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.


Messages - bubble789

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7
1
General Discussion / Re: Things that make you go Ummm...
« on: September 18, 2015, 12:45:06 pm »
Quote from: btswildpig on September 18, 2015, 06:59:54 am
You do know that you can list a bunch of "problems" for the most advanced aircraft carrier right ?

The competitive edge of Bitcoin is the liquidity , marketcap , network effect , not technology .

You can bash bitcoin's technology all you want , but in the end you would just push away a major community that's open minded enough to invest in something "so lame , so slow , so old" . If they're opened minded for something "so lame" , imagine what they would see in BitShares if you present it well ?

The best way to achieve the success for BitShares is to grow the whole crypto and blockchain industry instead of hoping people would abandon bitcoin and come to jesus .

Like it or not , Bitcoin will grow , the blockchain industry will grow , multiple projects will grow , even the ones lamer than Bitshares , even the ones who refuse to take BitShares's technology , even the ones with 1 hour confirmation . And investors are investing in the whole industry instead of a single project now .

You have to adjust your expectations . You don't need people to sell their bitcoin and buy Bitshares . You need people to buy Bitcoin and Bitshares because they're both awesome .

And there are many ways to show how awesome something is . Making people think they're not wise enough to choose your product is not a good way . At least not a good way for a project that's suppose to gain the most network effect as possible .

Come back to the question in OP . It's not a matter of "good" or "bad" or "problems" , it's about the suitableness in specific applications . You should link the features to a specific application to sell it , such as high volume stock trading .

Imagine a world where people use Bitcoin as currency in a major way , and businessmen use BItShares to issue and trade stocks , and Bitcoin would be still slow , lame as hell . So what ? Who says that's not a win for BitShares if other project still succeed with lame features while BitShares also succeeded ?

wise words as always.
i do enjoy reading your insights :)

2
General Discussion / Re: Ethereum price discussion
« on: August 22, 2015, 08:16:21 am »
Quote from: Ander on August 22, 2015, 01:12:25 am
Quote from: bubble789 on August 22, 2015, 12:23:12 am
Please dont make this thread your personal day trading journal. Sorry but it is annoying (to me). :)

I made the thread, now its my daytrading journal. [emoji14]
Sorry.
Do rename it in that case. :)

3
General Discussion / Re: Ethereum price discussion
« on: August 22, 2015, 12:23:12 am »
Please dont make this thread your personal day trading journal. Sorry but it is annoying (to me). :)

4
Technical Support / Re: When will we have public testnet for Bitshares 2.0 ?
« on: July 01, 2015, 08:04:30 am »
"Hosk" and Krills lol

5
Technical Support / Re: [ANN] BANX Capital Joins BitShares Exchange Network
« on: June 23, 2015, 12:38:24 pm »
is this why BTS price  is tanking ?.... :o

6
General Discussion / Re: What's a Whale?
« on: June 20, 2015, 01:15:06 pm »
Quote from: sittingduck on June 20, 2015, 01:10:13 pm
Some one with 0.5% of shares or more


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

current upply of 2.5B or the max supply of 3.7B ?
anyway definition of a whale is relative i guess ;)

7
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Road map
« on: June 17, 2015, 10:43:28 am »
@cob:
so have you decided on the dilution model and supply cap for Muse? ;)

8
General Discussion / Re: Cryptonomex? WTF is this?
« on: June 15, 2015, 12:50:48 am »
@Dan and Stan:
We just hope that you can consider a "better" aligning of interest between BTS, the devs and cryptonomex. A great example is RippleLabs, the legal entity's success is closely tied to the success of the protocol. RippleLabs helps integrations, consults partners and trains more devs. They actively seek deals and partnerships to expand the ecosystem. So their aim is to make Ripple successful so their (the legal entity's) stash will be worth billions. On the other hand, i was given the impression that cryptonomex (the devs) and BTS's interests have never been less aligned. In the last hangout, fuzzy asked whether cryptonomex will be holding fund in BTS because of this concern i believe, but Dan didn't see it.

All the issues with IP and licenses aside, I hope cryptonomex reconsiders its business strategy and direction. Let's try to work out a relationship analogous to Ripple - RippleLabs, because it seems like it works (big partners coming in, better prospect of mainstream adoption, millions of funding, all the mistakes that can be learnt from). The details should be of course modified to fit our ecosystem here at BTS.

All in all, I am not saying that cryptonomex and the devs are abandoning BTS, and not that they are not bringing in deals and partnerships; but a better alignment of interests and goals would be even better.

9
General Discussion / Re: Cryptonomex? WTF is this?
« on: June 14, 2015, 04:18:02 am »
Quote from: Stan on June 14, 2015, 04:09:11 am

Its after midnight and we've already established that I'm at least as dumb as Toast, but I couldn't spot the tweaks and mods to be considered...

:O)

so you are saying *by nature* these are analogous ?
if so, i believe you may have failed again in presenting it in such a way that people will like it..

10
General Discussion / Re: Cryptonomex? WTF is this?
« on: June 14, 2015, 03:35:24 am »
Quote from: bytemaster on June 13, 2015, 04:39:09 pm
Quote
BitShares is first and foremost a protocol based upon a public ledger. Anyone may provide and distribute an alternative implementation of the protocol and use the protocol for any other blockchain. The Graphene Toolkit produced by Cryptonomex, Inc is only one possible implementation of the protocol.

