Bitshares price discussion

[Tuck Fheman]

In hindsight, bitshares should have done the same with their first release.

So this *GENERAL WARNING* is placed here as a caution to all:

BitShares is an industry under development.
You have a chance to participate in that development.

Its products are highly experimental, immature, and full of bugs.
They have been made available so early adopters can help test them.
They are likely to break on you at the worst possible time.
You should not trust them.
You should double check everything they do.
You should experiment with very small amounts before doing anything big.
You should not do anything big.
You should realize that what worked yesterday should be double-checked today.

We could wait until it is perfect before letting you participate.
But by then the rewards you might get would be reduced by as much as the risks.

That's why the disclaimer you accepted before you could first launch the software warned that the software comes with no guarantees to be good for anything at all.

Yeah @Stan why didn't you warn us?! 

[karnal]

...
Ethereum has done a better job at underpromising and overdelivering, marketing 101.  They basically have told average users to stay far, far away with the frontier release.  In hindsight, bitshares should have done the same with their first release.  Realistically, both projects are probably near the same stage of development.
...

I think we can take a leaf out of Ethereum's 'under promised and over delivered' approach.  Investors jumped in joyful celebration when Ethereum delivered their first working version.

Bitshares or rather CNX has 'promised' a number of new features with BTS 2.0 - '1 second block intervals', 'over 100,000 transactions per second', 'user-friendly hosted wallet interface', 'financial smart contract features', 'tools for community feedback', 'referral system', 'developer-friendly and extensible codebase', and 'Transferable Named Accounts'.

Investors are not too happy but OK with the promised features delivered 2-month late, 6-month late or even 1-year later than the estimated delivery date - as long as Bitshares delivers all these wonderful promised features.  But they are certainly NOT OK with a 2-month or 6-month late delivery with one or worst, more of the promised features removed or reduced with so-called compromises. 

Let's surprise our investors with 'over joy' rather than 'deep disappointment'.

Well said!

[phillyguy]

...
Ethereum has done a better job at underpromising and overdelivering, marketing 101.  They basically have told average users to stay far, far away with the frontier release.  In hindsight, bitshares should have done the same with their first release.  Realistically, both projects are probably near the same stage of development.
...

I think we can take a leaf out of Ethereum's 'under promised and over delivered' approach.  Investors jumped in joyful celebration when Ethereum delivered their first working version.

Bitshares or rather CNX has 'promised' a number of new features with BTS 2.0 - '1 second block intervals', 'over 100,000 transactions per second', 'user-friendly hosted wallet interface', 'financial smart contract features', 'tools for community feedback', 'referral system', 'developer-friendly and extensible codebase', and 'Transferable Named Accounts'.

Investors are not too happy but OK with the promised features delivered 2-month late, 6-month late or even 1-year later than the estimated delivery date - as long as Bitshares delivers all these wonderful promised features.  But they are certainly NOT OK with a 2-month or 6-month late delivery with one or worst, more of the promised features removed or reduced with so-called compromises. 

Let's surprise our investors with 'over joy' rather than 'deep disappointment'.

Well said!

[Helikopterben]

I really think perceptions and community expectations and changes are playing a lot more into what you are saying than what was originally promised. I may be completely wrong, as I give Ethereum about 5% the amount of attention I give Bitshares, but during their fundraiser, did they claim that average users would have to stay far, far away from their first official release? What was their original promise?  What did they deliver?  How the heck is that Marketing 101? I would suggest that their developer names, personal networking and community environment has a lot more to do with the massive forgiveness I've seen regarding that release.

Again, perceptions.

I remember the ethereum camp saying things such as "the initial stages will have many bugs and problems, if there is ever an initial release at all."  - not exact quotes, and the bitshares camp saying things such as "there will be many separate blockchains for many different functions and if you buy pts, then you get a stake in all of it."  That obviously never happened.  Maybe i just perceive ethereum as being much more conservative and realistic in their approach and I could really care less about PR, but other people might care. 

Anyway, i am much more heavily invested in bts because I think the tech and vision is simply better at solving many of the greatest financial problems that have plagued mankind for centuries, and that is very exciting to be a part of.

[montpelerin]

Ethereum has done a better job at underpromising and overdelivering, marketing 101.  They basically have told average users to stay far, far away with the frontier release.  In hindsight, bitshares should have done the same with their first release.  Realistically, both projects are probably near the same stage of development.  Ethereum has said it would be another year before a fairly stable user version is available.  I would expect bitshares to follow the same trajectory.  In 5 years we should have stable platforms for which to conduct all things finance, but it is just unrealistic to expect it anytime soon.  Who knows, maybe 2.0 will overdeliver, but it will be hard to overcome the hype yet again.

