VOTE DAC Just Got More Interesting 2.0

[bytemaster]

every day is just waiting and more and different promises!

if you could not say anything it is fine.

what i whant to see is something like a probable timeline for all BTS chains - starting with BTSX

we are working at:
1. mobile app (expect Dec. 14)
2. .....
and so on

we want to work need more funds:

1. ....

maybe bytemaster or stan can put a summery together what was accomplished till now and what is coming in the next weeks.

this will be invested good time, because it feels like the people loosing some faith.

You must be new here.... except your post count suggests otherwise..

We don't post timelines because we will always miss them.
We have many things we want to do and things are being done by different people.
Business partners is a large majority of work to be done.

We are actively working on:
1) Notification system for light weight clients
2) Interest on Shorts
3) Escrow
4) A vote demo by Dec 7th.

These should be out within the next month.  (Not a light weight client, just the foundation for it).

High in the queue:
1) Rework of BTSX GUI to be more user friendly and pretty... estimated time about 1 month from start of effort... likely this year, but no promises.

[Shentist]

every day is just waiting and more and different promises!

if you could not say anything it is fine.

what i whant to see is something like a probable timeline for all BTS chains - starting with BTSX

we are working at:
1. mobile app (expect Dec. 14)
2. .....
and so on

we want to work need more funds:

1. ....

maybe bytemaster or stan can put a summery together what was accomplished till now and what is coming in the next weeks.

this will be invested good time, because it feels like the people loosing some faith.

[bytemaster]

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

Please elaborate.

The BTSX received via PTS angel address has to last... ie: BTSX must grow faster than the funds are spent or BTSX will be in the same boat as Bitcoin when it comes to paying for ongoing development.

[Empirical1.1]

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 to 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.

1) BTSX hard cap of 2 billion is going to limit its growth potential.
2) BTSX is multi-asset exchange and there will be many clones of it for many different assets... this VOTE DAC cannot support the transaction volume of all of those assets *AND* do everything else we want it to do... thus it will not be competing with BTSX as a store of wealth or exchange with derivatives. 
3) This new DAC will be funding features that will help BTSX holders... ie: my plan to fund BTSX growth without diluting BTSX.   BTSX is just swapping its tech for BitUSD for the tech funded by the other DAC and both sides win.   As a result BTSX development funds will mostly be used for "bug fixes" and "porting features" rather than developing new features.

1. Will the VOTE DAC have it's own BitUSD backed by shares of VOTE?

2. If so do you know if the BitUSD debit cards that have been mentioned will be launched and marketed using BitUSD backed by VOTE or BitUSD backed by BTSX?

1. Yes
2. Both

Ok thanks. That makes it seem a bit like BTSX + dilution except it doesn't snapshot off BTSX.

Be interested to see what the secret sauce is.

[Tuck Fheman]

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

Please elaborate.

[天籁]

 

I have not revealed the true secret sauce.... and will not say anything more about our strategy for VOTE / etc...

[bytemaster]

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 to 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.

1) BTSX hard cap of 2 billion is going to limit its growth potential.
2) BTSX is multi-asset exchange and there will be many clones of it for many different assets... this VOTE DAC cannot support the transaction volume of all of those assets *AND* do everything else we want it to do... thus it will not be competing with BTSX as a store of wealth or exchange with derivatives. 
3) This new DAC will be funding features that will help BTSX holders... ie: my plan to fund BTSX growth without diluting BTSX.   BTSX is just swapping its tech for BitUSD for the tech funded by the other DAC and both sides win.   As a result BTSX development funds will mostly be used for "bug fixes" and "porting features" rather than developing new features.

1. Will the VOTE DAC have it's own BitUSD backed by shares of VOTE?

2. If so do you know if the BitUSD debit cards that have been mentioned will be launched and marketed using BitUSD backed by VOTE or BitUSD backed by BTSX?

1. Yes
2. Both

[Empirical1.1]

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 to 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.

1) BTSX hard cap of 2 billion is going to limit its growth potential.
2) BTSX is multi-asset exchange and there will be many clones of it for many different assets... this VOTE DAC cannot support the transaction volume of all of those assets *AND* do everything else we want it to do... thus it will not be competing with BTSX as a store of wealth or exchange with derivatives. 
3) This new DAC will be funding features that will help BTSX holders... ie: my plan to fund BTSX growth without diluting BTSX.   BTSX is just swapping its tech for BitUSD for the tech funded by the other DAC and both sides win.   As a result BTSX development funds will mostly be used for "bug fixes" and "porting features" rather than developing new features.

