What's happening with the price?

[CLains]

fact is nearly all coins are in a downtrend, and fact is nxt, counterparty, mastercoin, ethereum, bitcoin foundation, etc. are struggling as much if not more than we are.. fact is everyone in crypto have underestimated the cost associated with revolutionizing finance. fact is if we all go up again to 150 million, bitshares devs would be making $10k a month. fact is there is a good chance the whole space, bitcoin included, is in its deceptive phase. fact is even at this price things are getting done that wouldn't have been without the delegate system. fact is most of the vc cash flowing into this space is going to solutions that break with honest principles, and they will suffer from centralized control down the line, just like gox did, just like ripple did, just like the bitcoin foundation did. fact is most people don't "get it" yet, and they won't until there is a new bubble, and by then we are ready with a decentralized, sound economically viable system.

[mdj]

Actually, I left out one important Fun Fact:  In 5 months the share supply has increased from 2,498,764,342 to 2,505,960,283 for a net increase of 7,197,985 or 0.28%.    So, those who complain about dilution are asserting that a fraction of a percent worth of dilution is responsible for several hundred percent decline in price.

Now, it may be true that complaining about dilution is responsible for such a drop, but the dilution itself has been negligible.

Good stats but I don't think anything can decline more than 100% unless we can go into negatives

[fuzzy]

Actually, I left out one important Fun Fact:  In 5 months the share supply has increased from 2,500,000,000 to 2,505,960,283 for a net increase of 5,960,283 or 0.24%.    So, those who complain about dilution are asserting that a fraction of a percent worth of dilution is responsible for several hundred percent decline in price.

Now, it may be true that complaining about dilution is responsible for such a drop, but the dilution itself has been negligible.

Very good point!  This fact needs to spread like wild fire in the Chinese community since many had fears.

Everyone knows that fact. They also know that all those numbers will keep getting bigger. Bigger in that way is perceived as not good. Why? Because in light of the genius idea to dilute and inflate, look what has happened to the share price. It going down, down, down despite all the Invictus innovations happening.

What's most amazing is you have multiple marketing delegates (and other delegates) collecting 100's of thousands of BTS and yet nothing is being done except a taxation to the chain at the expense of everyone else. Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot we need 1.0 before we can market anything.  It's a good thing nobody has ever made a teaser trailer for a movie yet to be released. I mean there is no way I just watched the Mad Max Fury Road trailer yesterday since it's not going to be released until next month. That would be idiotic to market something before it's release.

Also, it amazes me that the story of dilution and inflation was backed and reinforced by the fact that the Devs needed funding, yet here we are over 4 months later and the Devs have made a total of $3000 worth of BTS at current prices.  In their hindsight I know they know it was a bad idea as it has done more damage to their previous personal holdings than what it netted them in the meantime. Next time think things through and weigh the consequences and don't let the possible benefits blind you. Was it worth it?

we do neeed a little more transparency from marketing delegates. Ill give you that...and only that.

[NewMine]

Actually, I left out one important Fun Fact:  In 5 months the share supply has increased from 2,500,000,000 to 2,505,960,283 for a net increase of 5,960,283 or 0.24%.    So, those who complain about dilution are asserting that a fraction of a percent worth of dilution is responsible for several hundred percent decline in price.

Now, it may be true that complaining about dilution is responsible for such a drop, but the dilution itself has been negligible.

Very good point!  This fact needs to spread like wild fire in the Chinese community since many had fears.

Everyone knows that fact. They also know that all those numbers will keep getting bigger. Bigger in that way is perceived as not good. Why? Because in light of the genius idea to dilute and inflate, look what has happened to the share price. It going down, down, down despite all the Invictus innovations happening.

What's most amazing is you have multiple marketing delegates (and other delegates) collecting 100's of thousands of BTS and yet nothing is being done except a taxation to the chain at the expense of everyone else. Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot we need 1.0 before we can market anything.  It's a good thing nobody has ever made a teaser trailer for a movie yet to be released. I mean there is no way I just watched the Mad Max Fury Road trailer yesterday since it's not going to be released until next month. That would be idiotic to market something before it's release.

