from now this advantage will be gone which is why you want to form your alliances early.

Or better yet, they could launch an altchain and give all bitShares to Bitcoin holders.  If this happens, we need to have a far greater adoption of bitShares than these other chains can hope to get.
And we could launch an altchain and give it to Bitcoin holders and compete with theirs. Our chain could be better. And our distribution could go to the smallest holders in Bitcoin. We could do it far more fair. We could add new features, new assets, stuff which only Bytemaster could add in and ideas which only our community would come up with.

Our advantage is that as a community of minds and talent we are top notch. It's not just Bytemaster, it's the chemistry of all of us combined that another community would have to compete with. Just because someone can cut and paste the Bitshares code and try to act like it's something new, it does not mean it would compete with an actual innovative new chain designed and tailored for the Bitcoin community. So that idea doesn't really concern me because that could happen to Ethereum, to NXT, and so on, but the reason why it's not going to be a concern is because a cheap cut and paste isn't going to be seen as a positive or unique innovation when all the mechanics and assets inside that chain are exactly the same.

The economics would also probably be wrong too. Bitcoin is inflating, so to map a Proof of Stake on top of a Proof of Work? You could do it, but how would you do it in a way which is fair?
This is a big if...especially considering severely lacking support from the crypto-community outside our little watering hole here. 

Trust me when I say I am here for the betterment of the community at large too...and I think my efforts are proving it (Thank god I have a wife who understands my motivations and has patience with my ridiculous altruistic nature--or I'd be divorced for my constant juggling of items between here and my real life). 

With that said, the simple fact that people are bringing this up means that these ideas are wanting to be tested.  This, to me, means we are already at a point where fracturing can (and likely will) occur at some point in the future.  I know for certain that NoirShares is being worked on because of rifts that grew (which is ok).  For the life of me, I have a hard time understanding how we can seem to get upset when ideas are flourishing.  This is not a bad thing!  Decentralization wants to be decentralized! 

The whole design of Bitshares is that it would have multiple diverse chains each unique. This is actually one of the most promising features because it keeps things decentralized, allows alt communities to benefit, and there is no reason why they would have to clone our chain.

The original Bitshares chain should have its own unique assets in it. You can only fit a certain number of assets per chain anyway so we have to create forks on our own. It was assumed that we could just fork and keep 100% to ourselves but that probably isn't going to work.

So if we split 50/50 with other communities, they would have not just any fork but the best fork and the fork supported by the official Bitshares community. By giving us 50% and them 50%, you'd grow the size of both communities and the fringe developers who want to do something other than 50/50 will not be looked at as being fair. You cannot beat 50/50.

Can someone explain why is it a bad thing to have multiple versions of this tech go out 50/50 as "air drops" that also give all current stakeholders a stake in them?  I mean if something happens to bitShares (*knocks on wood*), but I have a 50% equal stake in the blackShares, peerShares, dogeShares or whatever other coin communities sign on...I will sure be glad I had the insurance that came from the good will between these "separate" communities.  I'll also be glad when another community with a talented marketing team finds a way to produce a series on DACs that my bitShares will benefit from (as a general audience grows more well-versed in the tech because of their videos)--wouldnt these efforts trickle up to benefit the bitShares community without ever requiring the use of AGS funds to pay for it?

That is what I think will happen and that is what I'm proposing should happen. It's better that we split with the PoS community 50/50 for Bitshares. I'm not advocating Dogeshares because they aren't PoS. Peershares are hybrid PoS so it's iffy. But Blackcoin is a community which holds the same economic values as our community and a way to promote these values is to build an alliance with the communities with them first.

If we are all about PoS replacing PoW then we should be forming alliances with PoS. This would promote DPoS and make the altcoin community switch to PoS. PoW will still exist and we can airdrop to them, but I think Bitshares as a chain should be all about PoS. This is something we can debate about for the future but I don't think it's fair to map Bitshares onto a blockchain which is inflating unless you can show that the community is truly asking for a switch to PoS. Bitcoin doesn't want to be seen as a share but if enough people do want that then we could come up with a Bitcoin edition of Bitshares.

