And, looking ahead, there is always Shanghai 2014:
http://bitcoinmagazine.com/8467/bitcoin-expo-2014-announced-for-shanghai/
Just for info from this post: "With this in mind, the conference’s organizers are very optimistic, aiming to attract 5000 attendees. At this point, very little is set in stone; sponsorship offers are wide open for anyone who wants to take them. Anyone interested in speaking should contact the conference organizers at conference@bitcoinexpo2014.com. Enjoy another great Bitcoin conference!"

Nice ideas. Likely to benefit parties on both sides, and remove corruptible intermediate management. Keen to hear more as this project develops. I am not sure how this fits into a typical DAC 'trading' format, I am sure someone will chip in to explain a bit more...

Here's my take. Very unfortunately I am not a guru programmer, otherwise I would be coding fast, right about now...

DACs: decentralized autonomous online trading networks. DACs provide a way to seamlessly integrate service delivery and currency with the intermediary (i.e. the DAC) designed to be incorruptible, honest and fair.
Protoshares: one of the founding blocks of decentralized services, that gives you early access to BitShares.
Proof of stake: coins that stay in your wallet for a set period are rewarded by a certain percentage (not sure what the figures are, guess it might vary with each DAC).

Very simply, a DACs primary job is to work hard to increase any shareholding you have in that DAC. At present DACs are set to be designed by humans, run by 'robots'. A DAC follows its set of rules, and these rules are not able to be changed unless altered by shareholder vote. It might operate to provide decentralized services in any sphere that you could imagine. Without putting too fine a point on it, this is what may be not be fully appreciated yet. Decentralized media services? Already being planned... Decentralized global legal service? Decentralized postal service with automated robotic delivery? Check out the alternative DAC thread for a few thoughts here. DACs are by their nature set to be 'incorruptible' in their decision making, which has the potential to add levels of trust in public services in any economy.

The tools that a DAC has are limited to various things, like auctions and dividends but bolting these basics onto a coin network opens up quite a few possibilities. DACs created with the "social contract" then reward protoshareholders with c. 10% of their blockchain, and so immediately gain a following of interested supporters.

Your ID can be mined and I think its 10 pts to add. How shares are mined is up for discussion at present.

Be sure to read the Invictus white papers. There's a lot of detail, but it gives you more insight into how DACs work.

The first one looks a little too q-bert for me 

I do like the 3d lineless version, very cool!
You could mirror it horizontally for the b in the new Bitshares logo too.
Now having the p and b logos that were mirrored would look slick!

Neat idea. I prefer the lineless logo. Possibilities to turn it into an optical illusion: http://michaelbach.de/ot/sze_missCornerCube/index.html

This kind of DAC is very possible and profitable.   

1) People must PAY to submit a dispute to the DAC, some of these fees are paid to the voters and some paid to the share holders.
2) Voting works for binary decisions but how could we use this to settle a divorce?
3) This works well for public disputes, how could it be used in the btc-u hacking dispute?

In a prior life I was working on a centralized debating forum with the aim of finding the truth of anything by having people debate in a new kind of web forum.  Recognizing that Republicans and Democrats will fail to apply reason to their votes and instead vote party lines or based upon a biased agenda I knew that I couldn't just have people vote 'true' or 'false' on any given assertion.   

So I came up with the idea of having people vote on the relationship between two pieces of information:  Does argument A support or contradict argument B.   I didn't reveal the result of the votes to the users.   The weight I gave a user's vote depended upon how close they were to the mean vote of all other users.    In effect, those that were able to correctly guess what others would guess were considered more trustworthy and less biased.   Someone with an agenda who voted out of line in an attempt to defy logic would get penalized.

Ultimately the whole system was too complex for people to grasp and I let it die.

That said, JuryShares would be a good way of establishing 'guilt' if you were willing to accept a judgment by random individuals.

Creating a new tier of justice, with not just a local jury, but a global voice of opinion, might be the way to develop this system in the learning phases, so that in the first implementations of such a system users of the process would be encouraged to adjudicate (online jury service, would you do it?) on decisions and processes.

It seems to be back up, but I think they added a minimum amount before withdrawal. Anyone remember what the withdrawal limits were before?

The translated message when attempting to withdraw anything is this:
"BTC withdrawal is disabled due to high system load, virtual currency extract suspended, open later, please give us a little more time, thank you for your understanding and support."

PM sent last week, not yet replied.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand is just collecting addresses and will send an email to everyone interested in due course.