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 - underwun

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5
1
Andreas Antonopoulos as usual very eloquently explains why reputation systems are contrary to the vision and principles of Bitcoin and by extension why Identabit is as well.

  • I could not disagree more with AA, as always he intimidates the interviewer and offers unquestioned authoritative overarching statements that lack credibility, he argues that reputation plays no role in diversified lending, to me these are words of a dogma fed by absolutes. I fail to see how anyone can argue that money will cost the same no matter who you are and that criminals should be able to reinvent themselves in order to rip off more people.

What are we trying to accomplish with cryptocurrency? Answer: MANY things, some of which are contrary to the reasons Bitcoin was invented. Identibit is such an example, however it would also be hypocritical and contrary to the principle of freedom to say Identibit should not be allowed to exist. If Mr. Underwood can make it happen let him try, I wish him the best of luck. If his efforts are successful it could have an indirect benefit to BitShares, not only by sharedropping on owners of BROWNIE.PTS but in getting a more mainstream audience introduced to cryptocurrency that otherwise would never learn of it. Once exposed they would be that much more open to the benefits of other crypto ecosystems like Bitcoin and BitShares that do not impose the restrictions that Identibit does.

  • What are we trying to accomplish with cryptocurrency? is the only question that fails to be sensibly answered by the likes of AA as he bathes in self serving rhetoric instead of saying how to succeed in slaying the institutional dragons that dominate the landscape.

    Surely the argument for all of us is how to win, how to marginalise and disintermediate in order to see the financial benefits digital money reach the people that need it most.

    Our goal is to see costless transactions replace exorbitant fees, for centralised funds management to be eliminated and passed on to those that own the asset and eliminate the role of big banks as controllers of our financial destiny and let’s emphasize that anonymity isn't needed for any of these goals to be achieved.

    In fact if we introduce identity, not only can achieve all of the above without restriction but we can also bring security and efficiencies to the shared and IoT economies that currently don't exist.


When Identabit was initially announced I was very vocal in my opposition of it, primarily b/c it sounded to me like CNX would be doing all of the technical work which I saw as a conflict of interest and a derailing of the focus towards BitShares' goals and vision. I still have some of those concerns, however I am not seeing Identabit gain much traction yet, and it maybe it won't, possibly because the banking industry may be open to cryptocurrency only as a closed, proprietary, internal system.

  • Re the banking industry, it’s spoken of as one and it’s not, it is made up of protectors and disruptors and there are plenty of new-bankers that have little or no regard for heavy weight bullies and long to disintermediate them.

    Progress seems slow because we are laying foundations, making sure we have a solid commercial plan before making claims. The past three months has been spent satisfying those doing due diligence into our adoption plans and the business models that will enable traction, ours it not a ‘build and they will come’ model.

    Everything is about execution, technology hardly features as we have for over a year believed in the original Bitshares features, we would argue that had Bitshares remained consistent and persistent with original objectives and promoted DPoS as the valid efficient alternative to PoW, today Bitshares/Identabit would be sitting pretty ready to take Bitcoin's place.

    As it is, this is now our job as DPoS, like so many Bitshares initiatives has been left behind as a great idea that didn't stick, I will argue that consistency and persistency based on a sound strategy is what it takes to succeed and I remain a huge believer in all of Dan's original thinking but today we need to take those ideas and blend them into a series of initiatives that pay respect to reality.

As I have said all along, AML / KYC compliance is contrary to the disruptive technology BitShares / Bitcoin is based on, and compliance to those regulations simply perpetuates the injustice and facilitates the war-mongering practices of the existing bankster cartel.

  • I ask WHY? Why is it necessary to throw the baby out with the bath water to disrupt and disintermediate Wall Street. Anonymity has little or nothing to do with new-banking.

    New-banking is all about empowering citizens, reducing the cost of money, denying centralised institutions control over our financial freedom, eliminating fees and creating competitive global borrowing. Anonymity adds nothing to any of these objectives but if you add assured identity and digitised collateral you can change the world and this is our goal.

The choice is in our hands. Will you choose freedom or the illusion of safety that complying with corrupt rules and regulations give you?

  • What are these corrupt rules, why is it corrupt to report suspicious transactions? What is wrong with protecting our children from extortionists, what's wrong with identifying ISIS funding. I get that bank data can be exploited and so we argue that if a government wants access they must be limited to the gateways that agree to data exposure and that as citizens we can bank with those that confirm every time we sign on, that the institution confirms our privacy is secure at the risk of their being sued for a false declaration.

    Personally I don't care if a bank sees my records but, like I respect those with beliefs that are different to mine, I respect those with a contrary opinion.

Consider where your personal vision lies and act accordingly.

  • Could not agree more. So let's join hands and use our agreement to offer a contrasting opinion to that of Antonopoulos, let's focus on winning not parading arguments that undermine our objectives to disintermediate the greedy. Let's make sure we don't let R3 or AA undermine the potential of digital money for the people and let’s stay true to a common objective.

