Quote from: Empirical1.2 on December 12, 2015, 01:34:46 AM

Quote from: bytemaster on December 12, 2015, 01:02:37 AM
In my humble opinion, BTS is so much more than Smart Coins at this point in time.   We shouldn't let that one feature shape our whole worldview.

Whether it's more liquid Smartcoins or an even more awesome, popular sellable product/UIA,  the ability to transfer them privately will surely increase potential demand for them and as a result increase the value of BTS shares.

However without sellable product, stealth transfers won't necessarily increase the value of BTS unless the belief is that BTS is currently undervalued because potential shareholders are reluctant to buy this amazingly undervalued company without privacy.

So I would think focusing on SmartCoin or  other 'better than Smartcoin' product would ideally precede Stealth, not critical though.

Although I am sympathetic to this position, I do believe that privacy is a fundamentally important feature. That implementing it should have already been well underway is irrelevant here.

The same argument could have been made for 100K TPS, and in fact CNX finally did realize a slower TPS, far less than 100K TPS, is perfectly acceptable and yet exceeds BitShares 1.0 performance by a large margin, thus a significant improvement.

The point is it was an investment in infrastructure anticipating future adoption of BitShares. Who would have signed up for 100K TPS back in the 1.0 era over wallet improvements and stability? I know I wouldn't have, yet BM saw the value in a new architecture that not only provides 100K+ TPS but so many more benefits as well.

It's not difficult to see how much of a barrier it is to those with lots of wealth to go public and place a significant portion of that wealth on the BitShares blockchain for all to see, scrutinize, target and try to get a chunk of. I know the concept of privacy it counter to the mainstream norm these days, even in this community, but it is a very important foundational principle to this ecosystem and to preserve and strengthen freedom.

I'll admit I don't know what the best approach is to prioritize improvements and implement new features to give BitShares the most optimal chance for growth and adoption. I can get so focused on a narrow view of things at times and in that tunnel vision choices seem easier. And of course trade-offs are always easier in retrospect. What's obvious to Stan & Dan may not be obvious to many of us. Historical judgements and choices made here fuel my skepticism and cloud my perspective of the future.

However, I gotta say the approach described by the OP is one I believe will help qualify what to focus on based on the hard empirical evidence of what people are willing to pay for. I like this very much. But I am still concerned we're trying to sprint to the finish line and overlooking other important, less exciting factors that directly impact adoption, especially by developers, such as quality, detailed documentation, tutorials and API "how to" examples. I did like what BM said here:

Quote
The assumption for all features is that a working reference GUI will be provided to make the features accessible.  Each feature will be fully documented with a detailed design complete with UI wireframes prior to Cryptonomex taking any money.  We want to ensure that the community knows what they are bidding on and to maximize the price we can get for each feature.   Bidding can start early (prior to detailed documentation), and users can cancel their bids if they change their minds prior to us locking them in.

The context sounds like he feels there's more of an incentive to be more thorough and rigorous regarding docs and UI / UX prototyping b/c it is tied to maximizing the profit from his work. It improves quality, and quality sells better. I think he is right on the money.

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 01:02:15 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:42:55 AM

Quote from: bytemaster on December 12, 2015, 12:27:48 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:17:16 AM

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 12:14:16 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:11:12 AM
Nice.

but then again why is this voting... for only after "the stealth non-sense is implemented"?


0. Stealth
1. Bond Market (Poloniex Style Lending)
2. Prediction Market (Auger Style)
3. Ethereum (or something similar) VM integration
4. Liquidity Incentivisation
5. Gambling Systems

Just calling it "nonsense" doesn't make it so. Please present an argument.

Well it is as sensible as the rest of them.
Why is it more sensible (deserves special treatment, in your mind)?

It deserves special treatment because @onceuponatime has already been grandfathered in.  I don't want to take the deal he earned and auction off his profits.  Also, he was planing to pay in fiat which is much appreciated.  Furthermore, I think his plan is further developed than some of the others.   

Unfortunately this is my take on the whole issue as well....the main difference being someone paying in cash....seeing said cash clouds any other reasonable judgment.

