Quote from: TravelsAsia on November 24, 2015, 05:20:22 AM

Quote from: donkeypong on November 24, 2015, 05:15:19 AM

Quote from: roadscape on November 24, 2015, 12:59:58 AM

Quote from: tonyk on November 24, 2015, 12:45:53 AM
Actually I am kind of a fan of a step less than that [It very well be my conservative thinking; or inability to see things as liberal as most here]

But free to everything BTS related should have been enough. I really do not want other chains (MUSE, PLAY, player X) getting the stuff that BTS holders paid for, for free.

If you want it - make yourself a DAPP on BTS, or pay to CNX or whoever developed that particular feature. The idea it to generally prevent even the thought of milk-cowing BTS, passing anybody's mind.


Anyway, definitely better than the current state, in my view.

+5%

Yes, well done.. definitely better.. BUT, while BTS is still trying to figure out it's business model, maybe we should be a little more conservative. I'm concerned about fragmentation of the network effect, and to some extent leeching, as tonyk mentioned.

Just revive the Social Consensus. Why am I the only poster who brings that up anymore? Look back over the last six months on this forum and I'll bet the last six posts on the Social Consensus have all been mine. Between licensing and stealing something for free lies the community's expectation that anyone using this technology will sharedrop a small percentage. If they don't, we blackball them rather than inviting them to Beyond Bitcoin. If they do honor the Social Consensus, then they have the full weight of this community behind their product. I think it's a great notion and I believe we should expect that of everyone using this technology (the development of which this community has supported technologically, financially, and morally).

+5% Makes sense.

this is what ive alwayd thought too...the community (we) should build many things that nee chains will want to be part of because they know it would be extremely valuable to get added to our infrastructure either A) extremely cheaply or B) free...as long as social consensus is met.

as for blackballing them...we dont need to even worry about that. All we need to do is ignore the ones that dont.

BTS and Eth should not be compared since they have very different features. However if BTS could have a blockchain code runner (execution environment) like Eth it would definitely make BTS the best overall platform.

Hey twitter, here are the results of your tips...

• bytemaster: has been credited 40 OPENSESAME

#sharebits "bytemaster" 40 OPENSESAME

Quote from: Riverhead on November 24, 2015, 11:17:08 AM

This is great news and certainly a step in the right direction both from an ideological and business perspective.

One thing to keep in mind about "people using what we paid for": How much have we paid for the c++ compilers, the BOOST licenses, the SSL libraries, etc. etc. etc. that is the core of BTS?

The space needs more building blocks.

Yes.. innovation of today is happening on layers from yesterday. If we ever hope to become one of those layers we need to be open about it.

This is great news and certainly a step in the right direction both from an ideological and business perspective.

One thing to keep in mind about "people using what we paid for": How much have we paid for the c++ compilers, the BOOST licenses, the SSL libraries, etc. etc. etc. that is the core of BTS?

The space needs more building blocks.

Quote from: jtme on November 24, 2015, 10:31:18 AM
Muse like chains do not need our userbase or expertise. They hire cnx, get users on peertracks, bitusd muse will get better liquidy .....

Yes .. but only because there is ONE startup running on top of MUSE ..
Imagine only one business in the banking, exchange and financing business to join the BitShares network!

I can tell you this:
   OpenLedger is just the beginning!

Quote from: xeroc on November 24, 2015, 09:37:18 AM

Quote from: Akado on November 24, 2015, 09:13:14 AM
I'm skeptical of this. I also dont want other chains to get for free what BTS
shareholders paid for. They can get them, as long as they pay too.

Couldn't we create some kind of consensus where if a chain wants certain
feature, has to pay something like 25% of it's original price by buying that
amount of BTS at the time and burning it or something?

and like it was mantioned, what keeps other projects from taking all we've paid
for and do it on a sidechain or whatever? a popular enough project like
ethereum and it's btc version could pull that off while leaving BTS in the dust
right? Even if their chains are not as optimized as ours, they still win the
popularity contest

Isn't that what the social consensus is doing for us? If a chain wants to have
our "support" and user base, they need to sharedrop their shares onto BTS
holders?

It all comes down to USER BASE! That's why whatsapp is worth $20B and we should
work as hard as possible to have the user base grow in our own chain.

Muse like chains do not need our userbase or expertise. They hire cnx, get users on peertracks, bitusd muse will get better liquidy .....

Quote from: xeroc on November 24, 2015, 09:37:18 AM

Quote from: Akado on November 24, 2015, 09:13:14 AM
I'm skeptical of this. I also dont want other chains to get for free what BTS
shareholders paid for. They can get them, as long as they pay too.