How can creating sidechains that honor other altcoins hurt the community if those communities want to honor bitShares holders in return for support by our community and (genius) devs?  We forget how valuable BM's brain will be considered to other cryptocommunities once they start getting an equal stake in a chain that Bytemaster's code enhanced in ways they never could have conceived.
Let's not put all of the value into Bytemaster. All of our brains are valuable as we all have unique talents. It's Bytemaster who is the programming and technical wizard, but there is a lot of talent in this community and that is what matters.

They can clone the source code, they cannot clone our brains. Any success we reach will be due to our brains, while the code is an expression of output which results from the coming together of minds and Bytemaster's technical wizardry. It's not just programming which will make Bitshares a success but the understanding of economics, the creative out of the box thinking, the willingness to test and fund completely new ideas.
  In this way, instead of stealing his brilliant ideas they are more likely to become part of a broader community that enhance eachothers' ability to innovate, which can then be adopted by all other forks, and even later improved upon by Dan and his team..

I do not pretend to have all the answers, and PLEASE TELL ME where my reasoning is faulty.  I truly believe we can figure these things out...but we need to really WEIGH the positives and negatives of the options we see as opposed to saying "just shoot me now" (which was wonderful comic relief, btw).

I agree with you on a lot of this. I think that even if they could steal Bytemaster away from this community (and I'm sure they could not), there are others here they'd have to steal away too in order to win. The Bitcoin community has almost not chance of doing that. The Ethereum community or Mastercoin community might peel some of us away but as long as we own shares in this community we will promote this community.

I don't think people understand that when you distribute the shares you're getting the support of the top minds in every community. The number 1 resource of any community is it's thinkers.

P.S.  Lets try to compile a list of downsides and upsides for the Air Drop to Keyhotee/Bitcoin/Blackcoin/Mastercoin/Ether compared to forging new DACs that enhance POS coins.  Lets make this productive...and most of all, lets remember this has been one of the coolest experiments in the history of equities and we are lucky enough to all be in the position to even worry about these things.  I know that, personally, I feel blessed to have been a part of this up to this point...even if I don't always agree with the friends I have made here. 


*final note*--screw the Nay-Sayers...and lets not focus on the negative FUD they try to spread, it is precisely the variations of ideas that will strengthen our ecosystem over time against the threats we may someday face (perfect example here:  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4284.msg53910#msg53910). Most of these people do not even have a clue what the hell POS is let along DPOS.  Their unwillingness to research is their fault, not ours.

A pro and con list would be a good idea. To me the pros outweigh the cons which is why I am in support of these ideas. We want better marketing, we want fork resistance, and the best way to have that is to do the fork ourselves to the PoS community to at least form economic alliances with other PoS chains.

Some communities will not believe in fairness and if they don't believe in fairness there are options we have which could be unfair as well. This is why it's all about being a community of thinkers rather than a community of followers.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 22, 2014, 12:58:13 am
Damnit...I should close this window.  Lol...

I see no reason why Dan and the team should not go down this avenue.  It goes right along with his philosophy of only changing things when it will give more to the investors in this project.  And lets face facts, with the work Invictus is doing, someone is going to eventually come along and fork this anyway...with NONE of the funding/effort we put into bringing this to fruition--and they'll only honor their investors, completely cutting the community out.  At least this way we can get them to continue supporting this new ecosystem. 

I still think we should do it one community at a time because to do a merger properly should take time. It's not just copy and paste. The other reason is I don't think Bitshares is for every community. I think it's something the PoS community with similar values would want but it's not for everyone.

There are other DACs which will be more suitable for other communities in my opinion. So I'm all about being inclusive, but one step at a time and one community at a time. It takes time to actually create these DACs, and custom DACs take time as well.

Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: bitbro on April 22, 2014, 01:30:16 am

(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/c8/c800a4e76547f1870685b9bbd12406acb3c0f6d724bdddd39a19e0261da295a7.jpg)
And with that cryptic response I will get back to work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

Empirical1, if you read between the lines here, you will see....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Empirical1 on April 22, 2014, 01:40:57 am

(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/c8/c800a4e76547f1870685b9bbd12406acb3c0f6d724bdddd39a19e0261da295a7.jpg)
And with that cryptic response I will get back to work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

Empirical1, if you read between the lines here, you will see....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No way dude  :) They are not the same person. I'm 99%+ sure on that.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: Stan on April 22, 2014, 01:42:42 am
I honestly do not mind donating to the other option (though I am near certain I am in a very small minority)--and it is understandable why this fact is so frustrating (because it is obvious it would only increase the value of bitShares over time).  These are both good ways to do it, but I also have no clue how we can protect from other coins' devs and communities simply taking the source code once it has been tested--all bugs fixed--and cloning it with slight alterations (even improvements).  Not completely convinced that even strategic airdrops to keyhotee/blackcoin/bitcoin/mastercoin/ether will protect us from that. 
I explained how.

Each chain should offer something different. We should help communities make a custom chain and that would mean new BitAssets, slightly different tweaks, new untested features and innovations which get tested out on these custom chains.

The Bitshares is like a family of DACs. Blackshares would be like a step son, the offspring of the Bitshares community and the Blackcoin community. It would be based on Bitshares but more than a mere cut and paste clone.

Anyone can cut and paste a clone. I could cut and paste a clone. Anyone could change a few parameters around and act like it's something new. That is not good for the PoS community and I'm thinking of something better than that.

We can only fit 16 different assets give or take into each chain. This means we need a diversity of different chains to test out more assets. Blackshares with different assets in it and some unique surprise innovations would be enough to get our community interested in trying it out and since we'd own 50% of it we'd use it. The Blackcoin community would own the other 50% and the assets in their chain would be the assets they choose just as long as it's not the same set of assets that are in the original Bitshares chain it's win/win.

The PoS community needs to be encouraged to use DPoS. We can do this by these strategic mergers where we split the profit from it 50/50 and co-develop custom Bitshares chains with input from the best minds of both communities. Then both communities test these chains out and also the size of the DPoS community grows with each of these merger operations.

Airdrops are best to be used to get people to use Keyhotee and for future DACs like Lotto. I think with the Dogecoin community they might appreciate something like the DogeLotto which is a rebranded and customized chain of Bitshares Lotto. Both of these chains could co-exist but before you can convince people to want a DogeLotto you should try the Airdrop method because that method is the most cost effective.

We could Airdrop the Dogecoin community 10% of the Bitshares Lotto DAC for example with the intention of giving them a taste of what it's like to cooperate with our community. Once they see how profitable cooperation can be they'll want to go 50/50 with us on a future DAC co-developed using feedback from both communities.
Bytemaster is a genius...this is a certainty.  But this does not mean he is a god and that another dev team might not find a way to improve upon the bitShares code and release it wholly as their own (to the detriment of our community) either. 
But this is about as unlikely as someone releasing a better Bitcoin client than Satoshi and the core developers could release. It's possible in theory but it's not like you can just learn how DPoS works overnight when it keeps changing.

I think Bytemaster is the only man right now who can make it all work. Other developers can read the code, and improve on it in certain ways, but Bytemaster understands the economics. There is an authenticity that you gain by having official support from Bytemaster, and from the Bitshares community. I'm convinced at least for now that Bytemaster with the support of the rest of us have a significant advantage just because we're a community focused on these topics already while another community would have to start from scratch. Six months or a year from now this advantage will be gone which is why you want to form your alliances early.

Or better yet, they could launch an altchain and give all bitShares to Bitcoin holders.  If this happens, we need to have a far greater adoption of bitShares than these other chains can hope to get.
And we could launch an altchain and give it to Bitcoin holders and compete with theirs. Our chain could be better. And our distribution could go to the smallest holders in Bitcoin. We could do it far more fair. We could add new features, new assets, stuff which only Bytemaster could add in and ideas which only our community would come up with.

Our advantage is that as a community of minds and talent we are top notch. It's not just Bytemaster, it's the chemistry of all of us combined that another community would have to compete with. Just because someone can cut and paste the Bitshares code and try to act like it's something new, it does not mean it would compete with an actual innovative new chain designed and tailored for the Bitcoin community. So that idea doesn't really concern me because that could happen to Ethereum, to NXT, and so on, but the reason why it's not going to be a concern is because a cheap cut and paste isn't going to be seen as a positive or unique innovation when all the mechanics and assets inside that chain are exactly the same.