The other unfortunate fact is even with his great generosity , love for the project and willingness to take a huge risk for BTS .... he is sadly lacking the ability [actually stubbornly refusing to do so] to properly judge what is best of his beloved (his and mine) project.

It is true that I lack many of the skills that you and others might have in this modern age and on this Forum. This is because I am probably much older than you and did my schooling before there were computers. There weren't even calculators when I went to school!

That doesn't mean that I lack common sense or discernment and discrimination. I'm sure that I have spent more time living on the streets than either you or even Martin 38PTSwarrior. I have traveled and lived in dozens of countries. I have degrees in Business Management and Economics and have worked (before the smell got too bad) as a special investigator for a Federal Government. I have slept under bridges and I have slept in palaces.

I think that I am as good a judge of character as anyone on this Forum. And I invest in people.

Perhaps your famous and cutting edge cynicism could be enhanced by a dash of Humility?

+5%.  As I've told my son, it's nice to be smart...but character trumps intellect IMHO.

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 02:00:22 AM

Quote from: Stan on December 12, 2015, 01:55:19 AM

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 01:02:15 AM
...This is because I am probably much older than you and did my schooling before there were computers. There weren't even calculators when I went to school!

Me too.  (Well, our school mainframe did have 8 kilobytes of core memory.)  The HP-45 scientific calculator (with Reverse Polish Notation) first came out when I was a Sophomore EE student.   

While others were sniffing glue, I was sniffing that calculator. 
I still put it into the microwave once in a while for a few seconds, just to relive that "new calculator smell".
Better than "new car smell" IMHO.

Kind of sad when in 2015, 'the millions of features' actually boils down to 'the feature for me (and all of us)" is the same calculator of 1981, as the  Grandfathered :) option...

:(

God, Tony! You are one of the people that I would invest in!  (I actually bought some GreenPoints although I did sell them again when you jumped ship - I'm not stupid).

Quote from: Stan on December 12, 2015, 01:55:19 AM

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 01:02:15 AM
...This is because I am probably much older than you and did my schooling before there were computers. There weren't even calculators when I went to school!

Me too.  (Well, our school mainframe did have 8 kilobytes of core memory.)  The HP-45 scientific calculator (with Reverse Polish Notation) first came out when I was a Sophomore EE student.   

While others were sniffing glue, I was sniffing that calculator. 
I still put it into the microwave once in a while for a few seconds, just to relive that "new calculator smell".
Better than "new car smell" IMHO.

Kind of sad when in 2015, 'the millions of features' actually boils down to 'the feature for me (and all of us)" is the same calculator of 1981, as the  Grandfathered :) option...

:(

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 01:02:15 AM
...This is because I am probably much older than you and did my schooling before there were computers. There weren't even calculators when I went to school!

Me too.  (Well, our school mainframe did have 8 kilobytes of core memory.)  The HP-45 scientific calculator (with Reverse Polish Notation) first came out when I was a Sophomore EE student.   

While others were sniffing glue, I was sniffing that calculator. 
I still put it into the microwave once in a while for a few seconds, just to relive that "new calculator smell".
Better than "new car smell" IMHO.

Quote from: Thom on December 12, 2015, 01:26:55 AM
Peaches == Features

Movin' to the country,
Gonna get a lot of features
Features come from a can
They were put there by Dan
On a farm far from town
If I had my little way
I'd get more features every day

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 01:02:15 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:42:55 AM

Quote from: bytemaster on December 12, 2015, 12:27:48 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:17:16 AM

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 12:14:16 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:11:12 AM
Nice.

but then again why is this voting... for only after "the stealth non-sense is implemented"?


0. Stealth
1. Bond Market (Poloniex Style Lending)
2. Prediction Market (Auger Style)
3. Ethereum (or something similar) VM integration
4. Liquidity Incentivisation
5. Gambling Systems

Just calling it "nonsense" doesn't make it so. Please present an argument.

Well it is as sensible as the rest of them.
Why is it more sensible (deserves special treatment, in your mind)?

