VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0

[nomoreheroes7]

... but trust me it may beat BTSX to the moon.

See that's the part that worries an investor such as myself. I have a small AGS donation, but a very large stake in BTSX. Now suddenly my BTSX stake has competition with itself. Should I plan to sell my stake and get more into VOTEs when they start trading? Tough to determine the most profitable route, especially when the details are still under wraps... 

[CLains]

My job is to lead not code.

Now that's what I am looking for.

[Stan]

If everyone thinks you're nuts you must be doing something right.

"If we weren't all crazy
we would go insane."

        -- Jimmy Buffet

[bytemaster]

If everyone thinks you're nuts you must be doing something right.

Then NuBits is on to something?

[arhag]

So bytemaster, when are you planning on letting us in on the details of this brilliant new way of doing the Voting DAC? The teasing is so painful.

I'm assuming the self-funding for the project will come through dilution of Vote shares? (something that could have been done with BTSX as well if we weren't so foolish to promise a 2 billion BTSX hard cap)

I'm still finding the fact that this could have larger (or even comparable) market cap than BTSX very hard to believe, but I guess I will have to wait for the details. I assume the market cap comes from the demand for BitUSD (I am surprised the only BitAsset planned for that chain is BitUSD). Not sure where the demand for BitUSD comes from though? I don't see how holding more BitUSD would (or even should) give one more voting power in elections. I'm assuming and hoping the Voting DAC is still going to be designed with the capability of supporting traditional elections where each unique human has one vote.

The other thing I want to mention (which may very well not be relevant at all) is that if the DAC's purpose has changed to not just be about voting but also to act as a decentralized bank and exchange AND means of paying for goods/services in the real world (essentially making BitShares X obsolete), then in my opinion it is only fair for that DAC to snapshot off of BTSX instead of PTS/AGS. But if its purpose truly is only for voting and BitShares X is the DAC meant for a store of value and to hold the BitCurrencies that the world standardizes around to pay for goods/services in the physical world, then the current snapshot of Voting DAC is fair.

[Riverhead]

If everyone thinks you're nuts you must be doing something right.

[bytemaster]

It seems to me that there is a fair amount of misplaced concern in this thread that BTSX is getting pushed to the back burner. If you look at the commit history for the toolkit you'll notice there is a lot of work being pushed daily to fix stability issues: https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/commits/develop

The brilliance here is that this is bolstering ALL DACs! I think the recent price drop has some people in panic mode. Take a deep breath and BUY / HODL imo!

Oh, and as for the recent VOTE push... I would look at the latest FMV blog post:

http://followmyvote.com/follow-my-vote-joins-cavo/

Coupled with the bill that prompted the formation of CAVO:

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB360

Perhaps the newfound "push" is pursuant of a huge opportunity for BitVote (and democratic elections in the U.S. at large)? Perhaps this opportunity is constrained by time and a reorganization of some priorities are in order? Parallel computing is much faster and more efficient than single core after all. I for one trust Dan's task scheduling algorithm.

It would seem to me that a state sponsored election on BitVote is very much in the cards (pending the necessary functionality is implemented to demo to the state of California).

Ding Ding Ding Ding... we have a winner. 

[Stan]

  I trust it.  there's bound to be some bumps along the way, but I think BM and friends have thought out most of the possibilities.  There's bound to be continued loss of value in btsX while it's development is left idle however. 

Nobody said anything about leaving it idle.
Nobody said anything about diverting resources.
The Eastern and Western Marketing Teams are now finalizing their Launch Facilities.
Their planned loud, earth shattering kaboom they have been promising is still coming.
Meanwhile our advanced concepts team continues to do what it does best:
 work on advanced concepts.
We need to keep the innovation pipeline filled.
Bytemaster is our pipeline filler.
(And you get to see what's entering that pipeline as soon as it happens!)
Sweat not.

[xh3]

   I trust it.  there's bound to be some bumps along the way, but I think BM and friends have thought out most of the possibilities.  There's bound to be continued loss of value in btsX while it's development is left idle however. 

[gamey]

New DACs give additional funding to the ecosystem.  People who have been here from earlier days may not have as much of an interest in BTSX as people new.  IMO Voting DAC is basically the same as the KeyID DAC, so there will be even more value in terms of potential dev money.

I'm much happier seeing I3/whoever diversify outside BitsharesX.  To not lay groundwork elsewhere would be foolish.   We get better strategic positioning via first mover type stuff.  We get more funding to help the ecosystem as a whole.  We benefit.

There is no first mover advantage without a userbase. Having an empty DAC will give no advantage at all. An established network with active users will come along and take whatever innovations they can for their own blockchain to use. Also how long do you think it will be possible to get funding out of the same small group of people?

