1
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: NOTES are listed ar CMC
« on: June 04, 2015, 03:54:29 am »
Ander I honestly have no idea what you're talking about.
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.
Pages: [1] 2
2
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: MIDEM + Secret Sauce / product release plans = ???
« on: June 03, 2015, 12:08:19 am »Quote
i don't care about the viability of one project over another
I do.
Now more than ever I think there needs to be a project to build a viable alternative to music distribution and commerce and I am starting to think that Peertracks, BitShares Music whatever you want to call it - this project - is not it.
3
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: NOTES are listed ar CMC
« on: June 03, 2015, 12:01:32 am »That would be worse. This is not only the way it should have been done, but after fundraising for a separate blockchain and spending all the money, you're suggesting they don't even build it and we all should have been using the original BitShares blockchain all along!?If whatever PEETRACKS is doing with blockchain was already possible with BitShares I would agree ... But I don't think it is ..
Also, IIRC and they are going to offer streaming in the MVP already .. then they will need to do alot of development at the frontend and server tech too .. The Peertracks business is NOT just a blockchain .. it's more than that .. and does cost money to develop and maintain .. independent of the ACTUAL blockchain
Disclaimer: I am not defending the secrecy around Peertracks and MUSIC .. I'd rather point out to you that Peertracks is not just a blockchain ..
I'm not saying Peertracks is
In the April update Cob said
Quote
The front end (the PeerTracks web app MVP) is complete and is being readied to plug into the music blockchain. A few pioneer artists will be able to create their profile and token as soon as the blockchain is completed!
The blockchain itself is being built as you read this. Most of it is complete and we are approaching testing phase.
Great the testing phase must surely be here by now since that was almost two months ago. The front-end is done (that's the bit that is privately owned by Peertracks) and the Blockchain is "being built as you read this". Well I guess since we're still reading this it's still being built.
When will it be released? "When it's done". Can we see evidence of progress? "No". Can we have detailed info on the process or the work? "No." What about some hint about the way the money has been spent? "No."
The consolation prize is that people can "sell their notes". Well guess what? I happen to actually care about the purpose of the project, the creation of an alternative system for music distribution and commerce.
I'm not saying they owe me this. I'm saying my personal assessment of their prospects is based on a demonstrated record of software releases and their response to questions like these (or lack thereof) - not
Perhaps some more of you should consider this method of assessment for this and all crypto projects. Or perhaps you're blinded by sunk cost fallacy.
The only reason I'm posting this is because I'm surprised there is so little evidence-based appraisal of the health of this project on a forum that is totally dominated by this project's claims in absence of proof.
edits: added strikethrough on a couple of grammatical and typo errors
4
Muse/SoundDAC / MIDEM + Secret Sauce / product release plans = ???
« on: June 02, 2015, 11:08:22 am »
My interest is not in investment of notes or picking which artists are going to be most popular. My primary interest is in an efficient, equitable and economically viable music distribution and commerce system.
5
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: NOTES are listed ar CMC
« on: June 02, 2015, 11:00:21 am »
That would be worse. This is not only the way it should have been done, but after fundraising for a separate blockchain and spending all the money, you're suggesting they don't even build it and we all should have been using the original BitShares blockchain all along!?
6
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: MIDEM + Secret Sauce / product release plans = ???
« on: June 02, 2015, 09:46:07 am »For the record, I'm not at all convinced by "secret sauce". The idea seems to go like this:Christo, are you questioning the existence of a disruptive business model or Peertracks ability to execute? the issue here is that we are having to make assumptions based on limited information and you quite rightly point out that what we have gleaned is incomplete. I think a lot of questions have been asked and the sense that the community seems to have been willing to accept very little information is about trust.
1. If the music industry hears about our plans they will recognise their brilliance and steal them. The music industry has the capability and the will to do what we are doing, they just haven't had the great idea we have had yet.
2. If the music industry heard about the PeerTracks music business model or software architecture etc. they could revolutionise the music industry for the benefit of artists instead of us!
3. Therefore we have to keep the idea secret until we demonstrate it is effective by getting artists on board.
4. The music industry, though they have such resources to compete with us if we tell them the idea, cannot possibly catch us once we get a few months lead time to build the system.
There are several things wrong with this line of reasoning but everyone here seems to take it on face value without question.
I can go into more detail if anyone is interested. Of course if I have something wrong here please let me know.
I believe peertracks has a new business model, powered by Bitshares and they have been doing their best to build the platform and stay ahead of the competition. My biggest concern is around what happens once the time for secrecy has passed. It will become clear pretty quickly if they have succeeded in building a disruptive business model and if they have failed, then we try again.