Couldn't we create some kind of consensus where if a chain wants certain
feature, has to pay something like 25% of it's original price by buying that
amount of BTS at the time and burning it or something?

and like it was mantioned, what keeps other projects from taking all we've paid
for and do it on a sidechain or whatever? a popular enough project like
ethereum and it's btc version could pull that off while leaving BTS in the dust
right? Even if their chains are not as optimized as ours, they still win the
popularity contest

Isn't that what the social consensus is doing for us? If a chain wants to have
our "support" and user base, they need to sharedrop their shares onto BTS
holders?

It all comes down to USER BASE! That's why whatsapp is worth $20B and we should
work as hard as possible to have the user base grow in our own chain.

Exactly, Ethereum and Bitcoin don't need our userbase. Some platform done on top of those has no need for us. We're only a burden. This, if it even makes sense for them to take out features, that were done with graphene. I dont know up to what point it would make sense to take them into a ethereum and bitcoin chain since chains have different proprieties, but still, if they are able to do it, there will be no social consensus because our userbase is only a burden for them.

But I agree with you that we should make our userbase grow as much as possible as to change the outcome in case that situation happens.

Quote from: Akado on November 24, 2015, 09:13:14 AM
I'm skeptical of this. I also dont want other chains to get for free what BTS
shareholders paid for. They can get them, as long as they pay too.

Couldn't we create some kind of consensus where if a chain wants certain
feature, has to pay something like 25% of it's original price by buying that
amount of BTS at the time and burning it or something?

and like it was mantioned, what keeps other projects from taking all we've paid
for and do it on a sidechain or whatever? a popular enough project like
ethereum and it's btc version could pull that off while leaving BTS in the dust
right? Even if their chains are not as optimized as ours, they still win the
popularity contest

Isn't that what the social consensus is doing for us? If a chain wants to have
our "support" and user base, they need to sharedrop their shares onto BTS
holders?

It all comes down to USER BASE! That's why whatsapp is worth $20B and we should
work as hard as possible to have the user base grow in our own chain.

Hey iHashFury, here are the results of your tips...

• bytemaster: has been credited 11 PERKS

Sensible and profitable move .
With more Graphene blockchains in use, there is more potential  work for the experts - Cryptonomex.

BitShares also benefits by association in expertise, promotion and profit.  +5%

#sharebits "bytemaster" 11 PERKS

Quote from: tonyk on November 24, 2015, 12:45:53 AM
Actually I am kind of a fan of a step less than that [It very well be my conservative thinking; or inability to see things as liberal as most here]

But free to everything BTS related should have been enough. I really do not want other chains (MUSE, PLAY, player X) getting the stuff that BTS holders paid for, for free.

If you want it - make yourself a DAPP on BTS, or pay to CNX or whoever developed that particular feature. The idea it to generally prevent even the thought of milk-cowing BTS, passing through anybody's mind.


Anyway, definitely better than the current state, in my view.

I'm skeptical of this. I also dont want other chains to get for free what BTS shareholders paid for. They can get them, as long as they pay too.

Couldn't we create some kind of consensus where if a chain wants certain feature, has to pay something like 25% of it's original price by buying that amount of BTS at the time and burning it or something?

and like it was mantioned, what keeps other projects from taking all we've paid for and do it on a sidechain or whatever? a popular enough project like ethereum and it's btc version could pull that off while leaving BTS in the dust right? Even if their chains are not as optimized as ours, they still win the popularity contest

This is GREAT ..
When can we expect to see the new license in the bitshares-2-ui repository?

Quote from: BunkerChain Labs on November 24, 2015, 06:18:17 AM

That's pretty much what I was saying.. the power we have now though is like a 10 lumen LED :) ... sure it's power.. but when we are up to 300k lumen floods.. then its noticeable... and powerful.

I would caution the expect and demanding though.. that could very quickly come across the wrong way. The whole idea of the social consensus was just that.. social.. demanding it is not very social.. neither is expecting. We can very fairly offer it.. and if the offering is accepted willingly and with joy.. then great. I am say though that they will look at it just like I said already and see that they are the losers in that deal and will not be so excited about it. Those that don't simply don't get our unique brand of support. I just hope what follows that doesn't lead to others not even wanting to engage us.

Yes, we can't be assholes about pushing it, like I've been known to be. But the expectation for social consensus needs to be there or else we are just rolling over dead. If we have people in our community who can do de-bugging, language translation, graphic design, crowd-funding, marketing, etc. (some examples), then maybe the sharedrop does not seem like a one-way handout to a group of entitled assholes who spend too much time posting on forums. Instead, it is a two-way street where we have a group of skilled and motivated foot soldiers ready to help your product succeed. You share with us, we share with you.