Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - gamey

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ... 151
241
General Discussion / Re: AI on the blockchain
« on: June 13, 2015, 05:43:20 am »
Quote from: jsidhu on June 12, 2015, 06:02:02 pm
neural nets are susceptible to curve fitting... it may find a local maxima for sure better than nothing but far from truth. I think prediction markets are more powerful.

Prediction markets do discrete events.  Neural networks can process continuous data. It is really application specific.  Neural networks can also do discrete events but are not likely so do as well as a prediction market if I were to guess.  Neureal.net is agnostic to the AI agent technology that is doing the predictions or other big data type analysis.  (Categorization etc.)  The reason it is called neureal is because the end game is to be a global neural net with outputs from some predictions fed into inputs of other via a p2p network.

242
General Discussion / Re: AI on the blockchain
« on: June 12, 2015, 05:06:37 pm »
This guy had a website etc when all he had was a forked coin. Has he created a demo etc?  Neureal.net has more promise. ;)

243
General Discussion / Re: Development Discussion: A LOW COST BITSHARES ATM
« on: June 06, 2015, 06:59:15 pm »
My twitter feed brought up a case recently in NYC where a dude selling BTC was asked to meet in a car where they pulled a gun out and made him transfer his BTC.  Which goes to show why if you are to do person to person transfers, stay in a starbucks or somewhere that dampens the risk of being robbed.  Or carry a gun and be ready to use it and roll the dice !!

244
General Discussion / Re: Development Discussion: A LOW COST BITSHARES ATM
« on: June 06, 2015, 03:22:10 pm »
Quote from: Helikopterben on May 29, 2015, 03:19:35 am
I'm not a big fan of crypto ATMs.  It's legacy technology for a 1950s economy.  I imagine a better solution would be something like an Uber for money.  Alice travels to a foreign country and needs to exchange bitgold for local currency.  She pulls up the Uber for money app on her phone and finds someone at the airport who is willing to do this exchange.  The future will probably look more like that IMO.

Having manual labor with a phone albeit smart is less "legacy" ? 

245
General Discussion / Re: What Is Bitshares? A Financial OS.
« on: June 03, 2015, 10:47:40 pm »
Quote from: valzav on June 02, 2015, 07:52:37 pm
Quote from: Method-X on June 02, 2015, 05:05:32 pm
Quote from: valzav on June 02, 2015, 04:47:12 pm
I like to see BitShares as a platform for smart contracts. So OS metaphor works pretty well here, but it's not necessary have to be narrowed down to financial applications.

I definitely see your point. Why limit Bitshares to a single niche? But is it really wise to attempt creating an OS that does everything or is it better to focus on a niche? If Bitshares were architected from the ground up to cater toward finance, I think that would offer us a significant competitive advantage.

I agree focusing on a single niche has a lot of benefits.

So what do you think about "platform"? In a lot of cases it's used as synonym to OS. If you followed startup ecosystem, there were a lot of debates - platform vs. product vs service, and it looks like platform is investors' favorite. Look at biggest companies (e.g. Google, Facebook, Microsoft) they all try to position themselves as platform.

Another reason I like word platform over OS is because OS sounds a little bit as closed ecosystem and platform is an open one.

Nonetheless OS is a good metaphor. I believe inability to explain what is Bitshares (e.g. "BitShares has layers" http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/update/2014/12/18/What-is-BitShares/  was a good but not successful attempt) made it really hard to market and good metaphor can really help to solve this issue.

This is very well put.  Also, for the true geeks who understand what an OS is and provides, it might be a bit of a put off. Until you have smart contract functionality, the OS analogy is really stretching it for the power user/developer type. I like both words, but +5% to platform.

246
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: POLL: Should paid Workers be REQUIRED to Publish their accountability info?
« on: May 22, 2015, 06:22:27 pm »
Quote from: jshow5555 on May 22, 2015, 06:11:13 pm
Discussing the stupidity of this clown ken, on a 8 page thread never the less,  makes this community look even more desperate and pathetic. To say nothing that every other post same ken is praised as 'one of more effective members of this community'. ken - the self proclaimed  enforcer that even the lead developer should report to! Pretty sad.

