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.


Messages - CWEvans

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 13
46
General Discussion / Re: thread on peercoin reddit
« on: April 06, 2014, 05:21:13 pm »
I think cooperation and consensus building are a great idea. Especially with Peercoin, which I really respect and which has a committed long term group of followers. But isn't Jordan Lee building Peershares, essentially their version of a simple DAC? I know they're probably nowhere near to Bitshares, and at best this probably would be something like Bitshares Me. But in some peoples' minds, I can see how Bitshares may be a conflict of interest, so to speak. I don't see it as a conflict, but some of them might.

They are building a colored coins application with peershares, not a whole bunch of applications...

Let's approach that community in a cooperative manner. Not like: We are better, come to us (like it was a bit the case with the Namecoin vs. DNS video). More like: Let the exchange of ideas between two great crypto 2.0 communities/projects, both with great a futures, be inspirational and beneficial for both sides.

Rule the galaxy as father and son, as it were?  ;)

47
General Discussion / Re: Delegated Proof of Stake (DPOS) White Paper
« on: April 06, 2014, 04:37:04 pm »
Quote
1.3 Ripple Consensus

The Ripple consensus algorithm allows a group of nodes to agree to reach consensus based upon the concept of a unique node list. The initial unique node list is like a club where 51% of the club members must vote to include a new member. Consensus will follow this core 51% and those outside have no influence. Because this club starts out “centralized” it will remain “centralized” and if it ever becomes corrupted there is nothing the shareholders can do. Like Bitcoin and Peercoin, Ripple separates shareholders from voting rights and is thus much more centralized than other systems.

I'm putting that on a t-shirt!

Categorizing cryptocurrency systems according to the seat of voting power is extremely important.

Quote
2.5 Are 100 Representatives Decentralized?

The definition of decentralized is hard to pin down because it has become a buzzword. We consider the free market to be the ultimate form of decentralization and barriers to entry to be the basis of all centralization. Like many things, there are degrees of centralization so we will instead compare the relative centralization of Delegated Proof of Stake to the other alternatives.

This point is ignored wayyy too often. In every critique, one should state explicitly compared to what.

Quote
3.1 Preventing Exclusion of Transactions

Having 100 representatives each elected by the shareholders and being required to take turns means that any transaction that is approved of by even 1% of the shareholders can be included in less than 30 minutes. This means that no representative can benefit by excluding transactions that vote for other representatives.

This should be expanded on and include an example.

Quote
<h4>4.0 Transactions as Proof of Stake (TaPOS)</h4>

should be: <h3>4.0 Transactions as Proof of Stake (TaPOS)</h3>

Every vote for a delegate can be either *for* or *against* them.   A delegate is ranked according to the sum of the votes for them minus the votes against them.   With this process in place it is now possible for delegates to be fired relatively easily for misbehaving even if the vast majority of a delegates supporters are lazy and not paying attention. 

Although it probably would be overkill in this context, it might be of potential use in a general reputation-scoring system to weight the votes cast as a function of the voter's own ranking in the system.  This way, if a gang of trolls decided to attack a particular user, the impact could be mitigated by the fact that their reputations each carried very little weight.

2) When making a normal transaction the user's wallet always votes for the delegate in their top 10 list with the least votes and pulls votes from the delegate with the most votes.  This will tend to rebalance a user's votes over 10 delegates and help keep the delegate pool well balanced.

Some might find this to be unintuitive. When the time comes, maybe we'll want an animated video that illustrates the underlying logic. Two-and-a-half centuries of representative democracy has many, if not most, believing that first-past-the-post winner-take-all democracy is an immutable force of nature.

48
General Discussion / Re: Decentralized Autonomous Charity
« on: April 06, 2014, 04:26:17 pm »
While the purist in me knows that charity ultimately backfires by supporting dependence... it cannot be denied that it would provide a powerful marketing advantage and even some political cover.

If one is donating to consumption goods and services, yes. However, one could donate to capital projects, like an incubator that supports budding entrepreneurs in economically deprived areas, that do not necessarily fuel the cycle of dependence.

49
General Discussion / Re: "Words they may have to eat" Department
« on: April 06, 2014, 04:19:52 pm »
Definitely...

Good point here.  Humility is the cornerstone of trust.

I, for one, am extremely proud of my humility.  ;)

Yeah... we have had to eat quite a few...

And it takes a strong character to do so. It is those who refuse to eat their own words, in spite of irrefutable evidence to the contrary, that are the most unpleasant.

More to the point of the OP above, there are several categories of having to eat one's words, including:

  • Fools: Those who pontificate on what they do not understand, especially experts opinioneering outside their fields of expertise.
  • Liars: Those who want something to fail and work actively to undermine it.
  • Luddites: Those who cling to outdated dogma, refusing to acknowledge innovation.
  • Skeptics: Those who are unfamiliar with what one is doing, and naively heed the words of fools, liars, or luddites.

Engaging well-meaning fools can be very productive sometimes. Anti-Bitcoin goldbugs might be an example here, when they correctly identify shortcomings of fiat currency, and then resort to appeals to tradition, popular sentiment, and authority, as well as proving a negative, to make their cases.

A somewhat more adversarial approach is called for with liars, who are actively attacking one, whether directly or indirectly. One need not be belligerent about it, but one is not going to convince a rival to embrace one's position by seeking common ground. One should either ignore or confront a liar's charges—as gently or harshly as fits one's personality and the image that one wants to project—and seek to make him or her an ally only after one believes that this person has ripened into a fool.

