To buy or not to buy PTS, that is the question.

[Stan]

This is messed up and sad. I bought PTS way early when it was still called protoshares. I ended up making a very good profit in terms of Bitshare, but then didn't sell. Before that music DAC snapshot happened, I sold all my Bitshare into PTS. Then I held PTS for a while and it completely tanked to unimaginable lows. A fraction of a cent. 500 dollars became 120 dollars became 30 dollars became 50 cents.

This is completely irresponsible. I feel I've been kept completely out of the loop. The cryptocurrency world is completely fucking disgusting. This shit will never take off without any government backing it to hold someone accountable for fraud such as this. Good luck.

Have a nice day.

The unique characteristics of PTS you refer to have been well-understood and appreciated by this community for a long time.  Check out this article from last February - before the very first PTS snapshot.

http://letstalkbitcoin.com/caution-watch-for-falling-pts/

Every aspect of every issue has been discussed here and analyzed in hundreds of posts and blog articles and interviews and mumble meetings since the beginning.

How exactly were you kept out of the loop?

[jwiz168]

Since developers have option of what to use for sharedropping, well and good . AGS and PTS have retained its purpose and the new player BTS is the most innovative of the 3 ( and probably the most consensus) , investors are presented with unique way of diversification. It's a win-win situation eventhough some of early concepts of AGS/PTS 10% DAC's share distributions have been diluted in favor of BTS. Now my understanding is clear as to what Bitshares has to offer in the future, might as well plan for the best. The 2014 is year of Bitshares, because it has helped me set a goal of achieving financial freedom in such a short time and I am very much confident with it and hope one day Bitshares may evolve into a thing that we cannot leave home without it as they say.

[Stan]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

Isn't it that social contract of I3 states that for every DAC being developed using DPOS has at least 10%AGS and 10%PTS? Please correct me if I am not inform with BTS being included.

Upon further reflection, without I3 there is no social consensus anymore, is there? The support of the community while the social consensus existed basically meant backing from I3, but without I3 support the community will naturally support whatever DACs they feel aren't screwing them, I am understanding this correctly, Stan? I read both the newsletter but didn't see the idea of social consensus directly addressed.

I3 took the initiative to help the community evolve its social consensus during the early phases but ultimately it is the community's job to maintain or evolve the consensus over time.  I3 alumni will still be here as free lance contributors, and we will have gradually diverging opinions, but the consensus will be whatever the community can cause developers to perceive is in their best interest to honor.

We have proposed no changes to that consensus and have continued to honor it.  From before the very first Feb 28th snapshot we have supported the concept of honoring the PTS/AGS proto-DAC grandparents through honoring a parent that had honored those grandparents.  So a new developer would be on solid footing doing it either way -- unless the community makes it clear that their consensus has somehow changed.

Meanwhile, we have tried to encourage developers to honor proto-DACs simply because it is in their own self interest. 

Let me ephasize that.
The consensus will be strongest if developers honor it in their own self-interest.

That's what BitShares Sharedrop Theory is all about.  By recognizing that all the coins of the world represent unique demographics they can choose to precision-target their free samples to groups other than the technically gifted.   You can target Mars colonists and permaculture enthusiasts and dog lovers and entire populations of small arctic nations.

But, if you are a smart developer, you will target people who understand and appreciate your coin and are likely to hold them rather than dump them.  Traditional miners are a notoriously bad demographic precisely because they are in business primarily to mine and dump.

BitShares Sharedrop Theory thus revolutionized the whole concept of how to get a safe and fair distribution while eliminating the last remaining (specious) argument for why you still needed mining.

So, regardless of what we many individually prefer, PTS, AGS, and BTS represent fantastic sharedrop targets each for their own demographic reasons.  AGS are proven donors.  BTS are active users.  PTS are HODL die-hards.

It is up to each developer to put together the coalition of demographics they think will make their product succeed.

[zavtra]

This is messed up and sad. I bought PTS way early when it was still called protoshares. I ended up making a very good profit in terms of Bitshare, but then didn't sell. Before that music DAC snapshot happened, I sold all my Bitshare into PTS. Then I held PTS for a while and it completely tanked to unimaginable lows. A fraction of a cent. 500 dollars became 120 dollars became 30 dollars became 50 cents.

