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 - oco101

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
466
General Discussion / Re: I3, open innovation and (de-)centralization of BA. A contructive discussion.
« on: March 11, 2014, 04:04:17 am »
Quote
2) All DAC development teams that can convince the community of their good ideas can raise all the money they require.
Please explain : How they will raise the money ? Put an address and raise more money from the community ? If the idea is that good why they should go to all that trouble of raising money  in this small community instead going on a much more bigger community in bitcointalk ? I mean both community know the crypto world  why a DAC developer not go directly there ? In top of that they should give 20 % AGS/PTS
Clains post try to answer some of the questions : https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3481.0 but besides the shark tank competition most of the point could be done by bitcointalk community too.
We need to have a very clear answer to those questions. Barwizi was a developer for some bounty of Invictus and a investor in AGS(I think) so he understood very well the vision of 3I but even himself did't see why honor 10/10 to AGS/PTS holder, when he created Noirshares.
Shark Tank competition may help  but I think this is not the optimal solution for everybody. Should be a better way to attract developers. Why not brainstorm the forum ? we may find something.

Quote
For example, I have people come to me all the time asking me to give them large shares of the AGS funds to develop their DAC.   They may be able to convince me they are trustworthy, but how can I know?

This is easy you don't pay them in advance. You pay them when they proof their work all along the development of the DAC so no need to trust them. They get money when they show you the advancement of their work.

I wrote some ideas here : https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3491.0 . I guess it is in line with "The free market is Ultimate Decentralization" too. 

467
General Discussion / Re: Have a message for Invictus? Look here
« on: March 09, 2014, 03:59:39 pm »
How many developers  are working full times for 3I ?
Any new employees hire lately ? 
What exactly Arlen del Castillo is working on right know ?

468
General Discussion / Re: A Rose by Any Other Name
« on: March 09, 2014, 05:24:29 am »
+1

469
General Discussion / Re: [Proposal] Milestone bounty DAC creation.
« on: March 09, 2014, 05:13:27 am »
Quote
No, not shark tank, just post your proposal and a donation address. If someone thinks it will be profitable and that you plan to honor the donations, then they will donate.

Right, so in that case why a DAC developer will come here ? I mean he could go with his idea and pitch it on  bitcointalk and he'll have a much wider audience, so he will have more likely chance to receive more donation there then here.

Quote
Dogecoin is an example of something that became successful without funding, but this is a discussion about the opposite, how to determine if something is successful to decide if it needs funding or not.

My point is  is if they had tried to get funding for their  idea nobody ever  would have put any dime there because nobody could have foreseen the success of Dogecoin. My point is that only by releasing  DAC out there in  to the wild will know if they will be successful or not. 
Like I said what is difficult it is not to see if the DAC has the potential to be profitable that part it easy to quantify look at your own post here : https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3488.msg43785#msg43785 I think we should be able to identify a real DAC for a vending machine, we should not be worry about that.

The bounty is not a proposal to just invest blindly in any idea whiteout any merit .  This DAC idea is so brand new that I'm not sure that anyone could predict how it will pan out. So this bounty will encourage new crazy ideas some will be very attractive  at first glance and some not, but to see witch one will work, the only way to know it is to release it in to the jungle. We don't need all of them to work we need a few but how you propose to find those few if not taking a calculated risk ?

There are many way to know if the idea could be a DAC. Each idea that passe the first milestone should address the DAC requirements. We should make a list with what makes a DAC a DAC. Stan and Bytemaster and others included you tried to address what is a DAC. Let put all that  together and every new idea should comply with that list, if it does then it is a viable DAC and should past the first milestone.

470
General Discussion / Re: [Proposal] Milestone bounty DAC creation.
« on: March 09, 2014, 02:33:56 am »
Quote from: toast on March 09, 2014, 02:25:50 am
Quote from: oco101 on March 09, 2014, 01:37:52 am
To win the first milestone it means that the DAC it should have a busniess plan that shows that it has the potenital of beeing profitable.

So then it should have no problem getting lots of funding, right?
How ? Shark Tank ? So needs to go to Las Vegas right, and maybe he'll lose. What if he does't have the money to go there ?
Then again how about dogecoin ?

471
General Discussion / Re: [Proposal] Milestone bounty DAC creation.
« on: March 09, 2014, 01:59:42 am »
Quote
Google got funding. Twitter got funding.

Dogecoin ?

472
General Discussion / Re: [Proposal] Milestone bounty DAC creation.
« on: March 09, 2014, 01:37:52 am »
Quote from: toast on March 09, 2014, 01:22:44 am
Quote from: oco101 on March 09, 2014, 01:17:28 am
Quote from: toast on March 09, 2014, 12:35:02 am
This rewards bad DAC ideas without helping good ones along. A good DAC idea will have no problem securing funding with just a proposal.

