Quote from: Ben Mason on March 28, 2016, 07:15:16 pm

Quote from: yvv on March 28, 2016, 06:54:54 pm

Quote from: Ben Mason on March 28, 2016, 06:26:12 pm

Agreed. In short there would need to be a consequence that prevents Yunbi from continuing their unilateral use of customer funds (without verifiable consent) or we need to innovate and adapt the platform so that similar exploits aren't possible or we need an alternative platform that has learned from these experiences and is more resilient.  I'm not saying for a minute that any of this is easy or without cost......trouble was inevitable from the outset.

From a slightly philosophical point of view, no human being on this planet has ever lived within a corruption resistant economy for any great period of time.  Even those currently fighting for an edge or tending towards greed for whatever reason may in fact prefer to live in a world that might  be possible should a platform like BitShares succeed. The confluence of old and new partly contributes to the problems all of crypto is currently facing. How do you convince someone who can exploit an edge today, in order to make a million, to sacrifice that edge in favour of something with integrity that helps many more than just himself? 

Apathy is one of the biggest challenges so the platform needs to provide all the support it can.....but then the platform must also be compelling enough to grow and gather network effect. It's this combination of issues that make continued innovation/development and integrity absolutely critical.

Such thing would not be possible with regular stocks, because there is a name attached to stocks certificate. There is no proof of ownership in bitshares. Possession means ownership.  If you give your funds away, even temporarily, you give your voting power away. Everybody just needs to realise this.

Sure. Perhaps awareness of the issue is all that is necessary to at least ensure that exchanges are forced to gather consent for their actions transparently. Or maybe heighten awarness of the fact that the owner of the key owns the funds. Certainly any other course of action requires a lot more work and uncertainty.....though may be more robust!

Perhaps we should start by trying to create awareness so people (not just BTS holders) can altogether avoid this unethical and despicable exchange.  Let's also consider specifically incentivizing BTS holders to get their BTS out of there and onto the DEX. 

And by the way, it's one thing to vote against all workers no matter what.  Such action can perhaps be chalked up to pure, unadulterated ignorance on the part of the "anti-dilution" crowd.  But it's another thing entirely to mount an attack by attempting to steal funds from the reserve pool.  For now, I'm not going to say what I think we should do about this if it continues.  But we should all should start thinking about it.  And we should think outside of the box.

Yes, awareness of the facts......totally, let's do it. I was not aware of an attack on the reserve pool, would you mind explaining that a bit further? If that is the case, I would say a more radical approach is absolutely required.

Quote from: Ben Mason on March 28, 2016, 05:45:57 pm

Quote from: yvv on March 28, 2016, 05:19:57 pm

Quote from: Ben Mason on March 28, 2016, 04:45:59 pm

Quote from: yvv on March 28, 2016, 04:35:40 pm

So, what is a problem? They can vote, and they vote. We agreed to vote with shares, and here it is, money democracy in practice. Accept it.

No thanks. You accept it. I'll continue to look for solutions, hopefully with other like-minded people.

I don't keep my funds at yunbi, this is my solution. If somebody does, this is their choice, which you can't change.

At best, Yunbi has made an assumption that people who hold BitShares on their exchange consent to their use of those funds. That is demonstrably untrue and is an action that reveals a weakness in BitShares which needs to be countered, not accepted. I appreciate wholeheartedly that you do not hold your BitShares with them and as such you are only a victim of this hijacking and misuse of power by default.

If people become aware, perhaps they will move their funds, great. If not, we should attempt to address this weakness in our platform.....and there are hopefully several ways we can do that which will be beneficial to BitShares holders in the medium to long term. 

Liquidity is one issue that we face. Access to, awareness, understanding and desire for our products are others. Development, distribution and the changing dynamics of the global economy will only add potential increases in the future price of BitShares.  We all want that but for different reasons and on different time-scales (well most of us  ). Either way, we must innovate to build resilience wherever we find weakness.  I've seen enough posts on this forum from enough people to believe that an ever growing core of this community still believe in the vision of building a corruption resistant economic platform with economic parameters to match. Unfortunately there are inevitably some hope aren't interested in that vision or have a very different idea about how to achieve it. I've seen absolutely nothing that indicates a cessation of support for the most hardworking or core development teams that would indicate future prosperity from a BitShares price point of view.

