Just wanted to drop by and say something I have yet to say...Good job brian.  Its really good to start seeing some media popping up!

With respect to my signature that is intended to distinguish casual conversations on this forum from more serious legal documents or commitments.   If everything I write on this forum could be construed to be legally binding I would have no choice but to stop posting all together because I would have to have a lawyer look over every post.     Stan makes one mis-statement and there is a huge controversy.

Many things I post on here are personal opinions and not that of me acting in my role of corporate officer.   

This all falls into my post-contract society enabled by crypto-assets and thus should be of no surprise.   

It's cool Bytemaster, you do not need to explain this...people know where your heart is in this movement, though sometimes we question whether your actions unintentionally fall out of line with your priorities, we can be pretty certain at the very least that you have the moral highground with regard to the future you want to help create.

Quote from: charleshoskinson on March 09, 2014, 04:30:15 pm

 The original strategy involved monetizing Keyhotee as a platform on a per user basis, activities related to the BitShares protocol, and a hardware line.

Ew, gross

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Isn't it funny that Daniel wanted to give Keyhotee for FREE to EVERYONE?  These are precisely the little points that over time make an ominous big picture with regard to Charles.

Your can be sure Charles is looking over your shoulder... patiently waiting...  ...and oop, there he is again.  We may be able to start a bit-Hoskinson and take bets on when he will reappear.

Lol... well played.

Quote

Let us please make sure both sides answer these questions...this could be the perfect moment to inform the public so we are not so "in the dark".  I understand there is information (everywhere, scattered about...etc), but it would be nice to get a thread where these tough questions can be asked of both of you.  The entire world has a great deal at stake (not just monetarily) in the outcome of these experiments...

There are no tough questions on my end. I am no longer associated with Invictus Innovations as of October and that was a decision made by the other members of the board of directors. It is a closed matter and will not be reopened by me because it is productive to no one.

The only Invictus issues that I am subject to are those involving the foundation of the company up until I left in October. Changes to the proforma impact all investors of I3 and the management has a fiduciary duty to communicate these changes to all investors in a timely manner. I am simply asking what the relationship between I3 and BitShares is and how this relationship benefits the investors of I3. From the Texas conference:

Quote

Dan Larimer
Founder & CEO, BitShares
Daniel Larimer is a Virginia based entrepreneur and software engineer with a passion to find free market solutions to secure life, liberty, and property. He is the founder of BitShares.org and the originator of the concept of DACs (decentralized autonomous companies). He is the chief architect of the peer-to-peer, trust-less, block chain based financial system known as BitShares.

http://texasbitcoinconference.com/speakers

There seems to be a debranding of I3 into BitShares thus my interest in the query.

Of course their aren't Charles.  You are quite cool and calculating my friend...and you obviously have perfected your pitch.  How long did it take looking in the mirror or chatting with your "advisors" to get this down?

Yet it seems so odd how you only show up on our forums to post when it directly will benefit you and "Ether" huffers... 14 posts and all in only the interest of batting away fires you start? My desire to listen to you grows less and less with every post here.  Taking into consideration I have been banned from "ethereum's" subreddit for asking questions and keeping them in the minds of those who visit makes me trust you and your little group even less.  Sure you enlisted talent...I just wonder if they know who they are working for.

Now it is my turn to ask, "why the hell are you here?"  Obviously you are not here to aid our community other than to ask tough questions from which you yourself apparently are immune.  Go back to magic land...

I honestly do not care why you left Invictus anymore.  I look at you and I think "Bill Gates"...and that is not a good thing.  The only difference is that the tech we are all looking at has consequences that potentially FAR outweigh the damage centralized systems have done to the world we know today and so the wrong individuals with the wrong ego could cause a great deal of pain to genuinely good people.

P.S.  sorry to those on the forums who know me and know this is out of my character...Charles and his antics have a tendency to bring me here..."I don't need to explain myself to anyone...no tough questions needed on my end, I am flawless...Turing complete! One chain to rule them all!"...these things all wreak of something I don't want to touch with a ten-foot pole let alone my investment money.  It's a good thing you already have plenty of "advisors" in the bitcoin community to co-opt, I mean fund, this venture of yours. 

Let us please make sure both sides answer these questions...this could be the perfect moment to inform the public so we are not so "in the dark".  I understand there is information (everywhere, scattered about...etc), but it would be nice to get a thread where these tough questions can be asked of both of you.  The entire world has a great deal at stake (not just monetarily) in the outcome of these experiments...

Quote

Charles,why do you continue coming on to bitsharestalk.org to make your comments and ask your questions? I believe Ethereum has its own sites?

You seem to have trouble letting go.

