Graphene probably sounds better than BitShares but I don't think rebranding is a good idea for the following reasons:

1. Confusion as what refers to what. (the blockchain, the corresponding core asset and the toolkit) It doesn't make sense to name the toolkit and the chain the same but the asset has a totally unrelated name.

2. SEO. And I think this is a quite important one, at least for the chain. For the toolkit it doesn't matter that much.

Okay my above comparison isn't working 100%. I'll try to look at this differently:

On a logical level a transaction fee should consist of two parts: raw tx processing cost + platform development cost. As xeroc said development cost is independent of nearly everything. It is a constant. So we have to distribute these costs arbitrarily with the goal that the user base perceives it as fair. To define fairness is always difficult but here are my thoughts. Development cost part of a tx fee should be dependent of:
   - the importance of our service to a customer
   - the importance of the customer relative to all customers (i.e. big company vs individual)

By setting a fixed tx fee customers pay linearly for development with the number of transactions they make. That is imo a very bad cost distribution regarding the two points made above. (Why should a customer who makes frequent small transactions pay much more for development of the platform than a customer who depends on less frequent but big transactions? Our service is equally important to both and thus both would be willing to pay the same amount of fees.) A more accurate picture would be total transaction volume, as it accounts in some way both points I listed. Hence I would argue that tx fees should be in some way dependent of volume.

The question that I have is how we can determine the value of a transaction? For example a rarely traded UIA can't be easily measured in USD or BTS.

-snip-

You are certainly right about "change scares people" and also the reduced incentive to accept and hold bitAssets. But I think we are still early enough in the process to change some mechanics and get things right. I rather have some changes now than later; or even worse a competing chain with a superior system.

Now I'm not generally opposed to the yield system, but I don't get what you are trying to say with the whole supply and demand thing. Yes, there is a higher incentive to short bitUSD but ONLY above the feed as you can get forced to settle at the price feed. So there will probably be a short wall just above the feed but if there isn't enough demand the shorts don't get filled and no bitUSD are created.

Or did I completely misunderstand that and your concerns are regarding BTS and not bitAsset supply/demand?

Quote from: Riverhead on July 14, 2015, 02:54:19 pm

Their revenue model

is what I am most excited about, although, I'm still not sure why they want to pay for a blockchain instead of riding the BTS and getting paid...

anyone got a clue on this one?

high tx fees on BTS chain?

Quote from: Frodo on July 05, 2015, 08:20:06 pm

Quote from: Akado on July 05, 2015, 07:38:40 pm

I'm pretty excited about this, maybe I'm being naive but this could just bring some change. It could be an important day in the history of europe. Maybe others will slowly start to wake up and follow. I don't know if this is good or bad, it seems bad for greeks, but it also seems something that would happen sooner or later. I'm just happy something new happened and by the fact it seems things can change.

meanwhile bitcoin at ~270$

I hope you are right about people waking up but I doubt that even a majority of Greeks have understood what is really going on.

People tend to take certain things for granted and don't dig deep enough. The fundamentals of society rarely get questioned, which leads to a thinking process that is trapped in boundaries provided by outside. That's why many people are unable to see the flaws of the underlying system and only encounter the symptoms caused by them. And I fear that can lead to simplistic decision making like "let's vote no, because we don't want austerity, because I don't want to pay more taxes and get less pension.". (Which is a very understandable reasoning, but yet a limited view of things.)

I think that the referendum results clearly show that 60% of Greeks fully understand what is going on. They have questioned twice the current status, the underlying system and the flawed economics of austerity measures against the weakest links of European countries. I hope that we do go all the way, I hope that the politicians don't betray Greek people as they have historically have done millions of times and most importantly I hope that people in other countries also wake up and realize what is happening in our world. There are too many shits in this world that have to go once and for all if we want to live peacefully, free and democratically.

By underlying system I actually meant fiat money rather than austerity. And realistically it will be necessary to adjust the  standard of living in Greece, no matter which way it goes.

So MaidSafeCoin just gained nearly 45% according to cmc.


Their last  blog post suggests that they are coming closer to a usable release. But I'm not following the project very closely so that is just a guess, maybe wishful thinking 
Meanwhile BTS price isn't doing so well, despite a slight Bitcoin up-trend.

What do you guys think? Can anyone make sense of that weird crypto market? 

I haven't done anywhere nearly as much as most of you guys who posted here. But I've been passionately following this project for over 1.5 years now and tried to engage in this forum by giving (hopefully) constructive feedback/criticism. Especially concerning dilution. (Like this proposal, which unfortunately didn't gain a lot of traction back then)

I don't feel entitled to anything but I would certainly appreciate any brownies send my way 

Also really good idea, small things like this can sometimes make all the difference for personal motivation.

BTS: frodo