Isn't it possible to make changes to the infrastructure of bitcoin or eth? I know the decentralisation is pretty strong, but I wonder if Etherum can be changed in the future to work around f.ex. scalability issues? Sorry if my question is stupid, I'm just pretty new to bitcoin

I'm not a computer scientist so use appropriate amounts of salt with my comments. From what I understand there is a fundamentally different design at the base of bitcoin and bitshares (and other graphene based blockchains).

The difference seems to be mainly whereas bitcoin stores and processes operations on the network, bitshares deals with messages (the results of operations). The latter allows for the massive optimizations and speed (not using the inefficient blockchain for the slow stuff, but only for the absolutely essentials). It also allows for more complex stuff like order matching on the decentralized exchange, something that is apparently virtually impossible to do on both bitcoin and ethereum.

Ethereum uses a similar design with bitcoin, but with a lot more operations and complexity. While there probably are ways to massively improve bandwidth and tx/s, from what I understand most of those can be applied to bitcoin and because of it's simplicity it would always have higher bandwidth then ethereum using the same techniques.

What ethereum can't do however is migrating to the message-system graphene uses without breaking off completely from their current design (unlikely since all the current customers would have to rewrite all their current apps and software) and that seems to be one of it's achilles-heels. One of the reasons that there is still not a bitshares-level app on ethereum is this design, despite all the devs clamoring that the first thing they'd write would be a dex and there being an opensource working one right here to copy. Also even if the bandwidth issue would be solved, it would still be held back by it's blocktimes and having to do linear operations. Graphene based chains seem to be capable to do multiple operations during a single block on top of the low 3 second blocktimes.

I only skimmed through the article referenced at the top, but superficially he does seem to have a point. Despite all the smugness I'm seeing in the Ethereum-community about the issues with bitcoin, I'm stupefied by the observation that most not realizing they have all the exact same issues, if not even worse in their case. (centralization, governance issues, waaaay to much power in the hands of a few, immediate bandwidth problems) For example, delayed transactions on the "simple" bitcoin network does not necessarily destroy the value propositions of the bitcoin tokens (although it is not a very good user experience), I'm pretty sure that the same situation on ethereum would have more serious consequences.

The hype-machine trying to convince people that ethereum can do and replace everything seems to be more than a little misleading. To be fair though, I've seen people like Zamfir issue public warnings, about not running mission critical code on the network, because of it's experimental state.

Ha-ha, btsbots sold all my BTS right when the dump started. My gratitude to suckers who bought it

If that sucker bought all the way to the bottom, then at the moment he'd be pretty happy with his 30% increase in btc. I wish I was a sucker that got 30% profit on his mistakes.

I know I shouldn't but I had a little chuckle at all the jaded bts-veteran remarks. Seems the long bear market has traumatized people in not being able to believe the price could possible rise.

I'm not saying it will rise btw, I've only been part of crypto since the mtgox collapse and bear market. I've never experienced an uptrend like this and I also have a hard time trusting it.

Still waiting on price to adjust.  I'm trying to set up lifetime membership and create a token.  Right now all fees are crazy high including just transfers.  Without the low fees what advantages does this exchange have over others...?

Well this is also kinda a problem of luxury that was not anticipated. Never in their wildest dreams did the progenitors of bitshares anticipate such a rapid price increase, that the fee adjustment could not keep up. 

On a more serious note, I feel ya. I did appreciate the trolling by the wallet though with it stating that it costs merely 8K bts to upgrade to lifetime membership. Whish I actually bothered to do the math before I clicked it though. Another expensive impulse buy.

EOS seems to be similar to Aeternity, wondering which one will be better?.

Judging just by things both projects have publicized then aeternity purely as a blockchain itself is not very impressive. 30 second blocktimes and 3 tx/s. Whereas the current blockchain of bitshares has apparently on average 1second blockconfirmations and thousands of tx/s.

EOS aims to increase and optimize the bitshares blockchain even further with hundreds of cores each at the very least close to bitshares current throughput per node/witness. He also talked about multiple eos-networks (like how we now have bitshares, steemit and peerplays), that would be able to interact with each other either through gateways or sidechains (provided that nut gets cracked).  The off-chain thing is a completely different debate, I don't know enough about that to have anything intelligent to say, other that I fear centralization and points of failure with that approach.

