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.
The price today is ALMOST the All Time High. $0.046529 according to coinmarketcap.com
The price has only ever been higher (in USD) than it is today for one night, August the 25th 2014
It's like moving our store from inside our own house to the shopping mall of someone else to operate under their new rules and not ours.I've known this to be true for years but right now is the first time I truly appreciate 100% shareholder control.
Today BitShares shareholders do have 100% control over the application, the blockchain itself and its settings. That's power we would probably lose running on EOS.
It's like moving a centralized exchange to BitShares ^^
Not saying it does not come with benefits but also not without risks.
Is BTS 2.0 the first company in history to be able to say that with 100% confidence?
But think a little while how well Bitshares has worked so far... From technical standpoint there shouldn't be anything that prevents it being a TOP5 blockchain. But the community hasn't been able to use the technology to grow the ecosystem.
Would it be really a bad thing if a community like that would lose some of the control? What's the point of having control if it's used ineffectively?
The "invisible hand" guides the market, are you suggesting you have forsight greater than an omnipotent all-knowing "entity" that represents the aggregate subjective decisions made by an economic community?
Are you suggesting Redistribution of wealth?
I would hope such an idea is rather unpopular on a forum with history of NAP and austrian school of economic theory.
Where's the proof it's the fault of the current shareholders?
Even if it was their fault, who's to say that a current shareholder would not learn from their mistakes and have knowledge that a newly appointed receiver of stolen goods would not possess?
The bts price would have dumped into the ground long ago and it would not have had the capital to employ or incentivize anyone.
Iif the shareholders of the previous 2 years did not risk their wealth to bring it to fruition, this project would be nothing.
This project IS the shareholders. The community.
The fact that BitShares "Has the potential to be a TOP 5 blockchain" is directly BECAUSE of the investment of the "current" shareholders.
Liquidity, collateral asset value, results of worker proposal voting, testing early product, community discussion participation are all the result of efforts made by the shareholders.
====
The whole essence of this project, the real asset that brings BitShares' monumental growth potential, is in it's founding principles and enablance of freedom.
I should hope that the Freedom from sneaky rug-pulling is included.
How right you areThe price today is ALMOST the All Time High. $0.046529 according to coinmarketcap.com
The price has only ever been higher (in USD) than it is today for one night, August the 25th 2014
No, actually the record had to be near May 8th, where BitShares was #15 and Steem was #10. I caped a screenshot of CMC with price of BTS at $0.056 that day.
EDIT:
For future reference:
As of 21:00GMT 16/05/17, according to coinmarketcap.com
US Dollar price of bts: $0.043429
BTC price of bts: 0.00002489
Total USD value of the entire crypto market: $57,809,925,880
Total bts in circulation (released from Reserve Pool): 2,601,040,000
USD market cap of BitShares: $112,960,566
BTC market cap of BitShares: 64,733BTC
16/05/17 BitShares' market share of the cryptomarket in USD: 0.19%
(btsmarketcap/USDcryptomarket)*100
I'm very interested in seeing how this % fluctuates during this big cryptoboom(/pump)
Also, when will the market cap of BitShares be equal to 21,000,000BTC?
I think it probably will be good news for BitShares 2.0
I do not think that Dan will have spent another 18months of his valuable time redoing what he achieved with BitShares 2.0.
I'm confident that EOS will benefit BTS 2.0 shareholders.
But what if it doesn't? This isn't Dan's baby anymore and the decision is for the shareholders
I completely agree with your idea of staying as independent as possible. The chance that eos will be opensource is pretty high, so even in a worst case scenario, we are at least able to glean some technical inspiration from it. Hell from the looks of it, bitshares is in way better shape than projects like ethereum. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes, if even half of what's been leaked is true.
Then again ethereum apparently never had any problems with funding and hype, which of course had nothing to do with these big and nasty hidden powers behind the project, that have absolutely no nefarious agenda at all. Those powers would of course never use any untowards means to insure their monopoly.
It's like moving our store from inside our own house to the shopping mall of someone else to operate under their new rules and not ours.I've known this to be true for years but right now is the first time I truly appreciate 100% shareholder control.
Today BitShares shareholders do have 100% control over the application, the blockchain itself and its settings. That's power we would probably lose running on EOS.
It's like moving a centralized exchange to BitShares ^^
Not saying it does not come with benefits but also not without risks.
Is BTS 2.0 the first company in history to be able to say that with 100% confidence?
But think a little while how well Bitshares has worked so far... From technical standpoint there shouldn't be anything that prevents it being a TOP5 blockchain. But the community hasn't been able to use the technology to grow the ecosystem.
Would it be really a bad thing if a community like that would lose some of the control? What's the point of having control if it's used ineffectively?