This is completely irresponsible. I feel I've been kept completely out of the loop. The cryptocurrency world is completely fucking disgusting. This shit will never take off without any government backing it to hold someone accountable for fraud such as this. Good luck.

Have a nice day.

[sumantso]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

Isn't it that social contract of I3 states that for every DAC being developed using DPOS has at least 10%AGS and 10%PTS? Please correct me if I am not inform with BTS being included.

Upon further reflection, without I3 there is no social consensus anymore, is there? The support of the community while the social consensus existed basically meant backing from I3, but without I3 support the community will naturally support whatever DACs they feel aren't screwing them, I am understanding this correctly, Stan? I read both the newsletter but didn't see the idea of social consensus directly addressed.

Riverhead's analysis https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=11980.msg160532#msg160532

So, not that my opinion means a whole lot (I also have zero legal training), it seems clear that, based on the below software license for the Bitshares Toolkit and the above Social Contract of Invictus:

 1) The Social Consensus Software License clearly states that anyone using the Invictus blockchain must give 10% PTS/AGS.  So for the social contract if the Bitshares blockchain is also considered the Invictus blockchain (Aug 2013 was before DPoS was a twinkle in Dan's eye) then PTS either allocates AGS 10% or is in violation of the social contract.

2) According to the Software License in the current Bitshares github repository PTS can use the toolkit legally (whatever that means in this context) without any requirement to give anyone anything.

This creates a bit of a paradox. If the Social Consensus Software License died with Invictus than PTS doesn't need to honor it. However, if it is the case that PTS doesn't need to honor it because it died with Invictus than PTS has no reason for being because the social consensus is dead. Or at least it would have no teeth.

So, um, ya. Given all that I feel since PTS is using the blockchain and wants future DACs to honor to Social Contract (i.e. taking the position it lives beyond Invictus' timely demise) than PTS needs to give AGS 10% of permanent allocation or be in violation of the Social Contract but not the software license.

Further more the Social Contract lives on, at least in spirit, as exampled by PLAY, MUSIC, and BTS.

https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/blob/master/LICENSE.md

IMO, whatever form of social consensus could've survived was killed by alphabar PTS.

[merockstar]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

Isn't it that social contract of I3 states that for every DAC being developed using DPOS has at least 10%AGS and 10%PTS? Please correct me if I am not inform with BTS being included.

Upon further reflection, without I3 there is no social consensus anymore, is there? The support of the community while the social consensus existed basically meant backing from I3, but without I3 support the community will naturally support whatever DACs they feel aren't screwing them, I am understanding this correctly, Stan? I read both the newsletter but didn't see the idea of social consensus directly addressed.

[onceuponatime]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

FOR: diversification is never a dumb choice.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

I do not agree. I can think of many instances where the greatest expected return is from betting on one winner over spreading out your bet (or investment, if you prefer).

For instance, if you buy every ticket in a lottery - you have lost for sure (your cost exceeds your winnings). In fact, according to accountants, your greatest expected return on investment comes from buying exactly one ticket.

In a horse race, it is more lucrative to pick one winner over spreading out the bets over several horses in the same race.

Where diversification might be valuable is when you spread out your investment into different sectors, so that if one sector goes down, another sector is likely to go up. But BTS and PTS are hardly in different sectors. In fact I would say that the success of PTS is dependent on success of BTS. If DPOS fails in bitshares, it will surely fail in protoshares.

Your definition of the word "expected" must be different than mine.

In any case, your examples (horseracing and lotteries) are zero-sum games with a house edge. Real economic settings like cryptocurrencies are generally not zero-sum games.

If PTS gains some traction as a sharedrop target (big if, I'm well aware) it will have very low short-term price correlation to BTS due to the snapshot price swing cycle.

It's probably true that long-term correlation between PTS and BTS will be high, but that's not really what interests me about PTS.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

DEFINITION of 'Expected Value'

Anticipated value for a given investment. In statistics and probability analysis, expected value is calculated by multiplying each of the possible outcomes by the likelihood that each outcome will occur, and summing all of those values. By calculating expected values, investors can choose the scenario that is most likely to give them their desired outcome.