The project members have chosen not to tell us the true status of the project in any detail because of fear of competition. How revolutionary can this "new business model" really be if it needs to be protected by secrecy? It must be something that is very easily reproducible by the music industry.
Not a good sign.
After watching this project for about 8 months (and they have been going well over a year) with no software releases I am being drawn to the conclusion that Peertracks is basically using the money raised to build proprietary software which they own 100% and they are neglecting to invest any significant time into a BitShares music blockchain or "distributed automated company" for music which this forum is supposed to be about.
It's a stark contrast with BitShares.
I asked for detail about the operation in an earlier thread https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,12323.0.html and was almost completely ignored. I asked for the details of the supposed "nonprofit" called BitShares Music Foundation and was ignored.
Who exactly is being paid with the money raised? Is any money left? Is there going to be any open source software released or is EVERYTHING A SECRET?
We hear about promotional activity but no engineering detail. We hear about music industry event MIDEM, we hear the podcast interviews rack up. Lots of talk. No software has been released. No beta program has launched. No source code with anything to do with music is even visible.
Why? Oh yeah secret sauce. I'm not convinced.
Now, it's possible in theory that the team is totally capable of executing and they really do believe that they cannot release anything until they have some kind of first-mover advantage against the music industry. But they are asking people who are paying their bills to believe them without any apparent obligation to even answer basic questions about their operation. I don't consider this honourable behaviour and I don't respect it.
This in no way resembles a competent professional operation.
Come on Peertracks prove me wrong!
7
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: NOTES are listed ar CMC
« on: June 02, 2015, 06:48:24 am »...
Up to now, what percentage of the crowdfunding money went into developing Peertracks compared to the music blockchain? Maybe @cob might be able to answer this one. I know this question have already been asked, but IIRC there wasn't a crystal clear answer. That answer matters, because my initial understanding when I donated to the pre-sale was that the money was to be used to develop the blockchain, not some privately held front-end.
Bravo! I asked this question and was told to wait a few months until March. Well it's June now and there is still no answer to this basic question.
What is being done with the money? How much is being put into a private company called PeerTracks and how much is being put into a blockchain resource that we can all use whether it is called BitShares Music or anything else?
When the answer is missing, the reasonable conclusion is that the people who have the money want to spend it without being accountable for how they spend it. (edit: and that's putting it very nicely!)
8
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: MIDEM + Secret Sauce / product release plans = ???
« on: June 02, 2015, 06:25:33 am »
For the record, I'm not at all convinced by "secret sauce". The idea seems to go like this:
1. If the music industry hears about our plans they will recognise their brilliance and steal them. The music industry has the capability and the will to do what we are doing, they just haven't had the great idea we have had yet.
2. If the music industry heard about the PeerTracks music business model or software architecture etc. they could revolutionise the music industry for the benefit of artists instead of us!
3. Therefore we have to keep the idea secret until we demonstrate it is effective by getting artists on board.
4. The music industry, though they have such resources to compete with us if we tell them the idea, cannot possibly catch us once we get a few months lead time to build the system.
There are several things wrong with this line of reasoning but everyone here seems to take it on face value without question.
I can go into more detail if anyone is interested. Of course if I have something wrong here please let me know.
1. If the music industry hears about our plans they will recognise their brilliance and steal them. The music industry has the capability and the will to do what we are doing, they just haven't had the great idea we have had yet.
2. If the music industry heard about the PeerTracks music business model or software architecture etc. they could revolutionise the music industry for the benefit of artists instead of us!
3. Therefore we have to keep the idea secret until we demonstrate it is effective by getting artists on board.
4. The music industry, though they have such resources to compete with us if we tell them the idea, cannot possibly catch us once we get a few months lead time to build the system.
There are several things wrong with this line of reasoning but everyone here seems to take it on face value without question.
I can go into more detail if anyone is interested. Of course if I have something wrong here please let me know.
9
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Why do we need NoteUSD?
« on: January 08, 2015, 04:18:43 am »Quote
There is no need for a separate blockchain. Any BitShares Music features could be implemented on the BTS blockchain. But that would require another "merger" and diluting BTS even more to absorb Note holders and the right to use all BTC collected in the crowdsale. I don't think anyone wants to go through that again.
Thanks arhag for clarifying this. Fundraising again.
10
Technical Support / Re: BitBTC advantages over Bitcoin
« on: January 07, 2015, 02:29:11 pm »
There is of course a compounded systemic risk. If Bitcoin crashes due to security defects, you will lose of course. With BitBTC you can also lose if that happens to BitShares.
11
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Why do we need NoteUSD?