    Dan has been right in so many ways but to succeed you don’t just need to be right, you need to be determined and its for this reason we believe in the mix of our respective strengths.

    WTS (what this space) there is a lot happening under this here duck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuA2kr3tXL8

Thanks Thom and if you're inclined please feel free to call me John or Underwun

2
IDentabit / Re: any update news?
« on: December 13, 2015, 10:21:45 am »
Hi All

There's a comment above saying it sounds like pie in the sky.

Here are some honest words out of an investor presentation on our strategic thinking.

strategic thinking
  • this is not an altcoin dream of getting rich before it fails, this is not a cryptocurrency confronting social norms, this is a well considered strategy designed to realize the full disruptive potential of digital money.
  • this project is binary it's either huge or nothing, it is a project designed to onboard visionary institutions and drag behind them those pragmatically protecting existing paradigms.
end

Frankly I wouldn't expect you to accept any promises of success so I am not here looking for your support or even your sustainable interest, but I do understand the curiosity and I can promise you that I believe it can or will be done, either by us or someone with a similar plan. However it won't happen because of breakthrough technology, it will only happen if execute against a strategic plan and prioritize usability.

This is a solution led project that began with very specific business objectives, I have exceptional input from highly regarded figures and have a final fundraising draft that defines a credible road map. There is no question that in my mind that there will be a common medium of exchange but it's pointless wasting time trying stuff that might work, the only way I know is to work the plan through till you can see checkmate. It doesn't mean it will result in a definite win but personally I need to be convinced and have documents that support our premise, I need to be able to put my hand on heart and say this will work. That's where we are now.

Now I have the seemingly impossible task of bringing in the money from the right people to ensure when we make calls to relevant leaders they pick up. All I can promise you I have done this before at the highest level and I am not in the least intimidated, but realistically we are surrounded by a background of noisy failures, financial scams and technology that until recently was still finding its way and it is for this reason you have every reason to challenge our ambitions and if that's your thing, knock yourself out because as Dan would describe Bitshares 2.0, I am industrial strength and battle hardened and we have only just begun.

Love and hugs and a very merry christmas to all of you...




3
IDentabit / Re: any update news?
« on: December 10, 2015, 04:28:48 am »
Hi All

We are very much in play but we focused on fundraising, partners and keeping our strategy private.

Our focus is on new-banking and its disruptive potential and the transition path required to see it happen.

As they say we are 'all in' and there is not a second we are not working towards our goal to define and establish the future of banking as we see it.

I will spend more time here in coming weeks as of today, thanks to the support of some of the foremost respected financial figures, we have now completed the strategic papers required to raise money but we will continue to keep our cards close to our chest, our asset is our thinking and strategic plan and the forum is surely not a good place to reveal our secrets.

I'll say the following:

  • R3 and its cast of characters are attempting to optimize & preserve obsolete business paradigms, a business model that justifies consulting revenues based on saying what the client wants to hear but ultimately their work will prove to be little more than a costly experiment
  • Existing attempts at centralized compliance chains are open to coercion and corrupt management practices
  • We are convinced that current banking revenue streams are past tense, i.e. centralized funds management, transfers, security and FX
  • We are satisfied that the world of new-banking is ripe for the picking and we have it sorted
  • We are feeling very up, timing is everything and our time is 2016


Take care and maybe ping me on Twitter if you want a one on one, it works for Fuzzy.

John

4
Fantastic ... The Team to Believe in ...

5
IDentabit / Re: Identabit Hangout w/ John Underwood
« on: September 07, 2015, 01:25:19 am »
It's always interesting stopping by to see how divergent opinions are dealt with, it's unsurprising but sad to see nothing has changed.

Newmine is one of the very last dissenting voices that has had his warnings about the project ignored and suffered abuse at the hands of an overly protective community for quite some time. 

I'd also like to hear the answers to empiricals questions but given how many projects we've now seen partner with bitshares and then produce....nothing..... I have to ask what the value is of adding more partners when it's all just vapor?   Any planned launch date for Bitshares Music/Muse? 

Every time I check this forum I see no useful progress on the projects that took funding and haven't yet delivered anything usable but lots more dreams about what could be done in the future.    It would be great to see some working product instead of more promises and funding requests.

Hi Adam

Some questions about the purpose of LetsTalkBitcoin is it to:

Argue a subjective case for Bitcoin's importance and survival, if so might there be a risk you use your platform to influence continued support for unassailable initiatives, potentially encouraging your flock to chase a fading rainbow.
or
Reflect objectively the evolution of blockchain initiatives with the risk that you might have to support arguments that conflict with the sustainability of your show as you could find yourself having to acknowledge that the independent movement for anonymous currencies is failing
or
Influence outcomes by subjectively criticising projects, criticisms that might be wrong and misleading and as a result you risk undermining initiatives that are constructive and have valid arguments for why and how to realise the potential of independent projects.
or ideally
LTB might be focused on how each initiative might succeed, investigating the weaknesses and offering constructive suggestions,  intent on identifying and where possible eliminating fatal flaws and contributing to success of of diverse projects designed to disrupt and disintermediate the inefficient.

