If every partner we bring here gets this kind of reception, how many fewer will we be able to sign?

y

I don't see any harsh comment, I only see the forum worrying and for good reason, I only see the forum trying to defend 3I interest and shareholder, this is very important. You guys are doing an amazing job and the community fully trust you no question. BUT when there are money involved the  scam artists are not far away. So sumantso and delulo are just raising a flag. You are human you could make mistakes and if we can help  prevent it in anyway will do it.
Nobody is saying that Eddie is Frictionlesscoin and probably he is not. First let make sure he really has that background experience that he's saying.

And there is absolutely no reason to be associated with Zenithcoin this has a very bad reputation. Better give him 50% and then he can do whatever he wants with his death zcoin. He can give the share to the Zenithcoin holders if he wants.
3I should do whatever it takes not to be even remotely associated with that coin  or scam artist like Frictionlesscoin. This is very serious please read Delulo post twice it covers all the dangers.


 

Une p'tite question. Les BTS ont déjà été distribués?
Ca vaut le coup encore d'acheter des PTS pour recevoir des BTS ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

La question et très générale. BTS veut dire  Bitshares est-que tu parle te Bitshare X, Bitshare DNS, Bitshare Music etc ?
Seul que tu ne peux  pas acheter pour le moment c'est le BTS X.
Si tu achète de PTS maintenant par contre tu vas avoir de shares dans tous les autre BTS dans le futur : BTS DNS BTS MUSIC etc.

I like it !!! I could see that working !!

There are many "learning tasks" we could assign. If you are interested I will make github issues specifically for you

Or maybe make a section of  "learning  tasks" for everybody who want's to learn instead just for a specific user ?

I'm a big fan.  I might decrease the percentage of nodes that are required to  sign a block to 75ish%  assuming there are a certain number of valid nodes

this should solve that :

The tradeoff is that even one node can stall the whole network. You can produce a block without a node's signature if that block includes transactions that remove enough votes for that node. I'm not sure what exactly to do if a node stops signing and then nobody takes their votes off of that node.

I concur on "timekeeper" for our marketing campaign. Who said that first?  Give them a tip I say.  You guys are awesome.  And unless anybody has something more soothing, lets move on the the next item on the agenda.  Here's why you should vote for "timekeeper":

Impartiality is implied with respect to the fact that nobody can fight or win a dispute against "time."

Also, "timekeeping" or "digital syncing" is a standard technical aspect in the 20-year old worlds of digital audio/video production, and has been since the 90's.  Anybody (and probably everybody by now) who has ever worked with digital A/V equipment (do they even make analog equipment anymore) will immediately understand the need for and benefit from the implementation of a high quality master "timekeeping" device when processing their digital audio or video data bits. 

But these are not bitcoin people, but maybe 2% of the other 99% of the people who have no clue about Satoshi. In other words, this targeted marketing group should in theory be smart enough to make the technical leap necessary to grasp the benefit of Satoshi's basic concepts.  They should be early adopters.  Best of all, these people love it when their systems have a "master digital clock!"

That is because, in their digital world, the implementation of a "timekeeper" or "master clock" as they say, guarantees the highest levels of security (compatibility and sometimes increased A/V quality) for their system.  Studios and free-lancers will always advertise their use of such devices in the same way that contractors show that they are "bonded" or can afford a lawsuit if sued.  It adds a high level of DOGE-ness or assured happy secure branding where nobody could possibly hate a cute puppy, so like: relax, man we got the highest level of security on your artwork (Bitshares), because we have a "master clock" so that nothing will fail during the recording process.  Ahhhhh, thanks bro.

Also since their happy "timekeeper" is basically a computer programmed by a human.  All they will need to know to sleep soundly is how our programming process works in reverse (since we cannot have an actual computerized timekeeper).  Your marketing focus should deal with our specific instruction set that our human clock (acting as a computer clock) will carry out in every conceivable instance (order, wording, priority, etc).  That list of commands needs to be ironed out and re-worded with enough dogystyle to convert the hardline "to infinity and beyond" hardliners who demand 100% secure DACs.

To sum up, we will use a term that is a hallmark of both safety and security for a group who is larger in size than all the BTC early adopters, and whom understand technical concepts similar to Bitcoin.

"Timekeeper," is textbook propaganda of the highest level rivaling that of the "affordable care act" which caused my premiums to jump 20% this year.  What do we say about imitation here in open source land?  We love forking, and we fork only the very best!

Here is an article that was written 4 years ago showing how much the audio community was obsessing about this back then.  "Clocks" were industry standard in the video industry a decade prior to the audio industry simply because "clocks" are more necessary in more complex systems, and video is an order of magnitude more complex in production than audio:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun10/articles/masterclocks.htm

How long have video scalers been around? Who has not heard of 480/720/1080P?  This stuff is pretty common nowadays to anyone who has lusted after a crisper picture on their flat screen: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_scaler

I just registered on this forum last night, and if I had done it a day later, I would have forever be known as "TIMEKEEPER" (yeah, probably in all caps too).  Fate's fickle finger.

Wow try to beat that !!! Timekeeper must win.

Quote from: bitcoinba on March 29, 2014, 10:39:01 pm

"A notary is a lawyer or person with legal training who is licensed by the state to perform acts in legal affairs, in particular witnessing signatures on documents. The form that the notarial profession takes varies with local legal systems.[1]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notary

I don't think this is a good choice. In the US notaries are relatively innocent and provide a basic function, however outside the US in some countries they act as government officials and wield an enormous amount of power.

Perhaps the 'timekeeper'?

If we go with this solution I vote for 'timekeeper'. Still many things unclear to me. Can you explain how you'll solve the "without manual involvement of everyone" because if there is a way to solve  "without manual involvement of everyone"  the "trustee" solution it starting to make a lot more sens.

With respect to 'centralization' of a point of failure, it is easy for the Notary to provide some redundancy and for the network to have contingency plans in place should anything happen.   These contingency plans can be executed without manual involvement of everyone.

If you Google bitcoin right know, first link on the page(news) is that  :

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-28/bitcoin-2-0-shows-technology-evolving-beyond-use-as-money.html

This is by far the greatest exposure that Invictus&Bitshare they ever had.