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 - slacking

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
16
Is it a new Fed or an update? >:D

It's just some guy named "Fed" and he's telling everybody his dollar is a mandatory upgrade.

17
I mentioned in the dry run thread but this place is appropriate.

Since you are using the BTS toolkit to make your DPoS PTS, you should honour the social consensus and award at least 10% to AGS. If you don't you are starting off by breaking it itself and setting an example.

Couldn't agree with you more! This is a new coin, new people running it, new code (ulitmately it won't even be called Bitshares PTS) AND they used the BTS toolkit to make it, therefore they should honor the social consensus and give AGS 10%.

18
"Upgrading PTS to DPOS has been planned for a long time, only nobody at I3 had the time to do it."
     If this was the intent of I3 then why did they very deliberately kill BitsharesPTS in order to merge it's value into BTS?

"From a purely technical perspective of course we're starting a new chain with a genesis block based on a snapshot from the old chain. There's really no other way to do it." 
     You want to start a new social consensus blockchain based on the Bitshares toolkit and airdrop on former PTS holders..that's it in a nutshell. That part I have no problem with. The problem is you state that future DAC's using the Bitshares toolkit are "invited" to honor your new social consensus but why would they? Because you have fraudulently called yourself the "new" BitsharesPTS. This looks like a copy and paste, pump and dump trading off a dead coin's brand and hijacked name...crypto coat-tail riding. And your response it "there's no other way to do it?".

"You can stay on the PoW chain and see where it leads. Most likely it won't lead anywhere but simply stop in its tracks."
     THAT WAS THE INTENTION. That was the whole purpose of merging PTS, AGS and all the others. So that there would be one place to snapshot for future DAC's wanting to honor the social consensus. BTS is what represents the Bitshares community not what you're doing. Your blockchain might have a use to some other crypto community but we are already united behind BTS.

It seems that you are not quite up to date regarding that merger. If you read the october newsletter you'll see that BTSX, DNS and VOTE were merged into BTS. It doesn't say anything about PTS and AGS being merged. I3 did not "kill PTS", and I don't think you know what their intention was - in fact BM and Stan have repeatedly said that PTS will continue to exist after the nov-5 snapshot.


Their intention was stated Oct. 19 in https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10148.0 but you repeatedly lobbied to take over PTS and they caved in for some reason.
(From Bytemaster post)

"My Proposal:

1) Drop all other BitShares brands.... rename BitShares X to just BitShares
2) End PTS...  BitShares will evolve to incorporate every possible feature that stakeholders vote on.
3) If there is a clone then it should start out with stakeholders it thinks are best... because BitShares holders are uniting.
4) Add stake holder approved dilution without limit to BitShares X.
5) Bring in all AGS holders and given them a stake in BitShares X that cannot be moved for 6 months... the ratio that this stake should be given should be equal to PTS market cap... so $5 million or 10% dilution of BTSX allocated to these individuals.    This is effectively BTSX buying out our competition. 
6) Bring in one last PTS snapshot also valued at $5 million for another 10% dilution of BTSX... 6 months until funds could be spent... buy out this competition and end PTS.
7) Our team will focus on no other DACs other than BitShares in general and work to make it the most robust and *FLEXIBLE* DAC out there.  "

19
"What if they can't and then there are two "real" Bitcoin chains?"

Kind of like how we now are going to have 2 PTS chains? BitsharesPTS and (confusingly) another BitsharesPTS. Which one should benefit from social consensus sharedrops? What if I decide to come along and fork the new BitsharesPTS, would you expect me to change the name? Would I be entitled to announce that it's a mandatory upgrade? Would I be entitled to market it as the recipient of all future sharedrops?
Indeed, those are the questions I'm asking.

Is it the case that a crypto cannot change its consensus algorithm? Is Bitcoin doomed to PoW forever?

Sent from my Timex Sinclair.

Are you really asking the question or just lamenting the fact someone can't fork a crypto, change all the core features, change the developers and then announce arbitrarily that it's a mandatory upgrade? I think it's been stated over and over, even Bytemaster agrees, change the name UPFRONT not after the fact or convince everyone to burn the original PTS to launch the new one.

20
"What if they can't and then there are two "real" Bitcoin chains?"

Kind of like how we now are going to have 2 PTS chains? BitsharesPTS and (confusingly) another BitsharesPTS. Which one should benefit from social consensus sharedrops? What if I decide to come along and fork the new BitsharesPTS, would you expect me to change the name? Would I be entitled to announce that it's a mandatory upgrade? Would I be entitled to market it as the recipient of all future sharedrops?