I am grateful to you and the LTB crew for the education you and your visitors have provided and until I read this put down of the Bitshares community I would have thought at a minimum you were interested in investigating possibilities, surprisingly it seems that you  are more interested in undermining decentralised initiatives that strive to navigate a path to disruption that you, without investigation, deem inappropriate.

You better than anyone know the staying power and the commitment displayed by the Bitshares team, it seems a shame you are prepared to casually undermine the credibility of Bitshares, Bitshares projects, LTB by default and those that have respected you from the pulpit of credence you have established.

While I have considered your voice at times somewhat condescending, I viewed you as opinionated and insightful. Now it appears you are prepared to casually undermine those those making every effort to disintermediate the corrupt and inefficient when their perspective differs from yours.

Adam I am keen to be wrong and open to all thoughts but first up let's not support or throw insults. This isn't an easy road we all have chosen and whether it's your way, the Bitshares way or the Identabit way, we all have a common objective, that is to slay the dragons of corruption, contain over reach and serve society.

Your narrative might be anonymity and ours privacy but surely we shouldn't make it a zero sum game, we can disagree but wish our respective objectives every success.

Right now we have a considered opinion that differs from yours, an opinion founded on a perfect storm. A storm  created when a publicity seeking regulator saw a $500m publicity campaign, this storm, gave Bitcoin undue prominence prior to it finishing its insidious journey to infiltrate consumer recognition and national boundaries.

As the storm settled in, whether we liked it or not, it became increasingly obvious to us that Bitcoin's journey to become a ubiquitous medium of exchange was over and at best it was going to remain a leveraged asset that underpins associated opportunities.

For us this was a major disappointment because along with Bitcoin, all anonymous currencies including Remitabit, a venture we had spent near a year on, were thrown under the bus. So we began a journey to counter our disappointment and to succeed rather than die along with all those crying 'hail anonymity', 'hail anonymity'.

We are guilty of being pragmatic but from our perspective it was either 'get real or die'.

At the same time we had a new son, we named Snowden, named for our respect for privacy and the man sacrificing his freedom for others, and like many parents of a newborn I became more sensitive to the plight of children. As I watched a news story about the distraught parents of a kidnapped toddler, I zoned in on the magnitude that true anonymous transactions represented to society, the capability truly anonymous currencies have to empower extortion and the exploitation of children with impunity in a way never before possible, and I asked myself that if I had Snowden's life in one hand and anonymous transactions in the other which would I choose?

Of course it wasn't ever a real question, is was in fact a realisation that any digital currency must have build in safeguards, not only to prevent overreach and financial exploitation but also to protect society from the crazy's down the road.

That's the history behind the journey that required we find a genuine solution to building a decentralised identity ensured currency. I say genuine because as you know it's easy to say but near impossible to build, we needed blockchain auditability, hidden addresses, hidden transaction values, ease of use, ease of engagement, decentralised governance, sustainable issuance and conditional transaction inspection that didn't expose the blockchain to government and yet would enable AML/CTF compliance and we needed brilliance, brilliance that until Identabit was, like you, dedicated to an opposing perspective.

I am sure you will agree that the task of satisfying the above goals was a tall order.

Today we have a genuine solution that respects first and foremost privacy to a far greater degree than Bitcoin, the need for institutional support by way of governed compliance, governed sustainable issuance and adoption and usage mechanisms that address engagement, accuracy of transfer, ease of use and widespread adoption. None of which would have been possible without the combined efforts and perseverance of our respective teams.

I suspect that you have joined this thread because folk have shown respect for our argument, and yet disappointingly your first words aren't questions but implied criticism. I can understand the automatic cynicism, talk of building an identity ensured alternative to Bitcoin brings, given the counterintuitive nature of the project and the smell of ill considered opportunism, but we are the real deal as time will tell.

So if you wish to put us down without due process you can, or if you are inclined, I offer to sacrifice my credence should you, Andreas and Stephenie wish to rip me apart.

We know this is a long game and will take strategic thought and considerable effort but I believe that unless we dispense with partisanship and take unified strategic action, we (you and I) will be watching the banks become the real beneficiaries of your efforts to raise awareness in blockchain technology.

6
IDentabit / Re: Identabit Hangout w/ John Underwood
« on: September 06, 2015, 01:22:50 am »
It's a good interview.  I don't  think Identabit will scale well because the big doors will be locked, also on the technology side they will have nothing that can't be replicated and they don't have the super massive funding that's required to compete with the likes of Blythe Masters and such ('It's on the blockhain' - Bloomberg Magazines Cover story 2 days ago http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-09-01/blythe-masters-tells-banks-the-blockchain-changes-everything )

In his intro John  identifies how a key difference between crypto and current payment options is convenience and simplicity however I would argue the simplicity, convenience & payment integration of crypto is only starting to take shape. With 1 second vs. 30 minute confirmation times. Crypto-funded debit cards, payment apps & stable BitAssets only starting to be introduced. I think it is too early to make his judgement.

