Author Topic: PTS - the insane gift that keeps on giving!  (Read 26613 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fluxer555

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 749
    • View Profile
We can't change precision of exchanges, so the only option is to change supply. There could be a hard fork that changes supply / maintains ratios without anybody having any effective difference (a lot like a reverse stock split).

Also, for the third time,

Why would anyone want to purchase DevShares?
« Last Edit: December 25, 2014, 05:59:39 am by fluxer555 »

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
It's dangerous and irresponsible for us to make people feel like their DVS is worth holding on to.

Why would anyone want to purchase DevShares?

It may be useful for DevShares to limit the total supply to something very low like 5000, to avoid facing the impossibility of trading at sub-satoshi levels.

What you're really saying is precision needs to be higher (we weren't close to the limit even at 2bn). Unfortunately we already launched, maybe we will need to reset or maybe there will just be a price floor at ~$10k market cap =P
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline fluxer555

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 749
    • View Profile
It's dangerous and irresponsible for us to make people feel like their DVS is worth holding on to.

Why would anyone want to purchase DevShares?

It may be useful for DevShares to limit the total supply to something very low like 5000, to avoid facing the impossibility of trading at sub-satoshi levels.

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
Toast, for some reason I feel that your argument for 100% Dan allocation is rhetorical, as in you're trying to prove a point by saying that. I'm not sure what the point is, however. Obviously having a test net controlled by a single user is not useful.

On the whole, I'm disappointed with the direction that DevShares is being taken. Namely, the "no rules" premise behind DevShares amputates its value proposition, and is at odds with the intention for it to have a non-zero value. It will be an interesting experiment for sure. I think engineering a real backbone to its value should not be too difficult, but this does not seem to be the intention of any of the Devs besides theoritical.

I think a choice has to be made: Is DevShares a DAC, or is it a test-net?

Why would anyone want to purchase DevShares?

It is a testnet that trades a price greater than 0 which enables us to test bitasset markets. You would purchase DVS to make test transactions.

Quote
Namely, the "no rules" premise behind DevShares amputates its value proposition
Good!
Quote
and is at odds with the intention for it to have a non-zero value.
No it's not, the only requirement for this is that an exchange lists it and that there is more than 1 order on each side of the book.

My suggestion wasn't entirely rhetorical, it was a genuine conversation we had at the office. The point I'm making is that it's dangerous and irresponsible for us to make people feel like their DVS is worth holding on to.
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

merockstar

  • Guest
I'm in awe that people care so much about DevShares.

It's there to test the new software before it gets unleashed to the public, right?

Anything other than a non-zero value is a bonus!

Why is there petty bickering over DVS allocation?

I very much agree with the things toast is saying on this matter.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2014, 04:04:12 am by merockstar »

Offline fluxer555

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 749
    • View Profile
Toast, for some reason I feel that your argument for 100% Dan allocation is rhetorical, as in you're trying to prove a point by saying that. I'm not sure what the point is, however. Obviously having a test net controlled by a single user is not useful.

On the whole, I'm disappointed with the direction that DevShares is being taken. Namely, the "no rules" premise behind DevShares amputates its value proposition, and is at odds with the intention for it to have a non-zero value. It will be an interesting experiment for sure. I think engineering a real backbone to its value should not be too difficult, but this does not seem to be the intention of any of the Devs besides theoritical.

I think a choice has to be made: Is DevShares a DAC, or is it a test-net?

Why would anyone want to purchase DevShares?
« Last Edit: December 25, 2014, 03:55:38 am by fluxer555 »

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
...I don't care and I think it's stupid.

Great, so a core BTS dev thinks the concerns of its shareholders are stupid. Good to know.

I care about BTS, not about PTS. None of the core devs read discussions about PTS anymore, isn't that what you'd expect once are incentives are folded into BTS?

You don't care about PTS, yet you sharedropped 33% of DVS on alphabar PTS?

First of all, the snapshot was december 14th!  Alphabar PTS holders did not benefit! Nobody who held normal PTS but not alphabar PTS was left out. So this is a red herring.

Second, I've been advocating that we should make devshares 100% allocated to Dan so that people don't argue and have the opportunity to feel ripped off.
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

sumantso

  • Guest
...I don't care and I think it's stupid.

Great, so a core BTS dev thinks the concerns of its shareholders are stupid. Good to know.

I care about BTS, not about PTS. None of the core devs read discussions about PTS anymore, isn't that what you'd expect once are incentives are folded into BTS?