21
"Upgrading PTS to DPOS has been planned for a long time, only nobody at I3 had the time to do it."
     If this was the intent of I3 then why did they very deliberately kill BitsharesPTS in order to merge it's value into BTS?

"From a purely technical perspective of course we're starting a new chain with a genesis block based on a snapshot from the old chain. There's really no other way to do it." 
     You want to start a new social consensus blockchain based on the Bitshares toolkit and airdrop on former PTS holders..that's it in a nutshell. That part I have no problem with. The problem is you state that future DAC's using the Bitshares toolkit are "invited" to honor your new social consensus but why would they? Because you have fraudulently called yourself the "new" BitsharesPTS. This looks like a copy and paste, pump and dump trading off a dead coin's brand and hijacked name...crypto coat-tail riding. And your response it "there's no other way to do it?".

"You can stay on the PoW chain and see where it leads. Most likely it won't lead anywhere but simply stop in its tracks."
     THAT WAS THE INTENTION. That was the whole purpose of merging PTS, AGS and all the others. So that there would be one place to snapshot for future DAC's wanting to honor the social consensus. BTS is what represents the Bitshares community not what you're doing. Your blockchain might have a use to some other crypto community but we are already united behind BTS.

"Therefore, the upgrade is mandatory from an economical perspective."
    That's like saying "here, I'm going to give you some free crypto in my new unrelated blockchain and you should take it because it's mandatory from an economic perspective." Try to understand, you are not updating PTS, PTS is DEAD..thus you are not adding value to it, because it no longer exists. It's value has been transferred to BTS. You are squatting on the name.

One final thing. You used the Bitshares toolkit to make your blockchain but are you honoring AGS holders? If not, you are violating the social consensus you purport to uphold.


22
Bitshares PTS Mandatory upgrade? This is misleading at best and deliberately fraudulent at worst. This is a hard fork, created by a new developer. There's nothing mandatory about it. The idea that you even have the right to use the Bitshares PTS name reeks of an intent to deceive. I suggest you rethink how you're attempting this launch if you want to maintain credibility.

23
General Discussion / Re: When will the next BTSX pump and dump happen?
« on: August 29, 2014, 07:58:40 pm »

3) I sell BitUSD for less than the price I purchased it.



You make your money by selling BitUSD for less than you bought it at? Not sure I understand.

24
Technical Support / Same for me
« on: August 28, 2014, 06:12:29 pm »
edit: looks like 4.9a fixed my issues   :)


Wallet 4.9, Windows 8.1, won't connect to network

{
  "blockchain_head_block_num": 321978,
  "blockchain_head_block_age": "52 hours old",
  "blockchain_head_block_timestamp": "2014-08-26T14:16:50",
  "blockchain_average_delegate_participation": "0.54 %",
  "blockchain_confirmation_requirement": 1,
  "blockchain_accumulated_fees": "165,130.24441 BTSX",
  "blockchain_delegate_pay_rate": "1.36516 BTSX",
  "blockchain_share_supply": "1,999,935,452.70804 BTSX",
  "blockchain_blocks_left_in_round": 10,
  "blockchain_next_round_time": "at least 2 minutes in the future",
  "blockchain_next_round_timestamp": "2014-08-28T18:12:20",
  "blockchain_random_seed": "a728665aa43b77b4a2dee68fd3085a51cb00005e",
  "client_data_dir": "C:/Users/shane/AppData/Roaming/BITSHA~2",
  "client_version": "0.4.9",
  "network_num_connections": 0,
  "network_num_connections_max": 100,
  "ntp_time": "2014-08-28T18:10:44",
  "ntp_time_error": 2.701765,
  "wallet_open": true,
  "wallet_unlocked": true,
  "wallet_unlocked_until": "12 days in the future",
  "wallet_unlocked_until_timestamp": "2014-09-09T07:52:39",
  "wallet_last_scanned_block_timestamp": null,
  "wallet_scan_progress": "? %",
  "wallet_block_production_enabled": false,
  "wallet_next_block_production_time": null,
  "wallet_next_block_production_timestamp": null
}

25
General Discussion / Re: Airdrop poll?
« on: April 12, 2014, 06:30:22 pm »
I think the real motivation is not so much the dollar value as number of shares and their potential upside. In other words, 20 free shares (or coins) in a shitcoin doesn't make me interested, 20 free shares in something that has the potential to be revolutionary and huge, I'm in. The initial dollar value isn't so much was motivates me to claim them.

