Encryption?

This is what I'm worried about.

Offer more than just "music". What about podcasts like Beyond Bitcoin?

Gotta think bigger, Pinky!

This should be the BitShares Media blockchain.

Authors would love to have an equivalent to peertracks. I would think that you could simply fork and rebrand peertracks software and operate an ebook platform the same way.

Bezos probably wouldn't be very happy though.

Then later - TV and Movies.

Quote from: cass on June 23, 2015, 12:05:08 am

sticky

Thanks Cass!

I guess I wasn't very clear in my request. What I had in mind was a child board with a name like "Procedures & Policies", and under it would be topics like "Voting Procedures", "Minimum Delegate Requirements", "How to Make a Worker Proposal" ...

The hierarchy would be General Discussion--> BitShares 2.0--> Procedures & Policies <various topics>

Make sense?

Plus 5

Who is this dude named Ben?

I'm drawing a blank with Li as well.

Thanks for your replies and hard work.

Hopefully we can get a more in depth look at CNX via a Beyond Bitcoin interview with fuzzy in a similar manner as the Taulant/Bitsapphire Developer Hangout.

I believe that it will be beneficial to the community to hear about the CNX on this level before the worker proposal voting.

Thanks again fellas.

Perfect:



1. Letter "N"
2. Beamed notes
3. Also looks like headphones

Since we are most likely going to be voting on awarding the majority of large worker contracts for the foreseeable future to Cryptonomex, I think it is the responsibility of the Bitshares community to require at least a responsible level of transparency regarding the makeup and ownership of what will be our largest contractor.

If there are a few big CNX investors that wish to remain anonymous for the time being - fine - but please allow the community to know that is at their request and weight the information ourselves.
They may wish to keep their anonymity and maybe the large percentage of this community will be OK with that, but in the spirit of what was Bitshares, I request a little more openness from here on out.

Now is the time for the community to set precedent on what requirements will be necessary from contractors, going forward.
I would like to see some answers to this before any of these proposals come to a vote.

My previous post that was unfortunately made at the end of the locked NuMine thread:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,16902.msg216862.html#msg216862

I don't see it that way.

I think most people here with legitimate concerns (by now I think most of us know who to read, who to consider and who to skip) are over Cryptonomex as a company.

We don't know the ownership percentages - what little we do know is from the mumble - that bytemaster doesn't own 51%.

But how much do the angels own? Who are they?  What are their goals? Interests? Alignment?  This matters.

bytemaster's claim that they plan to diversify holdings is somewhat bothersome as well and a lot of that part of the mumble came off as kind of like - (not a quote) 'well, things are different now - we are Cryptonomex, you're not - so it's none of your business'

Yes, that is bothersome - and this is coming from someone who has been here since the beginning and trusted in the devs through every minor crisis to date.

If the diversification is short term, to pay for rather immediate expenses - OK, but if Cryptonomex is truly all-in on BTS - their holdings should reflect that.

Also - who is Cryptonomex?

What makes the team? I've been looking for a team page and have yet to find it.

Is Toast part of Cryptonomex? Vikram? Agent86? theoretical? who? - is there a link I'm not seeing?

Again, I think most concerned here have a tremendous amount of trust and faith in the Larimer's and the rest of the dev team, but we have yet to be convinced that Cryptonomex is not something that can run away from them.

I really hope to get some reassuring answers soon. We have our first Bay Area meetup on Thursday and I'm sure most of us have had enough of a hard time trying to get up to speed with the technical and operational 2.0 changes - I really would like this issue to be worked out before being blindsided by a newb with interest and not having an answer.

Lastly, thanks again to everybody in this community - from the devs to the lurkers who show up for 1 or 2 important posts. The last 18 months have been the most optimistic I have ever been that the next 100 years will be one of enlightenment and abundance.

Thank you