We find a problem, we innovate and grow stronger or we wither and die over time. Are we here to make some bucks for a few traders and centralised exchanges or are we here to offer a new path for humanity?

This problem is many centuries old. You measure voting power with money, you give advantage to rich guy. This guy does not necessary need to own funds, he may borrow funds like yunbi. What are you going to do about that?

Agreed. In short there would need to be a consequence that prevents Yunbi from continuing their unilateral use of customer funds (without verifiable consent) or we need to innovate and adapt the platform so that similar exploits aren't possible or we need an alternative platform that has learned from these experiences and is more resilient.  I'm not saying for a minute that any of this is easy or without cost......trouble was inevitable from the outset.

From a slightly philosophical point of view, no human being on this planet has ever lived within a corruption resistant economy for any great period of time.  Even those currently fighting for an edge or tending towards greed for whatever reason may in fact prefer to live in a world that might  be possible should a platform like BitShares succeed. The confluence of old and new partly contributes to the problems all of crypto is currently facing. How do you convince someone who can exploit an edge today, in order to make a million, to sacrifice that edge in favour of something with integrity that helps many more than just himself? 

Apathy is one of the biggest challenges so the platform needs to provide all the support it can.....but then the platform must also be compelling enough to grow and gather network effect. It's this combination of issues that make continued innovation/development and integrity absolutely critical.

Quote from: Ben Mason on March 28, 2016, 04:45:59 pm

Quote from: yvv on March 28, 2016, 04:35:40 pm

So, what is a problem? They can vote, and they vote. We agreed to vote with shares, and here it is, money democracy in practice. Accept it.

No thanks. You accept it. I'll continue to look for solutions, hopefully with other like-minded people.

I don't keep my funds at yunbi, this is my solution. If somebody does, this is their choice, which you can't change.

At best, Yunbi has made an assumption that people who hold BitShares on their exchange consent to their use of those funds. That is demonstrably untrue and is an action that reveals a weakness in BitShares which needs to be countered, not accepted. I appreciate wholeheartedly that you do not hold your BitShares with them and as such you are only a victim of this hijacking and misuse of power by default.

If people become aware, perhaps they will move their funds, great. If not, we should attempt to address this weakness in our platform.....and there are hopefully several ways we can do that which will be beneficial to BitShares holders in the medium to long term. 

Liquidity is one issue that we face. Access to, awareness, understanding and desire for our products are others. Development, distribution and the changing dynamics of the global economy will only add potential increases in the future price of BitShares.  We all want that but for different reasons and on different time-scales (well most of us  ). Either way, we must innovate to build resilience wherever we find weakness.  I've seen enough posts on this forum from enough people to believe that an ever growing core of this community still believe in the vision of building a corruption resistant economic platform with economic parameters to match. Unfortunately there are inevitably some hope aren't interested in that vision or have a very different idea about how to achieve it. I've seen absolutely nothing that indicates a cessation of support for the most hardworking or core development teams that would indicate future prosperity from a BitShares price point of view.

We find a problem, we innovate and grow stronger or we wither and die over time. Are we here to make some bucks for a few traders and centralised exchanges or are we here to offer a new path for humanity?

Quote from: svk on March 28, 2016, 03:30:24 pm

While we may not think it's a good idea to have exchanges vote, you could also argue that as long as the exchange accounts are public and we know who they're voting for, anyone keeping their funds in that exchange implicitly agrees to their votes. If they do not agree they should move their funds elsewhere.

You can't really expect Yunbi's users who hold BTS to know exactly what is going on.  For all they know, they are just trading a cryptocurrency.  So unless Yunbi is informing their users about this very controversial action, then they are acting in an extremely unethical manner and should pay a serious price.

