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 - donkeypong

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 156
General Discussion / Re: Ethereum price discussion
« on: April 21, 2016, 05:32:41 pm »
Ethereum ... One blockchain to rule them all?

Established monetary systems are the "manned aircraft" and Etherum is the drone.

Random Discussion / Re: Tribute to the Greeeeat Tony "the Tiger" K
« on: April 21, 2016, 05:26:52 pm »

General Discussion / Re: Poor Man's Patent
« on: April 19, 2016, 04:35:42 am »
Great idea. PM'ed you some thoughts.


The sharedrop thing was never given any sort of chance. Mining gives away far more than 10%.  10% for a premade dedicated community to support your product isn't that bad of a deal. If someone gives you 10% then it either will be in the code or it won't.

I remain a big fan of sharedropping. If done right, it could be well worth the cost.

Follow My Vote / Re: Follow My Vote are running a Kickstarter campaign
« on: April 15, 2016, 03:50:40 am »
Hopefully, their campaign goes viral and they raise some money. Whether they're going to use the money for more development or to actually launch, I don't know. If their product is ready, then I'd say they need to prove this on a smaller scale first: student council elections, lodges, community organizations, maybe some boards. If it works and saves money, getting a little press along the way, then maybe a local government (with the freedom under state law to do its own thing) gives it a test run.

Technical Support / Re: openledger doesn't work in firefox
« on: April 13, 2016, 07:17:34 pm »
I just use the light wallet, which works better for me than OL in any browser.

General Discussion / Re: Moonstone?
« on: April 09, 2016, 04:05:02 am »
@bitsapphire et al - Any update from Moonstone?.. I've been out the loop but happy to now have BitShares2.0 working and then hoping other areas still progressing well.

Cob gave an update and mentioned how graphene code has some major issues that prohibit scaling... Said moonstone is being held back by these issues
I call BS on that statement. Moonstone is never coming imo, smelled bad from the start and their continued silence just confirms that.

Sent fra min MotoG3 via Tapatalk

Yeah, I wouldn't be betting the farm on it, either. From my understanding of cob's update, he isn't relying on Moonstone per se. He simply mentioned that Moonstone is trying to address some of the same problems he's facing. I'd love to get a perspective from a BitShares Graphene person ( @bytemaster ?) on the Graphene scalability issue that cob discusses in his thread (link below).,22171.msg289021.html#msg289021

Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Early 2nd quarter 2016 update
« on: April 09, 2016, 03:33:56 am »
Cob, thanks for the honest and comprehensive update. This is a very complex project and it sounds like you've steered it through a lot of obstacles. Rome wasn't built in a day; delays are par for the course with projects like this. Of course, I strongly look forward to the day when we have an awesome product to promote and grow.

It just gets better and better. Terrific work on this site.

General Discussion / Re: [Poll] REAL GOLD BLOCKCHAIN?
« on: April 08, 2016, 06:26:18 am »

I added another response that I think expresses your position and possibly others.

There are no statements in the poll that I agree with. A simple 'no' would be better. I just see a lot of reasons why your suggestion could involve a lot of work and expense for little real gain. But hey, if you can make this work, then I'm not against it. Here's an idea: why not run your survey outside of BitShares and see what other potential customers think? This place can be a bit of an echo chamber.

General Discussion / Re: [Poll] REAL GOLD BLOCKCHAIN?
« on: April 08, 2016, 06:22:12 am »

Just so I understand.. what do you mean in regards to 'this kind of business' specifically?

I understand it as crypto backed by gold or some interaction that uses one to add credibility to the other, but perhaps you've thought further ahead than I have.


With stock exchanges it is not a matter of ethics. They are heavily regulated. When you hold funds in trust, it is all written on paper, what they can do with these funds, and what they can't. No such contract exists between yunbi and their users. Which means that they can do whatever they want with funds kept on their exchange. I don't like what they do, that's why I don't keep my funds there. But complaining about what they do is wrong and pointless.

I said unethical, not illegal. There's a difference. Everything you wrote is true, but none of it excuses their behavior. I was likening their role to that of a stock exchange in terms of their ethical obligations to their fellow human beings and the communities with whom they interact. The fact that stock exchanges are regulated has no bearing at all on my example. But perhaps one could find a better analogy than I used.

The whole point of this technology is to replace centralized regulation with consensus driven code.  If yunbi truly is a major problem (and I'm not convinced that it is), then the rules of the system need to change.

I agree the rules probably could change and that this may not pose a major problem for BitShares anyway. I'm simply disappointed they went for the lowest common denominator, making the kind of dumb business decision a 12-year-old kid would make.

As to your point about technology replacing regulation, fine, but it doesn't apply here. I'm not imposing regulation on anyone. I'm simply expecting better things from my fellow human beings. Even if you live in some libertarian utopia where there's no regulation and no enforcement, then if someone robs you blind while you're carrying your bag of gold to the supermarket (or someone hacks and drains your account), then there's some expectation of human behavior there that's been broken. If you don't want to use the system, then you don't have to put them in jail or shoot them dead or sue them, but wouldn't you at least put out the word that they're not trustworthy and use any existing reputation system to explain to others what they have done with your trust?

I would suggest that we have duties to respect our fellow human beings and that these expectations transcend any written law. If you don't believe this, then we're no better than animals. The same is true for good practices in business. If you shit on your customers, employees, other stakeholders, or those in your community, then you've sacrificed your good will. When you lose your reputation in business, there isn't much left.

General Discussion / Re: [Poll] REAL GOLD BLOCKCHAIN?
« on: April 08, 2016, 05:31:20 am »
My answer is "no", I don't think gold is needed here. I could not find a poll response that was appropriate for me to choose. Crypto is not perfect and there would be much to gain from backing it with real assets, but I don't see gold as delivering a lot more value in a way that could help one of these businesses much.

First, gold bugs are mostly suspicious sorts. Average age is probably around 50. They don't even trust paper money or electronic money, so even though we trust crypto, it's a big stretch -- most of them won't. I know people here think there's a natural libertarian overlap, but I think converts are difficult to attain this way and that the overlap is therefore overblown -- you won't attract that many of them and the ones you do will cost you too much in terms of time/effort/money.

Second, storing/transporting/insuring gold is costly and it only makes sense if you have lots of volume. Until then, it's hard to buy/sell gold for anything near its spot price.

Third, maybe gold is as good as an asset gets, but it's still deeply flawed. Its price is heavily manipulated by big powers (isn't that one reason many people turned to crypto?). It's not as good of a store of value as it was in previous generations; a lot of younger people don't see it as so important as previous generations did. I still hold gold just as I hold crypto. I think (there's a good chance that) its value will stand the test of time. But I don't think it's a good basis for this kind of business.


Why should they fork if they can take under their control what already exists? How is this unethical if they don't violate any rules defined by network?  If you think that following your rules is unethical you have to adjust your ethic plank.

It's perfectly ethical for this group of dissenting BitShares users to take it over and do what they want with it -- go for it (if only they had the numbers). But it is very much UNethical for an exchange, which essentially is holding funds in trust, to participate in such a vote. It's like a stock exchange voting as a shareholder in a corporation's election -- that would be such a chickenshit thing to do that no one in their right mind would patronize such a business.


there is actually strong emotion of anti-dilution in China community, yunbi voted as requested by China community

It is a completely unethical action for an entity that considers itself an exchange.

If you want to change BitShares, then fork and build something yourself.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 156