When it comes to luddites, just let it go. You're asking them to repudiate beliefs that have defined their personhood for longer than you have been alive. To expect anyone to do that is asking too much. Warren Buffett is not going to start hanging out on this forum and sleeping over at the homes of BitShares developers, no matter how eloquently any of us makes the case for peer-to-peer, distributed, self-governing service providers that exist only in software.

If one finds common ground with skeptics, one often can convert them to one's point of view.

So... I would hesitate to quote Peter Schiff in the context of this thread, but Paul Krugman is fair game, as is Professor Bitcorn.

50
General Discussion / China: BitCNY, BitEUR, BitUSD
« on: April 02, 2014, 11:24:40 pm »
It is hard to tell what the real story is in China, but it looks like there might be a gaping maw of demand for BitCNY, BitEUR, and BitUSD there.

"OKCoin, FXBTC, and BTC38 Announce the End of Chinese Yuan Deposits Starting April 3, 2014"

http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/okcoin-fxbtc-btc38-announce-end-chinese-yuan-deposits-starting-april-3-2014/2014/04/02

Of course, the question still remains how someone in China will be able to acquire BitCNY.

I will keep my eye open for responses on this thread from our Chinese colleagues.

51
General Discussion / Re: The Distributed Autonomous Non-Profit (DAN)
« on: April 02, 2014, 04:14:51 pm »
+5% if you can work in a tax deduction, it would be perfect.

...says a man from Miami;)

52
 +5%

Very nice!

53
General Discussion / Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« on: April 02, 2014, 03:40:09 pm »
I don't think there is any gray area when it comes to decentralization. Either you are, or you are not. There is no partial compromise.  Since most people will be operating within the borders of existing government laws, true decentralization wil never be achieved. You must do what you think is best.

Granted, one finds pure decentralization and pure laissez faire nowhere in the world. However, there are shades of centralization.

By embracing the model of a protector trust, Bytemaster is embracing an existing set of traditions that works remarkably well in the real world for people who benefit from real wealth.

Count me among those who are comfortable with doing what is known, but much more efficiently, and not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good-enough.

54
General Discussion / Re: BitShares Phone Call
« on: April 02, 2014, 03:17:30 pm »
I think it's better to just add these payment options to an existing app. Phone calls are still routed to heavy centralized systems...for now

My field is finance and not engineering. Is there any plausible way to piggyback this on Skype or something similar?

55
General Discussion / Re: Beyond Bitcoin Reddit (update)
« on: April 02, 2014, 03:07:42 pm »
Bytemaster and I discussed the outline for what would have been the first day of the event. My assignment is to turn this into something that looks like a training course. Once that is complete, it would be easy to pour it all into a Moodle instantiation and run it as an online MOOC-ish thing, enabling people to run content-full local meetups.

Rather than fly Bytemaster's mild-mannered alterego all over the landscape, we could Skype him in like those flickery holograms in Star Wars.


"Help us Obi-Wan, you're our only hope!"

56
General Discussion / Re: Draft Talk for NYC [VIDEO]
« on: April 02, 2014, 02:58:38 pm »
Very easy to consume and great metaphorical comparisons with bitcoin!  Well done.

Agreed!   ;)

57
General Discussion / Re: CoinSummit Videos - Inspiration
« on: April 01, 2014, 05:52:22 pm »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLzAu2_BFbo 04:14 Maybe an event that is interesting for Charles?

Thank you for this link.


58
General Discussion / Re: Decentralized Autonomous Jedi Mind Tricks
« on: April 01, 2014, 04:20:33 pm »
Accurate. I think that is the reality of it. What it needs though is soft convincing of the current btc community (meaning soft (non arrogant) transitioning of their romantic believes to a competitive open source world where realizing of idealistic goals is possible but not simply by propagating them but by providing the tools that incentive transparency for example or empower people). There are a lot of good developers there!
The real world reason why the currency analogy is less appropriate than the company analogy is that there is competition between open source ownership networks unlike with a "traditional" (or "modern") understanding of "currency" which is thought of as issued as the only legal tender by a central authority.

This all should be easier to see, when new DACs do something other than issue shares called altcoins.

"Distributed Autonomous Company" is to the 21st Century what "horseless carriage" (automobile), "moving picture" (silent movie), "talking picture" (movie), and "information superhighway" (Internet) were to the 20th Century, and "iron horse" (locomotive) and "steam shovel" (excavator) were to the 19th Century. It's an attempt to convey some salient feature with familiar images.

59
General Discussion / Re: toast's evolving long-term plans
« on: April 01, 2014, 03:35:36 pm »
I read from the newsletter that toast is joining I3 fulltime .
Is it permanent ? I mean, is it a long-term contract or he is only with I3 fulltime for as long as creating bitshares DNS takes?

Nothing in life is permanent, but toast has made the plunge into the crypto space full time and we are helping him make the transition to become an independent DAC developer with his own funding.

Worst case, toast will get some stories out of all this that will last a lifetime. Excellent move.

You always have the option of passing your days under fluorescent lights in someone else's cubicle later.

The opportunity to be in Storm Central during a technology gold rush comes along only rarely.

60
General Discussion / Re: About the coins & chips in the DACs
« on: April 01, 2014, 03:31:37 pm »
DACs need control of their shares on a blockchain to function, otherwise they cannot add economic value and can only facilitate trust trading

Each DAC operates like a company, and its shares' value should be a function of the expected future value created by the DAC, adjusted for how risky the venture is.

Conventional companies' founders issue shares in those specific companies, and not alt-shares.

Hopefully, this will become clearer as more diverse DACs come online. As it is, the only ones that the vast majority see are altcoin DACs, which really are just altcoin mills.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 13