BUMP this, upvoting gets us as close to top of /r/bitcoin we'll get atm

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3b0ycp/the_current_system_where_every_user_is_a_network/csi36pn

Also suggest ways I can polish my posts for maximum effect..

Quote from: CLains on June 25, 2015, 05:51:46 PM

Quote from: CLains on June 25, 2015, 10:20:09 AM

Quote from: bitsharesblog.com on June 25, 2015, 09:32:53 AM
Currently the top post on Reddit, bytemaster's conversation with Satoshi almost 5 years ago...
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3b0ycp/the_current_system_where_every_user_is_a_network/

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3b0ycp/the_current_system_where_every_user_is_a_network/csi36pn

dno if this will work, shot in the dark honestly.

We had 7 points on this. Back to 2 now, and -3 to the guy defending it a few posts down.. such maximalists, even though bytemaster is right there in 2010 people still shut their ears. So sad.

I tried to help! In a "roundabout" kind of way ;)

LALALALA just in testing, all in BM's head LALALALA

Good thing BitShares is going the route of providing products and services that the market wants rather than relying on the speculation of bitcoiners.
Let the price punish the ignorant and reward the diligent.

Lol at lukejr proclaiming 'all altcoins are useless'.
Regardless of bitshares it's just factually incorrect. Trading hype-cycles is "useful".

I get the arguments as why the most established/useful CURRENCY will push out competitors - Gresham's law etc.

QuoteGresham's law is an economic principle that states: "When a government overvalues one type of money and undervalues another, the undervalued money will leave the country or disappear from circulation into hoards, while the overvalued money will flood into circulation."

But many fail to recognize that crypto will disrupt more than just currency. There's an entire financial system to be freed.
The phrase "jack of all trades but master of none" comes to mind. Bitcoin makes a great currency but something like BitShares is needed to perform other financial services.
I don't think its possible to be a perfect currency at the same time as a perfect trading-exchange.

Hence our "problem" of how to define BitShares:

Quote from: starspirit on June 23, 2015, 12:57:27 AM
The community has a schizophrenic view on BTS as a result of its history. A currency demands very little or no dilution. That's why we had many leave the community when dilution to fund development was introduced. On the other hand, developing a financial platform is a business endeavour that requires a lot of funding in return for profit. That's why CNX has had to establish externally to bitShares, to give the development team other avenues of funding the business. That separation has also upset some of the community. The basic problem is that BTS cannot be both a currency and a development business. In answer to my question on whether bitShares might consider market loans to help fund development (a business need), bytemaster in the Hangout suggested the big problem is aversion to dilution (the currency need). I understand that answer completely.

What I'm suggesting here is a way to potentially meet both needs within the bitShares system. What if we split BTS into separate decentralised currency and business vehicles? It's not fully thought out, and I'm not certain this would be a good idea yet or not - this is just conceptual and posted for feedback.

Quote from: CLains on June 25, 2015, 10:20:09 AM

Quote from: bitsharesblog.com on June 25, 2015, 09:32:53 AM
Currently the top post on Reddit, bytemaster's conversation with Satoshi almost 5 years ago...
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3b0ycp/the_current_system_where_every_user_is_a_network/

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3b0ycp/the_current_system_where_every_user_is_a_network/csi36pn

dno if this will work, shot in the dark honestly.

We had 7 points on this. Back to 2 now, and -3 to the guy defending it a few posts down.. such maximalists, even though bytemaster is right there in 2010 people still shut their ears. So sad.

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 03:01:04 PM

Quote from: bitsharesblog.com on June 25, 2015, 02:31:57 PM

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 11:22:35 AM
If Bitcointalk finds it acceptable to modify the interactions between people who helped bring this technology into being, then it is as good as worthless and has shown unequivocally that it cannot be trusted.

