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 - stuartcharles

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 19
91
General Discussion / Re: VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting
« on: October 20, 2014, 07:15:36 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on October 20, 2014, 05:44:20 pm

Quote from: Thom on October 20, 2014, 05:19:08 pm
I love this thread, and this is my first post in it as I have been very busy with other maters and also b/c the conversation has been deep and fast paced I wanted to be sure I understood what's really at play here before jumping in.

I've been somewhat troubled since bytemaster said:
Quote
I attempt to avoid labeling my views as labels carry baggage.

 I submit for your consideration the following unprovable and impossible to disprove hypothesis: there is only one consciousness and that consciousness is me.

As was pointed out previously, this is the philosophy of solipsism, a term I wasn't familiar with though I'm keenly interested in philosophy. As you yourself pointed out bytemaster, it is pointless to argue for or against this perspective. Given what you are doing here it is very surprising you hold this view, and I'm left to ponder how such an intelligent person as you finds value in such a perspective.

Further, you work in a field where labels are everything. Actually that's what language is all about so avoiding the label of solipsism is just a symptom of rejecting objective reality. You defined your belief quite well and that is what everyone accepts as the basic definition of solipsism.

You appeal to this community through rational, objective reason, yet you deny the participants in it our very own autonomous, individual identities.

I am curious about how much of an interest in philosophy you have, and how long you've been pursuing such knowledge.

It appears to me we both share strong libertarian / anarchist perspectives, for which I have grown to have a strong respect for you. However, it's causing me some cognitive dissonance as I am an objectivist and choose to believe in an absolute, objective truth.

I applaud your willingness to put yourself and your beliefs out here and to be vulnerable. You continue to amaze me, as well as puzzle me with how your mind works.

Thank you for sharing.

I can deal with everyone as if I am dealing with a part of myself.  I seek to find views without internal contradictions.   I cannot prove that there exists anything outside of myself Due to what I like to call the matrix effect.   

I recognize that there is only one basis upon which to hold a belief and that is if it produces better results in my life.   

Thus I have come to a conclusion that is the only conclusion that doesn't have a contradiction That I am aware of at this point in time.  Or perhaps has fewer contradictions then other views I might have. 

I came to this view as a result of meditation and attempting to separate who I am from the thought and story of my life.   

I grew up objective and Christian.  Stan of course isn't happy with my departure   

Why choose to believe in an objective reality that you cannot prove exists?

Thinking that you think i am a figment of your imagination gives me an interesting perspective of you. Its quite complementary for you to think of us like that. Maybe it would be a better world if we all viewed each other as integral parts of our selves. I think i will try it for a while, but i will choose to think we are all one, part of the same consciousness but some how divided and separated by the physical world.

92
General Discussion / Re: Non-Dillutable BTSX
« on: October 20, 2014, 03:14:09 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on October 20, 2014, 01:00:42 pm
I think that you are missing the point that the ability to raise capital is limited by the market.  Anything anyone does to vote in large spending that is not productive will impact share price.   This in turn will hurt devs more than help.   

Trust has value.

I'm not missing that point, i understand what you want and why you want it. Development is obviously essential but this is just money printing. Adding the value of one thing to another is great (facebook buys oculus rift or PTS + AGS = BTS) but just saying we are issuing x shares for development is not specific enough. All that will happen is shares value will be diluted.

As im typing this i think i see a solution. If a delegate were to ask for a specific sum to complete a specific development then it should work. It would work because in this case the market knows exactly what it is getting and at what price. Then once consensus has been reached and the funds issued the market can decide if it agrees with consensus (and adjust price) and again the market can readjust its opinion/price once the development has been completed and is adding value.

The delegate then earns a reputation based on what they propose and what they deliver.

For this to work I think you would not only have to hard code a % inflation but also hard code a maximum single award. Maybe the maximum award could be increased as reputation (number of completed projects) increases.

