1
General Discussion / Re: If you are a Brownie holder
« on: November 01, 2015, 06:38:32 pm »
yes
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Technical Support / Re: Outlining Roles and Responsibilities
« on: October 19, 2015, 01:24:53 am »
anyone interested in getting a mumble session going for people who want to see this through? something outside of the weekly Friday meeting? Paging @fuzzy
3
General Discussion / Re: Best Selling Option
« on: September 25, 2015, 04:20:47 am »The problem with a high number is voter apathy, so like i said, becoming a delegate should require you to submit a collateral bid, then the client is set to automatically vote for the highest 101 collateral bids unless you choose to manually vote.
Is nobody paying attention here?
r0ach makes one of the best suggestions/proposals I have heard lately!
We should evaluate them seriously.
PS I agree with the PR nightmare known as 17 delegates
PS2 PR was never his "big thing"
Not a bad idea... but it is effectively buying your way into power which is less accountable and has different risks.
is voter apathy really going to be a problem in these early days? I'm not so sure... I believe that, at this point, most people who own bitshares do so because they are actively following the project and know about 2.0. the problem with voting in 1.0 was that the software ran poorly, and voting was a pain in the ass. If voting is built into the GUI in an intuitive, easy way in 2.0, then everyone following this project is going to vote.
If that is the case, then this discussion doesn't actually matter so much, because no matter what the initial number of delegates, the community can change it as soon as the software is released.
On another note, I don't really like the idea of people being able to buy their way into delegate spots though collateral bids. how would that even work?
4
Technical Support / Re: Payments in real time
« on: August 26, 2015, 03:31:48 pm »Many can't see the forest but for the trees. i.e. sticky posts right under your very noses.
A discussion of micropayments can be found in the P & P index.
Don't miss the latest post there either, where the issue of accounting is raised about all costs of the ecosystem. To determine if micropayments are economically viable one must fist ascertain the cost to provide them, and I have not seen any type of discussion about that in the form of a comprehensive income / expense statement for the entire BitShares operation.
It's a difficult task to accomplish when so many variables are in play and changing all the time. The analysis may therefore be more of a projection than hard cold empirical numbers.
The issue is Bitshares needs adoption. If you can't attract people through micropayments how exactly will you get a person to work to earn a whole BitUSD? If people cannot earn a BitUSD through surveys, clicking ads, or watching ads, how will they learn the value of BitUSD? Don't assume that new people are going to want to buy BitUSD or that everyone has Bitcoin to trade to get BitUSD.
There aren't enough ways to earn BitUSD and that is suppressing the marketing effort. Micropayments would immediately fix that but would come at a price. In my opinion the price is worth it because the fees can come from many places.
Perhaps so, I don't agree or disagree with that point.
You seem to miss my main point is that WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT how to sustain a business (i.e. blockchain operations) to support them. I don't believe that subsidizing them from other means is sustainable, except from a charity basis.
I'm saying we need to do a comprehensive analysis of costs and income before we can know if micropayments are economically viable and I see NOBODY taking on that challenge, or if they have they have not disclosed it to the community here.
What I'm talking about is not rocket science, it's simply good business. If we can't do this for our own blockchain it makes us look like hypocrites when we say bitcoin isn't sustainable due to the cost of their security model.
I have no idea how to perform those calculations, but I very much hope someone does. That last discussion of micropayments veered off in a completely different direction and didn't reach a conclusion. I agree completely with @luckybit. Nanopayments are one of the main selling points of smartcoins. From what I remember, BM's analysis of BTS 2.0 was that people will be willing to pay slightly higher fees than other cryptos because of the network effect and wanting to operate on the same network as other people. But we're talking about internet currency, and nanopayments are going to be a huge part of that in the future (IMHO). Who is going to want to join a network with fees so high that they can't tip, pay small amounts for content, etc?
5
Technical Support / Re: Payments in real time
« on: August 26, 2015, 04:13:08 am »
Was there ever a conclusion reached regarding microtransactions in BitShares 2.0? If so, can someone point me to the thread? I think that's a terrible opportunity to miss out on, especially with smartcoins. I think a big part of the reason nanopayments haven't taken off is because of Bitcoin's volatility.
6
General Discussion / Re: Get ready for the wailing and gnashing of teeth, when the ETH dump comes.
« on: August 08, 2015, 11:15:06 pm »
what was the IPO price?
7
General Discussion / Re: Very disappointing BTS performance
« on: August 07, 2015, 02:45:32 am »
I think people need to stop freaking out over the price so much. Everything right now is basically pure speculation until BitShares 2.0 comes out. Is anyone really surprised that the price is so low when BitShares 2.0 hasn't actually be implemented or proven yet? The ideas are amazing but unless there is a product that works then there's no real reason it SHOULD be valued any higher.
If you look at any crypto 2.0 project you can see that they all take much longer than expected to implement in a good way. Ethereum is the best example of this besides BTS. They were the golden child of crypto 2.0 for a long time, at a time when BitShares was having all kinds of problems and criticisms, and in recent months Ethereum has started to experience many of those problems themselves. Nobody is immune to it. Such is the nature of this industry. We're all exploring new territory here. It's not gonna be a quick and easy process.
