By most estimates, about 10% of India's population speaks English. Even though that number seems small, it's a huge quantity of people. Probably most of the folks who are well-educated and affluent enough to use computers and trade/exchange online would be included in that 10%. So Hindi translation would certainly be "nice to have" but perhaps less than essential.

There's only one demographic that would want this in their local lingo.
Farmers doing commodities trading.
That is a far fetched concept for 2020 maybe. Maybe.
I recommend you to read Fortune at the bottom of the pyramid to know what am talking of.

-Xypher

Quote from: merockstar on December 27, 2015, 08:40:45 pm

Quote from: BitcoinJesus2.O on December 27, 2015, 05:36:59 pm

BTS allows freedom of choice.

so we shouldn't discuss it because we can vote?

Yes, you should, why else would I have bumped this thread?  Just to hear you bitch about poor documentation?

If we don't at least talk more about what is already happening today, then how can we expect to ever hope to talk about what is about to happen in the future:

the lion is about to eat the gazelle
the fittest is about to survive while the weakest dies
capitalism uses capital to grow capital
the force of gravity continues acting upon you
others whom you may not agree with will continue developing bitcoin and Bitshares (AND YOU CAN DO NOTHING TO STOP THEM WITHOUT VIOLATING THEIR RIGHTS)

All I'm saying is that if you ever hope to predict the future, then you might want to accept what is happening in the present, and then you might understand the math that predicted it (the present) so that you can use that same math to get rich simply because you predicted the future.  If at anytime in the past you predicted that crypto could be useful to humans, then congratulations, you correctly predicted the future.  Exactly how much money you choose to accept due to your correct prediction depends only upon which current math problems you are choosing to solve CURRENTLY.

BitShares is now being developed weather or not the existing shareholders are paying for it directly.  Your only recourse is to become politically active, and no political process is accurately defined, but it could be if you choose to do something about it besides bitch.  Or you could continue to bitch until someone else takes care of it much later than it would have occurred if you had helped do it yourself today instead of bitching.

But the freedom of choice is yours completely:

Plan A:

Bitch about lack of political documentation for a long time until someone else documents it for your teary ass

Plan B:

Draft a document for peer review which will get the job done sooner than plan A

Which plan is this thread about?

I was hoping for Plan B which was why I first came back from the dead and bumped your thread, but, you know what?  Fuck it, maybe I'll try back in another 6 months, because you obviously have a Plan A fetish and have not learned anything in the past 6 months because we are complaining about the exact (EXACT? yeah, exact like deja vu all over again, the exact) same shit today as we were back then:

Why has the share price not moved since I left here in August?

Why are you guys still talking about the same shit you were talking about nearly a half a year ago?

Do you see a bitch connection yet, or will it take another Bitcoin Jesus 2.O data point 6 months from now to show you what happens to communities that cry about their present situation vs communities that act to change their present situation.

Quote from: BitcoinJesus2.O on August 19, 2015, 05:37:35 pm

Quote from: starspirit on August 19, 2015, 02:13:56 am

I didn't listen to the hangout, so I'm missing the background on this. But what is the main purpose of BMs proposal?

Either way, the cost benefit analysis is the same.

If somebody wants to burn enough of their personal BTS to fund a project that we all want to happen eventually, and the market cap gets a big boost, then this works even better than advertised! 

Quote from: Pheonike on August 18, 2015, 11:06:28 pm

To keep things from getting crazy, there should also be  limiter on how much can be burned per vote. I would suggest no more than 1% of your total BTS. 

Why? If I want to completely fund a project that Fuzzy (or any one of your fine furry elected delegates that you all know and love and trust) proposed, and want to burn 100% of my BTS to do it, then don't you think that I might want to go out and buy some BTS later so that I can take financial advantage (like you are doing) of what I just paid to create?  Your logic is senseless.  The extreme scenario is actually financially the best (most lucrative) scenario for you.  The worst case, is nobody plays this game (0%) and nobody wins.  Everybody benefits.  Everybody wins when anybody plays.

Only do this if you want to cap your benefits.  But then so why would you even do this at all to any degree then?  I think that you all are so used to getting scammed that you can't see an obvious gold nugget in front of your face.  Because let's face it kids, this is the California gold rush all over again.  This is the crypto revolution and it is like the industrial revolution, but this time, we are the mother fucking steam engine about to lay claim to the easiest and most "profitable dynamic and interactive user controlled crypto community" cash geysers :

Step aside nobody (our current competition in this space), we are claiming this cash geyser first.  Anybody here who does not want to claim this giant fucking paperweight is either a pussy or competitor.





This shit that BM is proposing is just like laying claim to the biggest fucking nuggets that the crypto world has ever seen.  Free fucking money here.  He said that he is concentrating on building the most profitable crypto community rule set that the world will ever need to know, and who here thinks that BM has no clue? Go ahead speak up and say that BM wouldn't know an economics problem if John Maynard himself was smacking him upside the head.  Where would this community be without B to the mother fucking M?  He's the main reason why you even give a shit about my vomit.

What.... You don't trust BM?  He's the most god damn open book honest to god goody two shoes I ever blessed.  He is a mirror to good and evil.  You are what you think of him to be.  He is a soul gauge.  A tool for you to measure exactly how much of a tool you are.  If you think that he is fucking you, then you, my friend, are the fucker.