It deserves special treatment because @onceuponatime has already been grandfathered in.  I don't want to take the deal he earned and auction off his profits.  Also, he was planing to pay in fiat which is much appreciated.  Furthermore, I think his plan is further developed than some of the others.   

Unfortunately this is my take on the whole issue as well....the main difference being someone paying in cash....seeing said cash clouds any other reasonable judgment.

The other unfortunate fact is even with his great generosity , love for the project and willingness to take a huge risk for BTS .... he is sadly lacking the ability [actually stubbornly refusing to do so] to properly judge what is best of his beloved (his and mine) project.

It is true that I lack many of the skills that you and others might have in this modern age and on this Forum. This is because I am probably much older than you and did my schooling before there were computers. There weren't even calculators when I went to school!

That doesn't mean that I lack common sense or discernment and discrimination. I'm sure that I have spent more time living on the streets than either you or even Martin 38PTSwarrior. I have traveled and lived in dozens of countries. I have degrees in Business Management and Economics and have worked (before the smell got too bad) as a special investigator for a Federal Government. I have slept under bridges and I have slept in palaces.

I think that I am as good a judge of character as anyone on this Forum. And I invest in people.

Perhaps your famous and cutting edge cynicism could be enhanced by a dash of Humility?

apparently it is your time to dance to the sound of the music you ordered.... enjoy

PS
In the mean time I will highly appreciate if not being fed the  crap of the supposed 'choice' of a million features, when there is no choice but the predetermined one....

Quote from: bytemaster on December 12, 2015, 01:02:37 AM
In my humble opinion, BTS is so much more than Smart Coins at this point in time.   We shouldn't let that one feature shape our whole worldview.

Whether it's more liquid Smartcoins or an even more awesome, popular sellable product/UIA,  the ability to transfer them privately will surely increase potential demand for them and as a result increase the value of BTS shares.

However without sellable product, stealth transfers won't necessarily increase the value of BTS unless the belief is that BTS is currently undervalued because potential shareholders are reluctant to buy this amazingly undervalued company without privacy.

So I would think focusing on SmartCoin or  other 'better than Smartcoin' product would ideally precede Stealth, not critical though.

Quote from: Xeldal on December 11, 2015, 11:23:53 PM
Millions of features, features for me
Millions of features, features for fees

Look out!

8)

Peaches == Features

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sW_shbshUp4

In my humble opinion, BTS is so much more than Smart Coins at this point in time.   We shouldn't let that one feature shape our whole worldview.

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:42:55 AM

Quote from: bytemaster on December 12, 2015, 12:27:48 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:17:16 AM

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 12:14:16 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:11:12 AM
Nice.

but then again why is this voting... for only after "the stealth non-sense is implemented"?


0. Stealth
1. Bond Market (Poloniex Style Lending)
2. Prediction Market (Auger Style)
3. Ethereum (or something similar) VM integration
4. Liquidity Incentivisation
5. Gambling Systems

Just calling it "nonsense" doesn't make it so. Please present an argument.

Well it is as sensible as the rest of them.
Why is it more sensible (deserves special treatment, in your mind)?

It deserves special treatment because @onceuponatime has already been grandfathered in.  I don't want to take the deal he earned and auction off his profits.  Also, he was planing to pay in fiat which is much appreciated.  Furthermore, I think his plan is further developed than some of the others.   

Unfortunately this is my take on the whole issue as well....the main difference being someone paying in cash....seeing said cash clouds any other reasonable judgment.

The other unfortunate fact is even with his great generosity , love for the project and willingness to take a huge risk for BTS .... he is sadly lacking the ability [actually stubbornly refusing to do so] to properly judge what is best of his beloved (his and mine) project.

It is true that I lack many of the skills that you and others might have in this modern age and on this Forum. This is because I am probably much older than you and did my schooling before there were computers. There weren't even calculators when I went to school!

That doesn't mean that I lack common sense or discernment and discrimination. I'm sure that I have spent more time living on the streets than either you or even Martin 38PTSwarrior. I have traveled and lived in dozens of countries. I have degrees in Business Management and Economics and have worked (before the smell got too bad) as a special investigator for a Federal Government. I have slept under bridges and I have slept in palaces.