Also he makes some statements about Bitcoin use and demographics that I don't think are backed up by the facts.
The vast majority of Bitcoiners were young tech savvy Libertarian males not a small group of elites only using it for extremely illicit activity & as Bitcoin becomes more user friendly this demographic is naturally becoming less tech savvy and from a broader political spectrum attracted by the various now more accessible benefits Bitcoin provides.

25 Sept 2014 - http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-09-25/bitcoin-economy-widens-as-parents-pay-digital-allowance

Quote
People worldwide have opened 41 million bitcoin accounts, according to the Bank of England. Global spending on goods and services has doubled in the past year.

Parents are dispensing allowances in bitcoins so their kids learn to be digital citizens.Consumers in emerging markets such as Brazil and Russia are starting to use bitcoin to hedge against currency volatility.

Three factors are attracting consumers to bitcoin. The currency is less volatile. New apps and digital wallets make using it easier. And mainstream companies -- more than 75,000, according to payment services Coinbase and BitPay -- accept the virtual currency

Even if you were to focus exclusively on crypto's black market use. The black market accounts for over 23% of global GDP and in countries such as Greece  it's pushing 25-30%. 

Quote
Bitcoin ATMs could spring up across Greece as soon as October as citizens and businesses become increasingly desperate to move their money despite capital controls.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/19/greece-could-soon-get-1000-bitcoin-atms.html

That is a massive portion of the economy and population already operating outside the reach of traditional institutions. The reason crypto-currencies not owned by the big banks have the potential to be massively profitable & scalable is precisely because the traditional institutions are largely excluded from directly participating in it.

I also think it's possible to integrate social media accounts onto crypto blockchains for the less privacy concerned users and so still gain certain network effect benefits.. 

I think Bitcoin has struggled in price because of the high costs which he identified but also the volatility which means the massive increase in use of Bitcoin by consumers for traditional goods and services creates a net downward pressure on price because businesses operating on extremely tight margins have to exchange BTC revenue immediately for fiat. However despite it's volatility, Bitcoin is very popular fro currency hedging vs. rapidly depreciating currencies in South America as indicated in the article above . Also in places like Greece as a safe haven currency outside their failing banking system. 

However stable Smartcoins are much better suited to this and BitUSD is in many instances far more useful than fiat USD. So we haven't even scratched the surface of what's possible in these markets.

Also this is a global trend. Governments in many countries will be instigating strict capital controls to protect their currencies and their financial system.
(China just increased capital controls yesterday.) As a result I suspect, even with the Identity element most financial institutions would be not be allowed to interact with Identabit anyway. Or the Identabit gateways would have to enforce these restrictions too in which case Identabit would lose it's USP to the majority of the future mainstream market imo. (An inflation hedge and currency outside the over-leveraged banking system.)

So while I see a market for Identabit especially in remittances if they already have a partnership with a bank and can thus remove  a layer of transaction complexity. I think centralised blockchains started by big players will dominate. (Centralised blockchains will likely dominate his target market because it seems unlikely that people who didn't value the benefits of optional anonymity & financial freedom would then highly value the benefits/USP's of decentral vs. centralisation.) So I think that the really big future still lies with the traditional, anonymity optional crypto, but with much lower costs than Bitcoin and stable BitAssets.

Edit: On a side note the use of USD at black market rates in countries like Argentina, shows how an entire population, economy and businesses can get behind using a currency outside of institutions and regulatory compliance

I started with a detailed response but quickly realised this was an argument driven by emotion and hope. We wish you well.

John, I honestly hate the disregarding tone of your response. You could have just not answered if indeed that's your true thoughts. but you decided to go passive aggressive on one of the more thoughtful people around here (if you are not aware of that FACT take the time to read say last 50 posts of Empirical for self educating purposes,  I promise you it will be time well spent even with your busy schedule).

And while I do not have any strong thoughts one way or the other on the correctness of Empirical's analyses, I fail to see any strong emotions shown and have no clue what 'hope' are you talking about?

I agree, thank you...I have devoted the time to the deserving detailed reply.

7
IDentabit / Re: Identabit Hangout w/ John Underwood
« on: September 06, 2015, 01:07:19 am »
My apologies, I was tired and dismissive, below I explain why I felt the comments below lacked substance, and appeared to be driven more from a perspective of ideology

It's a good interview.  I don't  think Identabit will scale well because the big doors will be locked, also on the technology side they will have nothing that can't be replicated and they don't have the super massive funding that's required to compete with the likes of Blythe Masters and such ('It's on the blockhain' - Bloomberg Magazines Cover story 2 days ago http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-09-01/blythe-masters-tells-banks-the-blockchain-changes-everything )

This reminds me of a debate that argued against building a messaging platform because Facebook had 500 devs (a while back) and that it was foolish to think it was possible to compete with their dev power. 3 years later they bought WhatsApp for $16B and a dev team of 50.

Re funding and institutions, this is an area we are familiar with and we couldn't agree more that Identabit needs strategy, purpose and our relationships, in order to succeed.