The Graphene Toolkit will be licensed by Cryptonomex, Inc for use with the BitShares (BTS) blockchain. The terms of the license will allow the Graphene Toolkit and any derivatives thereof to be used with the BitShares blockchain without any restrictions. Cryptonomex, Inc retains all rights to the Graphene Toolkit and any derivatives thereof for any other use. The BitShares blockchain is defined as exactly one global ledger. In the event of a hard-fork only one branch may be considered the official BitShares ledger which will be unambiguously decided as the fork with the highest market capitalization.

This means that from the perspective of BitShares, the Graphene Toolkit is fully open source and its use, distribution, and future cannot be dictated by Cryptonomex or any other entity.

After further contemplation, I think that the business model you guys are building is good for everyone.
However, I believe certain tweaks and mods could be done to make it a better presentation for people. Remember one of the things we learnt from 0.9.x system where we did not "phrase/present" out "inflation system" well enough compared to Nushares?

I understand that the devs meant good for everyone with the conception of Cryptonomex, but I believe this time we can learn from Ripple for the business model. Cryptonomex and Bitshares can be analogous to RippleLabs and Ripple, with the difference that Cryptonomex controlling everything else it can but not Bitshares (hence no liabilities or whatsoever). RippleLabs has value because of all the ripple they still control, Cryptonomex will have value because of the license and talents it possess. Cryptonomex can receive fundings in a traditional way (seed, round ABC..), and everything else you guys have planned still basically can work as intended.

I may have missed something and not considered as many angles as you guys did but hope this option is considered.

11
General Discussion / Re: Cryptonomex? WTF is this?
« on: June 13, 2015, 03:25:47 am »
well we did not ask anyone to be owned by BTS now or at any point in time. we ask for community leaders.

but i guess with Dan insisting on being a contractor now, it is time to rebalancing my BTS position.

cross post:
Quote from: bubble789 on June 13, 2015, 02:28:29 am
My opinion is that a distributed community/society *does need* leaders in order to survive and stay focused+competitive. It doesn't have to be the "official" head but a socially-recognised and unanimously-agreed-on leaders who help to lead and serve the community. And again I want to stress that we won't need dictators but capable and devoted leaders.

Dan and co. have been doing that job extremely well and I (and hopefully the community) wish that the team continues to and stays committed in playing these roles in bitshares ecosystem.

12
General Discussion / Re: Cryptonomex? WTF is this?
« on: June 13, 2015, 03:19:20 am »
and I thought you were talking about working towards our guiding principles and ideological goals and purposes first then monetary gains will come eventually.
and I thought (after this whole time when the team has been underpaid) BTS developers were working hard towards something bigger than just monetary gains.
but, but I understand your point completely.

Quote from: bytemaster on June 12, 2015, 10:25:34 pm
BTS stakeholders must make do what it takes to retain talent, period.
Developers must do what makes the most sense to maximize their income, period.

BTS has been public domain thus far, which means anyone could take the code and the developers have been independent which means they are "free to leave".   

It really comes down to the community continuing to make "staying" the best option available.   This is FREE MARKET cooperation.

If GS wants to enter the market with a ton of money and produce a product that is compatible with our vision, then it would be stupid for BTS developers to not take them up on a job offer.  It would be stupid for both financial and philosophical reasons, namely, freedom supporting blockchain tech going mainstream is the real goal.   
If GS wants to produce a blockchain that is not compatible with BitShares philosophy, then developers should still take them up on it because it would be a DIFFERENT MARKET and they could use the money earned to improve BTS.

Bottom line the only reason for developers to not take them up on it is if they actually think they could compete head to head with GS when all technology is equal. 


13
General Discussion / Re: Cryptonomex? WTF is this?
« on: June 13, 2015, 03:05:52 am »
Quote from: newmine on June 12, 2015, 07:17:05 pm
I also found a post by a concerned person

I guess nm was talking about this post https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,16318.msg216006.html#msg216006
and just to clarify, I did not mean to create FUD but wanted a better understanding of the potential issues I foresee. 

14
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: What if BitShares could have perfect privacy?
« on: June 13, 2015, 02:34:48 am »
Quote from: jabbajabbaつ◕_◕つ on June 12, 2015, 10:57:50 pm
stealth + 5%... sounds good

this is good haha

15
Beyond Bitcoin [closed] / Re: Hangout Questions for Bytemaster (Due Friday @ 10:00am EST)
« on: June 13, 2015, 02:28:29 am »
Quote from: sittingduck on June 13, 2015, 01:15:45 am
Cryptonomex needs to separate themselves from being seen as the head for bts to survive.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My opinion is that a distributed community/society *does need* leaders in order to survive and stay focused+competitive. It doesn't have to be the "official" head but a socially-recognised and unanimously-agreed-on leaders who help to lead and serve the community. And again I want to stress that we won't need dictators but capable and devoted leaders.

Dan and co. have been doing that job extremely well and I (and hopefully the community) wish that the team continues to and stays committed in playing these roles in bitshares ecosystem.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 23 queries.