I really think perceptions and community expectations and changes are playing a lot more into what you are saying than what was originally promised. I may be completely wrong, as I give Ethereum about 5% the amount of attention I give Bitshares, but during their fundraiser, did they claim that average users would have to stay far, far away from their first official release? What was their original promise?  What did they deliver?  How the heck is that Marketing 101? I would suggest that their developer names, personal networking and community environment has a lot more to do with the massive forgiveness I've seen regarding that release.

Again, perceptions.

I'm still confused at how anybody can consider their current release as official - I think it does show some computer programmers can live comfortably inside their own small world by managing to interpret a CLI as an official release, while the rest (the probable majority of people that actually financed the project) have no realistic way to access the network.

Aside from that, I do think your listed time frame is probably a lot more accurate for heavy hitters and investment (but I wouldn't mind it come sooner  )

[montpelerin]

I think in amateur software yes but after you are experienced an estimate gets better.

I agree.

However, I don't think anybody here can truly be called "experienced" - this is all new stuff, and many of these achievements are completely new.

I'd expect that bytemaster's/CNX's estimates for custom plug and tweak enterprise chains will be much more accurate in the next few years as he gains more experience.

[cube]

...
Ethereum has done a better job at underpromising and overdelivering, marketing 101.  They basically have told average users to stay far, far away with the frontier release.  In hindsight, bitshares should have done the same with their first release.  Realistically, both projects are probably near the same stage of development.
...

I think we can take a leaf out of Ethereum's 'under promised and over delivered' approach.  Investors jumped in joyful celebration when Ethereum delivered their first working version.

Bitshares or rather CNX has 'promised' a number of new features with BTS 2.0 - '1 second block intervals', 'over 100,000 transactions per second', 'user-friendly hosted wallet interface', 'financial smart contract features', 'tools for community feedback', 'referral system', 'developer-friendly and extensible codebase', and 'Transferable Named Accounts'.

Investors are not too happy but OK with the promised features delivered 2-month late, 6-month late or even 1-year later than the estimated delivery date - as long as Bitshares delivers all these wonderful promised features.  But they are certainly NOT OK with a 2-month or 6-month late delivery with one or worst, more of the promised features removed or reduced with so-called compromises. 

Let's surprise our investors with 'over joy' rather than 'deep disappointment'.

[Riverhead]

Ethereum has said it would be another year before a fairly stable user version is available.  I would expect bitshares to follow the same trajectory.  In 5 years we should have stable platforms for which to conduct all things finance, but it is just unrealistic to expect it anytime soon.  Who knows, maybe 2.0 will overdeliver, but it will be hard to overcome the hype yet again.

Success means different things to different people. For this project alone success to some is if we get anyone outside of the crypto community to pause and critically think about their financial environment. For others the market cap needs to reach $1BB USD before it's considered a success.

If we look at ambitious software projects that have stood on the shoulders of giants (OSX->FreeBSD, Windows->Xerox, Linux->Unix, BTS->BTC) "success" came long before what anyone would consider a viable product.

For me success means I can work in crypto full time and support the lifestyle my current corporate gig provides. I think the timeline on that is much shorter than five years for those willing to put a bit of sweat equity into a project.

[Helikopterben]

Pro tip: If any software developer promises delivery in 2 months, expect 4. 8 months? Expect 16.
Add extra cushion for degree of difficulty.

I agree, but the TS dev eam shouldve maybe tried to be a bit more realistic with their announcements.  They suffer from planning fallacy pretty bad it seems. 
Ethereum managed to be only like 6 months late, but Bitshares is closer to a year late on promises now.

Still, it just shows you how hard what we are doing is, and how difficult it will be for anyone else to copy it and compete.

This depends on your perception, I believe.

Project coordinators dream about having software developers with the work ethic, foresight and ability to continuously re-examine the current status of their product half as good as this team has demonstrated. What you don't want is developers without ambition, because that is all you're asking for with a more "realistic" and longer estimated development time.

This is the part of the calculation that must be done on the investor end (this is also the part that newmine is using to abuse those with less experience).

As far as I am concerned, and as someone who has been around everyday since the beginning (this is not meant to be said as holier-than-thou, merely that I have been around from the original promises to today - everyday), BTSX launch + immediate repairs = delivered product. What we are seeing with 2.0 is an extra and improved build on the original which has been had for mere scraps of dilution.

