Quote from: Empirical1 on August 02, 2014, 06:49:21 pm

Quote from: tonyk on August 02, 2014, 06:36:49 pm

All the above worries me because it actually achieves nothing as a real economic benefit (compared to inflation-less) system, other than trying to incorporate much or less, some economic fallacies, such as: by increasing the supply of ‘money’ one can actually stimulate growth, and growing economic systems depend on constant increase in such supply.

I agree with your bolded statement. Unless the guys in this thread are talking about some other inflation business model then I think you/I have misunderstood the equity release model.

For example Alice & Bob start a business. They raise funds to start the business from investors and award people shares based on how much they contribute. They use those funds to develop and grow the business. If you want to shut down the business all you have to do is get to Alice & Bob or the funds. Applying it to a DAC, you've created a decentralised system with a centralised weak spot.

If you take the same model but have that equity released via delegates, the large active shareholders would probably still release most of it to Alice & Bob & not think much else about it,  but if they were targeted you would just re-direct the equity release elsewhere.

Edit: Maybe I should read your link first... 

Too much added inefficiency to achieve this goal, for my liking. I will think it over,... more.

Ok I read some of the original thread. Yeah it's interesting. I think re-directing the inflation % of Bitcoin through a DPOS system should work fine. But as you say in that thread usually all the money you need to run a business and then some should come through revenue.

However some businesses take a few years to be positive so it could be useful in that period. Also occasionally a business might have to borrow for expansion or to respond to a competitor so having some form of equity release/inflation available, that is mostly being 100% burnt, (ergo no inflation) available to be directed to funding the business when needed could be good.

Another problem we'll find is that shareholders of coca cola can be concerned with investment & electing a board of directors but people who drink coca cola couldn't really give a sh... With DAC's users/customers end up being shareholders at the moment, on the one hand it's a good thing as it creates demand for the stock in addition to revenue but as you say there will be a lot of people who own stock that won't be involved in this process. Which creates new problems.  Especially with a DAC that's specifically designed to be used a global crypto-currency. I will think about it more myself.

For example if there was equity release, I would vote to hire an additional enthusiastic marketing person who's passionate about this field, knows BitShares & competitor offerings inside out, interacts with the community daily, actively communicates & markets BitShares on other forums and builds effective, results visible, marketing/press/promotion relationships within this field too.

Unfortunately in the early stages of the business, fees barely cover a delegates running costs so the impact on change we as shareholders have is limited atm.

How have they abandoned it?

BitShares X has no inflation and has already burnt a few hundred thousand BTSX which acts as dividends for shareholders.

(Granted it's negligible, and personally I hope we'll get some quality re-investment options going via delegates vs. burning, but the business has just started.)

has this been posted outside of the forums as well.

I made quick posts when I saw the announcement on BTT in the general alternate currency area but maybe I should have put them in the announcement sections.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=721082.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=721043.0

I've got to the bottom of it, looks like it's down to Hip Hop icon Nas saying we're entering the age of Bitcoin...

http://www.coindesk.com/hip-hop-icon-nas-coinbase-age-of-bitcoin/

The buzz is Jay Z might where a Bitcoin symboled gold chain to a club next week, so we could even be looking at $20 000 BTC soon.

Edit: Darn it's been corrected

Moderator can delete thread if they like.

Quote from: Empirical1 on August 01, 2014, 03:07:55 pm

I think there will ultimately be a sub-section for these things.

I think ‘ Bank & Exchange’ is un excellent place for that! Let’s put them all there… wait, maybe in ‘Technical Support’ will be even better.

Is that even more sarcasm?   

I mean like maybe a child board 'competitions & give-aways' in the BTSX section for example. Banning them is fine too.

Do you not think even having 1/2 good marketing/promotions threads coming directly from dacsunlimited would be a positive?

Is anyone else tired of seeing the tonne of coins that say that they can do decentralized exchanges? Everyone is promising it including Mastercoin, yet we havent seen anything real yet. Check this out:

http://wiki.mastercoin.org/index.php/Decentralized_exchange

Quote

The Master Protocol enables the peer-to-peer exchange of any cryptocurrency or token with any other cryptocurrency or token.

Really? So why is Mastercoin tanking, and why are people still using bter.com and cryptsy if Mastercoin can do that? It seems like some people just like to blow a lot of hot air.

I tried using the counterparty wallet for the first time this week so I could sell half my Proof of burn XCP and buy more BTSX. It was alright. The speed was the big killer though. It reminded me of the nineties when I'd click on two audio songs, go to sleep and hope they'd downloaded by morning.
I presume they're going to have their own faster side chains or something soon enough but doing anything at that speed is just ridiculous. Especially when BTSX exists.

 

Fun game 

0.00002825

BTSX: tylerdurden