INVESTOPEDIA EXPLAINS 'Expected Value'

Scenario analysis is one technique for calculating the expected value of an investment opportunity. It uses estimated probabilities with multivariate models, to examine possible outcomes for a proposed investment. Scenario analysis also helps investors determine whether they are taking on an appropriate level of risk, given the likely outcome of the investment.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/expected-value.asp

[merockstar]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

Isn't it that social contract of I3 states that for every DAC being developed using DPOS has at least 10%AGS and 10%PTS? Please correct me if I am not inform with BTS being included.

Previously it did.

Then there was a merger where PTS and AGS got "bought out" by BTS, and the devs killed I3 and switched to being delegates for compensation.

And now I have no idea if there's even a social consensus anymore because it all happened so fast during a busy time for me.

Read the December (out today) and Halloween newsletters for all the details.

ty stan. i will get right on that.

[Stan]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

Isn't it that social contract of I3 states that for every DAC being developed using DPOS has at least 10%AGS and 10%PTS? Please correct me if I am not inform with BTS being included.

Previously it did.

Then there was a merger where PTS and AGS got "bought out" by BTS, and the devs killed I3 and switched to being delegates for compensation.

And now I have no idea if there's even a social consensus anymore because it all happened so fast during a busy time for me.

Read the December (out today) and Halloween newsletters for all the details.

[merockstar]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

Isn't it that social contract of I3 states that for every DAC being developed using DPOS has at least 10%AGS and 10%PTS? Please correct me if I am not inform with BTS being included.

Previously it did.

Then there was a merger where PTS and AGS got "bought out" by BTS, and the devs killed I3 and switched to being delegates for compensation.

And now I have no idea if there's even a social consensus anymore because it all happened so fast during a busy time for me.

[jwiz168]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

Isn't it that social contract of I3 states that for every DAC being developed using DPOS has at least 10%AGS and 10%PTS? Please correct me if I am not inform with BTS being included.

[biophil]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

FOR: diversification is never a dumb choice.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

I do not agree. I can think of many instances where the greatest expected return is from betting on one winner over spreading out your bet (or investment, if you prefer).

For instance, if you buy every ticket in a lottery - you have lost for sure (your cost exceeds your winnings). In fact, according to accountants, your greatest expected return on investment comes from buying exactly one ticket.

In a horse race, it is more lucrative to pick one winner over spreading out the bets over several horses in the same race.

Where diversification might be valuable is when you spread out your investment into different sectors, so that if one sector goes down, another sector is likely to go up. But BTS and PTS are hardly in different sectors. In fact I would say that the success of PTS is dependent on success of BTS. If DPOS fails in bitshares, it will surely fail in protoshares.

Your definition of the word "expected" must be different than mine.

In any case, your examples (horseracing and lotteries) are zero-sum games with a house edge. Real economic settings like cryptocurrencies are generally not zero-sum games.

If PTS gains some traction as a sharedrop target (big if, I'm well aware) it will have very low short-term price correlation to BTS due to the snapshot price swing cycle.

It's probably true that long-term correlation between PTS and BTS will be high, but that's not really what interests me about PTS.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

[onceuponatime]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

FOR: diversification is never a dumb choice.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

I do not agree. I can think of many instances where the greatest expected return is from betting on one winner over spreading out your bet (or investment, if you prefer).

For instance, if you buy every ticket in a lottery - you have lost for sure (your cost exceeds your winnings). In fact, according to accountants, your greatest expected return on investment comes from buying exactly one ticket.

In a horse race, it is more lucrative to pick one winner over spreading out the bets over several horses in the same race.

Where diversification might be valuable is when you spread out your investment into different sectors, so that if one sector goes down, another sector is likely to go up. But BTS and PTS are hardly in different sectors. In fact I would say that the success of PTS is dependent on success of BTS. If DPOS fails in bitshares, it will surely fail in protoshares.

[biophil]

AGAINST:

Any funds that you use to buy PTS can then NOT be used to buy BTS.

FOR: diversification is never a dumb choice.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

[biophil]

I have most of my bids around 100 satoshi. At that price it's hard to argue against picking some up. If some interesting coin ever announces a sharedrop, the price could easily pump 2-3x from there.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2