That being said, even if (and possibly when) some of the other crypto 2.0 projects start climbing in value more quickly than BTS does, I'm not going to be extremely worried. Yes, market cap is generally a good indicator of the success of a crypto project, but BTS is essentially different from ANY other project that's on the market right now. It is a totally new model for a decentralized business. In many ways it borrows features from centralized businesses, and in many ways it borrows decentralization features that were pioneered by Bitcoin. That's why I always like the DAC moniker. It might not be the best term to use for legal purposes, but in many ways it's a great descriptor of BTS. BTS offers financial products, and our growth is going to depend on having solid software that allows for WORKING financial products that provide UTILITy. If that mission is accomplished, people will use the products, and REAL, SUSTAINABLE, NON-SPECULATIVE growth will follow from there.
If you look at any crypto 2.0 project you can see that they all take much longer than expected to implement in a good way. Ethereum is the best example of this besides BTS. They were the golden child of crypto 2.0 for a long time, at a time when BitShares was having all kinds of problems and criticisms, and in recent months Ethereum has started to experience many of those problems themselves. Nobody is immune to it. Such is the nature of this industry. We're all exploring new territory here. It's not gonna be a quick and easy process.
That being said, even if (and possibly when) some of the other crypto 2.0 projects start climbing in value more quickly than BTS does, I'm not going to be extremely worried. Yes, market cap is generally a good indicator of the success of a crypto project, but BTS is essentially different from ANY other project that's on the market right now. It is a totally new model for a decentralized business. In many ways it borrows features from centralized businesses, and in many ways it borrows decentralization features that were pioneered by Bitcoin. That's why I always like the DAC moniker. It might not be the best term to use for legal purposes, but in many ways it's a great descriptor of BTS. BTS offers financial products, and our growth is going to depend on having solid software that allows for WORKING financial products that provide UTILITy. If that mission is accomplished, people will use the products, and REAL, SUSTAINABLE, NON-SPECULATIVE growth will follow from there.
8
General Discussion / Re: Bter is having problems with a bunch of coins
« on: July 23, 2015, 05:20:44 pm »BTer withdrawal back in action, successfully pulled some out. Should help the price with people no longer having to dump for btc.
dumped for BTC yesterday....great
9
General Discussion / Re: Coindesk: Crypto 2.0. 2015 - Turning Bitcoin Theory into Big Business
« on: January 03, 2015, 10:10:23 pm »
I cringe to think that people who have potentially never heard of us before are being directed to the current Bitshares.org site
10
General Discussion / Re: About Bitshares and the Network Effect - A call to arms.
« on: January 02, 2015, 12:31:16 am »We urgently need to fix bitshares.org to be able to even start this
this needs to be our number one short-term priority. I don't even feel comfortable sending people to the official site..
11
General Discussion / Re: Top Priorities for BitShares RIGHT NOW? (Part 2, consolidating the list)
« on: December 29, 2014, 04:04:26 pm »24 ) nice good looking and info oriented website for ordinary users to know more about BTS .
Oh, wait .......There is already one . www.AboutBTS.com
I also think fixing Bitshares.org should be a top priority. Every other major crypto has a great looking OFFICIAL site....ours is badly badly lacking.
12
General Discussion / Re: BitUSD onramp
« on: December 24, 2014, 05:10:32 pm »
Are there any onramps currently in the works? I kind of remember hearing that those discussions had fallen through...
13
General Discussion / Re: BitShares the Book and internet Show to launch this week
« on: December 17, 2014, 01:36:58 am »
This book rocks, guys. Can't wait to see Bitshares.tv. Great job Max!
14
General Discussion / Re: Is the Official Marketing Team Sleeping?
« on: December 15, 2014, 04:51:45 pm »
I gotta agree with Rune. Even if Brian has something big planned, the total lack of action in the interim makes me think that he's not the person who should be leading this project. I'd feel much more comfortable having Methodx in charge of marketing. He took the time and effort to set up Nullstreet and get TONS of initiatives going in the meantime.
Does Brian deserve the opportunity to respond and prove himself? I guess so. Even if he can't reveal his "secret sauce" to the community, what he NEEDS to do at the very least is hold a meeting with the top guys from Nullstreet (Methodx, HPenvy) and describe to them in detail his plan. I trust those guys far more than I trust him, as they are active members of the community doing real things.
That being said, we've called for marketing transparency before and haven't gotten it. The one thing we CAN do is hire more marketing delegates, starting with Matt608 who is going to tackle Argentina, one of the most important markets out there for us. VOTE!
Does Brian deserve the opportunity to respond and prove himself? I guess so. Even if he can't reveal his "secret sauce" to the community, what he NEEDS to do at the very least is hold a meeting with the top guys from Nullstreet (Methodx, HPenvy) and describe to them in detail his plan. I trust those guys far more than I trust him, as they are active members of the community doing real things.
That being said, we've called for marketing transparency before and haven't gotten it. The one thing we CAN do is hire more marketing delegates, starting with Matt608 who is going to tackle Argentina, one of the most important markets out there for us. VOTE!
15
General Discussion / Re: Is the Official Marketing Team Sleeping?
« on: December 15, 2014, 04:25:25 pm »
I agree that Bitmarket is doing great work. But Brian is the one in charge of marketing, and we have no idea what he's doing.
Let's have some transparency with the marketing. Please.
Let's have some transparency with the marketing. Please.