You don't care about PTS, yet you sharedropped 33% of DVS on alphabar PTS?

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
...I don't care and I think it's stupid.

Great, so a core BTS dev thinks the concerns of its shareholders are stupid. Good to know.

I care about BTS, not about PTS. None of the core devs read discussions about PTS anymore, isn't that what you'd expect once are incentives are folded into BTS?
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline infovortice2013

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 521
    • View Profile
    • BitShares en español
  • BitShares: traderx
...I don't care and I think it's stupid.

Great, so a core BTS dev thinks the concerns of its shareholders are stupid. Good to know.

manipulating info like this ..... can work on tv news.
New Keyoteeid: 5rUhuLCDWUA2FStkKVRTWYEqY1mZhwpfVdRmYEvMRFRD1bqYAL
new08/21 id 5Sjf3LMuYPSeNnjLYXmAoHj5Z6TPCmwmfXD6XwDmg27dwfQ

Offline infovortice2013

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 521
    • View Profile
    • BitShares en español
  • BitShares: traderx
bitshares ---- reimagine everything

but everything not fit on bts, need more space i think...

yeah caotic info flowing to forum, lot of changes , new unspectec dacs ,,,,,,,,,,,, is the famous pow (proofofwork), must keep in touch with bts to be updated to maximize your invest but if not you take shares equal, so...

im not from team work but i wish, so my words are only my sense.

and really if pts be used to make snapshots of other proyects (not only bts dacs or pts) and force them to give you shares , is this bad for pts stakeholders or bts ?... i think not.

and sparkles is comming.

i think bitsharesPTS need change name. i like perpetualshares cose can mantain pts
New Keyoteeid: 5rUhuLCDWUA2FStkKVRTWYEqY1mZhwpfVdRmYEvMRFRD1bqYAL
new08/21 id 5Sjf3LMuYPSeNnjLYXmAoHj5Z6TPCmwmfXD6XwDmg27dwfQ

Offline nomoreheroes7

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 756
  • King of all the land
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nomoreheroes7
...I don't care and I think it's stupid.

Great, so a core BTS dev thinks the concerns of its shareholders are stupid. Good to know.

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
For all practical purposes those 'old' PTS are the same as the new alphabar's PTS, as this is the exact time of alphabar's PTS genesis block as well. Meaning it would have made now difference if you used their genesis block.

Exactly, so alphabar's PTS holder don't get anything extra. What snapshots have their been off of his version exclusively?


I didn't respond to the 6+ pages of argument because I don't care and I think it's stupid. My only request is that their team call it "protoshares" instead of "bitshares PTS".
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline jshow5555

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
One of the worst things is that with Bitshares 1.0 release coming out, there will be a big marketing and advertising push for the first time. People will be searching for Bitshare related news and info and one of the thing that will be showing up is Bitshares PTS, a DAC that has nothing to do with Bitshares! They'll be getting free exposure by continuing to use fraudulently use the Bitshares name!

Stan makes the statement "The concept of merging PTS and AGS was brought up as a proposal for discussion but the idea of such a merger did not reach consensus.  The whole discussion lasted but a few days and the idea was abandoned, as many are after strongly opposing community input." so maybe he can show me where the community consented to having Alphabar...

1) Use the existing Bitshares PTS brand for a project of his own unrelated undertaking?
2) Claim the right to DAC (created from Bitshares toolkit no less) sharedrops from BTS?
3) Be GIVEN %33 DEVSHARES SHAREDROP, further legitimizing his claim of being the preferred sharedrop instrument for all future DAC's?

All of this leaves a very bad taste in my and many others mouths, the fact that the Chinese redacted it from the latest newsletter says that they fear their readers would not react well to it either. I wholeheartedly endorse any effort to start voting out delegates who don't switch to a %100 BTS sharedropped Devshares fork.

Actually the devshares sharedrop was computed from the old PTS.
We literally didn't even think about alphabar's PTS. So that's that. IDK if it should be "fixed"?

It is truly sad that after 6 pages of true and valid arguments you post to just to point a technical incorrectness.

For all practical purposes those 'old' PTS are the same as the new alphabar's PTS, as this is the exact time of alphabar's PTS genesis block as well. Meaning it would have made now difference if you used their genesis block.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan

Actually the devshares sharedrop was computed from the old PTS.
We literally didn't even think about alphabar's PTS. So that's that. IDK if it should be "fixed"?

As long as you used the Dec 14th snapshot, the two results should be identical at that time.


Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.