His appeal to authority is a bit tedious with the "20 years business experience".  HOWEVER, the guy does do a lot of stuff and is motivated.  Look around. How long have Bitscape etc had 2 delegates and not produced any real content?  (Or did I miss it?) What has Ken produced?  Yea, he is offbase a lot and his background is sketchy but if he is doing the stuff that no one else does then I applaud him. Dan never seemed to be able to hire the right people so we take what we get and if Ken is willing to lead the charge I support him.  I don't support all his ideas which are over the top, but just like everything it isn't black and white. The guy has done useful stuff.

247
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: POLL: Should paid Workers be REQUIRED to Publish their accountability info?
« on: May 22, 2015, 06:13:31 pm »
Quote from: kenCode on May 22, 2015, 05:58:02 pm
Quote from: gamey on May 22, 2015, 05:50:18 pm
Quote from: kenCode on May 22, 2015, 05:39:25 pm
Think of paid Workers like government employees..
 
Everybody knows what the Postman does all day.
Everybody knows what the Toll-Booth worker does all day.
Everybody knows what the public kindergarten teacher does all day.
 
But what did the Postal Service warehouse guy do all day today? Yesterday? What did he say he would have done by thursday of next week?
 
If he's a 100% payrate worker, then he should be proving himself 5 days/week, right?
 
So what was that logo designer doing for the last 2 months? What's she going to get done tomorrow?
 
Basics guys, that's all I'm asking. Work hours are part of keeping track too.
If I'm/we're paying someone 100% (a full time job) then I want to know what his real name is, I want to see his face once in a while and I want him to tell ME what's been going on. I shouldn't have to babysit our employees.
 
Let BlockchainHR at least handle these basics.
That's not too much to ask from someone who is using your money.
You are misunderstanding what blockchains can do. 
You shouldn't have to babysit the employees, but if you ask too much you'll never ever hire talent that is anywhere near the top. I personally would never work for such a micromanager. Goodluck finding a productive employee that does high level work and is willing to tell everyone what they're going to do the next day .. and if they do thats just time they could be doing work, no?
I liked the idea of the blockchain hiring people, but never liked the idea of having 100000s of bosses. The reason should be obvious.

I know that. The code makes the decisions, and the blockchain keeps track.
 
"finding a productive employee that does high level work and is willing to tell everyone what they're going to do the next day"
Not a problem. I've done just that for over 20 years and multiple types of globally distributed companies.
 
It's not too much to require these basics from the people we are paying.

It really depends on the level of work you are doing.  For high-skill white collar jobs, people do not tell their boss what they are "doing tommorow"  At least not on a daily basis which you seemed to be asking for.

And ... you don't understand I'm afraid.  Blockchains/code/DACs can make objective decisions but you keeping asking them to make subjective decisions. That will never work, because it just means the DAC can be gamed.  Thats the whole point of DACs, no one can game them and no one has to trust any specific person.

Now when we started hiring people, subjective opinions need to be made.  They will need to be made by people, not code.

248
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: POLL: Should paid Workers be REQUIRED to Publish their accountability info?
« on: May 22, 2015, 05:50:18 pm »
Quote from: kenCode on May 22, 2015, 05:39:25 pm
Think of paid Workers like government employees..
 
Everybody knows what the Postman does all day.
Everybody knows what the Toll-Booth worker does all day.
Everybody knows what the public kindergarten teacher does all day.
 
But what did the Postal Service warehouse guy do all day today? Yesterday? What did he say he would have done by thursday of next week?
 
If he's a 100% payrate worker, then he should be proving himself 5 days/week, right?
 
So what was that logo designer doing for the last 2 months? What's she going to get done tomorrow?
 
Basics guys, that's all I'm asking. Work hours are part of keeping track too.
If I'm/we're paying someone 100% (a full time job) then I want to know what his real name is, I want to see his face once in a while and I want him to tell ME what's been going on. I shouldn't have to babysit our employees.
 
Let BlockchainHR at least handle these basics.
That's not too much to ask from someone who is using your money.

