Quote from: arhag on June 09, 2016, 04:21:27 pm

So this comes with the disadvantage that there may potentially be a much smaller supply of SD than the demand for it. If this is still true despite dropping interest rates to 0%, then SD will have a large premium over the dollar. This is nothing new to the BitShares community. Even with the shorting-to-existence ability, BitUSD has experienced premiums over the USD as well. But with stronger limits to the supply of SD, I wonder how it will manifest in SD's ability to maintain the peg.

I've hardly looked at it but I would guess Steem & SBD should fail faster than any stable currency to date imo.

Either it will fail in the sense that Steem can't support the redemption of the SBD that's been awarded prior to July 4th & Steem will become fairly worthless or if there's some limiting mechanism which I believe there is, it will fail in the sense that you can only redeem your SBD at 0.1% a day or some other non viable amount. (In which case Steem will seem like a soon to be bankrupt bank no-one would want to have dollars in and shareholders would be racing for the exits too.)

In a nutshell:

BM's team delayed work on STEEM to build Stealth for Onceuponatime.
They completed that effort as specified.
They concluded that more work would need to be done to make it truly usable by the public (i.e. profitable).
BM refunded what Onceup paid (ate the cost of development himself) and received the useless tokens in exchange.
Onceup arranged with BitShares Munich to buy BM's tokens and finish the task with their own funds.

Quote from: -banano- on May 20, 2016, 05:57:32 am

lol, you said "STEEM subforum on Bitsharestalk" after they ran out of money to even finish "BTS Stealth"

Nothing cannot be done without the thought of profit in this craziest land o'Bitshares!

"Profit" is what you get after you are able to pay all your bills.

Quote from: lil_jay890 on May 18, 2016, 08:25:31 pm

Quote from: nomoreheroes7 on May 18, 2016, 08:22:37 pm

I for one miss seeing newmine's posts. He may have been a bit over the top, but hell there's been at least some truth to a lot of what he's said over time. BitShares needs its critics so it can know what it's doing wrong and find ways to fix the problem through open discussion. But I see everyone's ready to just grab a pitchfork around here and demand silence from any who dare speak ill of the almighty BTS.

 

That's why they want everyone to move over to steem... So the Larimer Lemmings can downvote anyone who doubts the messiah.

You haven't thought this through (I know it hurts, but brains need exercise too).

Any post on this Forum could be banished, without a vote, at the whim of a moderator. And many of the moderators are actually the very people that you seem to be accusing of desiring censorship of contrary opinion.

Moderators can, and do, delete spam and phising posts, but seem to tolerate a great deal of rude and obnoxious behavior and trolling.  The filtering of spam is accomplished at steemit.com by the community's downvotes, not a moderator's. Why do you think that there is going to be the inevitability of censorship of contrary opinion there if it is not happening here?

But, most importantly, positive effort, planning and work on behalf of BitShares can be and is being rewarded at steemit.com but definitely not here.

Tony man, of course I've got one.

Quote from: tonyk on February 23, 2016, 04:37:37 am

There is no d word... dilution is misnomer for btc and BTS...Let's assume I believe this (just because there is cap), and everyone else should/ is as well.

BUT

There are 23,000,000 new BTS entering into circulation each month.

23 Mil BTS needed to be absorbed by new money entering the system just so the price stays the same...

Do you think that on average 90,000 K USD are entering/buying into BTS every month right now?

 

There you go

Quote from: tonyk on April 20, 2016, 01:26:50 am

Quote from: onceuponatime on April 18, 2016, 09:38:24 pm

Quote from: liondani on April 18, 2016, 10:52:21 am

Quote from: Empirical1.2 on April 18, 2016, 10:28:02 am

My wild speculation is that when you funded STEALTH you were unaware of another DAC being concurrently developed. I think it's a possibility you have been given some of the 80% of STEEM they initially mined themselves (& obfuscated in their Bitcointslk announcement) as some form of compensation, hence your multiple post support for a DAC  that I would think you would otherwise not be thrilled about in your position.

I am sure! (or something similar) 
I can't  find myself another explanation   

You may have a mean spirited and grasping myopia if you can't find yourself another explanation.

The fact of the matter is that Bytemaster offered to reimburse me from his own pocket  the full amount of the investment that I had made into the STEALTH project when he determined that the vulnerability of inexperienced or careless users to losing their funds would be too high and unfixable within the time frame of our original agreement.

I found his offer to be extraordinarily generous and indicative of his honest character and the integrity of his overall vision.

After much consultation with Dan and members of the STEALTH Board, I have accepted a 6 million BTS payment from Dan in return for 800,000 STEALTH. I reluctantly did this because I am in need of funds for other BitShares projects I am contributing to and because I had expected the STEALTH project to be at a level whereby I would be accumulating funds from it by now.

The new Plan:

I will pay 20,000 STEALTH each to two Team Leaders to move forward  the implementation of STEALTH (in its new, more limited blinded functionality). Since they are being paid only STEALTH it will be in their interest to maximize the value of STEALTH shares in any way they can come up with (temporary fees, or whatever). This would benefit all holders of the STEALTH FBA.

I will provide the Team Leaders with a significant (but not unlimited) budget from my own pocket to contract the necessary talent to implement development of STEALTH up to an agreed upon functionality.

I will use a percentage of the payment from Bytemaster to help provide liquidity in the new STEEM ecosystem

I will use the remainder of the BTS from Dan, after the above disbursements, to create liquidity in the bitCAD, bitEURO and bitSILVER markets in preparation for hopefully widespread adoption of Ken's POS system and as a marketing tool for my presentation to a centralized exchange to entice them to add BTS, bitCAD and bitUSD (and possibly bitSILVER and bitEURO) to their current lineup of bitcoin and ether, fiat CDN and fiat USD. That way, merchants could move bitCAD or bitUSD they receive from their customers to that exchange and then withdraw fiat CDN or USD to their bank accounts to pay their bills.

I have not been given any position by Bytemaster in the STEEM initiative, and in fact I am, in comparison to many of you, at a disadvantage because I am not a miner. But I can read White Papers and I am a fairly good judge of character - so STEEM has my full support.

Interesting... so I have narrow minded view of facts because:
-My similar size investment in BTS never got an offer to be refunded/bought back.... so I should take your take on facts not mine correct? Or I will be labeled short-sighted/narrow minded, right?

-----
Let's assume the facts are as you state them... so you provide 45K for the development of BTS.... you did not care if other more important features are skipped because of it (let's call it a difference in judgments and your stealth was the best could happen to BTS as far as you are concerned)....But after 3+ month nothing comes out of it...all the rest is stopped...even more...a new competing chain is developed in total secrecy by the leader of BTS....
and you still support BM's vision? Vision where he promises and not deliveres, and instead launches a new 'personally owned chain'
-----------
You getting back 6mil bts for 45K USD and 20% of not finish (mostly useless) feature might speak for your generosity and or desire to sponsor BM... but what is the reason you included that info above anyway? Paying 15K for non existing and never paying for itself feature is not a sign of a great vision you self claim (inferred by accusing other of short sightedness)?...
What I am coming to is...NOW you gonna take you efforts of providing liquidity? Now after 3 months in which you virtually delayed this feature by forcing another feature (that ultimately failed) in front of that?
-----
You can like STEEM all you want, but do not forget that your 'sponsorship' provided the best ground for it to be developed in private.... and STEEM is nothing more than a centralized entity trying to take advantage of 2 established cultural phenomenon (blockchain and social midia sites) in an effort to not do much more but grab money for 'select few'... maybe that is your intersection of yours and BM ideals...idk.

The purpose of your post?