In his intro John  identifies how a key difference between crypto and current payment options is convenience and simplicity however I would argue the simplicity, convenience & payment integration of crypto is only starting to take shape. With 1 second vs. 30 minute confirmation times. Crypto-funded debit cards, payment apps & stable BitAssets only starting to be introduced. I think it is too early to make his judgement.

We believe the absence of widespread consumer adoption is for the following reasons:
  • We believe for users to transition to a new paradigm it must be easier not harder for users to engage and use, there must be a usage value proposition. Consequently the inherent the requirement of anonymity, being to carefully add users one by one, makes it harder not easier to engage and use.
  • Users cannot acquire the target currency through normal means.
  • The threat of theft and the stigma of crime is threatening
In summary Bitcoin is too hard to buy, too hard to use and unsettles consumers.

Also he makes some statements about Bitcoin use and demographics that I don't think are backed up by the facts.
The vast majority of Bitcoiners were young tech savvy Libertarian males not a small group of elites only using it for extremely illicit activity & as Bitcoin becomes more user friendly this demographic is naturally becoming less tech savvy and from a broader political spectrum attracted by the various now more accessible benefits Bitcoin provides.
 
Some facts:
80% of Bitcoin is trade is in China.
The Chinese are attracted to Bitcoin because it enables circumvention of capital controls, hence why the massive mining rigs, the Chinese need homemade Bitcoin that they can buy for Yuan.

Of the remaining 20%, Bitpay have reported that darkweb volumes outstrip regular merchant traffic. So we are left with a small percentage of Bitcoin trade being used by the examples listed below.

The facts above, if acknowledged, reflect that the majority of users are people circumventing various laws, and I am unaware of any facts that substantiate material adoption by regular consumers.

If we add the Chinese attracted to expatriation of funds, those trading on the dark and the web tech savvy Libertarian males we are left with the question where are the consumers?

In fact if we look at articles speaking of a shrinking market we can deduce that Bitcoin's exciting days of being accepted as a global currencies are, in the opinion of many, over.


Bitcoin Exchange Harborly Shuts Down Due To Shrinking Market Opportunity

37Coins.com Shuts Down Bitcoin Operations

Gyft Co-Founder: Credit Card Spending Now Outpacing Bitcoin

Bitcoin bust?

The examples below of Bitcoin being used are I believe reflective of spin and convenient reasoning and belong to a group of articles designed to keep the Bitcoin hope alive e.g.:

Barclays just became the first UK bank to support bitcoin

When in fact the truth is:

Leading UK Bank Barclay's has denied it will accept Bitcoin later this year

No matter the confidence displayed below the facts above are telling the story.


25 Sept 2014 - http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-09-25/bitcoin-economy-widens-as-parents-pay-digital-allowance

Quote
People worldwide have opened 41 million bitcoin accounts, according to the Bank of England. Global spending on goods and services has doubled in the past year.

Parents are dispensing allowances in bitcoins so their kids learn to be digital citizens.Consumers in emerging markets such as Brazil and Russia are starting to use bitcoin to hedge against currency volatility.

Three factors are attracting consumers to bitcoin. The currency is less volatile. New apps and digital wallets make using it easier. And mainstream companies -- more than 75,000, according to payment services Coinbase and BitPay -- accept the virtual currency

Accepting maybe but receiving is another story, Bitcoin Payments Decline Significantly At Expedia

Even if you were to focus exclusively on crypto's black market use. The black market accounts for over 23% of global GDP and in countries such as Greece  it's pushing 25-30%. 

Quote
Bitcoin ATMs could spring up across Greece as soon as October as citizens and businesses become increasingly desperate to move their money despite capital controls.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/19/greece-could-soon-get-1000-bitcoin-atms.html

I think the above confidence in Greece using Bitcoin is so heavily qualified by Thanos Marinos, the founder of BTCGreece, i.e. Thanos Marinos, the founder of BTCGreece, told CNBC on Wednesday that a soft launch was on the cards for October. "It is part of my vision to create a block chain ecosystem in Greece," he told CNBC. "If all goes as expected with no major issues we will launch first ATMs October 2015." that we shouldn't put much stock in it becoming a reality.

That is a massive portion of the economy and population already operating outside the reach of traditional institutions. The reason crypto-currencies not owned by the big banks have the potential to be massively profitable & scalable is precisely because the traditional institutions are largely excluded from directly participating in it.

I think the above means that, because banks don't trade in Bitcoin it makes for a more efficient payment environment, I am the first to agree that the banks are inefficient and that it is our job to disrupt but for the life of me I cannot see how this can be done from the outside, the only way to disrupt is from the inside.

If we pull together we can make a difference and change the financial landscape for the better but if we spend our time arguing principles, we will watch from the sidelines as the very institutions we sought to disrupt turn savings into profits.


I also think it's possible to integrate social media accounts onto crypto blockchains for the less privacy concerned users and so still gain certain network effect benefits.

