Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Xypher

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 21
76
General Discussion / Re: A simple fiat bridge into smartcoins
« on: December 29, 2015, 03:21:39 pm »
Why dont you work with electron.io and us for this ?
We are not launching the project in personal capacity, have the code base ready and are always open to synergy.
Ping me in telegram some time and we can take this forward.

Regards

77
General Discussion / Re: Governmania - The Game.
« on: December 29, 2015, 02:33:34 pm »
I have no idea, how do you think one can do that?

1. FBA
2. UIA
3. Private Investments
4. Crowdfunding

78
General Discussion / Re: Governmania - The Game.
« on: December 29, 2015, 09:18:51 am »
Over the years we all have witnessed many successful video games that evolved into something larger than just a game. These games influence players to some extent in a way that shapes their culture, behavior  and lifestyle . Games are a great way to enter minds. Now that we have a very powerful technology why dont we invent a video game that simulates an environment in which participants compete for an income by offering their services , similar to current bitshares system. In this game I would like to see officials being dismissed in a second if they dont do their jobs, just like bitshares. In this game the table will be turned the other way,  users will try to grab a piece of the pie without an intermediary, an even playfield for everyone.  A fun game with blockchain technology integration might demonstrate the new generation how a government should work, and you never know maybe this will lead to whole lot of different future. peace

Good idea, how will you fund this?

Regards

79
General Discussion / Re: 2016 Vision Blog Post
« on: December 29, 2015, 05:56:12 am »

Yea sorry, that's not how life works for 99.9999999 percent of the world.

You are correct.

Most of the world will see all the obstacles and will attempt to solve problems within the confines of the barriers placed in front of them.

Good thing some here don't think that way... otherwise Bitshares wouldn't exist at all.

Disruption is not the equivalent of logical fallacy :)

80
General Discussion / Re: 2016 Vision Blog Post
« on: December 29, 2015, 05:01:53 am »
Here's the problem.  Most people, and i'm going to guess over 90%, are here to try to leverage the overall move of the public to blockchain tech.  They are trying to profit by beating the banks. They are trying to leverage the technical  superiority of bitshares compared to bitcoin to achieve a higher beta return.


A major problem seems to be that hiring devs to add the features and refinements and upgrades that everyone wants takes funding.  How are "they" (those making suggestions/requests) proposing to hire and pay devs to accomplish "their" desires in the order that they propose?

These discussions could be a lot more fruitful if plans for funding of requests accompanied those requests.

If you own BTS now, you own a share of the blockchain technology "as is". You have not paid for future development (the money for that ran out a long time ago).

Correct.  Bootstrapping a business means choosing from the paths through the entrepreneurial maze that are available to you at each point in time. 

Each candidate path has its estimated costs and rate of return.  Sometimes the most direct paths exceed our immediate resources. Sometimes we need to take a few detours to acquire the resources needed to pursue the final goal. 

To make a DEX successful you need market depth.  To get that you need users.  There are many potential ways to get users and effort expended in any of them is potentially productive.  We look for ways that we can afford and that are likely to pay off sooner than later.

Sometimes you can attract users philosophically while you build features that will attract others economically

We are not given a map to our maze in advance.  The best solution is to explore the maze in parallel as a team of fellow entrepreneurs.  We are not limited to just worker proposals or just outside investments or just creating a compelling reason to work together.  It is the sum of all those efforts that will get us there.


I solved the map:



Yea sorry, that's not how life works for 99.9999999 percent of the world.

81
General Discussion / Re: 2016 Vision Blog Post
« on: December 29, 2015, 04:30:26 am »
Did you cheat and look at the map of the maze from above?

Try it again from ground level...

:)

Nope.
Tried multiple routes.
Went back and redid from alternative route when it didn't work.
One difference though, I began from the end point when working from the initial point got confusing.