Actually I keep getting drawn back in by other people or events. I would like an answer to my question, which has nothing to do with Ethereum or its affiliates.

   (though it DOES have everything to do with Ethereum and affiliates)

and, btw, I have not seen anything really answering Dan's questions...which are valid from my (investors) standpoint.

And trust me man...when I first heard about Ethereum, I was interested!  However, it will require me actually believing in you, who left Invictus to make a One-Blockchain-to-rule-them-all platform. 

What I wait to see is for someone to leave your organization, fork your work and put a huge marketing campaign behind it...which, like you said in the first debate, would be frustrating...

I wonder how Dan, Stan and the rest of the team feel...despite the "photo-ops" provided to ensure the community there is no bad blood.   

If I were you I would feel that the "culture" that apparently saddens you would fall directly on my shoulders for MY ROLE in its manifestation.

You feel like a salesman while Bytemaster feels like an aspiring paradigm-shifter who lacks the salesman's charm but has the engineer's ingenuity and idealism. Just sucks you have gotten so many Bitcoiners huffing "Ether".

Harsh words, I know...especially considering it is pretty tough to get me this confounded.  I would love to have my opinion changed.

*note* for a brief history and epidemiology of inhalants (including Ether), please note:  http://books.google.com/books?id=fOfxoQm_a7MC&pg=PA276&dq=neurology+%22Diethyl+ether%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=a9EcU-_7CIfMkQfZ4YGoDg&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAA

I hope you guys dont mind, but I'd like to help iron things out a bit.  Of course, if I am incorrect in any place please let me know.  Adam is the host of the first of a growing media network called "Let's Talk Bitcoin".  He literally did what most people are not willing to do and put his ass on the line to establish his network from the ground up.  This takes balls.  He gets the highest of regard from me. 

However we are in a place that is no longer as cut and dry as "hey we can store data on a decentralized blockchain instead of using centralized servers".  I know you guys wouldn't believe it, but the things he has said on here actually are pretty solid.  He gives very good advice and has the ears (which I am sure he uses) of other very brilliant engineers in the field.  He is also trying to incorporate new tech into his network everywhere he can...so some of the criticisms are legit in my opinion. 

Where I think we run into a problem is that with Adam, it seems like he has a healthy dose of idealism (why I personally love his show) that still can sometimes make less tech-centered minds smash heads with those who are on the engineering side of things.  I trust Adams intentions just like I trust Bytemasters.  They obviously consider two slightly different paths as being necessary with respect to the roll-out of this. 

However, I think most of the "disruptive" "FUD" he puts on this forum is with regard to outreach and teaching the community--which is not FUD at all.  THIS IS IMPORTANT and is why I am trying to build something behind the scenes (and learn everything needed to appropriately help others understand). 

When I heard Brian say in his latest interview that they would be getting real shark tanks and filling them with actual sharks I couldn't help but think..."why the hell would they prioritize this ahead of teaching people about the very basics of their technology?".  I think it is precisely decisions like this that make one question the focus of investment of AGS funds given by the community.

With that said, I want to take the opportunity to thank you Adam for all you have done for the crypto community.  It does not go unnoticed by many of us here on the forums and for those who do not understand, I hope they will realize your intention is to HELP the community and not spread "FUD". 

On another note, I have to say that consensus technology...from what I have learned, does not necessarily need to rely solely on mining to remain decentralized.  We are still in the nose-bleeding edge of this tech and the entire community of devs will eventually come to a consensus on what way is best to move forward.  Big changes will be necessary for ALL of the teams working in this area if they are to continue to exist as huge leaps in tech will be unavoidable. 

With that said, holding Invictus to a particular avenue is unnecessary as they will be forced to change.  I do, however, and always will have concerns for centralization of this power (precisely why I fear the "one-blockchain to rule them all of ethereum). Thanks for DACIndex.com, and please keep throwing "FUD" because it all keeps us honest with ourselves and reminds us we didn't get into crypto to make a more sophisticated version of the Debt and Death Paradigm we currently have today, but to fundamentally change the reward systems upon which we base all human interaction. 

This is important...

As for Bytemaster...thanks for doing your best to help the initial investors as you move forward with changes that need to be made.  This will NOT ALWAYS BE POSSIBLE, but the fact that you do it when you can makes me realize where your intentions are and that makes me continue to be a long-term holder.  It also makes me realize you listen to the community.  I distinctly remember positing the very idea of making sure all changes benefit PTS holders as opposed to hurting their bottom line very early on in the forums--you said you would take it into consideration, and obviously did). 

Now lets stop bickering, realize we will all have our differences and come to a consensus on one thing--How Crypto-Equities can lift the world out of poverty and debt-slavery!

*Amen*