I think Bitcoin has struggled in price because of the high costs which he identified but also the volatility which means the massive increase in use of Bitcoin by consumers for traditional goods and services creates a net downward pressure on price because businesses operating on extremely tight margins have to exchange BTC revenue immediately for fiat. However despite it's volatility, Bitcoin is very popular fro currency hedging vs. rapidly depreciating currencies in South America as indicated in the article above . Also in places like Greece as a safe haven currency outside their failing banking system. 

I point to the articles and the data mentioned above, it was this statement the massive increase in use of Bitcoin by consumers for traditional goods and services that caused me to stop writing this detailed response yesterday. This is simply not true and I believe reflects hope not fact.

However stable Smartcoins are much better suited to this and BitUSD is in many instances far more useful than fiat USD. So we haven't even scratched the surface of what's possible in these markets.

I have great regard for what makes Smartcoins smart, it is without question an example of why we are here and why we believe in the work done on Bitshares but I do not believe this feature and others are relevant until such time we have demand and volume for the core asset, hence why we are focused on mainstream adoption and why Market Pegged Assets and other advanced features are not part of our initial objectives.

Also this is a global trend. Governments in many countries will be instigating strict capital controls to protect their currencies and their financial system.
(China just increased capital controls yesterday.) As a result I suspect, even with the Identity element most financial institutions would be not be allowed to interact with Identabit anyway. Or the Identabit gateways would have to enforce these restrictions too in which case Identabit would lose it's USP to the majority of the future mainstream market imo. (An inflation hedge and currency outside the over-leveraged banking system.)

The above gets to the point of Identabit and where the division is between the writer and our objectives. We believe that these restrictions will be enforced and we must comply and that our USP is our respect for this reality.

Don't get us wrong, we want to disrupt but we intend to do it from within, we are not fighting for an ideal but for a realizable objective.

As a side comment, if China's capital controls are imposed and prevent Bitcoin being used for its primary purpose then Bitcoin problems have to get much worse.


So while I see a market for Identabit especially in remittances if they already have a partnership with a bank and can thus remove  a layer of transaction complexity. I think centralised blockchains started by big players will dominate. (Centralised blockchains will likely dominate his target market because it seems unlikely that people who didn't value the benefits of optional anonymity & financial freedom would then highly value the benefits/USP's of decentral vs. centralisation.) So I think that the really big future still lies with the traditional, anonymity optional crypto, but with much lower costs than Bitcoin and stable BitAssets.

Out of all the statements and inferred questions above I consider this to be the most pertinent and if true then I would go further and say this means there is no place for an independent neutral currency, not Bitcoin, not Identabit not anything and we should all pack up and go and work for the institutions.

It was confronting this potential reality that gave birth to Idenabit, because the at heart of both the objective and the argument are neutrality, ROI on existing infrastructure and adoption. three elements that when combined make the case for an independent decentralised identity ensured network.

Neutrality is logical because domain specific currencies work for the self interests of the issuer, as a consequence they will see resistance to acceptance across borders, 'if You own it, They won't use it' where as a neutral medium of exchange has the potential to cross borders and be used by everyone.

ROI on existing infrastructure, we are already seeing Bitcoin businesses exiting due to a shrinking market, they need a currency that they can profit from and it's these businesses, amongst others, that Identabit is designed to serve.

Adoption is core to execution, if we look at Bitcoin and the altcoin market they all have one thing in common, none have a use case designed to drive adoption, this is core to our medium term objectives and will shared in the months ahead.


Edit: On a side note the use of USD at black market rates in countries like Argentina, shows how an entire population, economy and businesses can get behind using a currency outside of institutions and regulatory compliance

There is no question that anonymity has it's place but in reality it will most likely be driven underground, Identabit is not competing for blackmarket constituents.


In summary we believe we need a currency that works with the system in order to change it.

8
IDentabit / Re: Identabit Hangout w/ John Underwood
« on: September 05, 2015, 12:45:58 pm »
It's a good interview.  I don't  think Identabit will scale well because the big doors will be locked, also on the technology side they will have nothing that can't be replicated and they don't have the super massive funding that's required to compete with the likes of Blythe Masters and such ('It's on the blockhain' - Bloomberg Magazines Cover story 2 days ago http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-09-01/blythe-masters-tells-banks-the-blockchain-changes-everything )

In his intro John  identifies how a key difference between crypto and current payment options is convenience and simplicity however I would argue the simplicity, convenience & payment integration of crypto is only starting to take shape. With 1 second vs. 30 minute confirmation times. Crypto-funded debit cards, payment apps & stable BitAssets only starting to be introduced. I think it is too early to make his judgement.

Also he makes some statements about Bitcoin use and demographics that I don't think are backed up by the facts.
The vast majority of Bitcoiners were young tech savvy Libertarian males not a small group of elites only using it for extremely illicit activity & as Bitcoin becomes more user friendly this demographic is naturally becoming less tech savvy and from a broader political spectrum attracted by the various now more accessible benefits Bitcoin provides.