You have no way to verify their work hours.  Thats why people have managers etc in the real world.  You're just asking for a system where honest people are screwed and the dishonest continue on. That was my point about the blockchain.  You are misunderstanding what blockchains can do.  They do not have anyway to enforce anything except by the economics of their tokens.  So yes you can easily fire someone, but you can't get a blockchain to make that decision, nor can you make the blockchain  report hours in a trustless (? trustful ?) manner.

All people need are tools that shows how much workers are paid and what they've done.

You shouldn't have to babysit the employees, but if you ask too much you'll never ever hire talent that is anywhere near the top. I personally would never work for such a micromanager. Goodluck finding a productive employee that does high level work and is willing to tell everyone what they're going to do the next day .. and if they do thats just time they could be doing work, no?


I liked the idea of the blockchain hiring people, but never liked the idea of having 100000s of bosses. The reason should be obvious.

You were a bigtime developer in early internet days, so you should have some idea about the job market for developers.  At least in the West, they're being paid quite well these days.  The 100% delegate doesn't touch such a salary, but you seem to suggest they should be working 5 days a week.  How do you justify all this?  It is all a bit nuts to me.  One size fits all approach.

249
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: POLL: Should paid Workers be REQUIRED to Publish their accountability info?
« on: May 22, 2015, 05:13:28 pm »
Before anyone sees this as an attack, let me state that I think Kencode is one of the more effective members of this community at this point in time. I just find that he is far too broad in the scope of his suggestions.  I also think he can possibly add to the misunderstanding of the technologies involved with his suggestions.

BTW - A wall burn would be sufficient for a report. I saw no explanation why not. Instead we get suggestions that add great complexity to a project that is already trying to keep its head above the water with what they're currently working on.

250
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: POLL: Should paid Workers be REQUIRED to Publish their accountability info?
« on: May 22, 2015, 05:02:26 pm »
Quote from: kenCode on May 22, 2015, 04:26:36 pm
Reports and Proposals won't fit on a wall, that's asking too much.
 
It sounds like you're not too fond of Factom or Open Transactions. Moonstone has Partnered with them and will be using OT tech as well, so they can't be that bad. I see Factom doing a lot of good things too in securing property registers and such as well.
Factom and Storj are just examples, ways we could access large chunks of data with our blockchain.
 
Automated firing/hiring/rewards - It's very tough to manage a globally distributed team of people, especially in a large company with hundreds of workers.
 
No mud here, just perfect clarity. If an employee has 2-weeks of vacation time each year, works M-F, 9-5, has two 15min breaks per shift, then we can calculate how many days they have left (also sick days, paternal, etc). If we need say, 10 Tech Support people, the blockchain will know who is on, who is off, and who will be gone during what days. Now, when a customer calls and needs Tech Support, the blockchain will instantly reveal who is available that second. We could even code it in (like the forum "Notify" feature) to randomly contact one of those available people. Customer Service is everything.
 
Those are just a few of the great things that can come from really having our proverbial *shit* together, ya know?
At least the "basics". See my definition of that a few posts back..

I have nothing against OT or Factom. I happen to have a friend and acquaintances that worked for Monetas and I know a large amount of the Factom team personally to some degree and would consider one of their highest level guys a friend.  So no, it has nothing to do with that.  Good try though.  You just namedrop technologies without any suggestion of why you think we should use them.  Moonstone doesn't have their own blockchain AFAIK so Factom could be a better fit.  The question was never about the quality of their technology, the question is how exactly would we use them?  Please answer in a broad overview sense, yet with some specifics. You don't do that though because you seem to not understand the technology very well. This discussion does muddy the waters as it is more vapid cheerleading than trying to vet which ideas are useful and which aren't.

Approval of vacations is far different from saying you are on vacation. Since everyone is remote these accountability approaches are near worthless.  Sure, use the blockchain to store information. Do not use the blockchain to "approve" vacations and some half-assed automated firing mechanism.

edit - Blockchains are great for transferring data/value across a write-only database. They completely fail when one tries to tie much more into what blockchains can do.  Like automated firing by having the blockchain come to consensus whether or not the periodic report was sufficient.... that is silly.