The economics would also probably be wrong too. Bitcoin is inflating, so to map a Proof of Stake on top of a Proof of Work? You could do it, but how would you do it in a way which is fair?
This is a big if...especially considering severely lacking support from the crypto-community outside our little watering hole here. 

Trust me when I say I am here for the betterment of the community at large too...and I think my efforts are proving it (Thank god I have a wife who understands my motivations and has patience with my ridiculous altruistic nature--or I'd be divorced for my constant juggling of items between here and my real life). 

With that said, the simple fact that people are bringing this up means that these ideas are wanting to be tested.  This, to me, means we are already at a point where fracturing can (and likely will) occur at some point in the future.  I know for certain that NoirShares is being worked on because of rifts that grew (which is ok).  For the life of me, I have a hard time understanding how we can seem to get upset when ideas are flourishing.  This is not a bad thing!  Decentralization wants to be decentralized! 

The whole design of Bitshares is that it would have multiple diverse chains each unique. This is actually one of the most promising features because it keeps things decentralized, allows alt communities to benefit, and there is no reason why they would have to clone our chain.

The original Bitshares chain should have its own unique assets in it. You can only fit a certain number of assets per chain anyway so we have to create forks on our own. It was assumed that we could just fork and keep 100% to ourselves but that probably isn't going to work.

So if we split 50/50 with other communities, they would have not just any fork but the best fork and the fork supported by the official Bitshares community. By giving us 50% and them 50%, you'd grow the size of both communities and the fringe developers who want to do something other than 50/50 will not be looked at as being fair. You cannot beat 50/50.

Can someone explain why is it a bad thing to have multiple versions of this tech go out 50/50 as "air drops" that also give all current stakeholders a stake in them?  I mean if something happens to bitShares (*knocks on wood*), but I have a 50% equal stake in the blackShares, peerShares, dogeShares or whatever other coin communities sign on...I will sure be glad I had the insurance that came from the good will between these "separate" communities.  I'll also be glad when another community with a talented marketing team finds a way to produce a series on DACs that my bitShares will benefit from (as a general audience grows more well-versed in the tech because of their videos)--wouldnt these efforts trickle up to benefit the bitShares community without ever requiring the use of AGS funds to pay for it?

That is what I think will happen and that is what I'm proposing should happen. It's better that we split with the PoS community 50/50 for Bitshares. I'm not advocating Dogeshares because they aren't PoS. Peershares are hybrid PoS so it's iffy. But Blackcoin is a community which holds the same economic values as our community and a way to promote these values is to build an alliance with the communities with them first.

If we are all about PoS replacing PoW then we should be forming alliances with PoS. This would promote DPoS and make the altcoin community switch to PoS. PoW will still exist and we can airdrop to them, but I think Bitshares as a chain should be all about PoS. This is something we can debate about for the future but I don't think it's fair to map Bitshares onto a blockchain which is inflating unless you can show that the community is truly asking for a switch to PoS. Bitcoin doesn't want to be seen as a share but if enough people do want that then we could come up with a Bitcoin edition of Bitshares.

How can creating sidechains that honor other altcoins hurt the community if those communities want to honor bitShares holders in return for support by our community and (genius) devs?  We forget how valuable BM's brain will be considered to other cryptocommunities once they start getting an equal stake in a chain that Bytemaster's code enhanced in ways they never could have conceived.
Let's not put all of the value into Bytemaster. All of our brains are valuable as we all have unique talents. It's Bytemaster who is the programming and technical wizard, but there is a lot of talent in this community and that is what matters.

They can clone the source code, they cannot clone our brains. Any success we reach will be due to our brains, while the code is an expression of output which results from the coming together of minds and Bytemaster's technical wizardry. It's not just programming which will make Bitshares a success but the understanding of economics, the creative out of the box thinking, the willingness to test and fund completely new ideas.
  In this way, instead of stealing his brilliant ideas they are more likely to become part of a broader community that enhance eachothers' ability to innovate, which can then be adopted by all other forks, and even later improved upon by Dan and his team..

I do not pretend to have all the answers, and PLEASE TELL ME where my reasoning is faulty.  I truly believe we can figure these things out...but we need to really WEIGH the positives and negatives of the options we see as opposed to saying "just shoot me now" (which was wonderful comic relief, btw).

