hi AB, i can understand where you're coming, but i dont think the vision has changed. the timeline for implementing the vision has merely become more realistic

The way i see it, the old vision fragmented development of several products and pigeonholed the bitshares toolkit developers into working on their own projects in relative isolation. from what i can tell, the bitshares toolkit still requires some major development time, and realistically there are only a handful of developers alive that currently have the know how to do so.

 the old plan essentially dictated that key devs like Toast, HackFisher etc would have to stop developing the toolkit (which is critical to DAC industry growth) and work on their own projects. between coding, taking on the role of project manager, providing support for delegates and users, etc i cant imagine there would be any time left for them to help develop the toolkit. software development is rarely a one man job and for good reason imho

developing separate, competing DACs is a great idea (and inevitable if bitshares succeeds) but the infrastructure needs to be sufficient first

3i should do DPOS,not others
not AlphaBar.
not me.

Quote from: xeroc on October 28, 2014, 10:27:49 pm

Maybe we should remind ourselves that we are not a classical business ... and also need not necessarily take the same strategies .. as classical businesses ..

Like engineering controversy to garner publicity?

Quote

Do we want people to understand how our system works or do we just want to throw returns in peoples faces?

You realise we are talking about marketing a product, right? No, we do not require people to understand how our company works on the back-end, yes we want to throw clearly digestible numbers in their faces when telling them about our products.