I think some of the valuations here are a bit optimistic and wishful thinking. That said in the long run they may become true and even greatly surpass the original investment.

However we should also take into account human nature and other factors. Many, including myself have been waiting to become liquid so we can unload some. Where I'm going with this is, let's assume for a moment that all investors are at least smart enough to not want to sell at a loss. The moment XTS becomes liquid, we should look at the lowest price, not the highest that AGS was being acquired at. In general people should not sell lower than that.

Then there are other factors. Even if I am a big believer in the ideas, the velocity of the team wasn't to my liking so, I think there is risk they will be outrun by competition.

Thirdly the Ethereum sale will be coming up, and I would definitely want to diversify and move some % from XTS to eth.

I'll try to do a more detailed analysis and display what prices people bought at, we should then use those as a theoretical floor, since people generally should not sell at a loss.

Exciting times indeed. Trading will be very emotional as well, there will be some fun volatility ahead.

Dan's whitepapers haven't been peer reviewed, have they? Furthermore these classes are taught by professors that teach in renown universities. I think it is best for Dan to do his thing and work on the toolkit. Teaching will not really buy us much.

Very nice to see you here! I think it would be awesome if Storj actually become part of the toolkit. Once you have storage you could do DACs whose data lives in Storj

They are going the wrong way about this. Also it seems that they are just using this as a way to fund their company. The 900BTC will go directly into their company as an assurance contract. Not that there is anything wrong with that but it seems backwards. They couldn't sell the tech elsewhere  so they are making a DAC funding to pay their bills.

Also this won't solve micropayment problems. I was considering getting in but then I was like nah 0.1BTC is the most I would put here personally, even though I could afford much much more.

Would be nice to create a wifi device that can authenticate based on payment. Or not a device but an open source firmware. The uses are massive, imagine an apartment building where only 2-3 actual ISP accounts exist and the rest just pile up. They probably have some clause preventing from reselling bandwidth though. But if it is in a virtual currency may be different rules apply?

Correct me if I'm wrong but a delegate's job is to sign messages. Nothing less, nothing more. A cell phone could do that. My point is a micro instance can totally do it, and it costs like what $15/mo? AWS instance would be much more likely to be always on, compared to my home internet, which goes out once in awhile.

Another reason I offer AWS is because it is extremely easy for someone to create an image, that then others can just fire up, may be edit a single file and reboot. This discussion is about bringing non-technical delegates on-board. Even if it is just 5 lines, it's never that simple, unless you use the exact same version for everything. Even then, sometimes you do an update and you get the wrong library linking mixed up, stuff doesn't compile. I'm advanced user so I can recover from these things, but it is very discouraging for the non-technical fellas.

You mean any DAC that's listed on Mastercoin, NXT, Counterparty? I mean that's just plain stupid protectionism.

What you want is to show why honoring the PTS/AGS social contract is actually beneficiary to the new DAC stakeholders.

How is PTS/AGS creating value? I've heard the opinions. But would be nice to have real examples.

Once we have a few DACs out there, we should make a list of *proven* benefits.

Examples might include things like: "Getting listed on at least 2/3 exchanges". "Got additional funding in the amount of X", etc.