Also, it amazes me that the story of dilution and inflation was backed and reinforced by the fact that the Devs needed funding, yet here we are over 4 months later and the Devs have made a total of $3000 worth of BTS at current prices.  In their hindsight I know they know it was a bad idea as it has done more damage to their previous personal holdings than what it netted them in the meantime. Next time think things through and weigh the consequences and don't let the possible benefits blind you. Was it worth it?

[fuzzy]

And talking of bitcoin .... Bitcoin Foundation torn apart ..

"Dear Members,

I was elected on a platform of transparency and decentralization of core development. Since the beginning, the Foundation has been sorely lacking any transparency of its actions. I can no longer in good conscience hide the truth on what I have witnessed in the Bitcoin Foundation since I was elected last month.

First of all, the Bitcoin Foundation is effectively bankrupt. As a result of 2 years of ridiculous spending and poorly thought out decisions, they almost ran out of money in November of last year. In extremis, but way too late, they decided to select a new executive director during that time. That new director decided that the only way to still get funds at that point, was to focus solely on funding core development, in the hope that people would see that as a good cause. But people were smart enough not to trust the Foundation anymore. Despite it’s intentions, they failed to collect the necessary funds to support this idea. With the election in February-March, it became clear that people did not want the Foundation meddling with core development. The truth is that the Foundation’s plan was to hire even more core devs + to start a Bitcoin Standards Body. No organization should have this much control over Bitcoin, and a disaster was avoided.

When I joined on my first Board meeting, Jim Harper and myself immediately put forward a vote to have the board meeting recorded. We followed Robert’s rules of orders, and everyone else basically shut us down and failed to follow procedures. There were “more urgent” things to discuss (as you will see later, the urgent pattern was an excuse to just continue on their course and shut us up). It was critical for us to vote on a plan that would save the Foundation. When I mentioned that such a critical vote is all the more reason to make sure the whole meeting gets recorded, I was ignored. The Bitcoin Foundation hates transparency. If they would have been transparent then everyone would know there is no money left. Something I think the members have a right to know, wouldn’t you think? Members have a right to know that the current board failed to tell them the truth, and that their way of running the organization resulted in it going bankrupt. But instead of taking responsibility, they want to find the next executive director, that will come up with another magic plan. Ironically, being transparent from the start might have prevented this whole thing to begin with.
Everyone has the right to know the truth:

– The Foundation has almost no money left, and just fired 90% of its people. Some will stay on as volunteers.
– Core dev can no longer be funded by it, and Patrick Murck is trying to re-create a new Foundation just for core dev, because the current name is tarnished. Do not fall for this.
– The current Executive Director (Patrick Murck), will be gone in 2 weeks, and they are trying to find the next person to blame everything on.
– Jim Harper was threatened for doing a press release which was (barely) critical of the Foundation after he got elected. The Foundation tries to make sure we hide the truth by subtly threatening us on a regular basis.
– If I get asked to leave the Foundation for telling the truth, so be it. The truth is being told.
Moving forward:

– A special trust fund is being created and I will donate several 100k to pre-pay Gavin’s, Wladimirs and some other core devs wage for the next year (if they choose to accept). The control of this trust fund will be handed over to the core devs, who can decide who can join it. Alternatively, we can give voting power to everyone who puts money in it (pro-rata). I will also organize crowdfunds and help make this fund public. At no point do I want to have any control whatsoever.

– It is up to the members of the Bitcoin Foundation to decide what they want to do now. The bylaws allow for a special board meeting to be called by 15% of members. I would recommend you to do so and ask for all information to be released so you can learn the truth. Additionally I would recommend for you to replace the whole board if you want this organization to last. Alternatively you can vote to shut it down and get your money back. There might not be enough money left in the Foundation to pay its members back, but I will personally try to help make up the difference, even though I have not been part of it.

The lesson for all of us in Bitcoin is to never put any trust in a centralized org again that wanted to represent Bitcoin or the Core Development of Bitcoin.

Please provide feedback here on the Bitcoin forum.

Note: I totally expect the current Board members to try to place blame on me for whatever reason. They are very bad at taking personal responsibility. I have had several threats, but I’m releasing this anyway.

