Quote from: cube on October 15, 2014, 05:31:57 pm

hmm.. does btsx <-> bitusd/bitasset count?

Not sure how a DAC / blockchain is supposed to get a license   

This.

I mean the DAC is all around world. On the internet. So who is going the issue a license? UN?

Quote from: toast on October 13, 2014, 01:06:24 am

Ags are an abstract concept, not an actual token. You can claim the *rewards* from ags by importing your donating wallet into a DAC which honored ags. In your case, you could claim DNS (go ask in "keyid" subforum)

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

The "abstract concept" mentioned above has been illustrated several ways, but I think this may be the clearest:

http://bitshares.org/bitshares-airdrop-theory/

In this case, the independent DNS developer has recognized the public record of your donation to the BitShares Trust AGS fund as a good reason to choose you to receive some free promotional samples. This particular developer indicates above that he sees it as a way of rewarding (thanking) you for helping to make the toolkit he is using possible.

Hi Stan, the link you gave refers to Lotto-Shares as an example of share distribution. However, pointing to a failed start-up is not a good idea even if the subject is the distribution. That last section should be rewritten to direct people to Bitshares Music or DNS. imho

Should we panic?

Quote from: Thom on September 29, 2014, 07:35:41 pm

Quote from: Stan on September 29, 2014, 06:30:47 pm

I don't think it's anything personal.  It's just business. It's not an argument that can even be won. The buggy whip industry did not want to see the emergence of horseless carriages.  Miners don't want to see the demise of mining.

Whether it's personal or not is irrelevant. My point is it's a vulnerability, a potential weakness and point of attack. The whole I³ team should be well aware of the implications of the technology they're building, and who it will affect. Those are mighty powerful groups and I'd be shocked if those forces haven't been discussed or are considered too distant to worry about now. Perhaps so, but when then?

At some point the giants will awake and try to stop their discomfort. Is I³'s blindly gambling they can design a revolutionary tech, build it, test it, refine the design and get it marketed and adopted by enough people fast enough so it can't be stopped?

That depends on when the giants awake, and if BitShares has enough of the process completed to make squashing the irritation too costly or impractical.

The way I see it is the cats already out of the bag. Pandoras box has been opened. Destroy I3 and someone else will pick up the torch. The vision will persist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSLeuTvRPdI&t=165

I just want to add my two bits on the tax issue, with a real world example.

Disclaimer: I am not a tax expert.


Any gamer here knows or heard about diablo3 and its in game market I think. And it also had the real money option. You could buy/sell game items for real money or in game gold.

There were lots of bots, scanning the market and placing buy/sell orders for in game gold. With the aim of increasing their total in game gold, so they can sell it for real money.

To my knowledge, there is not a case of taxation for "in game gold/in game item" trades. So why should BitAsset/BTSX trades be taxable? (Unless BTSX counts as "money")

Then again, I am no tax expert.

http://data.bter.com/api
https://www.cryptsy.com/pages/api

Well, so long as someone else is willing to take over the short positions.... 

I think the way I will solve all of these fee issues is to accumulate BitUSD and simply sell it into the market at the highest bid and take the BTS received and destroy that.  Keep things simple and restore balance to the force.

I tought we did not use force here.  balance to the source maybe?