I wish we would admit to ourselves that most DAC ideas are bad and should not be supported.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

How you would know it is a bad DAC ? To win the first milestone it needs to be a viable DAC on the first place so It will not be a vending machine.
Many ideas that nobody tought  much about them became very popular. Google at the begining was just onother serch engine, Twiter was plein stupid.
If could not be a viable DAC will not pass the first milestone.

Google got funding. Twitter got funding.

> If could not be a viable DAC will not pass the first milestone.

By this exact same reasoning you should expect that same DAC to get funding. Your suggestion is just an *easier* way to get money, without anyone having to "bet" on whether the DAC will succeed. Who decides if it passes the milestone? Wouldn't the same people who decide it passes want to invest because they think it will be profitable?

The only people better off are those whose idea can't convince *anyone* that it will be profitable, but can convince the community that it would be unfair not to give them the bounty since "you don't know it won't be profitable!"
To win the first milestone it means that the DAC it should have a busniess plan that shows that it has the potenital of beeing profitable. We just have to require that the DAC proposed should be a profitable DAC. Profitable and sucessfull are two diffrent thinks. On paper many DAC proposed already could be profitable but we will see if they will be sucesfull. The sucesfull part that's the part that is unknown.

473
General Discussion / Re: [Proposal] Milestone bounty DAC creation.
« on: March 09, 2014, 01:17:28 am »
Quote from: toast on March 09, 2014, 12:35:02 am
This rewards bad DAC ideas without helping good ones along. A good DAC idea will have no problem securing funding with just a proposal.

I wish we would admit to ourselves that most DAC ideas are bad and should not be supported.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

How you would know it is a bad DAC ? To win the first milestone it needs to be a viable DAC on the first place so It will not be a vending machine.
Many ideas that nobody tought  much about them became very popular. Google at the begining was just onother serch engine, Twiter was plein stupid.
If could not be a viable DAC will not pass the first milestone.

474
General Discussion / [Proposal] Milestone bounty DAC creation.
« on: March 09, 2014, 12:26:24 am »
The idea is to create a "open bounty" meaning that it is always active even if it has already been awarded as long as  you  complete the requirements of the bounty. You will win it no matter how many winners won before you.

This will  stimulate the DAC creation and has many advantages over a  classical bounty . In order to win the reward you need to complete some milestones, for each milestone completed you'll be rewarded . Total  reward could be 7000 PTS (could be more or less)

Of course in order to be eligible to win any milestone reward, the DAC developers needs to completes all the priors milestones.
Any milestone will be rewarded no matter what as long the requirements are fulfilled.

The first milestone 50 PTS :The DAC creator should detail the idea of the DAC, how it will work and the business model e.g. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=7.0.What is essential here is this : If the idea could be applied to a  DAC, you win the milestone no matter what. So it does not matter if the idea is judged good or bad by the community. The only requirement here will be that it could work as a DAC. This will encourage DAC developers to go into the process without the fear of being rejected by the community.

Milestone two rewards :1000  PTS :   Proof of  code the DAC developers should submit to Invictus some code that shows meaningful advancement in the development of the DAC (there should be clear rules to be defined to quantify  the "meaningful developments" ). This code would be release as open source only after 60 days. This will ensure the DAC developer that no one could steal the code and use it to release the DAC before the original developer. In the same time it will stimulate the DAC developers not to waste  any times and work towards milestone 3 knowing that his code will be released.

Milestone three, four,etc:   2000  PTS  : More proof  of code ..  same  rules as milestone 2 

Final milestone will be the released of a working DAC .

This will be a win-win situation for everybody. For the DAC developer: he'll know 100 % he'll have the funds to build his DAC from the beginning of the development, not at the end like in classic bounties. He'll also know that nobody could stop the development as long as he fulfills all the requirements. He can start anytime so he should not wait for a fix date like for example  the Shark Tank competition.

For the community:  each DAC  must honor the social consensus so reward 10/10 AGS/PTS . Even if the DAC is not completed, each milestone payed rewards the community too, so nothing is lost.

This are just some basic ideas. The rewards or the number of milestones are just examples. It could be more or less.

475
General Discussion / Re: DACIndex.com now live
« on: March 07, 2014, 09:37:27 pm »
Quote from: Ohpinot on March 07, 2014, 08:50:34 pm
Quote from: donkeypong on March 07, 2014, 07:23:25 am
Thank you, bitbro! Half the freaking postings around here are from this Adam guy, who clearly does not feel like it's a good fit for him. He complains that his time is 150% committed and he doesn't have time for anything, yet he comes back here again and again to waste the time of these developers, who keep patiently responding to his crud. Move on already. How many times do you keep calling a girl who clearly isn't into you?

Adam has clearly shown to be deeply committed and invested to making this whole DAC idea work.  He has written, conversed, and added a ton of value to this space.  What have you done besides shit on his work and say that he is wasting his time.  Honestly if he isn't involved or has walked away, then that is a strong indication that we should leave as well.

Yes it is true he shown to be deeply committed and invested to making this whole DAC work true. He had many very good ideas too.
Unfortunately  lately he no longer wanted to be constructive. He was very aggressive and simply stopped having a conversation with the rest of the community it was he's way or the highway. You know respect goes both way too.
The rest of your post are just empty accusations nobody "shit on his work", on the contrary many supported he's ideas. Look for yourself you'll see ..