93
General Discussion / Re: Proposal to Resolve a Million Issues at Once
« on: October 20, 2014, 01:04:51 pm »
Quote from: James212 on October 20, 2014, 12:59:00 pm
Quote from: matt608 on October 20, 2014, 12:21:36 pm
I'm in favour of the proposal so long as we got VOTE on board BTS.  I haven't looked into DNS so I don't know how big a deal it is, but merging with competition which then becomes a feature is a great move.

I'm a bit confused as to why merging VOTE (and DNS?) with BTSX (which will become BTS) is connected to acquiring PTS+AGS?  Is it because VOTE is (was) an independent DAC and BM had an obligation to support it due to obligations to PTS+AGS holders, so if PTS+AGS are brought on board BTSX THEN VOTE should be too so that vote isn't competing with BTSX which would contain the PTS + AGS holders?

AGS/PTS value comes from all future DACs.  If these future dacs are now to be a division of bst(x) then we are TRANSFERING the value that used to belong to PTS/AGS.  Therefore they will be useless and have no value.  Bts(x) will need to compensate the AGE,PTS holders with new BTS<- this is where the value was transferred to. 

What is stated above relates to dacs launched by I3/the bitshares team.  Third parties can still use the bitshares tool kit and pay a percentage to  (now) all BTS(x) holders

This makes good sense James212 as i3 are large PTS/AGS holders they will also receive extra development funds and there is  then no need for any dilution/share issuing.

94
General Discussion / Re: dilution - who decides - where do the coins go?
« on: October 20, 2014, 12:50:46 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on October 20, 2014, 12:47:48 pm

Quote from: stuartcharles on October 20, 2014, 12:44:41 pm
Quote from: bytemaster on October 20, 2014, 12:40:57 pm
Delegates receive higher pay, not one time large dilutions.  It comes down to trust that stakeholders will vote for delegates that have spending authority proportional to their trust. 

Most delegates would get low spending authority. 

A max infusion rate can be hard coded and require a hard fork to change.   This can prevent some attacks.

So the extra shares are issued to the delegates? and the delegates get to vote on whether they want more pay?

Voting is all ready a problem, something like this carnt work until the voting problems are sorted.

Delegates cannot vote themselves a pay raise.  Only decrease it.

But you say "Delegates receive higher pay, not one time large dilutions" and delegates decide how many extra shares to issue? Or am i missing something?

95
General Discussion / Re: dilution - who decides - where do the coins go?
« on: October 20, 2014, 12:44:41 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on October 20, 2014, 12:40:57 pm
Delegates receive higher pay, not one time large dilutions.  It comes down to trust that stakeholders will vote for delegates that have spending authority proportional to their trust. 

Most delegates would get low spending authority. 

A max infusion rate can be hard coded and require a hard fork to change.   This can prevent some attacks.

So the extra shares are issued to the delegates? and the delegates get to vote on whether they want more pay?

Voting is all ready a problem, something like this carnt work until the voting problems are sorted.

96
General Discussion / Re: Non-Dillutable BTSX
« on: October 20, 2014, 12:35:54 pm »
Quote from: Stan on October 20, 2014, 01:55:39 am
Quote from: Rune on October 20, 2014, 01:30:02 am
Guys I realize the idea of dilution is kinda scary at first sight, but once you think it through and approach it from the right context, which is the COMPANY, then it makes perfect sense.

Imagine 2 facebooks competing for world social media domination. One of them can issue shares to acquire other startups such as Whatsapp and Oculus, and also issue shares to VC companies that help them kickstart growth. The other has a fixed amount of shares because shareholders dont want to be diluted.

Which company would you rather be a shareholder in? Would you even consider investing in a facebook that could not issue new shares in situations where it would be beneficial? Taking over world finance isn't that much different than taking over world social media, because of the massive network effect involved. Share issuance is an absolute must in the competition we are about to see ramp up, and we are the first DAC that will actually manage to implement it. We will not even have a real competitior until a different blockchains realizes that share issuance is basically a requirement to be competitive.