When this happened it was a mod error on btt, they restored it. Someone posted after bytemaster a question to bytemaster about pts or bts years after the satoshi conversation, the mod trimmed those recent comments and mistook bytemasters last comment as being recent and trimmed it too. Another mod restored it and I think locked the thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=801613.0;wap2

If that is the case then so be it.  I apologise.  I'm a bit sensitive about manipulation and wandering standards.  However, i think a lot more care needs to be taken when handling conversations that may well be interesting a thousand years hence!  Thanks for letting me know.

I'm rather sensitive about those things too Ben, which is why I raised a question about censorship in meta. It's not censorship here, just overworked devs making adjustments without making it always obvious to us what they're doing. This community is a bit "jumpy" lately with all the changes going on. Lets slow down, take a breath and extend a little grace to Vikram, fav and anyone else working behind the scenes to manage this forum.

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 03:01:04 PM

Quote from: bitsharesblog.com on June 25, 2015, 02:31:57 PM

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 11:22:35 AM
If Bitcointalk finds it acceptable to modify the interactions between people who helped bring this technology into being, then it is as good as worthless and has shown unequivocally that it cannot be trusted.

When this happened it was a mod error on btt, they restored it. Someone posted after bytemaster a question to bytemaster about pts or bts years after the satoshi conversation, the mod trimmed those recent comments and mistook bytemasters last comment as being recent and trimmed it too. Another mod restored it and I think locked the thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=801613.0;wap2

If that is the case then so be it.  I apologise.  I'm a bit sensitive about manipulation and wandering standards.  However, i think a lot more care needs to be taken when handling conversations that may well be interesting a thousand years hence!  Thanks for letting me know.

Your welcome, I had a similar reaction when it first happened (forum handle currencydebt on btt)

Quote from: bitsharesblog.com on June 25, 2015, 02:31:57 PM

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 11:22:35 AM
If Bitcointalk finds it acceptable to modify the interactions between people who helped bring this technology into being, then it is as good as worthless and has shown unequivocally that it cannot be trusted.

When this happened it was a mod error on btt, they restored it. Someone posted after bytemaster a question to bytemaster about pts or bts years after the satoshi conversation, the mod trimmed those recent comments and mistook bytemasters last comment as being recent and trimmed it too. Another mod restored it and I think locked the thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=801613.0;wap2

If that is the case then so be it.  I apologise.  I'm a bit sensitive about manipulation and wandering standards.  However, i think a lot more care needs to be taken when handling conversations that may well be interesting a thousand years hence!  Thanks for letting me know.

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 11:22:35 AM
If Bitcointalk finds it acceptable to modify the interactions between people who helped bring this technology into being, then it is as good as worthless and has shown unequivocally that it cannot be trusted.

When this happened it was a mod error on btt, they restored it. Someone posted after bytemaster a question to bytemaster about pts or bts years after the satoshi conversation, the mod trimmed those recent comments and mistook bytemasters last comment as being recent and trimmed it too. Another mod restored it and I think locked the thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=801613.0;wap2

Quote from: Tuck Fheman on June 25, 2015, 12:23:05 PM

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 11:41:38 AM

Quote from: bitmeat on June 25, 2015, 11:30:33 AM

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 11:22:35 AM
If Bitcointalk finds it acceptable to modify the interactions between people who helped bring this technology into being, then it is as good as worthless and has shown unequivocally that it cannot be trusted.

Decentralized Forums, Where Art Thou?

Right on

http://qora.co.in/?blog ... closest there is right now.

*shrug* Needs to have a sexy version.

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 11:41:38 AM

Quote from: bitmeat on June 25, 2015, 11:30:33 AM

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 11:22:35 AM
If Bitcointalk finds it acceptable to modify the interactions between people who helped bring this technology into being, then it is as good as worthless and has shown unequivocally that it cannot be trusted.

Decentralized Forums, Where Art Thou?

Right on

http://qora.co.in/?blog ... closest there is right now.