The "invisible hand" guides the market, are you suggesting you have forsight greater than an omnipotent all-knowing "entity" that represents the aggregate subjective decisions made by an economic community?
What I'm trying to say is that markets clearly don't appreciate Bitshares. That's not because the technology sucks, so it must be because the community sucks.Where's the proof it's the fault of the current shareholders?
Even if it was their fault, who's to say that a current shareholder would not learn from their mistakes and have knowledge that a newly appointed receiver of stolen goods would not possess?
Are the shareholders learning from their mistakes? So far I haven't seen much evidence.The whole essence of this project, the real asset that brings BitShares' monumental growth potential, is in it's founding principles and enablance of freedom.
I should hope that the Freedom from sneaky rug-pulling is included.
I'm interested in freedom, too, and that's why I'm willing to let Bitshares to die if it can't help with the financial revolution that the world really needs. If Bitshares doesn't want to integrate to EOS and the community will keep progressing very slowly, eventually somebody else will start to build financial platform in EOS ecosystem. That might be so much better that it will take the market share from Bitshares.
If that ever happens, the question is: Are you going to be loyal to the blockchain or are you going to be loyal to the principles? Will you keep supporting Bitshares even if it's not a good tool for freedom, or will you abandon it and jump to the better ecosystem that can actually create a real change in the world?Just remember that Bitshares is a DAC. Dan can not do anything to it without the shareholder vote.
I know that very well. That's why I want to encourage everybody to think deeply how to vote in the near future. Do you want to keep on going the unsuccessful road or choose another one that might be better?
With what is happening This Summer, you won't even be thinking about EOS till Christmas.
Please stop pumping me.
I don't follow the Ethereum at all (why botherI think it probably will be good news for BitShares 2.0
I do not think that Dan will have spent another 18months of his valuable time redoing what he achieved with BitShares 2.0.
I'm confident that EOS will benefit BTS 2.0 shareholders.
But what if it doesn't? This isn't Dan's baby anymore and the decision is for the shareholders
I completely agree with your idea of staying as independent as possible. The chance that eos will be opensource is pretty high, so even in a worst case scenario, we are at least able to glean some technical inspiration from it. Hell from the looks of it, bitshares is in way better shape than projects like ethereum. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes, if even half of what's been leaked is true.
Then again ethereum apparently never had any problems with funding and hype, which of course had nothing to do with these big and nasty hidden powers behind the project, that have absolutely no nefarious agenda at all. Those powers would of course never use any untowards means to insure their monopoly.), what has been leaked?
Could you give me your quick summary?
I remember your attitude on shareholder freedom over the years, I was hoping you'd chime in
Nothing can stop him from inventing the next big thing.
Knowing that, make your investments.
I have to agree with this. The EOS will pump like God giving CPR.
I'm going to take some good profits on the first pump, and hold some to see if it can replicate Ethereum like insanity.
That said, let's not run the BTS community into the ranting and pursuing tech changes that should not take place. Cut out unreasonable and impractical options - and take the low hanging fruit, which being sidechains secured with DPoS like committees.
No reason we all can't own BitShares 3.0 as well.
There's no reason we can't, but is there a reason we should? It seems like a low-opportunity and possibly detrimental marketing choice, respectfully.
I concluded above that a sidechain asset into a native EOS DEX would make the most sense. Competition is good for everyone, at least those like us with good tech.
I'm surprised that the mere mention of a certain individual makes people here discuss the question of dropping BTS for something about which very little is known at this time, basically that it will be called EOS and is some new idea of BM.But if EOS is a system that completely undermines the wealth of BTS 2 shareholders, then what's to say that Dan won't find cryptonitesupercode language better suited to blockchains in 2 years time? And replaces EOS again?
...
I know you can't release certain information; but is 'Don't worry BTS 2 shareholders, we aren't going to fuck you over' that much to ask for?
IMO it's a safe bet that Dan will sooner or later leave EOS behind. He's got a history of doing that.
And you won't hear a "we aren't going to fuck you over", because I think that BM worries very little about the *people* here.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that EOS is going to be an amazing piece of technology, and I'm sure that BM does not intend to "fuck anyone over". But that doesn't mean you won't feel like having been fucked over, after he's left.
Well said @pc, well said.
I know that very well. That's why I want to encourage everybody to think deeply how to vote in the near future. Do you want to keep on going the unsuccessful road or choose another one that might be better?
Has anyone actually thought about how BTS in EOS would work?
An EOS native token to BTS would be like Ethereum Gas to Maker DAO, but it probably uses Steem style rate limiting (as Dan seems to have suggested some fee-less trading), meaning the more EOS you hold, the more you can trade for free, up to your proportional bandwidth limits.
Adding this up, if BTS were built into the EOS Virtual Machine (Wren), then it means for BTS to work as a part of EOS that BTS traders need to hold EOS.