1. Will the VOTE DAC have it's own BitUSD backed by shares of VOTE?

2. If so do you know if the BitUSD debit cards that have been mentioned will be launched and marketed using BitUSD backed by VOTE or BitUSD backed by BTSX?

[bytemaster]

I have not revealed the true secret sauce.... and will not say anything more about our strategy for VOTE / etc...

[Stan]

Please don't reveal any details. I urge you to keep the secret sauce SECRET until it is ready to be released. There are a lots of ideas that are coming from this forum and now they are used by others and 0 credit given.
Bitshare toolkit is opensource so anybody can do whatever they please with it and this is perfect, but this is enough. There's too much information and ideas discussed publicly already that should not be reveal until they are done.

It very clear that BitsareX will continue to be developed at full speed. I don't even know where the idea came that development will slow.
Actually if Bytemaster will work to Vote in parallel this is good. The fundamentals ideas of BitshareX are done, the peg is working the rules of trading are final now. What is left be done it is a lot of development a lots of coding , wallet, light wallet, trading software, marketing. This is important but you don't need Bytmaster for that...ohh by the way he's not leaving he'll surely make sure that Bitshare will be whatever everyone here and himself wanted to be.
Please people, the whole thing here exist because of Bytemaster idea and he delivered, so if the guy is saying that it is worth working in parallel for something that could be bigger than Bitshare X ... then what the hell are you arguing about ? What all of you want is Bytemaster to be a leader not a coder, but already you know he'll do both.
Please stop putting  pressure to reveal any more information until is to late, we shoot ourselves in the foot here just putting all out strategy in plain view.

This.  Thank you.

[Riverhead]

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).

Welcome to the big leagues. Good thing we have world class devs and business guidance.

Stan I hope you write a book one day. Something tells me it'd tell quite a tale...

[Stan]

... 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... 

I hear you.

Of course, taking off the wraps prematurely could cause you to wind up with nothing.

Bottom line, people on this forum will know what they need to know before 99.999% of their competition.

To the vigilant go the spoils.

[oco101]

Please don't reveal any details. I urge you to keep the secret sauce SECRET until it is ready to be released. There are a lots of ideas that are coming from this forum and now they are used by others and 0 credit given.
Bitshare toolkit is opensource so anybody can do whatever they please with it and this is perfect, but this is enough. There's too much information and ideas discussed publicly already that should not be reveal until they are done.

It is very clear that BitsareX will continue to be developed at full speed. I don't even know where the idea came that development will slow.
Actually if Bytemaster will work to Vote in parallel this is good. The fundamentals ideas of BitshareX are done, the peg is working the rules of trading are final now. What is left be done it is a lot of development a lots of coding , wallet, light wallet, trading software, marketing. This is important but you don't need Bytmaster for that...ohh by the way he's not leaving he'll surely make sure that Bitshare will be whatever everyone here and himself wanted to be.
Please people, the whole thing here exist because of Bytemaster idea and he delivered, so if the guy is saying that it is worth working in parallel for something that could be bigger than Bitshare X ... then what the hell are you arguing about ? What all of you want is Bytemaster to be a leader not a coder, but already you know he'll do both.
Please stop putting  pressure to reveal any more information until is to late, we shoot ourselves in the foot here just putting all our strategy in plain view.

[bytemaster]

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 to 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.

1) BTSX hard cap of 2 billion is going to limit its growth potential.
2) BTSX is multi-asset exchange and there will be many clones of it for many different assets... this VOTE DAC cannot support the transaction volume of all of those assets *AND* do everything else we want it to do... thus it will not be competing with BTSX as a store of wealth or exchange with derivatives. 
3) This new DAC will be funding features that will help BTSX holders... ie: my plan to fund BTSX growth without diluting BTSX.   BTSX is just swapping its tech for BitUSD for the tech funded by the other DAC and both sides win.   As a result BTSX development funds will mostly be used for "bug fixes" and "porting features" rather than developing new features.   

[Riverhead]

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

Then NuBits is on to something?

No one thinks they are nuts. Dishonest and deceitful perhaps, but not nuts.