Quote from: thistome on November 08, 2014, 10:33:33 am

pts 分到冻结的bts ，是否在35%play分配权中？

是的，包括DNS， VOT，和AGS，Dev等

这里的Dev指的是

Developers of DNS and VOTE had to settle for a smaller stake (1.2%) in a much bigger DAC.  Given the combined potential, this was also a great trade.

BTS详细分布见这里
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10844.0

Quote from: Shentist on November 08, 2014, 10:52:31 am

Quote from: delulo on November 08, 2014, 10:44:32 am

Given that PLAY will have its own chain...
I understand that BTS has the bigger network effect but is 10/10 AGS/PTS and 35 BTS reasonable? AGS/PTS were the ones that enabled this and AGS/PTS are the proto coins with all the early supporters...

Hackfisher can do as he pleases as long as the social consensus honored. so this allocation is fine. why start complaining? This allocation is totally fine.

Sure he can do what he wants! Support is based on a perception of fairness. It was the same with the Music DAC which also offered 10/10 initially. The discussion after the allocation announcement in the end lead to a better allocation. Discussion (not complaining) is never bad.

As for me: I will support the PLAY DAC ANYWAY but I would find it more "fair" to have more for AGS/PTS since AGS/PTS contributed something of value (initial funding for the toolkit).

I can understand the people who held AGS/PTS but already sold BTSX might have concerns like you. But as soon as it's the BTS holder now are supporting the current codebase of BTS/BTSX, or toolkit, and PLAY is forking that codebase in some sense, so I think it is not a bad choice. And I was involved in BTSX to some extent, play will be more successful with support from BTS community members, they are holding here at least.

For Play, it will have a more wide distribution.

pts 分到冻结的bts ，是否在35%play分配权中？

是的，包括DNS， VOT，和AGS，Dev等

I could not follow things super closely lately.
Will PLAY be included into the BTS chain?

PLAY will not be included to the BTS chain, but it will honoring/allocate/airdrop to it for the support from BTS.

几乎所有的价值创造来追根溯源都源自于人类的基本需求，对于BitShares PLAY所专注的游戏领域来说，游戏玩家的需求也可以分为几类，基于风险回报或运气的需求，和娱乐体验和成就感的需求。前者注重投入回报的比较，而后者更类似于购买消费或社交活动。

基于这两种需求发展成了不同形态类的游戏，而前者的极端就是博彩类游戏，世界各国以及各个文化对于此类游戏的看法不同，一种观点是人类本身并不完美应该克制此类需求，而另外一类则是技术至上自由市场主义。

对于BitShares PLAY本身来言，作为一个去中心化网络和技术，本无需关心不同价值观的差别，但是从一个游戏平台和游戏DAC的角度来说，不同的设计会对其所支持的游戏种类有不同的影响。对于BitShares PLAY来说，最主要的愿景是通过技术创新让游戏社区和加密社区碰撞出火花，所以不同的价值观点的冲突既非我们所关心，也非我们应该专注去解决的问题。所以从BitShares PLAY的角度来说，我们选择支持消费增值类游戏，而非博彩类游戏。

这种变化体现在PLAY设计上的变化，特别是对于on-chain的游戏，最大的区别就是“内置双向兑换”模型的改动，我们会选择由双向改为单向兑换，也就是系统只能将PLS按照当前价格兑换成游戏CHIPS(游戏币或道具的统称)，反之则不行。CHIPS销售所有的收入将可以分成，一部分给游戏发布者，另一部分给系统。对于on-chain的Chip价格将继续保持由销售总量和CHIP供应总量之比决定。

另一方面，玩家和玩家之间P2P二手交易游戏道具市场将仍然存在，系统内部将自动撮合买家和卖家达成交易以提高效率，这种自动交易将会是DAC相对于传统线下交易平台的优势，这样的市场存在有助于促进商品和消费流通，保护玩家的利益和促进游戏供应商的销售。传统的平台如Steam市场也是类似，但是DAC带来的透明度和无需信任的机制是传统平台无法比拟的。

至此，我们可以看到在BitShares PLAY中的模型得以简化和统一，一个去中心化的游戏商城和一个去中心化的游戏二手市场。游戏商城中的游戏分为On-chain和off-chain(传统)游戏两种，区别在于定价方式和是否基于信用。On-chain的游戏，指的是那些游戏的所有规则，至少是游戏的经济模型是放在blockchain上的游戏，定价模型则是基于历史收入和当前游戏币总供应量。 而传统(off-chain)的游戏定价则是完全由游戏发布者决定和更新，其所销售的游戏币价值也取决于发布者的信用，而DAC将会设计反馈监督规则来防止欺诈的发生。即使对于传统类游戏来说，DAC无人运行公司的介入带来的优势依旧是无可比拟的，这些优势主要包括，去除中介人(意味着风险降低，成本减少)，透明度，开放和自动化程度。

对于大规模普及，则需要一个像BitShares Music的PeerTracks一样的传统平台来推动发展，playshare.io就是这样一个平台。就像以前说的，这样的平台只是作为PLAY这个去中心化网络其中的一个节点而存在，就像BitPay之于Bitcoin，任何人都可以搭建类似的平台，这个网络本身是去中心化和基于开放协议的。PLAY将倾向于选择类似于BitPay类似的模型来解决价格波动性的问题，而非使用类似BitUSD的模型。关于这两个优劣仁者见仁，智者见智，而playshare.io做出这个选择的原因无非是因为BitPay的模型更容易传播和理解，并且只需保持适度的灵活性，当BitUSD模型成熟之后再迁移至其中的难度也并非那么大。

感谢Gulu, Clar, HeyD, Boombastic花时间与我讨论，以促成这篇后补

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/license

XBox is allowing reselling if the publishers enable this:

Trade-in and resell your disc-based games: Today, some gamers choose to sell their old disc-based games back for cash and credit. We designed Xbox One so game publishers can enable you to trade in your games at participating retailers.  Microsoft does not charge a platform fee to retailers, publishers, or consumers for enabling transfer of these games.

In our role as a game publisher, Microsoft Studios will enable you to give your games to friends or trade in your Xbox One games at participating retailers. Third party publishers may opt in or out of supporting game resale and may set up business terms or transfer fees with retailers.  Microsoft does not receive any compensation as part of this. In addition, third party publishers can enable you to give games to friends. Loaning or renting games won’t be available at launch, but we are exploring the possibilities with our partners.

Quote from: HackFisher on November 06, 2014, 03:34:49 am

Quote from: gamey on November 06, 2014, 03:32:30 am

Quote from: HackFisher on November 06, 2014, 03:26:39 am

Will there continue be such a toolkit?

Was there ever a toolkit ?   

I'm not being a smartass. I'm confused at your response.

There was a toolkit, right? I'm asking will it continue exists.

Correct me if I am wrong but the toolkit was always the first DAC, bitshares X.  So then DNS came around which seemed like something reasonable to fork instead, but it was never named "bitshares_toolkit".  The problem is beyond a few utilities here and there, it isn't much of a framework for creating DACs. 

I'm not complaining as I've accepted these changes etc, but if BTS expects sharedrops instead of PTS/AGS, then it seems to me they should do something to help enable third party DACs going forward.

I'm just curious what the community thinks of this line of thought.

To some extent, there was such a codebase going to the toolkit direction. My concern is that will toolkit still be one of the target in this community.
Really hope people who want to develop DACs based on BitShares technology could continue effort on these.