476
General Discussion / Re: Brian, have a great time in Texas. Excuse the thread of Toast
« on: March 07, 2014, 05:00:54 pm »
Quote from: barwizi on March 07, 2014, 02:24:30 pm
Quote from: unimercio on March 07, 2014, 01:53:11 pm
Lets just hug it out and make some kickass DACs..
We love Brian, the work he has and will contribute. So what, if these t-shirts don't agree with everyone (that's ok).

NEXT

Speaking of kick ass DACs, the Bootcamp repository now has a PTS template, i will complete the modifications for importing balances later today. :-

https://github.com/DACBootcamp 
+1

brought to you by the Noir Developers.

477
General Discussion / Re: some dude wants a fork even before the official bts x is released :))
« on: March 07, 2014, 02:46:09 pm »
I'll say let go all propose a fork of Bitshares on bitocintalk !!!

478
General Discussion / Re: Brian, have a great time in Texas. Excuse the thread of Toast
« on: March 07, 2014, 01:01:42 pm »
Quote from: GodsCreation on March 07, 2014, 12:58:06 pm
Quote from: sumantso on March 07, 2014, 12:50:28 pm
Why all the deletion? If something was said let it remain. If somebody wants to retract go ahead and post.

Deleting threads sounds a lot like sweeping stuff under the carpet.

Well, the posts where just harsh and spammy and should have been deleted in the first place.

They where harsh yes, but so it happens in a forum sometimes. If we start deleting post we create dangerous precedents.

479
General Discussion / Re: Long Term, Outcome Oriented Five Year DAC Bounty proposal
« on: March 07, 2014, 03:35:07 am »
Quote from: onceuponatime on March 07, 2014, 03:31:51 am
Quote from: onceuponatime on March 07, 2014, 12:48:02 am
Quote from: AdamBLevine on March 07, 2014, 12:37:42 am
Quote from: onceuponatime on March 07, 2014, 12:18:46 am
I don't always agree with you Adam, but do so more often than not. And I mostly like and am enthusiastic about this proposal of yours.

Now you will say that I am "too close" to this because I am a larger AGS holder than PTS holder, and you would probably be right. But in an attempt at helping me to become more objective, would you please extrapolate upon your reasoning as to why both PTS and AGS should not both be awarded a 10% stake in applicants' entries to this contest? (I do agree that Invictus should not be eligible to enter).
It seems to me to be difficult/impossible to separate out what benefit would be received by applicants tangentially from AGS funding. And therefore we AGS holders would be to some extent subsidizing PTS holders.

Invictus has specified that AGS is only supposed to be honored if AGS funds are used to develop the software.  Otherwise the requirement is only PTS, unless I misunderstood?   I am attempting to make as few requirements as possible while honoring "the deal".

Allright. In the interests of maximizing benefit to the overall project I set aside any perceived slight unfairness and give your proposal my enthusiastic endorsement. Minimum Viable Product and all that  :)

Adam, I have greatly valued your amazing contributions to the cryptocurrency movement. I feel that I have also made significant contributions in my own way (for instance, being the first large donor to Armory so that Alan could quit his day job and give full time to its development - long before his round of Angel funding where Trace Mayer and others got in on expectation of personal gain).

LetsTalkBitcoin is a cornerstone in my opinion, and brought me to bitshares.

Now comes the "however" (you knew there was going to be one, didn't you?)

You edited the post that I responded to after my response.

I responded as I did, despite misgivings, because you are a VIP and very influential in the community. I therefore attempted to generate some consensus and mollify you as I was able.

But now I no longer think that I understand your point of view or motivation. I am finding Stan's responses on your other (related)  thread to be thoughtful and convincing and valid attempts to answer your concerns - though obviously not what you want to hear. Have you acquired a pre-conceived notion of how it should be with the result that you don't  hear responses that don't fit your formula?

By editing your post after I had responded,  it looks as if I am agreeing to it in its entirety. That is not true.

I think that your contest has merits, but I think contestants for the prize should be limited to those who honor both PTS and AGS holders with minimum 10% Otherwise, let those who want to contribute to a prize for this contest do so.

I wasn't deceived when I donated my PTS and BTC to angelshares. Are you thinking that you were?

+1

480
General Discussion / Re: Brian, have a great time in Texas. Excuse the thread of Toast
« on: March 07, 2014, 03:30:22 am »
Quote from: Troglodactyl on March 07, 2014, 03:19:09 am
I just got back from the conference, and I think it went really well.  The BitShares guys were doing a ridiculous number of interviews, and I think a lot of good networking came out of it also.


That's very nice to hear. Now if we only can calm the spirits on this forum and go back and work together...

Good work Brian keep it on man, sometimes is not easy.

P.S. I think we need to hear your voice more on this forum that could only do all good !! :)

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 23 queries.