Thanks to roelandp setting up a periscope stream on his phone I could pick up snippets of the presentation today. Unfortunately I only got snippets and I think I missed most of it, but here is what I could pick up.

No info yet on token distribution, updates will happen through the mailinglist at eos.io.

As has been leaked on the telegram group, eos will be a next step in graphene technology adding parallel threads or processing as it were. Where applications have to be written around messages and every block can do multiple actions instead of the just one currently. Applications can communicate rapidly with others in the same blockchain, but also with other chains through sidechains which will have higher latency (40 seconds for confirmation finality)

The vision seems to be for multiple eos-chains (even private ones) to be able to coexist and communicate with each other, further enhancing the throughput and bandwidth.

There will be a slight overhead because of the vm, making it initially a little slower compared to single threaded applications like steem and bitshares, but because of the options to run multiple parallel threads and because of the multiple operations for messages per block that can be mitigated quite a bit.

I also think I heard Dan mention that nodes can pick and choose which messages to focus on, like an exchange not having to process socialmedia transactions, although all apps can still interact with each other.

EOS economic model is similar to steem, where initially revenue will be generated through 5% inflation of tokens, which can be changed and distributed in a still to decide manner by the token holders. (Although the 5% inflation can only be lowered not raised)

Eventhough quite a few big names are involved in the project already, everybody will have to buy in to the tokens in the same way. (Which I guess means no pre-allocation like with ethereum and ripple). Big names already involved in the project besides the ones already known, seem to be Bo Shen, Yunbi, bitfinex and some others I can't remember.

For now that's about all I can remember or was able to glean from my mostly broken connection to the periscope stream.

Hope this helps, have nice day.

PS
Oh almost forgot. Dan did mention that he thinks bitshares should do some changes to match more with the concepts in eos. For example he thinks that users should be taxed less for interactions, like not having to pay fees to register changes on the blockchain and only asking a fee for executed orders not for just placing and cancelling them.

Still I think this is not immediately bad news for bitshares, but I do think the community should take action to claim their piece of the eos pie. Pretty damn sure that the exchange thing will be a big target for quite a few people.

I got the impression that if this eos-thing works it is going to make big waves and I do feel that ethereum is screwed. Or to speak in Tron terms: Ethereum program is about to be derezzed, end of line.

I don't follow the Ethereum at all (why bother ), what has been leaked?
Could you give me your quick summary?

I remember your attitude on shareholder freedom over the years, I was hoping you'd chime in

Oops, seems I did not word that as well as I could. I meant to say what has been leaked about EOS so far does not bode well for ethereum. I was referring to the snippets of information released on the telegram chat and elsewhere. Also reading all the comments from devs about their troubles developing for ethereum and the architectural differences with eos, then provided that eos works as intended then ethereum might just become obsolete before they are able to conquer the world. Since bts (and steem) are technically (apparently) a lot easier to adapt or integrate in eos, I figured bitshares future a bit more promising, as in, opportunities for the taking.

I have always feared the arrival of the big powers and to me Ethereum with their small group of "founders" and behind the scenes dealings and sponsors combined with their actions, is a very close match to how I'd envision an attack on crypto would take place. Conversely I'm keeping my eyes peeled with eos as well.

The "one chain to rule them all " concept is one of my worst nightmares. That's why I half jokingly proposed that eos stood for eye of sauron. Not that I've seen anything yet that would point to something like that, but it is something I'm very worried about. I most definitely would prefer if bitshares remains an independent entity, but I do realize that we need to grasp every opportunity we can to grow.

If some of the leaked statements about EOS are true, then at the very least we have a roadmap target of potential bandwidth increase and/or a possibly easily accessible new community of potential customers if we play this right.

I don't immediately see this as bad news for bitshares. Dare I say the opposite or am I going to far then?

Running the wallet from firefox through bitshares.org/wallet works fine for me.

As far as I recall the exact same installed light-wallet used to work, but maybe an update on ubuntu messed things up. After the problem started occurring I downloaded the most recent version, but the white-screen problem remained the same.

Someone mentioned in the telegram group as a response to someone else having the same problem, that it could be an issue with having and AMD-cpu, which I do have, but I don't understand how that's relevant, unless someone went overboard with the CFLAG-optimizations.