Well as I was lead to believe Mastercoin's main difference from Bitshares is that Bitshares is actually decentralized, but if it is being premined and distributed, that takes out basically the point of calling Bitshares truly decentralized.

Mastercoin lacks liquidity and publicity of being a tradable coin.   It has inefficient price discovery because those early investors were in it for the long haul.  It is also hard for Chinese to participate in. 

All of that said a premine coin sold into existence like mastercoin secured by mining may be the best of all. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote from: td services on December 01, 2013, 04:41:22 PM
Mining coins makes sense as a byproduct of a productive activity of a DAC, say providing encrypted wireless mesh networking bandwidth, or providing encrypted network storage space in a Tahoe-LAFS public cloud, but otherwise seems to be a senseless waste of resources. The mining aspect of Bitcoin didn't really make sense to me when I first learned about it (when it was at .10 USD), which kept me from being an early adopter at the time.

NXT has a proof of stake in development, but Mastercoin-Exodus and Bitshares have a much more professional organization as projects.

I've been through 4 different methods of coin distribution: Giveaway with huge amount held in reserve by originators- Ripple; Purchase during public offering with deadline, no cap limit - Mastercoin; Mining - Protoshares; and Public Offering with no deadline or capitalization limit posted - NXT. Of the 4, Mastercoin, with the simple purchase of shares with a set deadline and schedule of early adopter bonuses has been by far the best.

From this experience, I would favor methods including awarding bitshares to developers for work, IPOs with set deadlines or capitalization limits and bonuses for early participants, and additional creation and payment of bitshares such as providing useful computational work related to the purpose of the DAC, provision of storage space, or supplying network bandwidth. Dividends from the DAC may awarded according to Proof of Stake or maybe it would be preferable to just let the value of the shares appreciate to avoid creating a tax liability.

People who preferred Mastercoin were the ones who could buy in early. By giving these away directly you are setting up a system looking more identical and centralized like Mastercoin as well... When you only cater to people who have the money the coins will end up in the hands of not nearly as many people.

Can anyone find details on nxt proof of stake.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mining coins makes sense as a byproduct of a productive activity of a DAC, say providing encrypted wireless mesh networking bandwidth, or providing encrypted network storage space in a Tahoe-LAFS public cloud, but otherwise seems to be a senseless waste of resources. The mining aspect of Bitcoin didn't really make sense to me when I first learned about it (when it was at .10 USD), which kept me from being an early adopter at the time.

NXT has a proof of stake in development, but Mastercoin-Exodus and Bitshares have a much more professional organization as projects.

I've been through 4 different methods of coin distribution: Giveaway with huge amount held in reserve by originators- Ripple; Purchase during public offering with deadline, no cap limit - Mastercoin; Mining - Protoshares; and Public Offering with no deadline or capitalization limit posted - NXT. Of the 4, Mastercoin, with the simple purchase of shares with a set deadline and schedule of early adopter bonuses has been by far the best.

From this experience, I would favor methods including awarding bitshares to developers for work, IPOs with set deadlines or capitalization limits and bonuses for early participants, and additional creation and payment of bitshares such as providing useful computational work related to the purpose of the DAC, provision of storage space, or supplying network bandwidth. Dividends from the DAC may awarded according to Proof of Stake or maybe it would be preferable to just let the value of the shares appreciate to avoid creating a tax liability.

Quote from: coolspeed on December 01, 2013, 09:12:43 AM
On bitcoin system, miners contribute hash powers the DAC needs, than the DAC taxes by inflation from the share(coin) holders to purchase the hash power. All this process is a fair business.

In the case of Transactions as POS，I am worrying whether there will be a rational issue Model.

Though, I really appreciate your effort on the thinking of all the Merged Mining, vesting, proposing decentralization, etc.

May you make it.

Coins have already been issued via mining if you want to call that rational. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote from: smiley35 on December 01, 2013, 09:18:50 AM

Quote from: glitchboy on November 30, 2013, 11:22:33 AM
Have a look at Nxt: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345619.0

Did you get paid to put this here? They are only giving them out to people that "promote" the coin on other forums.

No, I didn't. I posted it there because Nxt is Proof-of-Stake-only coin.

Quote from: glitchboy on November 30, 2013, 11:22:33 AM
Have a look at Nxt: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345619.0

Did you get paid to put this here? They are only giving them out to people that "promote" the coin on other forums.

On bitcoin system, miners contribute hash powers the DAC needs, than the DAC taxes by inflation from the share(coin) holders to purchase the hash power. All this process is a fair business.

In the case of Transactions as POS，I am worrying whether there will be a rational issue Model.

Though, I really appreciate your effort on the thinking of all the Merged Mining, vesting, proposing decentralization, etc.

May you make it.

I love pos

QuoteThe Cons of Proof-of-Stake?
1) How to distribute coins?  Many options here.

This is quite a bit of a question really. Mining works to distribute coins efficiently and allows anyone (with varying amount of course) to actually create the coin free and anonymously. One of the foundations promised of Bitshares is that it will be decentralized, I am not sure why you feel the need to take the initial foundation of incentivised mining out of Bitshares rather than focusing on more logistics of the idea of Bitshares as a whole.

No


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote from: ruletheworld on November 30, 2013, 09:42:04 PM

Quote from: phoenix on November 30, 2013, 09:29:25 PM
This is a very good idea, and I think the result would be a secure and reliable network. However, you still have to figure out how to distribute the coins. My biggest question is: what blockchain do you want to try to use this for?

ProtoShares of course :)

So, are we looking at another hard fork in ProtoShares?

Quote from: phoenix on November 30, 2013, 09:29:25 PM
This is a very good idea, and I think the result would be a secure and reliable network. However, you still have to figure out how to distribute the coins. My biggest question is: what blockchain do you want to try to use this for?

ProtoShares of course :)

This is a very good idea, and I think the result would be a secure and reliable network. However, you still have to figure out how to distribute the coins. My biggest question is: what blockchain do you want to try to use this for?