« on: January 07, 2015, 02:22:50 pm »Can't NOTEs be used as the underlying currency, like BTS is used in BitShares? It seems to be quite redundant to have NoteUSD and it brings with it its own problems.
Because the average user needs a stable currency, if he puts 10$ in he should still have $10 worth a month later if he hasn't spent it. Also because songs etc should have a stable price, not 10 BTS today, 15 BTS tomorrow, 5 BTS next week.It seems like NoteUSD is the equivalent of BitUSD except orchestrated by a separate blockchain that uses Notes instead of BTS.
My question is why not use BitUSD and BitShares instead of NoteUSD and Notes?
Because it's on a different blockchain with it's own version of assets specifically tailored to artists.
LOL yeah but why doesn't BitShares have the capability to do that?
Mixing the two doesn't seem like a good idea to me, Music will have very specific requirements for it's assets and user issued assets that will be very different from Bitshares. Let Bitshares be a financial DAC and Music be a music DAC imo.
I guess you would also prefer a separate blockchain for movies, software, books and each other digital content medium or is music the only one that needs it's own blockchain?
If these things have been explained in detail please point me to the info. I haven't found it.
12
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Why do we need NoteUSD?
« on: January 07, 2015, 01:54:01 pm »Can't NOTEs be used as the underlying currency, like BTS is used in BitShares? It seems to be quite redundant to have NoteUSD and it brings with it its own problems.
Because the average user needs a stable currency, if he puts 10$ in he should still have $10 worth a month later if he hasn't spent it. Also because songs etc should have a stable price, not 10 BTS today, 15 BTS tomorrow, 5 BTS next week.It seems like NoteUSD is the equivalent of BitUSD except orchestrated by a separate blockchain that uses Notes instead of BTS.
My question is why not use BitUSD and BitShares instead of NoteUSD and Notes?
Because it's on a different blockchain with it's own version of assets specifically tailored to artists.
LOL yeah but why doesn't BitShares have the capability to do that?
13
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Why do we need NoteUSD?
« on: January 07, 2015, 02:25:29 am »
It seems like NoteUSD is the equivalent of BitUSD except orchestrated by a separate blockchain that uses Notes instead of BTS.
My question is why not use BitUSD and BitShares instead of NoteUSD and Notes?
My question is why not use BitUSD and BitShares instead of NoteUSD and Notes?
14
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: What is the delineation between Peertracks and Bitshares Music?
« on: January 05, 2015, 05:21:42 am »
Thanks for your response Cob.
So if I wanted to work on this problem of equitable music distribution and commerce I would not be able to collaborate on or integrate with the music blockchain until its planned release in March. After that launch Peertracks will also be competing with other companies to deliver streaming and curation services etc. on top of that BitShares Music Blockchain, likewise non-competing complementary services can be developed only after that time.
I understand that it's difficult to make public statements about how the money will be split between the company and the non-profit when you haven't yet decided how the money should be spent. Hopefully you've received legal advice about the proper operation of the two entities!
Is Peertracks a registered company and is BitShares Music Foundation a registered non-profit? I can't find any registration records for entities with these names. The Notes Sale Agreement does not identify any registered entities. Peertracks domain names however, have been registered to a company called "The Corral Group". Is this a parent company?
It may sound like I'm hassling you here, but really I'm just trying to establish exactly how the project is being run since I'm a potential passionate advocate and supporter. Also, you seem to be the project's primary spokesperson.
So if I wanted to work on this problem of equitable music distribution and commerce I would not be able to collaborate on or integrate with the music blockchain until its planned release in March. After that launch Peertracks will also be competing with other companies to deliver streaming and curation services etc. on top of that BitShares Music Blockchain, likewise non-competing complementary services can be developed only after that time.
I understand that it's difficult to make public statements about how the money will be split between the company and the non-profit when you haven't yet decided how the money should be spent. Hopefully you've received legal advice about the proper operation of the two entities!
Is Peertracks a registered company and is BitShares Music Foundation a registered non-profit? I can't find any registration records for entities with these names. The Notes Sale Agreement does not identify any registered entities. Peertracks domain names however, have been registered to a company called "The Corral Group". Is this a parent company?
It may sound like I'm hassling you here, but really I'm just trying to establish exactly how the project is being run since I'm a potential passionate advocate and supporter. Also, you seem to be the project's primary spokesperson.
15
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Can Music beat that ?
« on: January 05, 2015, 12:26:56 am »Quote
there is a link at the bottom of the infographic to some of its data sources.
Thanks I should have spotted that. FTR full data here: http://bitly.com/DigitalRoyalty
Pages: [1] 2