Relates a lot to what we are doing here.
We need to make our moves with our end goal in mind and re-iterate strategies when we see some don't working :)

82
General Discussion / Re: 2016 Vision Blog Post
« on: December 29, 2015, 04:24:19 am »
Here's the problem.  Most people, and i'm going to guess over 90%, are here to try to leverage the overall move of the public to blockchain tech.  They are trying to profit by beating the banks. They are trying to leverage the technical  superiority of bitshares compared to bitcoin to achieve a higher beta return.


A major problem seems to be that hiring devs to add the features and refinements and upgrades that everyone wants takes funding.  How are "they" (those making suggestions/requests) proposing to hire and pay devs to accomplish "their" desires in the order that they propose?

These discussions could be a lot more fruitful if plans for funding of requests accompanied those requests.

If you own BTS now, you own a share of the blockchain technology "as is". You have not paid for future development (the money for that ran out a long time ago).

Correct.  Bootstrapping a business means choosing from the paths through the entrepreneurial maze that are available to you at each point in time. 

Each candidate path has its estimated costs and rate of return.  Sometimes the most direct paths exceed our immediate resources. Sometimes we need to take a few detours to acquire the resources needed to pursue the final goal. 

To make a DEX successful you need market depth.  To get that you need users.  There are many potential ways to get users and effort expended in any of them is potentially productive.  We look for ways that we can afford and that are likely to pay off sooner than later.

Sometimes you can attract users philosophically while you build other features that will attract them economically

We are not given a map to our maze in advance.  The best solution is to explore the maze in parallel as a team of fellow entrepreneurs.  We are not limited to just worker proposals or just outside investments or just creating a compelling reason to work together.  It is the sum of all those efforts that will get us there.




Solved the maze.
No more need to try to solve the maze in parallel :P

83
General Discussion / Re: 2016 Vision Blog Post
« on: December 29, 2015, 03:57:52 am »
Here's the problem.  Most people, and i'm going to guess over 90%, are here to try to leverage the overall move of the public to blockchain tech.  They are trying to profit by beating the banks. They are trying to leverage the technical  superiority of bitshares compared to bitcoin to achieve a higher beta return.


A major problem seems to be that hiring devs to add the features and refinements and upgrades that everyone wants takes funding.  How are "they" (those making suggestions/requests) proposing to hire and pay devs to accomplish "their" desires in the order that they propose?

These discussions could be a lot more fruitful if plans for funding of requests accompanied those requests.

If you own BTS now, you own a share of the blockchain technology "as is". You have not paid for future development (the money for that ran out a long time ago).

That's what worker proposals were suppose to be for... adding features.

I saw 3 worker proposals for 400 usd the other day, what's the largest worker proposal we have agreed to so far?

84
General Discussion / Re: Can a Bitcoin Mixer be built in BitShares?
« on: December 29, 2015, 03:54:20 am »
poor persons mixer. account x sends funds to sharebits account you anon control / sharebits withdrawal sends funds to account z you control. mixed for ~75 BTS round trip.

Haha, them user cases though :o

85
General Discussion / Re: Poll on Bitshares referral program
« on: December 29, 2015, 03:52:59 am »
In all honesty, the referral program looks like a good idea on paper but in reality - atleast over the six past months we haven't been able to prove its viability or use.

^^^THIS, but why? Not enough documentation and promotion, that's one reason. We need more quality PR pieces like the BitShares 1.0 tri-fold brochure, However, when things always seem to be in a state of flux it's a major disincentive to build anything, a business or a brochure.

I hope CNX starts to see the how much planning and release cycles would address such issues. We need more stability in the way features are evolve, from conception, implementation, testing, documentation, delivery and marketing. It seems like the CNX core is stuck in a loop of the first 2 items in that list.

The problem is people who consider to use blockchain do not know that there is Bitshares. But once they know, they are amazed by the technology.
I also hope that Bitshares has more stability with regular update cycle.