I agree with you on a lot of this. I think that even if they could steal Bytemaster away from this community (and I'm sure they could not), there are others here they'd have to steal away too in order to win. The Bitcoin community has almost not chance of doing that. The Ethereum community or Mastercoin community might peel some of us away but as long as we own shares in this community we will promote this community.

I don't think people understand that when you distribute the shares you're getting the support of the top minds in every community. The number 1 resource of any community is it's thinkers.

P.S.  Lets try to compile a list of downsides and upsides for the Air Drop to Keyhotee/Bitcoin/Blackcoin/Mastercoin/Ether compared to forging new DACs that enhance POS coins.  Lets make this productive...and most of all, lets remember this has been one of the coolest experiments in the history of equities and we are lucky enough to all be in the position to even worry about these things.  I know that, personally, I feel blessed to have been a part of this up to this point...even if I don't always agree with the friends I have made here. 


*final note*--screw the Nay-Sayers...and lets not focus on the negative FUD they try to spread, it is precisely the variations of ideas that will strengthen our ecosystem over time against the threats we may someday face (perfect example here:  https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4284.msg53910#msg53910). Most of these people do not even have a clue what the hell POS is let along DPOS.  Their unwillingness to research is their fault, not ours.

A pro and con list would be a good idea. To me the pros outweigh the cons which is why I am in support of these ideas. We want better marketing, we want fork resistance, and the best way to have that is to do the fork ourselves to the PoS community to at least form economic alliances with other PoS chains.

Some communities will not believe in fairness and if they don't believe in fairness there are options we have which could be unfair as well. This is why it's all about being a community of thinkers rather than a community of followers.

Thanks for this post.  Great thinking in this whole thread.
But we would like to challenge you to go a step further:

Even more than a community of thinkers, we need a community of doers!
Don't wait for us to do stuff - take the lead yourselves.

BitShares is a decentralized community!
If you have a great promotion idea, go team with somebody and make it so!

We'll be there to help, but don't wait for us to lead.

That way leads to the dark side.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 22, 2014, 07:31:52 am
(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/c8/c800a4e76547f1870685b9bbd12406acb3c0f6d724bdddd39a19e0261da295a7.jpg)
And with that cryptic response I will get back to work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

@Dan, I think you need to understand that this entire thread is based off of the knowledge that DPOS and its future iterations are going to be a GIFT to the entirety of POS coins.  If it works like it seems like it could, we are looking at a frigging game-changer.  I do not have all the answers, and just because I pose my own often-misled theories they are only there for people to think over.  Hell, 1 out of approximately every 1000 actually get used! 

If anything, you should consider this thread a testament to how absolutely powerful we think this innovation will be...that we actually think POS altcoins will jump at the chance to compete for its implementation on altchains should tell you that your hard work and perpetual problem solving means something.  Do I know how it will ultimately manifest?  Hell no, but I do know that there are as many distros of linux as you can shake a stick at...its just the nature of the beast.  And I know that the "threats" to investors are pretty difficult to predict.  Even well thought out solutions seem like shots in the dark to a certain extent.  I for one like contemplating it, though I'm sure you want to bang your head against the wall at times :)

Oh, and btw, I have never once redacted the volunteerd 10% of my stake (though I am sure I am a little guy compared to some who will likely choose to donate nothing to the cause).

I am making no direct judgement on this thread... merely hinting that I have another approach that will gain the attention of these other POS coin holders in a way that is much cheaper. 

I think that we need to carefully consider all ideas.

Yum...

We could Airdrop the Dogecoin community 10% of the Bitshares Lotto DAC for example with the intention of giving them a taste of what it's like to cooperate with our community. Once they see how profitable cooperation can be they'll want to go 50/50 with us on a future DAC co-developed using feedback from both communities.
thinkers rather than a community of followers.

Ideas like this are priceless..



Thanks for this post.  Great thinking in this whole thread.
But we would like to challenge you to go a step further:

Even more than a community of thinkers, we need a community of doers!
Don't wait for us to do stuff - take the lead yourselves.

BitShares is a decentralized community!
If you have a great promotion idea, go team with somebody and make it so!