Dan concluded in 2013, the best business model for a native asset is to be the primary currency like BTS and Ethereum are trying to be now. It seems he came to the same conclusion for EOS, which will be native asset, and most likely to gain windfall investment.
From a techincal standpoint, t would be a better strategy for Dan (and for the future of Decentralized Exchange) to build a system of EOS with an absolute native DEX running primarily on EOS with Customizeable and Progammable UIAs, Smartcoins, and two way side chain assets with Witnesses acting as side chain signers. This would create the optimal DEX because it would include the potential for creativity and Unique Selling Propositions (USPs) and therefore succesful ICOs - and with this functionality at the core there is no need for a decentralized exchange to demand secondary assets in order to trade.
Further on BTS, if it were to be re-written as a EOS Wren app, then a ton of work would need to be done, and that could take forever. BTS holders, if they commit to something, may be disappointed by the transition leading to vaporware or worse.
Frankly, Dan must know this. Because of that, this whole 'BTS inside EOS' must be a marketing and tribe creating strategy more than anything (and hell, some promises need to exist to replace the lack of sharedrop, which would be the viable alternative to migrate over the BTS tribe).
And in practical conclusion, BTS is not likely to become anything more than a sidechain asset, which of course will have its own economic limits, like all sidechains. Further, if the EOS does have its own native DEX, like it should, then the BTS sidechain assets are destined to play second fiddle.
Sorry for the chicken scratch..it's late here..
I don't follow the Ethereum at all (why bother
Could you give me your quick summary?
I remember your attitude on shareholder freedom over the years, I was hoping you'd chime in
Oops, seems I did not word that as well as I could. I meant to say what has been leaked about EOS so far does not bode well for ethereum. I was referring to the snippets of information released on the telegram chat and elsewhere. Also reading all the comments from devs about their troubles developing for ethereum and the architectural differences with eos, then provided that eos works as intended then ethereum might just become obsolete before they are able to conquer the world. Since bts (and steem) are technically (apparently) a lot easier to adapt or integrate in eos, I figured bitshares future a bit more promising, as in, opportunities for the taking.
I have always feared the arrival of the big powers and to me Ethereum with their small group of "founders" and behind the scenes dealings and sponsors combined with their actions, is a very close match to how I'd envision an attack on crypto would take place. Conversely I'm keeping my eyes peeled with eos as well.
The "one chain to rule them all " concept is one of my worst nightmares. That's why I half jokingly proposed that eos stood for eye of sauron. Not that I've seen anything yet that would point to something like that, but it is something I'm very worried about. I most definitely would prefer if bitshares remains an independent entity, but I do realize that we need to grasp every opportunity we can to grow.
https://steemit.com/bitshares/@Stan/hollywood-heros
A workable link: http://bit.ly/2qf7ALC
bitsharestalk.org needs a 'how to use' thread. To many people get the posting links wrong.
And how to post images. Even @Stan can get this wrong.
Just an idea for everyone here without any special talents like software development:
- Borrow USD
- Borrow something else or deposit some other awesome crypto you don't mind holding
- Check the USD price from coinmarketcap.com
- Set up buy and sell orders at 2-4% spread, 10 orders on each side at 1% increments
- Check out your market every 12 hours
Why?
- You will make a profit once someone else takes your orders
- You will make the DEX look good
- Your actions act like a seed. A bootstrapped market invites more participants
- You can hold your BTS while trading other coins against USD, which itself benefits Bitshares
- You don't take any risk by holding something you fear might crash
- You can diversify within the DEX
- You will need other exchanges less
- People want to trade on the DEX, and together we can provide to them.
- You don't take the risk of leveraged trading, unless you trade in BTS markets
I've done this to the USD:MAID, USD:STEEM, USD:BLOCKPAY, USD:BTWTY, USD:EUR, USD:GOLD, USD:SILVER markets, and next I'm getting some Synereo AMP and Tauchain AGORAS to bootstrap USD:AGRS and USD:AMP markets. Once LBRY and Solarcoin are added, I will do the same to them. I'm doing all this with some €4k, which is all I have.
I'm a little amazed about the fact that I'm bootstrapping or helping bootstrap several markets, while I hold only 1/1,000,000 of all BTS (or something to that degree). What are all other holders doing? How much liquidity and how amazing markets could we provide with all that BTS? Is everyone so afraid, so the keep BTS at Poloniex just in case? Come on everyone! I don't want to brag, but point out that we have everything we need. We can do it by - doing it :-)
EDIT: If you check out the markets, you might notice that I fail to keep all the markets nice. I keep running out of liquidity myself, but then I try to readjust my holdings in order to be able to continue. Then there's the STEEM:USD market, where my orders are tiny compared to one single $6k wall, which makes it look ugly, but so what. The market is working!