Can you actually prove this?
I have a number of references where people left Bitshares because.. sorry to be crass "shit got confusing as fuck with the changes every couple months".
I can attest to the fact that stuff did get confusing and even now I have to keep bugging fuzzy or dig through old documentation at times.

86
Really well written points by someone that does give a fuck about long term viability and profit.
Can't possibly agree more with you. Here's what I'd mentioned a few days back personally

I'm the only one that think this is bad idea?

Nope. I feel outnumbered here too.

What are the difference between future fees or vested dilution? Help me?

1 - Future fees are not known, probably a lot more.

2 - Future fees causes political issues, for instance, the community could decide that the stealth should be the default transfer method and charge more for non stealth transactions, the people or group of people holding stealth BTA would say NO!.

3 - Future fees complicate things, create systemic risks with some people or group owning some network features.

I really think we should be united as BTS as all interests of all participants. And always clear of any form of future debt beside vesting. And knowing all workers cost on advance.

Very elegantly said. I don't see the point of even having a blockchain if we're just going to sell out every incoming feature to those willing to put cash on the table. That's how the centralized financial system currently works and I'm here because I favor a paradigm change.

To someone of communist mindset this FBA is offensive.

I'm not a communist and I find the FBA proposition offensive.

We've seen how capitalism works with regulations, checks and balances, and we're seeing how it works when you let investors and businesses control everything. I favor the former, but believe this is a step towards the later.

inb4 patronizing posts telling me to sell and leave if I don't like: I've already adjusted my holdings and I'm spending less time at these forums. "this is 'murca and if you don't like it you can GIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT OUT!"  It's sad that the most promising prospect for change that I've ever seen is opting to go this route. It really bothers me. Sorry for having an opinion and expressing it.

Really important point here.
Going to speak on a personal basis - and am sorry if the following post offends anyone. I don't intend to piss people off, just want to share my honest opinion.


1. We have the groundwork for an amazing crypto here. A vibrant community, decentralized decision making via committees (although voting is not clear to me) and most importantly, insanely quick transactions that can scale to the needs of a global user base.

2. We do have something that's almost close to a decentralized form of governance with the committee system in place, but there's literally no documentation whatsoever nor a means for a person that's not a dev to really partake in it. In addition, its not sensitive to the needs of a global user base. For instance, there's no way we can have a committee with representations from key markets like China or a major demographic like gamers.

3. The FBA system is incredible - from the pov of someone that's about to raise funds. Yes, I can "theoretically" pledge my "theoretical" tx fees from the future to users here and "theoretically" raise funds. I use theoretically, because hey.. we haven't had a successful fund raise yet. In terms of legality, i don't know how different this is from a UIA, where I can simply say "I'll pledge my ref to the backers of the project" , or we can go the route of traditional VC's and say, I pledge x percent to the backers . Again, the legality of this is largely in murky waters because its not clear yet. From the eyes of an average consumer, this is a very innovative way to raise funds, but from what I know of banking..organizations repeatedly find ways to raise funds via multiple complicated systems when there's no actual economic growth going on. Remember subprime mortgage and the tech stock crash of 2000's? This is what it truly reminds me of.

4. Worker proposals are cool. Agreed. But beyond CNX and a few others that have been involved with the community for years we have neither attracted talent nor had individuals putting forward proposals. From my experience, I find worker proposals a zero sum game because it takes time to raise funds that way and in most cases given the declining markets of BTS (currently) - associated risks are way too high when we take exchange rates into consideration.