I think that I am as good a judge of character as anyone on this Forum. And I invest in people.

Perhaps your famous and cutting edge cynicism could be enhanced by a dash of Humility?

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:42:55 AM

Quote from: bytemaster on December 12, 2015, 12:27:48 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:17:16 AM

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 12:14:16 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:11:12 AM
Nice.

but then again why is this voting... for only after "the stealth non-sense is implemented"?


0. Stealth
1. Bond Market (Poloniex Style Lending)
2. Prediction Market (Auger Style)
3. Ethereum (or something similar) VM integration
4. Liquidity Incentivisation
5. Gambling Systems

Just calling it "nonsense" doesn't make it so. Please present an argument.

Well it is as sensible as the rest of them.
Why is it more sensible (deserves special treatment, in your mind)?

It deserves special treatment because @onceuponatime has already been grandfathered in.  I don't want to take the deal he earned and auction off his profits.  Also, he was planing to pay in fiat which is much appreciated.  Furthermore, I think his plan is further developed than some of the others.   

Unfortunately this is my take on the whole issue as well....the main difference being someone paying in cash....seeing said cash clouds any other reasonable judgment.

The other unfortunate fact is even with his great generosity , love for the project and willingness to take a huge risk for BTS .... he is sadly lacking the ability [actually stubbornly refusing to do so] to properly judge what is best of his beloved (his and mine) project.

There won't be a lot more demand for BTS shares/transfers whether they have Stealth or not, until investors see that BTS can offer a competitive BitAsset imo. So yes doing Stealth first doesn't make a lot of sense to me but if the money is on the table I don't blame them.

I created a STEALTH asset to help gauge demand and give feedback / pricing information to the community.   

Obviously before a feature can be implemented the following factors must align:

1. It must be approved by shareholders
2. It must have sufficient liquidity to cover the cost of development
3. It must be the most profitable for us (requiring us to sell the smallest fraction of the total asset supply to cover our costs as possible)

Each FBA is like a mini company, Cryptonomex (or other developers) are like the founders of a startup looking to raise capital.  They want to give away as little equity in their work as possible. 

Quote from: bytemaster on December 12, 2015, 12:27:48 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:17:16 AM

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 12:14:16 AM

Quote from: tonyk on December 12, 2015, 12:11:12 AM
Nice.

but then again why is this voting... for only after "the stealth non-sense is implemented"?


0. Stealth
1. Bond Market (Poloniex Style Lending)
2. Prediction Market (Auger Style)
3. Ethereum (or something similar) VM integration
4. Liquidity Incentivisation
5. Gambling Systems

Just calling it "nonsense" doesn't make it so. Please present an argument.

Well it is as sensible as the rest of them.
Why is it more sensible (deserves special treatment, in your mind)?

It deserves special treatment because @onceuponatime has already been grandfathered in.  I don't want to take the deal he earned and auction off his profits.  Also, he was planing to pay in fiat which is much appreciated.  Furthermore, I think his plan is further developed than some of the others.   

Unfortunately this is my take on the whole issue as well....the main difference being someone paying in cash....seeing said cash clouds any other reasonable judgment.

The other unfortunate fact is even with his great generosity , love for the project and willingness to take a huge risk for BTS .... he is sadly lacking the ability [actually stubbornly refusing to do so] to properly judge what is best of his beloved (his and mine) project.

Quote from: onceuponatime on December 12, 2015, 12:05:39 AM

Quote from: Vizzini on December 11, 2015, 11:59:00 PM
So if Mr. Duke has 100,000 BTS to wager and Mr. Valentine has 100 BTS to wager, it is the Mr. Dukes of the world who will control the agenda. This sounds like pay to play. Am I mistaken?

Mr Valentine sounds like a lover and should have no problem getting together a group of his most many intimate friends to play any game they can think of.

Just examples of rich and poor. I took the names from the iconic movie Trading Places.

For this set of proposals, I understand how the market can function to help make these choices, since you are right that these would be the same people paying for it.

But don't get any ideas about this being a voting model for BitShares, because it is a piss poor idea to charge someone to vote and to reward those who have the most to wager.