The way I look at it, if the value of each of my shares is going up due to an infusion of new capital/talent/customers/whatever, then what do I care if there are a few more of those valuable shares?  The new shares represent the new value received plus a bunch more to share with current shareholders making their shares more valuable too.

Infusions are only done when their is more gain than pain.

The problem is ensuring the gain and pain are shared by the same people. I have invested time and money in i3's ideas and you seem sound people but we are interested in a trust less system. If i3 has enough voting power to decide which delegates are in and which are out, and could then vote for delegates which approve a big development fund for i3 then we do not have a trust less system.

97
General Discussion / Re: Proposal to Resolve a Million Issues at Once
« on: October 20, 2014, 12:17:14 pm »
Quote from: inarizushi on October 20, 2014, 08:25:07 am
I love the new proposal, but hate the confusion/instability. Too many delegates, that's true. Incoherent and embarrassing POW for PTS, that's true. Fixing illiquid AGS, great. One BitUSD to rule them all, huge. And I'm all for patience for the marketing side.

But the functional 1.0 wallet must be released, and the marketing campaign be launched at some point. i3 will have to focus on development. I hope this proposal will pass, and after that, no more messing around...

Re "Fixing illiquid AGS" It just occurred to me that AGS is already liquid in that we gave PTS and BTS to i3 in return for AGS and those BTS and PTS were given as liquid assets to fund development.

98
General Discussion / Re: dilution - who decides - where do the coins go?
« on: October 20, 2014, 11:43:32 am »
Quote from: Rune on October 20, 2014, 11:34:43 am
There will be no inflation of bitassets. Inflation of bitshares will ONLY be used in profitable ways that generate a return significantly higher than what has been spend. Think of it as Facebook issuing stock to acquire Oculus, because they know that the two companies will be a lot stronger together in the future, than apart.

With inflation we will be able to fund exponential growth in development and marketing avenues. If a delegate is ever discovered to inflate for no reason and just runs off with the money, he will be instantly kicked out.

This doesn't answer my concerns as posted above

We carnt fairly vote on whether to issue more shares or not (dilution) when i3 controls enough shares to sway the vote.
Where are any newly issued shares kept, who controls them?

99
General Discussion / Re: dilution - who decides - where do the coins go?
« on: October 20, 2014, 10:48:37 am »
One big reason we bought into this was the lack of inflation, Bitshares is not like bitcoin which is inflationary.

We get interest not inflation remember  +5%. If you add the value of one thing to another say PTS to BTSX to make BTS thats not inflation that's consolidation and that perfectly reasonable. I understand the need for development funds but adding an unknown value to that, at this stage, is beyond messy.

What ever has to be done has to be done quick, when figures like 80% development fund appear you can expect even more panic than before.

Dev's you need to be quick (very), decisive and clear. Your decision must been seen by the majority of shares to be fair, if it doesn't feel fair then there will be no confidence that something like this wont happen again.

100
General Discussion / dilution - who decides - where do the coins go?
« on: October 20, 2014, 08:45:40 am »
Been plowing through the posts and listened to the mumble.

I can see why the mumble session was positive, putting some of the DAC's together makes absolute sense, from a pooling of resource and not competing with ones self point of view. However, the problem which made me feel uncomfortable was not addressed. These are:-

We carnt fairly vote on whether to issue more shares or not (dilution) when i3 controls enough shares to sway the vote.
Where are any newly issued shares kept, who controls them?

Edit - To be clear i am not talking about the conversion of AGS,PTS and BTSX to BTS that can be reasoned out with discussion. I am talking about any future dilution which Dan said could be voted on and then used for development.

101
General Discussion / Re: Proposal to Resolve a Million Issues at Once
« on: October 19, 2014, 07:16:00 pm »
Quote from: Stan on October 19, 2014, 06:50:58 pm
Quote from: fuzzy on October 19, 2014, 05:31:35 pm
Quote from: Stan on October 19, 2014, 05:27:51 pm
Quote from: Gentso1 on October 19, 2014, 02:34:49 pm
A couple of things:

I for one dumped my PTS to go all in on BTSX because that was the DAC I believed in. Under your original model users would invest in just the DAC's they believed in and not invest in the ones they didn't.