Olivier"

wow...nice find man. Holy crap.  I think...this is overall a good thing if the "foundation" is breaking up. We will see how bitcoin guides itself though without voting and a system like that of delegates.

[mike623317]

And talking of bitcoin .... Bitcoin Foundation torn apart ..

"Dear Members,

I was elected on a platform of transparency and decentralization of core development. Since the beginning, the Foundation has been sorely lacking any transparency of its actions. I can no longer in good conscience hide the truth on what I have witnessed in the Bitcoin Foundation since I was elected last month.

First of all, the Bitcoin Foundation is effectively bankrupt. As a result of 2 years of ridiculous spending and poorly thought out decisions, they almost ran out of money in November of last year. In extremis, but way too late, they decided to select a new executive director during that time. That new director decided that the only way to still get funds at that point, was to focus solely on funding core development, in the hope that people would see that as a good cause. But people were smart enough not to trust the Foundation anymore. Despite it’s intentions, they failed to collect the necessary funds to support this idea. With the election in February-March, it became clear that people did not want the Foundation meddling with core development. The truth is that the Foundation’s plan was to hire even more core devs + to start a Bitcoin Standards Body. No organization should have this much control over Bitcoin, and a disaster was avoided.

When I joined on my first Board meeting, Jim Harper and myself immediately put forward a vote to have the board meeting recorded. We followed Robert’s rules of orders, and everyone else basically shut us down and failed to follow procedures. There were “more urgent” things to discuss (as you will see later, the urgent pattern was an excuse to just continue on their course and shut us up). It was critical for us to vote on a plan that would save the Foundation. When I mentioned that such a critical vote is all the more reason to make sure the whole meeting gets recorded, I was ignored. The Bitcoin Foundation hates transparency. If they would have been transparent then everyone would know there is no money left. Something I think the members have a right to know, wouldn’t you think? Members have a right to know that the current board failed to tell them the truth, and that their way of running the organization resulted in it going bankrupt. But instead of taking responsibility, they want to find the next executive director, that will come up with another magic plan. Ironically, being transparent from the start might have prevented this whole thing to begin with.
Everyone has the right to know the truth:

– The Foundation has almost no money left, and just fired 90% of its people. Some will stay on as volunteers.
– Core dev can no longer be funded by it, and Patrick Murck is trying to re-create a new Foundation just for core dev, because the current name is tarnished. Do not fall for this.
– The current Executive Director (Patrick Murck), will be gone in 2 weeks, and they are trying to find the next person to blame everything on.
– Jim Harper was threatened for doing a press release which was (barely) critical of the Foundation after he got elected. The Foundation tries to make sure we hide the truth by subtly threatening us on a regular basis.
– If I get asked to leave the Foundation for telling the truth, so be it. The truth is being told.
Moving forward:

– A special trust fund is being created and I will donate several 100k to pre-pay Gavin’s, Wladimirs and some other core devs wage for the next year (if they choose to accept). The control of this trust fund will be handed over to the core devs, who can decide who can join it. Alternatively, we can give voting power to everyone who puts money in it (pro-rata). I will also organize crowdfunds and help make this fund public. At no point do I want to have any control whatsoever.

– It is up to the members of the Bitcoin Foundation to decide what they want to do now. The bylaws allow for a special board meeting to be called by 15% of members. I would recommend you to do so and ask for all information to be released so you can learn the truth. Additionally I would recommend for you to replace the whole board if you want this organization to last. Alternatively you can vote to shut it down and get your money back. There might not be enough money left in the Foundation to pay its members back, but I will personally try to help make up the difference, even though I have not been part of it.

The lesson for all of us in Bitcoin is to never put any trust in a centralized org again that wanted to represent Bitcoin or the Core Development of Bitcoin.

Please provide feedback here on the Bitcoin forum.

Note: I totally expect the current Board members to try to place blame on me for whatever reason. They are very bad at taking personal responsibility. I have had several threats, but I’m releasing this anyway.