Well, it has been nearly half a year since you began crying about what is happening around you (FBA) instead of embracing that which makes you stronger than those who want you to continue to deny the existence of gravity so that they can be the first to discover the law of gravity which you refuse to monetize:

Factom, IOTA, and Ethereum

Go ahead, and bitch about FBA for another 6 months and see where your competitors are then...

If you're lucky, I'll drop by just to plot the next data point number 3 and plot you an accurate trajectory that will mathematically show you the future of those who bitch rather than act

Am in to assist and support with plan B.

r

If you don't like FBA, then support a committee that votes against FBA.

If you support FBA then vote for a committee member who likes FBA.

BTS allows freedom of choice.

so simple

Quoting from earlier.

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.



-
-Xypher

Quote from: theredpill on December 23, 2015, 05:45:59 pm

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

Nope. I feel outnumbered here too.

Quote from: theredpill on December 23, 2015, 09:32:26 pm

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.

Quote from: BunkerChain Labs on December 24, 2015, 10:28:02 am

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

Quote from: clayop on December 27, 2015, 04:14:52 am

Quote from: BunkerChain Labs on December 27, 2015, 04:10:47 am

The refer program has been instrumental in attracting big projects to bitshares and making it far more attractive as a value proposition. Actually without it I know of at least one project that would have not been interested in bitshares.

They are attracted by referral program first, then are surprised by high fees and hence are discouraged to build business on Bitshares.

No, that has not been my experience thus far.

Can you

1. Name the company
2. Back your statement with numbers ?

One clear example of a good use case for an FBA would be a prediction market.

Augur raised $5.3 million to fund building and marketing their prediction market. https://sale.augur.net/
Augur have a specialist prediction market focused team of talent and entrepreneurs. http://www.augur.net/#team
Running a successful prediction market will take a lot of ongoing focus from that team.


Without FBA's

- BTS would not be able to get a miniscule fraction of that amount through dilution without crashing BTS so would struggle to compete with competitors without being able to raise funding for the PM specifically and directly.
- A prediction market would need to incentivise entrepeneurs and specialist developers, to develop market and manage the PM.  They can only be attracted and incentivised with a share of that specific business and it's revenue.

If the development is small and doesn't require a lot of ongoing management then as BTS has dilution (I'm not a fan) it should be considered but for larger projects FBA's are superior.

Can you define "larger" projects in this context?
The E-sports venture is right in line for a prediction market and I've had atleast 5 people give me the augur comparison. Even Bytemaster for that matter, but there's no way we can legitimately raise say 500k with a UIA due to the legalities involved. Maybe we could do a FBA . Maybe, but that's a slight possibility.

For any business to be sustainable, it needs to focus on two main things

1. Customer acquisition
2. Profitability.

Bytemaster has truly pioneered a wonderful system with the tx fee backed project funding system that we have going on here. However, from my understanding this is repeatedly shooting ourselves in the foot. There are a number of reasons for my belief.

1. The high BTS fee involved in transactions limits platforms from truly working in the field of Micro-tx's. Just today we had an individual wanting to send out small amount of BTS  to 5000 people and they couldn't do so because it'd cost 150k BTS, just in fees. The same applies to our marketing campaigns - we are spending cash on each wallet opened and from there, our users will still pay a high amount to tx BTS. Due to this, we've had to stick to UIA's.

2. User cases are actually very little for Bitshares in its current form. Given the high fees, there is virtually noone using the system for transactions beyond exchanges, which is a dangerous place to put ourselves in. I understand the system is turning profitable, but when there are so many problems to solve, it becomes imminent that the number of transactions done each day increase rampantly.

It is my honest opinion that going forward we will need to emphasis on finding the fine balance between tx fee and the number of transactions . In terms of technology the product may or may not be great but when you look at it in terms of economics, it makes no sense whatsoever to me personally.  If the tx fee is lowered, the number of tx's might increase rampantly and thereby help us fund more projects. Think about Amazon for instance.
Amazon works on very meagre profit margins, but where it wins is in terms of volume. How does it get its volume ? It makes multiple user cases for people from a broad spectrum of fields. How does it further increase its volume ? It works across countries and works towards being inclusive of various backgrounds and nations.

I believe it is important we focus on creating user cases with a high number of transactions.
onceuponatime's investment of 45,000 into stealth transactions is one of the examples. Gambling related ventures or any venture with a high number of transactions is another good example of the same. Unless this occurs,we can all sit here , patting our back  hoping developers do something amazing and turns us all rich by sheer luck.

My 2.00 bts, which btw , I can't transact because.. tx fee. That's why.
Never mind.. my 32 bts, of which 30 bts wont reach you.

Hey guys,

This might be the wrong section, if it is, do let me know.
I've been wanting to play Rise of Nations for a while and I was wondering if fellow members would like to join in.
For those who don't know what the game is about, its basically a strategy oriented game, similar to Age of Empires or .. chess in a very graphic form.
In case you don't have the game, I'd be willing to buy it for you if you can pay in Bts.
Currently, the game is on 75 percent off sale and costs about 3 USD
http://store.steampowered.com/app/287450/

We can have teams of 2 each (me and Kuro on one side) - and 2 on the other.
Bets will be at 2500 BTS for each participant, with winning group taking all.
If we see more participation, we can have larger pools.

P.s - Had some spare time and I've been missing the game. Thought this will be a fun thing to do.
Ignore if you'd rather do something else

Regards