We'll be there to help, but don't wait for us to lead.

That way leads to the dark side.

I agree, but there is a limit to what I feel comfortable doing/promoting without the backing of the community and the developers who are literally indenturing themselves to improving this project for myself and the rest of the community. 

There is literally nothing else stopping me from going on Blackcoin's boards and offering this idea for them to accept...except for an understanding that I am only one person here and one who has certainly made mistakes in the past and will likely do so in the future. 

Far better to look at the stars than to look at my reflection if you know what I mean :)
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: CLains on April 22, 2014, 02:35:09 pm
Communitycoin is another 100% POS with multipool.

http://community.bitcoinland.org/multipool/

They also have "Coin Control" allows you to control sending the coins with minimum coin-age, so to preserve maximum the pos generation.

They distributed the coins to "a selected community of experienced Crypto users, marketers and developers."

Another interesting experiment in live action.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 22, 2014, 04:40:00 pm
Communitycoin is another 100% POS with multipool.

http://community.bitcoinland.org/multipool/

They also have "Coin Control" allows you to control sending the coins with minimum coin-age, so to preserve maximum the pos generation.

They distributed the coins to "a selected community of experienced Crypto users, marketers and developers."

Another interesting experiment in live action.

yum...
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: donkeypong on April 23, 2014, 03:17:17 am
Blackcoin collaborating with Doge. Looks to me like a shameless bribe.

http://www.followthecoin.com/blackcoin-supports-dogecon-first-coin-to-ever-support-a-conference/ (http://www.followthecoin.com/blackcoin-supports-dogecon-first-coin-to-ever-support-a-conference/)
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: luckybit on April 23, 2014, 03:50:31 am
Blackcoin collaborating with Doge. Looks to me like a shameless bribe.

http://www.followthecoin.com/blackcoin-supports-dogecon-first-coin-to-ever-support-a-conference/ (http://www.followthecoin.com/blackcoin-supports-dogecon-first-coin-to-ever-support-a-conference/)
Perhaps I'm not being cynical enough here but...

How could anyone see this news as bad? We should be collaborating as well. Business is all about relationships and Bitshares is a business (not a cult!). Blackcoin and Dogecoin have something in common and that is marketing talent, so it makes perfect sense for them to have a Dogecon.

We aren't preaching the gospel, we are trying to make money. This means we have need friends.

I don't understand the attitude I see around here.

(http://www.followthecoin.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/blackcoin_dogeconsponsor-720x340.png)

The crypto-mergers are coming whether we like it or not. Let's collaborate with Blackcoin on Blackshares so we can be both in the news and a part of this conference.

Look at who will be there
http://www.followthecoin.com/dogeconsf/
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: donkeypong on April 23, 2014, 04:23:32 am
Yup, I'm right there with you. My term "shameless bribe" was tongue-in-cheek, and a bit of a complement. Any sort of an air drop would be a shameless bribe. We will need these sorts of partnerships. I heartily agree with you that the coin mergers are coming, like it or not.

Bitshares is much more than a coin. Once we figure out how to bring in some members of various alt coin communities, we will be able to leverage their numbers and energy, while helping them participate in something revolutionary and rewarding. I think it's utterly shortsighted not to consider these partnerships.
Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: fuzzy on April 23, 2014, 05:56:19 am
http://www.reddit.com/r/BeyondBitcoinShow/comments/23qrno/reggie_middleton_talks_ultracoin_cryptocurrency/ 

Reggie Middleton has stated that he would be willing to answer questions regarding Ultracoin on the Beyond Bitcoin thread I posted on the subreddit.  Dan told me not too long ago he would like to have more people to chat with him regarding alternative opinions (and this helps all of us). 

I recommend going and asking him questions as well as upvoting the *side note* asking him to join up for a meetup on the Mumble Server. 

Title: Re: Blackshares, can it be done? Is it in our mutual benefit? Brainstorm here
Post by: CLains on April 23, 2014, 12:11:33 pm
Business is all about relationships and Bitshares is a business (not a cult!).

We aren't preaching the gospel, we are trying to make money. This means we have need friends.

I don't understand the attitude I see around here.

 +5% +5% +5%