Olivier"

[fuzzy]

It's a question I ask to myself a lot lately ; what does prevent bitcoin of upgrading his current noneffective tech & POW system to our BitShares way of doing things ?

On the technical side, porting bitcoin to DPOS would be a major undertaking. Nobody would be willing to take the risk that something goes wrong along the way, because a mistake in that process could destroy bitcoin.

On the political side - NO WAY! The bitcoin community consists largely of PoW believers who wouldn't touch PoS or DPOS with a long pole. Ever. Even if a subset of the community did make such a move, the rest would stay behind and effectively fork bitcoin.

This^^
Precisely this.

[pc]

It's a question I ask to myself a lot lately ; what does prevent bitcoin of upgrading his current noneffective tech & POW system to our BitShares way of doing things ?

On the technical side, porting bitcoin to DPOS would be a major undertaking. Nobody would be willing to take the risk that something goes wrong along the way, because a mistake in that process could destroy bitcoin.

On the political side - NO WAY! The bitcoin community consists largely of PoW believers who wouldn't touch PoS or DPOS with a long pole. Ever. Even if a subset of the community did make such a move, the rest would stay behind and effectively fork bitcoin.

[Stan]

I edited my numbers to include the fact that we started slightly below 2.5 billion.  Same conclusion.

[yellowecho]

Actually, I left out one important Fun Fact:  In 5 months the share supply has increased from 2,500,000,000 to 2,505,960,283 for a net increase of 5,960,283 or 0.24%.    So, those who complain about dilution are asserting that a fraction of a percent worth of dilution is responsible for several hundred percent decline in price.

Now, it may be true that complaining about dilution is responsible for such a drop, but the dilution itself has been negligible.

Very good point!  This fact needs to spread like wild fire in the Chinese community since many had fears.

[Stan]

BitShares has a fixed ceiling it will never reach and one-fifth the dilution of Bitcoin - which wastes its dilution instead of reinvesting it.  How does that disqualify one from being a currency and not the other?

Further, BitShares is a profitable company that produces smart-currencies as its products.  Products that are better in every way with none of the drawbacks you mention.  There is no inflation in BitAssets at all (relative to their underlying peg) and the underlying BTS can produce those stable currency products whether is gaining or falling in value.  BTS is not intended to be a currency itself, so a tiny amount of dilution has zero affect on the value proposition of its smart currency products.

Further, regardless of whether developers are paid in "mined" equity or existing equity from the AGS stash or 10% set aside for developers in the genesis block, the selling pressure they generate to pay their rent would be the same anyway.  That modicum of selling pressure is the cost of generating forward thrust.  There was no other source of thrust.  BTSX would have stopped advancing in the state it was in November.  If work had stopped, where would the price be?

BTSX would have stagnated with no further support while BitShares VOTE and DNS would be splitting the benefits of what BitShares is today - self funding of developers and other ecosystem entrepreneurs.  People always seem to forget what the alternatives were when the decisions were made.  The fact is that

The BTSX-only universe you are wishing for was not one of the choices available to us.

The only choices were to merge or commit fratricide - three block chains competing to the death for market depth and network effect (where BTSX was the only one unable to pay developers).  Imagine three different BitUSDs splitting the current market depth.

We are so incredibly much stronger than we were in November I can hardly believe it.  The market will catch up with that fact in due time.  In the meantime, I hope everybody enjoyed the March Madness sale!

Stan - this post should be a sticky. I couldn't agree more and needed this sanity check/reminder of where we are/came from in November.

 

I'm really getting tired of all that delegate pay doom and gloom talk. I don't understand how our greatest advantage over all other crypto projects is constantly getting attacked in such a manner. Whereas Bitcoin with far higher inflation (and inefficient use) has still a market cap 200 times higher. And even more importantly is trading relatively stable at those prices.

Actually, I left out one important Fun Fact:  In 5 months the share supply has increased from 2,498,764,342 to 2,505,960,283 for a net increase of 7,197,985 or 0.28%.    So, those who complain about dilution are asserting that a fraction of a percent worth of dilution is responsible for several hundred percent decline in price.

Now, it may be true that complaining about dilution is responsible for such a drop, but the dilution itself has been negligible.