251
General Discussion / Re: bitsharesblocks.com often won't load when accessed over Tor
« on: May 22, 2015, 04:15:14 pm »
Quote from: karnal on May 22, 2015, 03:57:35 pm
This is already with JS on - bitsharesblocks won't work without, and at any rate, cloudflares' captchas are horrendous without javascript.. there are no words for how much tor users hate cloudflare :) "Attention Required!" on 80% of new tabs these days.. I digress.

I gave up on the captcha.  I could try and guess it easily enough, but there was something about a confirmation code which I could never figure out since everything else was in a foreign language. (and it wasn't that important to me)

I remember on Dan talking about switching to websockets.  If the lightweight wallet backends use websockets they're going to need to pay big $$ to use cloudflare. (Not that bitsharesblocks is the lightweight wallet.. but figured I'd mention that here)

252
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: POLL: Should paid Workers be REQUIRED to Publish their accountability info?
« on: May 22, 2015, 04:11:29 pm »
Quote from: kenCode on May 22, 2015, 04:03:51 pm
Factom is a data-layer for the Bitcoin blockchain, that's why I said "tech" after their name. If we have the ability to store additional data on our blockchain, then let's make use of it in a way that brings value to BitShares.

The burning on walls does this.  It doesn't need Factom or anything else requiring their technology.  Those transactions might need some tweaking, but factom's tech is all about being a partial parasitic chain with a secondary chain of sorts to store data.  That is nothing we'd ever want or need.. Just like the time you suggested Open Transactions without ever laying out a plan on how to use them.

In general I am in agreement, but the automated firing and other weird ideas, not so much.  Requesting vacation?  How does the blockchain approve it?  So instead of focusing on a simple list of delegates and what they're doing and when we got their last update, we get a lot of muddying of the waters from you.


253
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: POLL: Should paid Workers be REQUIRED to Publish their accountability info?
« on: May 22, 2015, 04:00:13 pm »
Quote from: kenCode on May 22, 2015, 01:25:47 pm
Code it in, and store the data forever on the blockchain.
Storj and Factom tech can help with this, see my series of posts above explaining how this is done.
Thru code, I can easily check grammar, make sure it's 10% than last month's submission, etc.

How do you store factom tokens on the bts blockchain which are required to utilize factom?

254
General Discussion / Re: bitsharesblocks.com often won't load when accessed over Tor
« on: May 22, 2015, 03:55:45 pm »
Tor browsers turn off javascript so if your site doesn't degrade gracefully then that might be the problem although I wouldn't expect those symptoms.

255
General Discussion / Re: Bye Bye Bitshares.
« on: May 18, 2015, 03:57:43 pm »
Quote from: newmine on May 18, 2015, 07:43:08 am
Quote from: gamey on May 17, 2015, 12:07:09 am
Quote from: newmine on May 16, 2015, 10:14:04 pm
Quote from: gamey on May 16, 2015, 09:38:10 pm
Quote from: newmine on May 16, 2015, 08:56:39 pm
Quote from: Akado on May 16, 2015, 04:21:25 pm
Quote from: Ggozzo on May 16, 2015, 03:35:48 pm
I am out too. Not for the same reason as lazr or Tony, but because I was put in a position I couldn't get out of and lost near half my BTS. Had I been able to get out when I originally wanted to, I would have only lost 8-10%. But because of the rule were you can't use the posted collateral to exit the position and instead have to possess or purchase excess BTS than what you used to short/CREATE a bitAsset, I lost near 50%.

I learned my lesson the hard way. Back to bitcoin.

The rule can be bad, not saying it isn't since that's not my point. My point is that you didn't inform yourself before taking that position. You didn't know the rule. So, instead of blaming the rule itself, maybe inform yourself better next time.

aaaaannnnnd you wonder why the project can't gain any users and is only losing them.

