It's not cool for BM to blame the community or "dumb people" for the "mistakes" of BTS, instead of thinking of  his own mistake for not fully discussing with community when he made those big decisions.

not cool at all .
I can not explain enough to people without wasting my time why bitshares' founder has announced the "bitshares' failures" .

after all  , a large part of BM's own mistakes wasn't even mentioned in the article . I had to teach them the history over and over again until they realized : oh , it's BM who failed , not bitshares , and it seems STEEM is not something we should remotely consider to invest in given the history .

I need to upgrade my brain buffer in order to understand long sentence above

well , it translates the same in Chinese at least . "learn from bitshares' failures " = "learn from the reasons why bitshares has failed "

i'm sure if his English could be better he'd use the word "mistakes" instead of "failures" .

Anyway , he's right about one sentence : technology can not fix dumb people .
The difference between DAO and BTS is that , BTS didn't have a 6 million USD budget in the first place , it's just in BM's imagination . The dilution plan was accepted reluctantly by the community only because of :
1. BM will perform some big thing with vote , millions of users will be using BTS , hence any reputation cost by the merger and continue dilution could be compensated .
2. Upon the delivery of 2.0 , BM magically proposed that to unleash the delegate-by-delegate dilution to worker dilution , with a misleading promise that all dilution will be vested for years , no selling pressure .

After the two promises were broken , he still convinced that he has 6 million budget to spend . This is what I called "wishful thinking" .

Anyway , I don't believe the future holds for The DAO .  But what BM said regarding the "failures" of BItShares and blame it on "dumb people" are just plain stupid .


By the way , how's brownie.pts going ? As far as we know , nobody is controlling brownie.pts except BM . He can dilute it to support development . How come brownie.pts hasn't been successful already

Quote from: lil_jay890 on May 18, 2016, 03:04:06 am

There are a lot of "projects" coming out of the woodwork now that people have seen how easily crypto investors part with their cash.

Most seem borderline scammy and there is no recourse for investors if the projects go belly up or if the founders leave with the cash.  Maybe you have some hope if you are in the us, but if your investing in something foreign you have virtually zero share holder rights.

 I'm not sure how much longer they will be able to do this before people get wise or regulatory authorities take a closer look at what is going on.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1410943.0

In their self moderated STEEM ANN, they didn't disclose that they mined 80% of the intial STEEM to themselves & also that they made it deliberately difficult for others to participate which is key investor information.  They also boldly labelled it as ' No Premine | No Instamine' which they knew was misleading given they'd secured 80% of the initial supply. I would have thought there was a high risk that would count as financial miss-selling but I assume they've taken legal counsel on most of their decisions.

wow

yes it get cut .

https://steemit.com/crypto-news/@dan/is-the-dao-going-to-be-doa

Bytemaster wrote a great article on this over on steemit.

(I'm 100% against the blanket poaching of BitShares forum users to the subforums of a vaguely related project. However.. that article above is a good read.)

I saw a great article on PTS/AGS before written by a Bitcoiner .
I wish I had believed it . 

however , if you think about it , everybody can write something on why something can not come true , especially in the crypto world .
you're bound to become a good predictor if you bash enough projects .

Quote from: btswildpig on May 14, 2016, 01:56:32 am

i think i'll pass .
I have much nightmare about putting my money on programmers and let them spend it to invest on something they thought was cool .   

AGS/PTS/JL777 .......

i think your understanding of the DAO is not clear.
at the moment the DAO is in creation phase and after the creation is done, anyone can make a proposal and get funded. this will be probably done first
from slock.it, because they are the creators of the smartcontracts the DAO is using.

if you want your ETH back you can everytime split and your ETH is returned to you, so it much less risk then with AGS, JL777, ETH or any other crypto project so far.

Hmm......So that means DAO's token price will certainly higher than or equals the marketcap of the Ether it holds ? 
And as long as we assume Ether can not go lower ...... investing in DAO will have no chance of losing money but winning as long as not much money are spent in the fund ?

Sounds like too good .......If that's the case , it explains why people who were not selling their Ether in the first place is now investing crazy in DAO ......because they can purely bet on the token price of DAO before significant money spent from the fund without any risk ?

It just sounds too good .

BTW. ....According to Coindesk article , it seems like programmers in this DAO(we thought it was slock.it) denied they're the operator and initiator of the DAO .....

Tricky ...... They said the code was built by them , but they didn't actually started this DAO , and the funding was not raised by them