Indeed. There have been several sincere attempts to engage with those decrying all dilution but no serious argument or proposals have been forthcoming. This is an answer.  There is no rational argument against paying for added value via workers with dilution.  There are alternatives but none that work so easily to compensate core development etc. The actions of Yunbi and their supporters are self-destructive and, given the lack of any sensible engagement, likely driven by short-term price related greed or a desire to see BitShares fail in favour in the hope that an alternative will succeed. It is also possible that Yunbi sees the demise of their business in the BitShares decentralised exchange and are unwilling to adapt. How are their reserves?

Yes Samupaha, I'm very unhappy about the short-sightedness of those not prepared to pay for workers who are clearly adding value. Yunbi using customer funds to vote is an affront that must be countered.

Quote from: Ben Mason on March 11, 2016, 05:58:36 am

It's with a great sigh of relief that what Cob has shown us appears to be a tool that has great potential, but belief in the objective and belief in the team attempting to deliver are two very different things. It is a direct result of TravelsAsia's persistent attempts to engage with the development team that have prompted this latest indicator of progress and has enabled you to comment.

Really? Why do I seem to remember Cob telling us that a video or two would be ready in March? They came right on schedule and I'm not going to credit any forum posters for that. Sigh of relief? Sorry, I'm laughing too hard; didn't you expect something awesome? I sure did. Look, this project is either going to succeed or it isn't. If someone is posting comments on one day that he's almost willing to take a hit on his investment, and then the next day he's all stoked cause he saw some video, then that's fine; it's just a different investing mindset than I have. I waited almost two years for a decent BitShares product and there were plenty of times when people were getting anxious here on the forums. For months and months and months, I was the asshole responding to many of those postings with the same stuff I'm writing now: A good product takes time. If you want it to succeed, give the developers enough space to do their thing and get it done. If you want a good short term investment, this ain't it. If you aren't willing to lose 100% of your investment, then crypto ain't the right space. If you're willing to be patient, then great things are possible.

You are very right that we have a different mindset. I have always advocated for patience but I'm not into closing my eyes, putting my fingers in my ears and burying my head in the sand. If you can't see that there are serious potential problems with the delivery of this project then fine.....hope away. Having seen some evidence of development, I am relieved but the fact that there is no roadmap, communication is highly limited and the project team don't appear to be willing to do a mumble has me very concerned. Oh, I guess that makes me a 'squeaky wheel investor.' So be it. I prefer the approach of other, more professional projects like maidsafe, synereo, follow my vote and others.... They seems to value communication and have both the organisation and resource to do so.

Quote from: Ben Mason on March 11, 2016, 10:17:59 am

Sorry Fuzzy....if you are busy don't worry.  I'm trying to connect to the mumble server and the connection is being rejected as an unrecognised user name.  I'm trying the username that i registered with  Beyond Bitcoin..... is that right?

Did you change your mumble certificate in the mean time? If so then mumble will not recognize you as the owner of the login name. If you want to reclaim it I can remove the old registered name and you can re-register it.

ok yes please JoeyD.  So i need to re-do the certificate after i've re-registered? Thank you

Quote from: TravelsAsia on March 11, 2016, 01:01:19 am

The project is looking great! With some more communication and transparency, you could really mobilize the investors.

Not worried about this. While I understand your sentiments, most people have been holding because they believe there is real potential here. I'd rather Cob and Eddie work on getting the technology and partnerships done rather than spending their time with squeaky wheel investors. You either believe in it or you don't.

TravelsAsia is not a 'squeaky wheel.'  His concerns have been measured and completely reasonable. And your comment about believe or don't is quite silly and dismissive in the context of the number of project failures and waste in crypto. It's with a great sigh of relief that what Cob has shown us appears to be a tool that has great potential, but belief in the objective and belief in the team attempting to deliver are two very different things. It is a direct result of TravelsAsia's persistent attempts to engage with the development team that have prompted this latest indicator of progress and has enabled you to comment.