So first off, I really hope I got this wrong. Sorry but I'm not that familiar with the LTB thing or the media-group they are trying to build.

Can someone explain to me how this LTBCoin thing works?  From the sound of it, I get the impression it is similar to the old Factory tokens that could only be spent in the factory store and using it to create lock-in.

If that's how it works, then I'm not supportive of that at all. That is one of the reasons we're in this mess we are trying to fix with the whole distributed concept. I do not want to help retrace the steps that led to the invention of the Federal reserve.

Another big issue for me is this Adam B Levine person and supporting him. How important and essential is he in all this?  I only know Adam B Levine from his posts on this forums and sometimes seeing his remarks on reddit and such, but that did not leave a favorable impression at all. Especially not how he seems to be so adamant at trying to antagonize the forums here. Like how he starts this whole drama-queen nonsense and persecution nonsense with "forum defense force" and crap like that. Reading the reactions, Adam apparently seems to have a lot of pull in the bitshares community and outside, but I honestly think there is something wrong with him.

So I hope someone can debunk my fears.  Otherwise supporting this plus the delegates supporting this would not be helping cause in trying to combat monopolies and corruption and help with the (re)distribution of powers.

EDIT
Just a disclaimer, I do not represent anyone other than myself. So if somebody wants to use my quote in any other way, I claim copyright and you have to point to my entire post.

The only links are for the unedited ones, which are not easy to listen to. I have uploaded my recording, but I lost connection for a bit at the start, so maybe someone else has an uninterrupted one he's willing to share.

I don't know if anyone uploaded an edited version.

Very creative ticklebiscuit and not far from how I came to see the ethereum-ipo back when I never even heard of bitshares before.  Don't tell anyone, but I ony discovered bitshares because I was excited about Ethereum and doing research on it.

One of my bigger gripes with Ethereum, apart from the POW and single blockchain, is that the proposed plan was for the IPO to pay for bounties for yet unsolved problems that the project needs solved. When I read that I was like  , oookaaay. Ticklebiscuits analogy is pretty close to the actual proposed roadmap.

I might be biased though, seeing how I use a javascript blocking plugin for my webbrowsers. Had the project not been pow based, single blockchain and coated with less Microsoftian Applesque Walledgardenism Middleman-(bordering-parasite)-syndrome rhetoric, I might still have retained some of my earlier excitement about it.

Back to bitshares-toolkit and dpos, you'd think the database on a blockchain implementation complete with extended database operations would garner some attention. Looking at internet analogies, because many in crypto love those, database operations are not the smallest building block on the internet so having that capability on a blockchain could prove quite useful.

Quote from: Shentist on October 07, 2014, 06:01:20 pm

the spikes in "counterparty" are like the twitter mistake on the exchanges. just some people buying without understanding anything.

reminds me of darkcoin going crazy because people think it's related to darkwallet

Eventhough I had a hard time pulling myself away from the thrilling spectacle of a progress bar showing the transfer of a multi terabyte copy over my lan, I somehow managed to find some time to look into this counterparty medici thing.

I've come the conclusion that nobody seems to know what is going on exactly, or are not telling what they know. Counterparty itself seems to think the exchange will be a counterparty-app, but several other sources and crypto-press have stated the exact opposite by specifically mentioning a new solution being built. So the medici project will either use xrp, or it will not. Hope this helps.

What TheFu.. said, and eagleeye.

If you think about it, getting a whole range of bitYourPharmaceuticalBrandOfChoice on bitsharesx would be HUGE. It would finally get the very much needed price discovery solved and get some real honest price-fighting going. Plus they love USD like no other, they'd love bitUSD.  Talk about undercutting the banks, that would be taking away their #1 customer.  Also think about how messed up that market is, if you're not part of the in-crowd the resident pharmaceutical company can even get governments to declare war on its competitors.

BUT, without the onramp thing solved then it would be no more than just pricediscovery. Maybe the OpenBazaar might solve the onramp thing, you need to be sure that you get your sugar instead of something horrible like Aspartame, man that stuff messes up your brain.

Someone put a 40k sell wall on bitstamp today to get the price below $300. Why I don't know, but someone posted a warning for the exact number of bitcoins an hour or so before it actually appeared. What's the point of such an ostentatious move. Putting $9 million dollar amount of bitcoin in a single limit sell order, is that normal behavior or is this a case of very open manipulation?

I don't think btsx would be unaffected if someone pulled a move like that.

Although it is a talk about bitcoin, it applies to the entire crypto-exchange experiment.

http://youtu.be/_LRRA1tBIS8

I don't know if mentioning the butterfly lab people is bad per se, because he is not trying to prove the benefits of mining and them being put under FTC-restricted operations might put some extra weight on the risks of mining centralization he's talking about.

Also when mentioning other projects, ethereum is POW (and only a concept as of now) and has no mechanics in place to avoid centralization last time I checked, so why would Bytemaster recommend projects like that in a speech where he wants to convince people to return to decentralization as envisioned by Satoshi?