91
General Discussion / Re: Dan is doing the right thing .. again!
« on: June 29, 2015, 10:29:42 pm »
First up I applaud you for your efforts to keep the ship afloat even with funds drying up, compared to the threats I've seen on the ethereum reddit of simply abandoning development if they are not paid those wages.
Maybe I should have split up my post to clearly differentiate between my gripes with what's going on with ethereum from my concerns for the move to bitshares2.0. Or maybe you are reacting more to newmines post.
Like I said I don't refute the fact that the developers are adding value to the community and I do hope you don't think everybody believes that you should not reap any benefits of the sweat equity you've put in. Bytemaster remarks about the crypto-community not realizing how much value developers add sounds a little bitter and over generalizing. Then again you might very well have a better grasp on this than I do, but is unwillingless really all there is to it?
I'm still not convinced using going rates is entirely applicable in the crypto-currency crowd-source scene in it's current state and I don't think it is solely because of unwillingness to pay developers. I think cryptocurrencies are a little different from your average startup especially in the funding aspect. Not only are the current cryptocurrencies not targeting the same audiences on the same scale as something like twitter, their funding has to come mostly internally from their own marketcaps instead of coming from the outside, almost like mini economies. Cryptocurrencies are still a long way from reaching adoption like the current internet, and the internet itself took quite a while to reach it's current level of adoption. I think comparisons with similar niche crowd-sourced projects would be more fair and set more realistic expectations. If there was new outside VC money coming in or big corporations support then those "industry standard" wages would be more easily achievable, but the crypto scene is not that big and with bitcoin as the only onramp this limits the amount of people and money that can be reached even more. If blockchains would be in the realm of google/facebook levels of succes then I'd expect the going rates or higher would be a non issue.
Honestly the bitcoin bearmarket following the mtGox bubble might be a bigger culprit than community unwillingness, although Ethereum dumping 30k btc in a bearmarket probably didn't help much either.
EDIT
Oops sorry Method-X, seems I'm a slow typer and the discussion already moved way beyond where I started my reply.
Maybe I should have split up my post to clearly differentiate between my gripes with what's going on with ethereum from my concerns for the move to bitshares2.0. Or maybe you are reacting more to newmines post.
Like I said I don't refute the fact that the developers are adding value to the community and I do hope you don't think everybody believes that you should not reap any benefits of the sweat equity you've put in. Bytemaster remarks about the crypto-community not realizing how much value developers add sounds a little bitter and over generalizing. Then again you might very well have a better grasp on this than I do, but is unwillingless really all there is to it?
I'm still not convinced using going rates is entirely applicable in the crypto-currency crowd-source scene in it's current state and I don't think it is solely because of unwillingness to pay developers. I think cryptocurrencies are a little different from your average startup especially in the funding aspect. Not only are the current cryptocurrencies not targeting the same audiences on the same scale as something like twitter, their funding has to come mostly internally from their own marketcaps instead of coming from the outside, almost like mini economies. Cryptocurrencies are still a long way from reaching adoption like the current internet, and the internet itself took quite a while to reach it's current level of adoption. I think comparisons with similar niche crowd-sourced projects would be more fair and set more realistic expectations. If there was new outside VC money coming in or big corporations support then those "industry standard" wages would be more easily achievable, but the crypto scene is not that big and with bitcoin as the only onramp this limits the amount of people and money that can be reached even more. If blockchains would be in the realm of google/facebook levels of succes then I'd expect the going rates or higher would be a non issue.
Honestly the bitcoin bearmarket following the mtGox bubble might be a bigger culprit than community unwillingness, although Ethereum dumping 30k btc in a bearmarket probably didn't help much either.
EDIT
Oops sorry Method-X, seems I'm a slow typer and the discussion already moved way beyond where I started my reply.