26
KeyID / Re: rebranding update
« on: April 12, 2014, 09:38:41 am »
That said, you should think about different kinds of brands.  What brand will you use to reach out to your DACs customers (.p2p) vs what brand will you use to reach out to investors in your DAC's stock? (powered by BitShares DNS) and how do you want your DAC to appear on the exchanges?  Do you want to instantly communicate that you are a profitable DAC in a specific industry with tons of support, or do you want your ticker symbol to merge into a sea of other newbies trying to get noticed?

Your first point is what I was really getting at. There is no reason the customers (people buying domains) need to understand how DACs work any more than they need to understand traditional DNS to get a .com domain. I'd love to just market ".p2p + okTurtles" to the masses.


Hmmmm, not so sure about that. If you are marketing an alternative DNS system and the key differentiator is that it's a DAC then how do you get around explaining how DAC's work and what their value proposition is? If I'm trying to get someone to accept .p2p over .com there has to be a good reason for going with the less recognizable domain name. But in any event, why can't the two things co-exist? Bitshares DNS is the DAC's name and it's brand, .p2p is simply one (I assume there will be others) of the top level domains available to website registrants.

27
KeyID / Re: Namecoin airdrop?
« on: April 12, 2014, 08:35:18 am »
Excellent idea and I have no problem with 20% but how about this...airdrop on Namecoin holders first to see how it takes with the obvious targeted audience and if it generates a lot of buzz then come out with a media announcement that "the first airdrop was a smash success so we've decided to extend the offer to bitcoin and litecoin holders too!!!". Generate a pre-buzz with namecoin before the big-buzz that follows. I don't think I would be behind extending the offer to ALL the altcoins cause most of them are junk but why not the target audience and then a followup to the next two biggest coins? Promote the Namecoin airdrop directly in their forum/reddit (but not with press release) and promote the subsequent airdrop the same way but in conjuction with a big media press release. Beta test the airdrop in other words.

28
Keyhotee / Re: Keyhotee Status Update
« on: February 04, 2014, 08:58:20 pm »
I almost hate to venture an opinion on how update notifications should be done since emotions seem to be running high on this issue BUT, for me personally, going to Github to see issues outstanding seems like a much better way of tracking progress than to detail them on this forum. The issue I do have, is when clicking on the milestones tab at https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/keyhotee/issues there isn't any relevent information about the milestones. For example, the two milestones listed are "End Of Year" and "Milestone II", neither have due dates or explanations of what was hoping to be accomplished in them. Also, there isn't a milestone roadmap so to speak (and I'm not a developer) but shouldn't there be a listing of all anticipated milestones, something like:

  • Milestone 1 - Requirements analysis
  • Milestone 2 - Coding of non-gui elements
  • Milestone 3 - Coding of gui
  • Milestone 4 - 1st round beta testing
  • Milestone 5 - Fix bugs from beta 1
  • Milestone 6 - 2nd round of beta testing
  • Milestone 7 - Fix bugs from beta 2
  • Milestone 8 - Implement enhancements
  • Milestone 9 - Final testing and bug fixes
  • Milestone 10 - Alpha release

I know these aren't the real steps of software development but hopefully everyone gets the idea. The idea being a comprehensive milestone roadmap that we can follow using Github.

29

Fixed the new implementation so it works on AMD. All that had " error: expression must have pointer-to-struct-or-union type" type errors, please download the new version (build6), or simply update the sha512vectorized.cl file in your already downloaded build5.

Thanks to all for the bug reports and for the patience.
girino.

Updated to V6 of the miner. Windows 8.1 64 bit, overclocked Radeon 7950, -a gpuv7 (used to crash on this before) -m512 (1024 still crashes)...now getting in the 1030 cpm range.

http://i.imgur.com/0jc0v5y.jpg

Update: After running for half a hour or so, cpm's rose and stabilized at around 1048....not too darn bad for a Radeon 7950.

Update: After running for a few hours, cpm's are at a stable 1056.

30
error when run build5

windows 7 64bit HD7950 and build 4 runs normally


I have Windows 8.1 64 bit, overclocked Radeon 7950, -a gpuv6 -m512 (1024 crashes)...getting in the 930 cpm range.

http://i.imgur.com/LrIeoBq.jpg

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4