What happened to profitable DAC'S funding themselves, paying their own way so to speak?

Remind me why we are diluting btsx to help PTS? These users have the liquidity advantage and are free to move into any DAC they like.

I looked at BTSX as a DAC on the edge of breaking out. The reason being "the big marketing push" , the creation of on and off ramps through the partnership with a bank or more likely credit union.Your argument is bitshares is to complex which is valid.Mine is that we have done nothing to educate (other then community lead efforts) the average user. Marketing up to this point seems to be completely centered at attracting big money, not education of the consumer. 

So why dilute btsx when is is getting ready to actually be marketed and partnerships are on the cusp of being formed? What is the need to change the plan before we give the original one a chance to succeed?

The opportunity appears now.

some more clarification please?

Once Bytemaster & his trusted mates discovered the "secret sauce recipe" and realized how to gain orders of magnitude faster penetration into the market by exploiting certain opportunities that have recently appeared, it became clear that the opportunities had to be seized. 

By now people should know that what they are investing in is the products of a very agile team that will stay ahead of the competition chiefly because of that agility.  We make no apologies for playing to that strength.  Those that are able to HODL will be rewarded.  Those who can't will fall off at the hairpin turns.  We will always have people who have climbed on board for the wrong reasons and they are the ones who will eject during the high-G maneuvers.  Buy when they sell.

If you want slow and steady, invest in Coca Cola.  :)

Maybe the frustration comes from creating an inflammatory thread like this with out giving us the full picture. That is not telling us the "secret sauce recipe". I understand the tactical advantage in keeping secrets but i have no idea what the tactical advantage of starting of a discussion like this but keeping the best reason for doing it to your selves.

Saying that you can't be good at everything, i trust in the your vision and competitive nature,  i wouldn't dream of letting go of any of my stake.

102
General Discussion / Re: Proposal to Resolve a Million Issues at Once
« on: October 19, 2014, 06:20:18 pm »
merger is a much easier sell than dilution. I think the market would support that if absolutely no extra equity was created and reassurance was given that dilution would never happen.

I think we also need an explanation as to how all of the negative aspects of "one chain to rule them all" no longer apply?

103
General Discussion / Re: Proposal to Resolve a Million Issues at Once
« on: October 19, 2014, 09:03:12 am »
Quote from: 520Bit on October 19, 2014, 08:04:52 am
Quote from: kbrom on October 19, 2014, 07:59:14 am
一天一个想法，3I的诚信在哪里？规则就是规则，这样搞和原来的规则差别实在太大了！

I am happy to translate your words here:

Where is 3I's integrity, why change the rules so often? Rule is rule, current proposal is very different to previous one.

I agree, too much impatience. If you change the fundamentals now then you tell all investors that you may do it again in the future. This can only result in a calapse of confidence. I would urge the core developers to stem this quickly with a reassuring statement and pray you haven't already let the cat out of the bag

104
General Discussion / Re: Suggestion: Investment guide for Bitshares X bulls
« on: October 15, 2014, 08:04:18 am »
Quote from: mf-tzo on October 14, 2014, 05:35:29 pm
Fully agree with Luckybit in everything he said. The rules of shorting have been explained to me a lot of times and I have been tried to short since the first day the client came out without any success yet...

Unless I see a video or a slide with specific examples I will never be able to understand this client and I do understand economics and trading...

I'm the same, i have no idea why this isnt a priority, its been mentioned enough.

I would love to have a play, who knows maybe i would be good at it. Maybe lots of us would.

Marketeers, educate, please

105
General Discussion / Re: Suggestion: Investment guide for Bitshares X bulls
« on: October 14, 2014, 03:58:26 pm »
I would like to use a service like that with a % of my holdings, good idea

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 19

Page created in 0.2 seconds with 23 queries.