There was never an expectation of receiving something in return. There was a hope that third party DAC developers would voluntarily choose to support the community by gifting shares.

Quote from: Stan on October 22, 2014, 11:31:52 PM

Quote from: trader on October 22, 2014, 10:36:53 PM

Quote from: bytemaster on October 22, 2014, 09:47:00 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 09:20:45 PM

Quote from: MeTHoDx on October 22, 2014, 09:01:34 PM
I wonder if this was one of the reasons for bytemasters recent push to allow a DAC to self fund itself. Would make an awful lot of sense through that lens.

Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

Yes... self funding DACs was heavily motivated by regulatory issues with crowd funding.

Im confused - BitShares was funded by crowd funding via AngelShares. So how does Peter Todd's tweet not apply to us?

And I also dont get what sidechains has to do with regulation.

It does seem ironic that a key person in decentralized currency would want the SEC to come in and squash competition.

Not crowd funding as it has come to be defined.
Nothing was sold.  Nothing was purchased.
Just no-strings-attached donations to fund a common vision.
And the hope that independent developers would want to voluntarily honor the donor demographic.

That vision has worked.  It's realization has arrived. 

And now we can all enjoy the fertile ground it creates for us as it continues with a life of its own.

When I recall donating it was called a "donation". Originally on forum posts they discussed having a crowd fund but someone brought up the legal risks so they made it into a donation instead.

At this point it's a donation and our BTSX was a gift. We even got gifted with BTSX from Keyhotee donations. It's not illegal as far as I know to give gifts to people who donate to worthy causes and I think the gift economy is actually a viable alternative solution.

Quote
A gift economy, gift culture or gift exchange is a mode of exchange where valuables are not sold, but rather given without an explicit agreement for immediate or future rewards.[1] In contrast to a barter economy or a market economy, social norms and custom govern gift exchange, rather than an explicit exchange of goods or services for money or some other commodity.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy

AGS and PTS were gift tokens which act as proof of interest or donation. Just like if you donate to a political campaign or charity they might keep your email on a list and share discounts with you, reward points, rebates, etc. At least that is how I would interpret it and how I would do things going forward because there are no laws for giving and receiving gifts. If such laws existed then politicians would have to be prosecuted.

Quote from: trader on October 22, 2014, 10:36:53 PM

Quote from: bytemaster on October 22, 2014, 09:47:00 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 09:20:45 PM

Quote from: MeTHoDx on October 22, 2014, 09:01:34 PM
I wonder if this was one of the reasons for bytemasters recent push to allow a DAC to self fund itself. Would make an awful lot of sense through that lens.

Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

Yes... self funding DACs was heavily motivated by regulatory issues with crowd funding.

Im confused - BitShares was funded by crowd funding via AngelShares. So how does Peter Todd's tweet not apply to us?

And I also dont get what sidechains has to do with regulation.

It does seem ironic that a key person in decentralized currency would want the SEC to come in and squash competition.

Not crowd funding as it has come to be defined.
Nothing was sold.  Nothing was purchased.
Just no-strings-attached donations to fund a common vision.
And the hope that independent developers would want to voluntarily honor the donor demographic.

That vision has worked.  It's realization has arrived. 

And now we can all enjoy the fertile ground it creates for us as it continues with a life of its own.

Quote from: MeTHoDx on October 22, 2014, 10:09:59 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 10:05:53 PM

Quote from: xeroc on October 22, 2014, 09:24:50 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 09:20:45 PM
Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

lol .. that guys just said the tech is 'equivalent'?

- DPOS
- TITAN
- 5sec block intervall
- voting on the blockchain
- short on the blockchain
- market peg
- need more?

I am in for the TECH .. not the money :)

You don't get it.. anyone can fork.. NXT has other features BTS doesn't have... counterparty has others... you never invest in technology its mostly priced in at this point but you invest in the people who bring you those technologies... and if it becomes a self-fulfilling technology like the self-funding DAC then that is an ever more important feature that once priced in might prove to be the best feature yet ... or worst if there are no takers   (why? because no regulatory bodies can take that away).

+5% Always invest in people.

Competent creative highly motivated people. Identifying them is a challenge.

Quote from: bytemaster on October 22, 2014, 09:47:00 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 09:20:45 PM

Quote from: MeTHoDx on October 22, 2014, 09:01:34 PM
I wonder if this was one of the reasons for bytemasters recent push to allow a DAC to self fund itself. Would make an awful lot of sense through that lens.

Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

Yes... self funding DACs was heavily motivated by regulatory issues with crowd funding.

Im confused - BitShares was funded by crowd funding via AngelShares. So how does Peter Todd's tweet not apply to us?

And I also dont get what sidechains has to do with regulation.

It does seem ironic that a key person in decentralized currency would want the SEC to come in and squash competition.

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 10:13:21 PM

Quote from: MeTHoDx on October 22, 2014, 10:09:59 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 10:05:53 PM

Quote from: xeroc on October 22, 2014, 09:24:50 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 09:20:45 PM
Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

lol .. that guys just said the tech is 'equivalent'?

- DPOS
- TITAN
- 5sec block intervall
- voting on the blockchain
- short on the blockchain
- market peg
- need more?