I had no idea that you could not use the collateral to close out a position until he(Ggozzo/skyscraperfarms) pointed it out a month or so ago. Can you direct to me to the place in the client where it's states this? Or how about direct me to a post by the dev's (un-edited) that states "you should allow enough BTS to remain in your wallet that can cover your entire short position beyond the 2x collateral"? In essence a bitAsset then needs 4x the collateral, it just 1x needs to stay in your wallet. Sheesh.

It's too bad you guys continue to alienate users. He was "all in" on your shit, tries to close out a position, is stuck and gets a big FU in the form of multiple people saying he "should of informed himself more" or he didn't  "do his due diligence". Wtf, that guy probably lost beans compared to what some of you worthless good for nothing delegates are "earning" and you have the gall to tell him he should've known better. I guess it must be nice not earning your BTS and being able to laugh off your losses.

Your misconstruing is humorous. What is even more amusing is how you try so hard to suggest the delegates are being overpaid in some manner. The nonsense will never stop.

What am I interpreting wrong? Here is his post last month, where the same shit happened: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,15561.0.html

Did you see PC's comment?

As for the delegate pay comment, I was referring to some of the 100%'ers who aren't doing anything and just sitting on the BTS bankroll, namely every marketing delegate, dacx, the bitscape ones and probably a few devs (that many Devs working fultime should've been able to put out a solid client by now, which tells me a lot of those guys aren't doing shit but maybe an hour a week if that).

Would you like me to leave, since I don't conform to your paradigm of positive outlook through delusional confidence?

You've made numerous observations which are barely consistent. You take every chance you can to twist something into being more negative than it is.

I am not one partaking in any positive outlook through delusion confidence. Read or reread my posts from the last few months. This is but another example of more of the same from you. chuckle @ your definition of "my paradigm".

Do what you wish.  I find you borderline humorous until the BS gets too thick.

Truths generally hurt those who have the most to lose when the lies become known. I am guessing you have a large stake that you are now willing to let vest or die. It would be nice if I had expendable funds like that.

Call my bullshit with links to my posts and refute them instead of ad hominem attacks about the delivery of what I say.

There are definitely delegate squatters. 3% and 100%ers. For crying out loud, some 100%ers are in the low 90% reliability range and one is in the 80% range. Why other than Koolaid are they still given the potential?  The goddamn network is less secure because of them.

Dan definitely passively threatened to abandon BTSX if the merger did not happen.

Dan definitely proposed delegate pay of +$2K a few days after he claimed I3 had plenty of funds.

Stan is a propaganda artist spreading more BS than I can even come up with in my wildest dreams.

Dan is not "like" a Steve Jobs and Bitshares is not like the next Apple.

VOTE has no "secret sauce" as I pointed out when FMV met with CALVO.

AK is only a drain on BTS funds and wealth as has been proven with his lack of presence and effect so far.

PTS needed an upgrade last March and I was shit on for saying it.

Freetrade secretly gave himself a boatload of MMC in the genesis block that he admitted to after I pressured him and ABL jumped in.

Charles Evans was a little too close to the project given he was auditing AGS funds. He left ~5 days after pointing this out.

These are some of the major points I believe I helped come to light.

If these things are not consistent or are lies please let me know where I have fouled up.

I have definitely noticed your turn in opinions towards the project though.

All at once you throw out a post that seems factual. (I have no clue) This is a distinct difference in content from your typical post. It proves little.

You have posted a lot.  I personally have no clue what of value you posted - that doesn't mean you've never posted useful stuff.

My ad hominem was no worse than your talk about my "paradigm" which was a complete and total misrepresentation of my presence on this forum for months.

I sold most of my stake when it was still in the mid 20 marketcap. I would have liked to have been able to do it when Dan first started talking about the merger, but my 1 windows machine with a working wallet was not around. I kept my vested stake but it isn't that large. So no, you are wrong and swinging and missing yet again. "It would be nice if I had expendable funds like that". OOoook ....... and you completely ignore all my criticisms in the posts leading up to this. The truth doesn't really matter with you.

You were basically completely wrong about me, but hey you just showed us how factual you are. <eyeroll>

Put the rest of your post on your resume. Not sure what else to tell you.


Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ... 151

Page created in 0.2 seconds with 24 queries.