Quote from: bitmeat on June 25, 2015, 11:30:33 AM

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 11:22:35 AM
If Bitcointalk finds it acceptable to modify the interactions between people who helped bring this technology into being, then it is as good as worthless and has shown unequivocally that it cannot be trusted.

Decentralized Forums, Where Art Thou?

Right on

Quote from: Ben Mason on June 25, 2015, 11:22:35 AM
If Bitcointalk finds it acceptable to modify the interactions between people who helped bring this technology into being, then it is as good as worthless and has shown unequivocally that it cannot be trusted.

Decentralized Forums, Where Art Thou?

If Bitcointalk finds it acceptable to modify the interactions between people who helped bring this technology into being, then it is as good as worthless and has shown unequivocally that it cannot be trusted.

Quote from: Stan on September 29, 2014, 06:30:47 PM

Quote from: donkeypong on September 29, 2014, 05:58:30 PM

Quote from: Thom on September 29, 2014, 04:26:01 PM

Quote from: luckybit on September 29, 2014, 06:41:22 AM

Quote from: edilliam on September 28, 2014, 10:41:35 PM
If people are trying to censor and hide stuff like this, can we turn it around and actually get it more exposure à la Streisand effect?

The fact that they are willing to use tactics like censorship and other underhanded political machinations, it leads me to believe that perhaps a lot of people have a lot of money/power at stake and Bytemaster could be interfering with that.

I don't know who has it out for Bytemaster or who Bytemaster may have pissed off. I'm someone who looks squarely at the technology and I admire what Bytemaster has been able to accomplish with Bitshares X. Some of the solutions are quite novel and even the people who might not like Bitshares or Bytemaster will probably copy these solutions.

The code should speak for itself. There shouldn't be any reason to start trying to erase history but the fact that Bitcointalk is willing and capable of doing that means the same could happen on this forum. History can be changed with a few keystrokes.

+5% +5% +5%

Is there any doubt what bitshares tech will accomplish? I have none, and what you suggest above seems inevitable, in which case bytemaster will come under serious attack if he hasn't already. I sure hope I³ has given this ample thought and have plans in place to deal with this when it happens.

Could this "censorship" be the start? It doesn't look like it to me based on what MeTHoDx has found, but that is far from an exhaustive investigation. If this is the start of some effort the erode bytemaster's rep or alter his historical role with satoshi it will take more evidence to convince me firmly either way, but it "looks" like it was just a stupid moderator.

I like the fact that he's speaking at the Inside Bitcoins conference. And that he's relating all of BitShares' development as a progression of the work that Bitcoin started. There is no point in antagonizing people when we can ask them to join us rather than fight. But at some point, you are right; the forces behind Bitcoin (and even those against it...large companies and governments) will fix BitShares firmly in their crosshairs. Hopefully, we're up and running to the point of steady growth and inevitability by then, since there is nothing else out there that's even close to BitShares in terms of technology, market presence, or acumen. Yet all of us must remain peacefully vigilant to defend against attacks and continue encouraging others to join/try it rather than fight it.

I don't think it's anything personal.  It's just business. It's not an argument that can even be won. The buggy whip industry did not want to see the emergence of horseless carriages.  Miners don't want to see the demise of mining.

:)

It is personal Stan!  I find it bl00dy offensive to have important history censored.  Ignorance is no excuse whatsoever.  We should expect standards that are good for everyone (all crypto) to be stringently adhered to.  There will always be some short-sighted excuse for corruption and that is exactly what we are attempting to eliminate.

Quote from: bitsharesblog.com on June 25, 2015, 09:32:53 AM
Currently the top post on Reddit, bytemaster's conversation with Satoshi almost 5 years ago...
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3b0ycp/the_current_system_where_every_user_is_a_network/

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3b0ycp/the_current_system_where_every_user_is_a_network/csi36pn

dno if this will work, shot in the dark honestly.

Currently the top post on Reddit, bytemaster's conversation with Satoshi almost 5 years ago...
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3b0ycp/the_current_system_where_every_user_is_a_network/