I am in for the TECH .. not the money :)

You don't get it.. anyone can fork.. NXT has other features BTS doesn't have... counterparty has others... you never invest in technology its mostly priced in at this point but you invest in the people who bring you those technologies... and if it becomes a self-fulfilling technology like the self-funding DAC then that is an ever more important feature that once priced in might prove to be the best feature yet ... or worst if there are no takers   (why? because no regulatory bodies can take that away).

+5% Always invest in people.

Tough call in an environment like this.. but if those people make the right decisions you want to roll with that.. the best thing they can do to leave a legacy is to develop things in such a way that their decisions are applied over time in a predictable manor... such as capital infusion.. it is a decision to create a technology based on voting technology building blocks that will allow for a predictable outcome to grow the system over time. In this way, the person who makes these decisions doesn't have to be around for the technology to help the system, it becomes self-fulfilling. A prediction market ensues.

Agree. By the way, what you're describing is called an egregor.

Quote from: MeTHoDx on October 22, 2014, 10:09:59 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 10:05:53 PM

Quote from: xeroc on October 22, 2014, 09:24:50 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 09:20:45 PM
Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

lol .. that guys just said the tech is 'equivalent'?

- DPOS
- TITAN
- 5sec block intervall
- voting on the blockchain
- short on the blockchain
- market peg
- need more?

I am in for the TECH .. not the money :)

You don't get it.. anyone can fork.. NXT has other features BTS doesn't have... counterparty has others... you never invest in technology its mostly priced in at this point but you invest in the people who bring you those technologies... and if it becomes a self-fulfilling technology like the self-funding DAC then that is an ever more important feature that once priced in might prove to be the best feature yet ... or worst if there are no takers   (why? because no regulatory bodies can take that away).

+5% Always invest in people.

Tough call in an environment like this.. but if those people make the right decisions you want to roll with that.. the best thing they can do to leave a legacy is to develop things in such a way that their decisions are applied over time in a predictable manor... such as capital infusion.. it is a decision to create a technology based on voting technology building blocks that will allow for a predictable outcome to grow the system over time. In this way, the person who makes these decisions doesn't have to be around for the technology to help the system, it becomes self-fulfilling. A prediction market ensues.

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 10:05:53 PM

Quote from: xeroc on October 22, 2014, 09:24:50 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 09:20:45 PM
Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

lol .. that guys just said the tech is 'equivalent'?

- DPOS
- TITAN
- 5sec block intervall
- voting on the blockchain
- short on the blockchain
- market peg
- need more?

I am in for the TECH .. not the money :)

You don't get it.. anyone can fork.. NXT has other features BTS doesn't have... counterparty has others... you never invest in technology its mostly priced in at this point but you invest in the people who bring you those technologies... and if it becomes a self-fulfilling technology like the self-funding DAC then that is an ever more important feature that once priced in might prove to be the best feature yet ... or worst if there are no takers   (why? because no regulatory bodies can take that away).

+5% Always invest in people.

Quote from: xeroc on October 22, 2014, 09:24:50 PM

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 09:20:45 PM
Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

lol .. that guys just said the tech is 'equivalent'?

- DPOS
- TITAN
- 5sec block intervall
- voting on the blockchain
- short on the blockchain
- market peg
- need more?

I am in for the TECH .. not the money :)

You don't get it.. anyone can fork.. NXT has other features BTS doesn't have... counterparty has others... you never invest in technology its mostly priced in at this point but you invest in the people who bring you those technologies... and if it becomes a self-fulfilling technology like the self-funding DAC then that is an ever more important feature that once priced in might prove to be the best feature yet ... or worst if there are no takers   (why? because no regulatory bodies can take that away).

Sorry, but Todd's tweet is hilarious.

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 09:20:45 PM

Quote from: MeTHoDx on October 22, 2014, 09:01:34 PM
I wonder if this was one of the reasons for bytemasters recent push to allow a DAC to self fund itself. Would make an awful lot of sense through that lens.

Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

Yes... self funding DACs was heavily motivated by regulatory issues with crowd funding.

Quote from: jsidhu on October 22, 2014, 09:20:45 PM
Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

lol .. that guys just said the tech is 'equivalent'?

- DPOS
- TITAN
- 5sec block intervall
- voting on the blockchain
- short on the blockchain
- market peg
- need more?

I am in for the TECH .. not the money :)

Quote from: xeroc on October 22, 2014, 09:19:33 PM

Quote from: MeTHoDx on October 22, 2014, 09:01:34 PM
I wonder if this was one of the reasons for bytemasters recent push to allow a DAC to self fund itself. Would make an awful lot of sense through that lens.

*agreed* ..

the next few days will stay exciting .. I guess ..

I already lost my sleep .. so thing to loose at that end :)

You and me both xeroc! It's exciting though.

Quote from: MeTHoDx on October 22, 2014, 09:01:34 PM
I wonder if this was one of the reasons for bytemasters recent push to allow a DAC to self fund itself. Would make an awful lot of sense through that lens.

Like I said all of the decisions are seemingly looking good in hindsight... almost prophetic. I invested in these decisions not in technology because tech is equivalent but decisions will take the right tech way beyond competition.

Quote from: MeTHoDx on October 22, 2014, 09:01:34 PM
I wonder if this was one of the reasons for bytemasters recent push to allow a DAC to self fund itself. Would make an awful lot of sense through that lens.

*agreed* ..

the next few days will stay exciting .. I guess ..

I already lost my sleep .. so thing to loose at that end :)