[EstefanTT]

correlation != causation

Agreed, interesting nonetheless.

I have gotten more done for the future of BTS in the past month than in the 3 months prior and everyone on the core team knows it.

Except ultimately, BitShares is likely going to be even LESS inflationary than Bitcoin even with all delegates at 100% (and that won't happen).  So actually from everything I've read the Incorrect perception that BitShares is truly "inflationary" is a hard sell for those who have been around here reading the analysis over time on the forum. 

Bitcoin is going to change or die.  It cannot change, though, without pissing a bunch of people off, which will cause problems for it.  Bitcoin needs something better than the "Bitcoin foundation" to rule it. 

BitShares actually gives the citizenry a way to choose the course of BitShares in a more stable and less volatile way--BAKED INTO THE DAMNED CAKE!  This means that once we all figure out how to best utilize those tools (and some of those tools are built by people -- like bitsapphire and many others), our problems will not hold us back at all because we will more easily adapt to them. 

Everyone here does recognize BitShares is just a little bit over 1 year old and Bitcoin has been around for almost 7, right?  Let's everyone here do me a favor and lets promise to get on Mumble in 5 more years and look over this post together--and record the commentary.

One caveat though--I get to drink a bunch of Gin and laugh at all of you who are hanging your heads right now...and you have to laugh too, cause you will have to admit how ridiculous this fear was.   

It's a question I ask to myself a lot lately ; what does prevent bitcoin of upgrading his current noneffective tech & POW system to our BitShares way of doing things ? We would have the same tech but no market cap and no public reputation. That is not something that would hurt us but simply destroy the project.

Maybe it's not the best time to ask it, everybody is stressed enough with the price playing with our cortisol level but I'm probably not the only one who had this interrogation. An answer for someone with good knowledge about this could add some peace in some minds.

I don't postpone this question because, let's be reasonable, in a very near future BitShares will rock the world of cryptos and there won't be places for doubts anymore ... So, I enjoy the time of doubts and stressy questions, it won't last for long

[xiahui135]

Btc has a larger inflation than bitshares now , but they just do not concentrate on it.  They just announce there will only be 21 million in total ever.

[fuzzy]

-MetaExchange
-3D Printing Alliance growing (ISG3D)

-Open Source Hardware
-DataSecurity Shares
-MoonStone
-CryptoFresh (bitscape & roadscape)

-LimeWallet
-Nathans Wallet
-MineBitShares
-PLAY
-MUSIC
-BitSharesTV
-NullStreet Marketers
-*CryptoSmith*
-*BeyondBitcoin.org* (when Stan gets the domain to Jabba
-*BitShares Island* 



And this isn't even talking about Chinese initiatives (like selling shares in berkshire hathaway)...
And as always...there are others I am not at liberty to talk about (yet).

[fuzzy]

correlation != causation

Agreed, interesting nonetheless.

I have gotten more done for the future of BTS in the past month than in the 3 months prior and everyone on the core team knows it.

Except ultimately, BitShares is likely going to be even LESS inflationary than Bitcoin even with all delegates at 100% (and that won't happen).  So actually from everything I've read the Incorrect perception that BitShares is truly "inflationary" is a hard sell for those who have been around here reading the analysis over time on the forum. 

Bitcoin is going to change or die.  It cannot change, though, without pissing a bunch of people off, which will cause problems for it.  Bitcoin needs something better than the "Bitcoin foundation" to rule it. 

BitShares actually gives the citizenry a way to choose the course of BitShares in a more stable and less volatile way--BAKED INTO THE DAMNED CAKE!  This means that once we all figure out how to best utilize those tools (and some of those tools are built by people -- like bitsapphire and many others), our problems will not hold us back at all because we will more easily adapt to them. 

Everyone here does recognize BitShares is just a little bit over 1 year old and Bitcoin has been around for almost 7, right?  Let's everyone here do me a favor and lets promise to get on Mumble in 5 more years and look over this post together--and record the commentary.

One caveat though--I get to drink a bunch of Gin and laugh at all of you who are hanging your heads right now...and you have to laugh too, cause you will have to admit how ridiculous this fear was.