Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10
I like the idea of easy movement between the chains. Id like to see confirmation it will be built for easy deployment on Bitshares based exchanges and that it will cover all Bitshares assets / ERC20 tokens.

It'd also be good to get the view from some of our CEXs about whether this would be useful / beneficial in their view (George, Ronny etc). It feels a bit odd funding a business sat on another chain I guess is also part of my hesitation...maybe that's a bit close minded though as it is s function that is all about being cross chain.

Kong's point (and Jonathan's by proxy) is a good one - what business will this add? My baseline view is it would be a good addition bit I don't have much basis for that.

I don't know enough about the man hours required to comment on the estimated budget. We've been talking a lot about cross chain swaps the last few much of an add on is this compared to what we will have?

Also, and this is sincerely meant as no criticism to the original posters as I'm not that clued up on ethereum projects, but have people used Everbloom? Is it good and is it popular? I couldn't see any data about it on Alexa or CMC.
Stakeholder Proposals / Re: Witness Report for for-one
« Last post by sahkan on Today at 05:57:17 pm »
Are you still on the test net? I'm going to support you. I think we always need new witnesses as some of us get voted in and out all the time.
Could you explain exactly how you will use this on your exchange and the estimated demand for the service provided etc. This way we can get an idea of initial usage, I'm all up for adding features to BitShares but a certain amount of research needs to be carried out so we aren't paying for features that will never be used. Thanks.

中文(Chinese) / Re: 将MSSR降为101
« Last post by zhouxiaobao on Today at 02:43:14 pm »
Beyond Bitcoin / Re: New Stage of the WoodShares Project
« Last post by WoodShares Project on Today at 02:42:42 pm »
Brief history:

The WoodShares Project was born in Colombia in 2014 as an initiative to develop a virtual asset that was backed by a physical asset, for which commercial timberlands were thought as their underlying value.

The project in general liked very much for the novelty in the use of blockchain technologies in addition to its social and environmental approach; however, it did not have the expected traction, which is attributed to several factors such as:

1 - Lack of financial education for investment in long-term projects;
2 - Profitability possibilities completely opaque by Altcoins (including scamcoins and shitcoins) that experienced extremely high value increases in a matter of weeks, days and even hours.
3 - Lack of focus on the community and working together.
4 - Complexity in the proposed business model.
5 - Limited technological tools available for the implementation of the proposed DAC model.
6 - Very limited resources to guarantee the initial deployment of the project.
7 - Great lack of knowledge of blockchain technologies, their capabilities and potential.

Presentation of WoodShares at Open Talent 2015:

Presentation of WoodShares at Finnosummit Bogota 2016:
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10