5. It is sad that CNX would focus on what an individual would offer them to build instead of having the collective requirements of us as a community needs. I am by no means blaming CNX here, but pointing the fact that our ecosystem may not be as vibrant as it should be. We have collectively failed to attract talent, infuse capital and build an ecosystem where we don't have to depend solely on CNX to build the things we need.  The reason for this being
(i) complexity of understanding the system
(ii) lack of documentation
(iii) on-going politics and underlying personal motivations and agendas

6. If we are to see a change in the way things are, we'll need
(i) - effective forms of governance and decision making.
CNX has laid the groundwork with the committee system but I am yet to see how its effective

(ii) Effective means of fund raising and backing projects
-How come only a handful of projects have fund raised with UIA's ? Nxt's ecosystem is a very good example of this.
SecureAE is an extremely efficient system in handling such user cases (although I've experienced bugs)

(iii) Open towards International Communities
Solely releasing PR in 15 languages won't do the job. We'll need to understand user cases and local markets efficiently to penetrate markets. Resource persons from each demographic need to be bought on board, paid if need be - and learned from to create better products.

(iv) Empower entrepreneurs
As an entrepreneur, I can attest the fact that yes, this ecosystem is very confusing. We need to put individuals that are reliable, trustworthy and capable to help onboard businesses and nurture businesses within the ecosystem. Why don't we have a community backed accelerator of sorts. Pooled funds to invest into x number of startups for y amount of equity. Performance tracked every quarter. This will be largely capitalistic in nature, but its something we should look into. I am happy to dedicate time into something of this nature if we are up for it.

FBA isn't about capitalism vs socialism. Its about our combined failure to create redundant systems that are non reliant solely on CNX to define the future of what a decentralized currency that works almost at the speeds of NASDAQ can be.

My .32 bts, because as mentioned earlier... I can't send you guys 2 and 30 bts would now go to the network.
-Xypher

87
Freebie / Re: What is this PM about?
« on: December 29, 2015, 03:43:49 am »
It could be a possible reset of your account.
@kuro112  and @hybridd  thoughts?

88
General Discussion / Re: Q1 2016 Expectations for BitShares
« on: December 28, 2015, 04:55:42 pm »
Q1, Apple uses BitShares to secure ApplePay transactions ... It may sound overoptimistic and it is probably but they are actually looking for ways to use Blockchain to do exactely that.

They don't know if to create a blockchain of to use an existing one. Isn't BitShares exactly what they are looking for ??

Besides, in his analogy, BM compare BitShares Vs Ethereum to Apple Vs Android ...  It has to be a sign !  :P

Here is the article : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vivek-wadhwa/how-apples-trojan-horse-will-eat-the-credit-card-industry_b_8860964.html

Someone has the private number of Tim Cook ?  :P

I know Vivek Wadhwa if that helps.  :)
He's the author of that article.

89
Hi Ronnie- i love the video by the way, but i have a question. In there is the example of trading apple stock for copper. I didnt think we were able to buy stock shares yet. This would be something that would be huge because i would like to buy gold mining stocks for example. Rather than use TDAmeritrade, i would MUCH prefer to use the blockchain and trade for example, USD for SANDSTORM Gold or SilverWheaton.

Thanks

Damn :o
Stock brokerage that runs on the blockchain.
Highly possible if AML/Kyc challenges are tackled.
CCEDK is in a perfect position to do this.

Not sure if Ronny is doing it though.
Beautiful concept none the less.

Whitelisting procedure and introdution as well as the ability to use the fiat gateway will be started monday next week first week of 2016. It is top priority to be implemented and functional already this first week, so I expect and hope for a great start of this New Year.

You are talking about AML/KYC
Am talking about a full blown brokerage.
What you have is a brick.
What am talking of, is a wall.  :)

90
Hi Ronnie- i love the video by the way, but i have a question. In there is the example of trading apple stock for copper. I didnt think we were able to buy stock shares yet. This would be something that would be huge because i would like to buy gold mining stocks for example. Rather than use TDAmeritrade, i would MUCH prefer to use the blockchain and trade for example, USD for SANDSTORM Gold or SilverWheaton.

Thanks

Damn :o
Stock brokerage that runs on the blockchain.
Highly possible if AML/Kyc challenges are tackled.
CCEDK is in a perfect position to do this.

Not sure if Ronny is doing it though.
Beautiful concept none the less.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 21