There is no first mover advantage without a userbase?  That is how it works ?  So if someone else created a far superior Namecoin without any users, they wouldn't have an advantage ?    KeyID/DNS doesn't even necessarily overlap much with the people who are interested in BTSX.

People will use the products due to value they perceive in using it. Your account is quite new so I assume you see everything in BTSX tinted glasses.  Ok... I get it.

Metcalfes law. Namecoin is currently 100% useless precisely because no one uses it. OB might change that, but a better version of Namecoin coming along would not be able to piggyback off that in any way, and would thus be as useless as Namecoin currently is.

The only way to attract new users en masse "out of nowhere" is through monetary incentive, and that is why currently BTSX IS bitshares, as it is the only bitshares DAC with the potential to attract users. Once btsx gains a network, then the other DACs might actually benefit from it and the greater ecosystem can be established and grow. Without btsx growth, there will be nothing.

I've heard people suggest JDS might have a very high valuation.  So I don't think your premise is true. 

I think I3 would be in a far worse position if they just let a better Namecoin come around. 

I figure there are likely 2 camps. Those who want more DACs and the toolkit the mature and those who want absolutely everything put into Bitshares X.  I have about as much in AngelShares post Bitshares X snapshot as pre.  That money shouldn't all be put into a speculative position for BTSX, because that is not why people were putting into AGS when they donated post Feb 28 AFAIK.

I want BTSX to succeed more than anyone, but it is just one possible out. While BTSX solves the largest need, it also has the largest competition. 

[Stan]

A lot of components had to be engineered to reach the moon.

See that big 1st Stage?   Yeah, that's BitShares VOTE.

(Meanwhile, we already have people working on all the other stages.)

[robrigo]

It seems to me that there is a fair amount of misplaced concern in this thread that BTSX is getting pushed to the back burner. If you look at the commit history for the toolkit you'll notice there is a lot of work being pushed daily to fix stability issues: https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/commits/develop

The brilliance here is that this is bolstering ALL DACs! I think the recent price drop has some people in panic mode. Take a deep breath and BUY / HODL imo!

Oh, and as for the recent VOTE push... I would look at the latest FMV blog post:

http://followmyvote.com/follow-my-vote-joins-cavo/

Coupled with the bill that prompted the formation of CAVO:

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB360

Perhaps the newfound "push" is pursuant of a huge opportunity for BitVote (and democratic elections in the U.S. at large)? Perhaps this opportunity is constrained by time and a reorganization of some priorities are in order? Parallel computing is much faster and more efficient than single core after all. I for one trust Dan's task scheduling algorithm.

It would seem to me that a state sponsored election on BitVote is very much in the cards (pending the necessary functionality is implemented to demo to the state of California).

[天籁]

 

1) All work on web wallets will work for all DACs.
2) All work on partnerships benefits all DACs
3) All bug fixes on core code (network, RPC, etc) benefit all DACs
4) AGS funds received after Feb 28th need to be spent on infrastructure other than BTSX and "now".
5) The new project will be self funded, not being funded by BTSX development fund.
6) BTSX will likely be funded by the new project.


7) The biggest reason of all why we are doing this has to do with the fact that we can gather "network effect" faster with the VOTE DAC...

How we do all of that is still slightly under wraps... but trust me it may beat BTSX to the moon.

[bytemaster]

1) All work on web wallets will work for all DACs.
2) All work on partnerships benefits all DACs
3) All bug fixes on core code (network, RPC, etc) benefit all DACs
4) AGS funds received after Feb 28th need to be spent on infrastructure other than BTSX and "now".
5) The new project will be self funded, not being funded by BTSX development fund.
6) BTSX will likely be funded by the new project.


7) The biggest reason of all why we are doing this has to do with the fact that we can gather "network effect" faster with the VOTE DAC...

How we do all of that is still slightly under wraps... but trust me it may beat BTSX to the moon.

[tonyk]

Btsx is not being abandoned.  This project is designed to fund common infrastructure via dilution.   My job is to lead not code.   And btsx is dac suns job to maintain upgrade and bug fix as I improve the toolkit. 

Btsx is hamstrung with a fixed dev budget that will take time to grow. 

Anyway, btsx will thrive and grow in parallel.

in Parallel?

Please, please, please!

Let's finish the new earth... before building the new solar system...

When Mercury-Atlas manned orbital missions were blasting off from Launch Complex 14

In parallel Gemini-Titan II two man missions were being prepared for Launch Complex 19

In parallel we were preparing Apollo-Saturn launch facilities at Launch Complex 39

This is a fast-break offense.

Mercury-Atlas It first flew on 29 July 1960, conducting the suborbital Mercury-Atlas 1 test flight. The rocket suffered a structural failure shortly after launch, and as a result failed to place the spacecraft onto its intended trajectory....


Hope you are ready with similar budget as NASA ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA )

 and you are prepared for likely structural failure ...