Quote from: crypto_prometheus_81 on October 22, 2014, 02:34:11 am

Bravo!!

to CLains!

DA - really sorry to hear your frustration. Its impressive how much effort you put into destructive remarks. Though letting out anger and getting personal could have a self-calming function medium-term.

Indeed, BM sets high expectations and the results are not set in stone. Targets are moving and previously envisioned path ist almost certain to change... Even ideals are likely to adjust when confronted with real-world hurdles, whereby common sense of leaders and community is expressly desirable at such junctions.

But otherwise investing here wouldn't qualify as risky but promising. By reasonably contributing to any of the projects out there, including BTS, one can make such project just a bit less risky and a bit more promising. So, if you are giving up on BTS - wish you feel better with hard-working and well-intentional NXT semipros or any other project of your choice soon enough!

Edit: Looking at your below post, Decentralised, maybe I overreacted here somewhat - you just seem to be a very sarcastic personality . Best of luck with ether then!.

Thanks Vikram. Would such issues still be worked on if the merger happens?

Quote from: xeroc on October 20, 2014, 06:59:06 pm

It's called First Mover Advantage .. not First Mover Winner :-)

Is it true that Ethereum now has Google Ventures funding them?

google ventures holds stake in ripple labs... never heard that about etherium, rather some private funds of some Goldman Sachs bankers..

Bitshares YOUnited

Quote from: alexkravets on October 19, 2014, 11:06:31 pm

Here's the real question, once "stake holder approved dilution without limit" is encoded into software rules, do we have a DAC anymore or is this now a DAD (Decentralized Autonomous Democracy ?).

I'm posing this question here as a topic for a real debate ...

I don't claim to have a crystal ball or to know "the answer" if one is better than another, but it seems that going from a deflationary hard-bounded crypto equity to something resembling Apple stock (which can also be diluted without limit through a board vote, presumably on behalf of the best interest of all shareholders) should be debated on its own without other issues being commingled into the debate.

Well, its certainly still a company - just like Apple in the characteristics you mention. 
It is far more decentralized that Bitcoin. 
So you might better ask whether it is still autonomous. 

Yes, in every way that matters in the original concept.  No central authority can corrupt it (successfully).  If delegates get taken down in their jurisdictions others will pop up.  Its code is still inspectable and its data is still transparent.  And if DAC Sun goes away, someone else will pick up the baton and carry on.

And it is infinitely more answerable to its shareholders than Bitcoin and most of its alts.

Hi Stan, I was delighted to hear both Dan and yourself speaking lucid on mumble, and much of your reasoning feels valid. Obviously, there is no unique way forward, and every of the discussed moves may end up in failure, survival, or success, depending on upcoming events and other circumstances. it is very important to the community to keep i3 motivated, and for i3 to get community backing. however, i must admit, that even though the mumble session alleviated many concerns and brought most participants into cheering mood - perhaps now its time for the community to reflect non-emotionally and orderly discuss the pros/cons of main possible future roads?

I sense the issues alexkravets, amenocon and some others are pointing to are indeed quite fundamental. Via BTS United we might achieve faster adoption, marketing success plus concentration of efforts (which is paractical and emotionally rewarding). Though does it mean compromising the very soul, ideological foundations of the initial crypto-equity project with additional capital infusions? Meaning that BTS is rather innovative i3- and shareholder-powered tech company, rather than a novel entity behind tectonic shift in economic paradigms? Would you consider continuing debate about these issues more disturbing or desirable? I just feel that such fundamental shifts require more time to be reflected and decided upon by all stakeholders: leaders, developers and investors, unless there is an extreme urgency...

Thanks!

BITSHARES UNITED! 

BTSU

BTER.COM/TRADE/DNS_BTC

VOTE stakes are out there for pre-snapshot PTS holders. Not yet tradeable.

Quote from: Empirical1.1 on October 18, 2014, 12:45:39 pm

I am not an economist either and could be wrong.

But if Amazon says 'BitUSD accepted here' do you think I can make a Y DAC that issues $1 million worth of my BitUSD backed by 5% collateral? I do not think those are the BitUSD Amazon will accept as payment. When they say 'BitUSD accepted here', BitUSD will refer to one specific DAC - the one that controls the brand 'BitUSD' Others will be 'YBitUSD accepted here too' etc.

*agreed*

wouldn't make sense for the merchant to have to monitor several chains for a bitUSD payment

So .. in the end .. we need a mechanism for the enduser .. to flawlessly exchange 1bitUSD in DNS for 1bitUSD in VOTE .. or BTSX ..

hmm ...

a centralised bitUSD exchange / payment processor would resolve that *lol*