What about giving PTS 1.0 holders more of  whatever comes next? Release PTS 2.0, but honor all PTS 1.0 holders in a way every PTS 1.0 holder thinks it would be fair. Those who invested early should get "more" than everybody else who got in late(r). The earlier you get in, the more you invest in an idea. That should be honored. Investing in Apple 1980 got you more than investing in 2010. Investing in PTS november 5th 2013 should give you more than investing in 01/2014 when everybody wants to because the word spread.

Only issue with that is that people like me invested early...but then bought through exchanges over time after the cost of mining went up.  Opening up that can of worms can upset a large number of people and make newcomers feel the game is fixed and out of their favor.  Those people will not want to invest and will likely be more than willing to spread that message.

Quote from: bytemaster on December 15, 2013, 04:43:39 pm

Quote from: Lighthouse on December 15, 2013, 04:39:03 pm

Quote from: coyote47 on December 15, 2013, 04:35:03 pm

Bytemaster, you have explained that this move would be an effort to increase value for current shareholders. That value is set by market forces not energy costs. If new investors can't be lured into your ecosystem PTS lose their value. I have been purchasing Protoshares under the assumption that Protoshares were only the beginning and that the vast majority of stake in future projects would still up for grabs. Newcomers like me drive the price of PTS up. Energy costs have nothing to do with it.

Precisely.  Everyone acknowledges this increases the fundamental value of PTS (reducing supply without changing existing holdings) but that's not really necessarily or even desirable.   To succeed the project needs to be inclusive because inclusion is growth is value.

To the extent that mining grows the network effect, this does add value to the coin.    So put yourself in the shoes of the DAC that is PTS and ask yourself how much equity you should give away for free through a process that destroys $100K per day?

Which is why I'm not advocating mining, I'm advocating contests or giveaways.  Have a flash game created that walks you through the value proposition of PTS and Bitshares, when they complete the game and provide a PTS address they get a small amount of PTS, use http://www.rafflecopter.com/ to create giveaways that are easy to manage, yield data for Invictus, encourage viral spreading of the message and run them every week or two.

There are lots of ways you can do this without the inefficiencies of mining, I agree it's a waste of money but the purpose it serves is anyone can waste their money equally and most aren't consciously doing it (just running their or multiple computers, which is percieved as a cost you already incur with or without mining)

I really like what lighthouse is saying here. 

True, the legal ramifications would be difficult in this scenario. If Invictus did all the paperwork, there wouldn't be any problems from the government. The real problems would be people that are afraid that Invictus is being controlled by the government.

Amen...
but not by "the" government...but by ANY government

bitcointalk thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=325735.0
Official site: datacoin.info

What are your thoughts on this project? It is definitely limited in use by the fact that you can only store 128KB files at the most, but it's definitely an interesting idea. It could have a few different uses, one being the sharing of torrent trackers. Instead of hosting torrents and posting them on the Pirate Bay, people could upload the torrent trackers to the Datacoin blockchain. It may also be possible to expand the file size limits through "personal chains".

 I like the idea...and I also like the competition with Namecoin.  People often forget that competing versions of altcoins also make it more difficult to destroy the cryptocurrency market as a whole.  If nation-states (and their puppet-masters) decide to destroy namecoin with a MASSIVE buy and dump...or some other unforeseen attack, if another system exists to serve a similar function, the people will move to the one that still exists...and the devs will learn from the weaknesses in the dead crypto

What I would like to see is bounties that give special Keyhotee ID's to developers who successfully complete bounties for projects that the ProtoShares community choose...there could even be competitions (like zuckerberg did when searching for talented fb coders).

This model would be free for Invictus yet provides a real incentive as otherwise these people would have to pay 10 PTS to get the ID.  Yet the value their input gives to the projects would increase the value in Invictus' as a whole (not to mention bounty collectors' PTS rewards/holdings), thus providing a net benefit for both parties at little-to-no "cost" for Invictus. 

This would also incentivise individuals working on projects to advertise their work through their own personal networks...which serves as free advertising...

This exact same model could be used for numerous bounties...especially those that serve to increase the Crypto-Communities' respect for Invictus and Invictus' Name recognition through "buzz" campaigns.  Imagine if Protoshares had the buzz that Quark has...

It would be #3 on coinmarketcap easily.

Quote from: bitcool on November 27, 2013, 01:49:05 am

Each of these initiative is a big undertaking, I'm afraid you are over extended.

This is a real concern.  We have laid out a grand vision and will not be able to get there in a single day.   We are working one item at a time and hope others will join us.

others will not even know this exists without good media buzz...and the twitter feed is looking weak.  I mean seriously... only three tweets?  Not complaining...just trying to provide some information worth considering when moving forward.

Quote-
[Users could submit a transaction that asks a question and includes a 'bounty' for the answer. 
Other users could submit answers that risk money to submit.
Other users could bet on which answer would be accepted.]-Quote
I am not one to gamble often, this appears to be something I would have a hard time with unless risk was minimal.

I personally like the idea of giving everyone who contributes a chance to win (I really like YahooAnswers).  The trick would be to find some way to award people points for asking the question, answering it.  That something could be like Cryptsy and Yahoo points where activity is rewarded, then have them be redeemable for coins (like BitCoin, LiteCoin, SecureCoin...etc from sponsors).  If there is a flood of users because of the great influx of different currencies, then so be it...it brings more activity to the ecosystem (which adds to the network effect anyway).  If someone cheats to get correct answers to people...that are voted up by the community...then I don't care about cheating, because in the system the right answer wins.  Accepting multiple currencies would add free cash flow and would give incentive to learn about different coins before choosing them as payment.  Algorithms would need to be created/utilized to calculate weighted differences in prices for different coins or it could even offer the option of being put in the genesis block of the most important code forks and provide vanity that come with that level of trust.  A good way to model incentives is to look back to good ol' psychology 101:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs .     

I have no idea how to keep cheating out of the picture, some minds will always look for a way to get an edge by cheating.

If there can be a way to make cheating add something to the economy it would help negate the downsides.  Potentially, a bounty could be put out on finding "ways to cheat"...anyone who can prove it first and give a provable means of establishing a baseline for the economic energy stolen from the community from them maximizing their profits from cheating will receive a reward 2x what they would make in a year of cheating.  That would give incentive for people to find new ways of cheating, to submit tickets and give their search urgency. 


Also...are all DACs connected to project Keyhotee?  As in, you need a Keyhotee ID to invest in a DAC or utilize the services of a DAC? Is Keyhotee a kind of a Fork in the Web?  Sometimes I think we are moving in that direction...and if we are, then DACs could give their own Keyhotee ID benefits to people who earn great levels of trust in the system.