Incentives are relatively well aligned but it could be better. I heard (on mumble) and read (https://bitshares.org/blog/2015/06/15/the-history-of-graphene/) that some core developers had to sell most of their BTS in order to continue to work on Bitshares / Graphene. They basically traded BTS for CNX shares this way because they bought themselves time because they didn't have to work some other job to pay their bills and invested that time into building Cryptonomex.
Bitshares would profit from a CNX team that has aligned incentives with BitShares. For example when deciding whether graphene is used for something that could compete with Bitshares or when negotiating whether someone acquiring a graphene license is honoring BTS etc.   

The idea is to partly reverse that trading of BTS for CNX shares again (voluntarily of course, but I will try to show how everyone involved could profit form it below).

Maybe some of the core devs that had to sell lots of BTS and are low in BTS can come forward and explain their situation and what they would want.

What could be done to align incentives more?
1. Some BTS whale (or a few) that is not a CNX shareholder could be found that is willing to exchange some BTS for CNX shares.
2. A fundraiser. Would be preferable to (1) if the participants in the fundraiser would receive CNX shares in return. If not the question is whether enough funds can be acquired with the fundraiser without financial incentives. The disadvantage would be legal questions...

In any case an exchange of BTS for CNY shares would be a plus sum game for...
1) ...the BTS givers because a) they receive CNX shares and b) they create more alignment of interests between BTS and CNX holders which is good for them as BTS holders (see above).
2) ...the CNX holders as they can dampen their investment risk. CNX holders have, especially if they are low in BTS, a much higher percentage of all shares in CNX than of all shares in BitShares. An exchange of CNX shares for BTS would distribute the risk of company/startup failure (risk reduced by 50%).
In addition BTS is much more liquid for the foreseeable future than CNX shares. 

Do you agree with the overall goal (aligning incentives)? And what is your opinion on the means of achieving that goal?

Quote from: delulo on July 23, 2015, 11:27:57 am

I run the bitshares_client now and it began replaying the blockchain. The is no promt like normal in a terminal window so I can't type "open default" and enter my password..

prompt will come after replaying the blockchain .. it will look like this
>>>

Quote

I always updated it by newly compiling it and then imported a backup. By updating do you mean update via a github command?

if you are under windows you can simply use the exe file provided in the github releases ..
otherwise you need to compile version 0.5.3 first, run it and import your wallet .. then you can checkout the latest version, recompile and start the client again

Ok thanks I will do that (with the old wallet) if it doesnt work now with the command line client.

I post quite frequently in the support section atm. Thanks to anyone who looks at it!

So yesterday I replaced the complete wallet folder in .bitshares with a wallet folder I backed up a while ago. I logged in with a password that is stored in a password manager. That worked.

Today I started the client again and used the same password. This time it didn't work. the client also didn't say that the password is incorrect. When I go to "Accounts" -> "go to my accounts" it also asks me for the password. If I enter the password there it replies that the password would be incorrect.

I have made a backup of the wallet when I was logged in yesterday. When I import the wallet the client just shuts down.

Anything I have overlooked?

Update: I have replaced the wallet folder again with the wallet folder I backed up month ago. Here my password works again. A solution might be to change the password of the wallet but "File" -> "change password" is grey.

Quote from: Erlich Bachman on July 22, 2015, 12:32:07 pm

Quote from: sittingduck on July 22, 2015, 12:02:21 pm

all of the down sides of sharding. 

What are the downsides of sharding besides the obvious ones?

In V's blog about the hypercube approach the cost is confirmation time.    The other problem is that everyone focuses on scalability of TRANSFERS while ignoring the issue of scalability of MARKETS or "smart contracts in general".

Can you say what the limitations of "stacking" are (see also https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,17671.msg225225.html#msg225225 )?

Quote from: delulo on July 22, 2015, 08:51:31 am

... [ALT] and dragging somewhere inside the window moves the whole virtual machine window...

Maybe you need to let the VM grab you mouse and keyboard inputs first .. (by pressing inside the VM somewhere) .. which VM are you using?

Can you not increase the screen size of your VM?

uuhhh now it works. thanks so much!

I did "disable mouse integration" in Virtualbox...

When I run the client (linux) the top of the client (with "File" and "Account") is not there and I also can not pull it down The client seems to be too far up on the screen.
Any idea whether why that is? It might just have to do with Linux, not Bitshares...

Quote from: delulo on July 21, 2015, 08:41:55 am

Quote from: devlux on July 21, 2015, 12:23:32 am

I mean it seems a bit pointless to have DPOS & a requirement for a local chain.  I can see a need to add fully verifying as an option you can turn on and off, but really why not SPV as the default?  It would make it so much easier and less resource intensive.

With DPOS and a local chain you trust that 51 delegates or less won't collude, that is much more safety than trusting one delegate. But you are right the syncing is a pain atm! I am at 92% after about 28 hours
All active development has stopped for BitShares 1.0. According to BM / tests BitShares 2.0, where all development efforts go into atm, will only need 250 mb of Ram and a proper light client / web wallet will be available (standard wallet).

If it takes 28 hours, are you sure it's syncing at all? On my reasonably fast internet connection it takes less than 1 hour for the wallet to download the entire blockchain from scratch. But I can't imagine that you'd have 28x slower internet. Are you sure you haven't got some firewall up and running or some advanced router option like IP-flood-protection enabled?

It has now synced completely. It runs in a virtual machine (2 gb ram). It may have to do with that...