25 Sept 2014 - http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-09-25/bitcoin-economy-widens-as-parents-pay-digital-allowance

Quote
People worldwide have opened 41 million bitcoin accounts, according to the Bank of England. Global spending on goods and services has doubled in the past year.

Parents are dispensing allowances in bitcoins so their kids learn to be digital citizens.Consumers in emerging markets such as Brazil and Russia are starting to use bitcoin to hedge against currency volatility.

Three factors are attracting consumers to bitcoin. The currency is less volatile. New apps and digital wallets make using it easier. And mainstream companies -- more than 75,000, according to payment services Coinbase and BitPay -- accept the virtual currency

Even if you were to focus exclusively on crypto's black market use. The black market accounts for over 23% of global GDP and in countries such as Greece  it's pushing 25-30%. 

Quote
Bitcoin ATMs could spring up across Greece as soon as October as citizens and businesses become increasingly desperate to move their money despite capital controls.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/19/greece-could-soon-get-1000-bitcoin-atms.html

That is a massive portion of the economy and population already operating outside the reach of traditional institutions. The reason crypto-currencies not owned by the big banks have the potential to be massively profitable & scalable is precisely because the traditional institutions are largely excluded from directly participating in it.

I also think it's possible to integrate social media accounts onto crypto blockchains for the less privacy concerned users and so still gain certain network effect benefits.. 

I think Bitcoin has struggled in price because of the high costs which he identified but also the volatility which means the massive increase in use of Bitcoin by consumers for traditional goods and services creates a net downward pressure on price because businesses operating on extremely tight margins have to exchange BTC revenue immediately for fiat. However despite it's volatility, Bitcoin is very popular fro currency hedging vs. rapidly depreciating currencies in South America as indicated in the article above . Also in places like Greece as a safe haven currency outside their failing banking system. 

However stable Smartcoins are much better suited to this and BitUSD is in many instances far more useful than fiat USD. So we haven't even scratched the surface of what's possible in these markets.

Also this is a global trend. Governments in many countries will be instigating strict capital controls to protect their currencies and their financial system.
(China just increased capital controls yesterday.) As a result I suspect, even with the Identity element most financial institutions would be not be allowed to interact with Identabit anyway. Or the Identabit gateways would have to enforce these restrictions too in which case Identabit would lose it's USP to the majority of the future mainstream market imo. (An inflation hedge and currency outside the over-leveraged banking system.)

So while I see a market for Identabit especially in remittances if they already have a partnership with a bank and can thus remove  a layer of transaction complexity. I think centralised blockchains started by big players will dominate. (Centralised blockchains will likely dominate his target market because it seems unlikely that people who didn't value the benefits of optional anonymity & financial freedom would then highly value the benefits/USP's of decentral vs. centralisation.) So I think that the really big future still lies with the traditional, anonymity optional crypto, but with much lower costs than Bitcoin and stable BitAssets.

Edit: On a side note the use of USD at black market rates in countries like Argentina, shows how an entire population, economy and businesses can get behind using a currency outside of institutions and regulatory compliance

I started with a detailed response but quickly realised this was an argument driven by emotion and hope. We wish you well.


9
IDentabit / Re: Important Criticism
« on: August 20, 2015, 02:35:45 am »
What about IDBit?

My favorite...sorted and we have the URL's IDBit.org and info

10
IDentabit / Re: Important Criticism
« on: August 19, 2015, 12:05:07 am »
No need to believe, lets see how we go. I enjoyed the teeth  ;) If you take a look above you will see a post recognising the issues raised.

11
IDentabit / Re: Important Criticism
« on: August 18, 2015, 07:36:37 am »
Hi All

My mistake, I haven't referenced the name for the currency other that the IDB shortcode we use and I should have, my apologies.

We will use a name other than Identabit for the currency, ibit works and inabit was suggested.

We have killed the D and we own numerous URL's including identabit.org/info, identibit.com/org/info, identabits.com so misspelling isn't an issue.

Identity will remain part of the name as we need to bring attention to our purpose.

Thanks everyone there is a lot going on and giving the attention to the detail deserved is always a challenge.

I would like to concentrate on money, software and partnerships once the naming of the currency is behind us.

Jakub thank you for pulling my head out of my ass and PD3 thank you for your constructive approach, to everyone else a big thank you. Your effort helped me listen.






12
IDentabit / Re: Important Criticism
« on: August 16, 2015, 07:00:48 am »
This is an ambitious and extremely thoughtful proposal you've forwarded here. You make a compelling case for bringing to market--and none too soon--a currency that will help fill a void, delivering on the promises that we know Bitcoin cannot.

About the name "IDentabit": yes, it's drawn attention here on this thread, but frankly I'm quite skeptical that means the name is clearly a win. It's not the capital "D" that is most concerning. Actually, "Identabit" would be memorable to consumers, as would be "Remitabit", provided that critical mass had already been achieved. These would be perfectly fine names for a company, a protocol, a platform... or a blockchain. But they would definitely be less useful as names of currency units. Perhaps most importantly, these names are unwieldy. Being four syllables, "Identabit" is a risky choice for currency units because it won't make it easy for people to speak of, think of, spell, and read about without stumbling over them or, worse yet, scoffing at them. All of this could impede the rapid uptake of the currency by consumers. Maybe when crypto has become mainstream, then clunky, long currency names will be more typical and more effective. But I don't think we are there yet, not nearly so.

Have you considered keeping "Identabit" and "Remitabit" as the names of the respective blockchains but using shorter and simpler names for the actual currency units? Using different names for tradeable units and their underlying blockchain seems to be quite a common practice nowadays: e.g., Ripple and XRP, Ethereum and Ether, MUSE and notes, etc.

You could call the blockchain "Identabit" but the currency units "IDbits" (which would jive well with "IDbank" and "IDpay"). Likewise, you could call the Remitabit blockchain's currency units "Rembits". The logo for IDbits (which evokes Bitcoin's logo) could stay the same. Which of the following sounds better: "I'd like to send you XX.XX Remitabits" versus "I'd like to send you XX.XX Rembits". Or "That'll be XX.XX Identabits, please" versus "That'll be XX.XX IDbits, please". To me, it seems obvious that the short & sweet names are more likely to catch on.

Another thought is that you could promote the usage of abbreviations for Identabits as much as possible, so that users would come to refer to them as IDB. Remitabits could be RMB (or some variation thereof to avoid confusion with the symbol for Chinese currency).

Sensible words we do in fact intend to refer to Identabits as IDB

13
IDentabit / Re: Important Criticism
« on: August 16, 2015, 01:59:32 am »
It's quite telling that a discussion thread dedicated to criticism ended up to be purely about the name.
And that's because that's the case really - everything is solid and flawless except the name.

I think to myself: what a shame such a great idea is going to be wasted for such trivial reason.
So please John don't kill your brilliant child with an ill-chosen name. It will come and haunt you when you try to promote it. People are mostly irrational and the name will distract them from the concept itself.

What I already proposed in the other thread is this: IDENTICON. It's not perfect but the best I can come up with if we need to have the word "identity" embedded in it.

Or it can even be Pied Piper  ;)

Thank you Jakub of the many comments yours is the most penetrating...it has left me with two conflicting thoughts

The first being we should open the door to anyone that can come up with a family of names that supports our vision for the blockchain and the strategic products that will flow from it - (please check the following so you are able to consider the implications)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zDPgdB9Ftm6TOOTPhk2ZzFQLMP2chYRXZsDo6nGWPEE/edit#heading=h.mmll6e7809dr or

A second thought is that the name is clearly a win given the attention it has drawn...I am increasingly thinking the big D has to go however...it definitely made people think of experiences we would prefer to forget.

In the interest of suggesting a name where the .com .org.info are available (as with Identabit.com/org/info) Maybe we should have called it armlessmonkey.com ;-)

14
IDentabit / Re: Important Criticism
« on: August 15, 2015, 10:14:48 pm »
The website is written in British English, which since your Aussie makes sense, but I am not sure which version of English is preferred for a worldwide audience.

I personally prefer British English, and subconsciously have a better impression when someone uses it flawlessly.

Pip Pip Old Boy  :D

Wicked, FYI I'm a mix, born in the UK, left after school for Australia and then lived in HK and New York...so my english is all over the place.

I think despite your constructive and complimentary words we should Americanise our content but I am afraid I have no choice but to use my botched version of the English language in the forum, so all I can ask is for your understanding.

15
IDentabit / Re: Important Criticism
« on: August 15, 2015, 10:05:57 pm »
What functionality does Ethereum have (or promise to have in the future) over BitShares? How much does the name "Ethereum" contribute to its current 10x market cap advantage over BitShares?

Etherium has a good market cap because they were able to get momentum behind their tech. That counts more than many here would like to believe.

Thank you I enjoy your comments and it would be remiss of me not to reply to you directly.

I've posted a general statement above and I agree that the D drowns the I and turns the name into a mouth guard, or something for kids with overbite.

The name is not precious but the strategy is and how the name interrelates with other names is important. As mentioned in the link below, the name is part of a family of names intended for use over the next few years where one of the most important being Remitabit. I need to expand the point behind rolling out Identabit first and how Remitabit is related but in short, I'll share the following:

Remitabit has a unique compelling model that we are keen to introduce but we came to believe that an anonymous blockchain wasn't going to cut it with institutional partners and that we needed to establish a case for an institutionally acceptable blockchain. Remitabit will sit atop Identabit but we didn't want to bring it out and have the identity argument drown the remittance story, so Phase 1. identity, Phase 2 remittances and the massive adoption of Remitabits driving the value of Identabits.

A quick message to our competitors, hiding beneath the surface are features and dependency on the Bitshares architecture that make this model work and sustainable despite increased government intervention. So we wish you luck but get use to the fact that we have spent nearly two years to get to this place and we are in this for the long haul...so get used to seeing us around.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zDPgdB9Ftm6TOOTPhk2ZzFQLMP2chYRXZsDo6nGWPEE/edit#heading=h.mmll6e7809dr


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5