Whatever promises each investing individual were most valuing and counting on are also not clear - the fact that they are not set in stone is one of the most positive aspects of Bitshares and bytemaster's leadership. Bitshares has swerved and pivoted when new information became available. This development has been a continuous evolution, if bytemaster had been so hard headed as to stick to the initial day 1 plans, it's very possible this project would be all but dead and everybody's investment would be much closer to zero.

As far as I am concerned, Ethereum has not yet launched.

Can you imagine the backlash bytemaster and team would have received merely suggesting an "official" launch without a GUI?

As investors, do we really think this next iteration will be the final version?  I have my doubts.  I have a feeling MPA's will be difficult to get right, but eventually the correct formula will be found.  Bitshares has been rebooted twice now.  First with the "merger" and now with 2.0.  I could foresee another reboot being necessary if this next version doesn't go exactly according to plan, but at least the dev team is willing to take on that task if necessary and not just try to patch things up if it doesn't work.

Ethereum has done a better job at underpromising and overdelivering, marketing 101.  They basically have told average users to stay far, far away with the frontier release.  In hindsight, bitshares should have done the same with their first release.  Realistically, both projects are probably near the same stage of development.  Ethereum has said it would be another year before a fairly stable user version is available.  I would expect bitshares to follow the same trajectory.  In 5 years we should have stable platforms for which to conduct all things finance, but it is just unrealistic to expect it anytime soon.  Who knows, maybe 2.0 will overdeliver, but it will be hard to overcome the hype yet again.

[NewMine]

I really don't get it...Who on earth is selling BTS at these prices? How is that even possible..
I can partially understand selling btc due to the whole confusion with XT maybe but why whould someone sell BTS now? I mean even CNX never comes out how is it possible that BTS is valued so low? We have a working platform with various bitassets and yet BTS is falling..I simply don't get this..

It really is preservation of capital.

With the stock markets dropping 5-10% in a day and bitcoin losing 30% in a few weeks, people are preserving capital and exiting the risky "investments" because fear is high.

Couple that with the complete uncertainty of Cryptonomex future alignments, aka the bank talk, and you have a recipe for stagnation. Let's also not forget about all the broken promises, failed deadlines, unusable current product and hints of grandiose things that never came to. People are rightfully skeptical and price has definitely reflected that.

There really is no mystery why.  There have been other good ideas by companies who were better run that failed too. Timing, marketing, competition are all categories that could cause failure and Bitshares whatever is failing with all three and more.

You could've just said "typical software development".

What is very unfortunate about the small holders that have been spooked by people like you (especially you) is that most of them have most probably never been involved in a software development project before and don't understand that these kind of delays are not only completely normal, but should be expected and planned for.

Pro tip: If any software developer promises delivery in 2 months, expect 4. 8 months? Expect 16.
Add extra cushion for degree of difficulty.

How many crypto decentralized exchanges had been built before Bitshares?
Yeah.

What's more interesting about Bitshares is that there actually exists a functioning client and blockchain that has been operating for over a year (with a functioning GUI  !!!) - and is about to release with a rewritten, more functional and streamlined version within the next 2-3 months (any somewhat experienced investor should not flinch if it were to take longer). The funny thing here is that you are probably the single most responsible one here at shaking out the weak hands (ie - making the poor, poorer and the rich, richer)

But keep at it, by all means - Mr. Numine - you have certainly helped people like me obtain far more BTS than I would have thought possible last year at this time. What you have been doing might be very good for you and the people that can easily see through you, but you are hurting those that can't - and you know what you are doing.

I just can't believe so many here let you slide with it until now.

It's one thing to take advantage of personal knowledge for personal gain - it's completely different to bait those lacking knowledge with FUD.

Monty

 

Hey Munty, whatever makes you feel nice and toasty inside with your poor investment decisions.

You should visit the technical help threads if you really think the current client/GUI is working fine.

As for shitty Ethereum, according to your qualifications for Bitshares, ETH meets them too.  They have a functioning blockchain.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

Pro tip: If any software developer promises delivery in 2 months, expect 4. 8 months? Expect 16.
Add extra cushion for degree of difficulty.

I agree, but the TS dev eam shouldve maybe tried to be a bit more realistic with their announcements.  They suffer from planning fallacy pretty bad it seems. 
Ethereum managed to be only like 6 months late, but Bitshares is closer to a year late on promises now.

Still, it just shows you how hard what we are doing is, and how difficult it will be for anyone else to copy it and compete.

This depends on your perception, I believe.

Project coordinators dream about having software developers with the work ethic, foresight and ability to continuously re-examine the current status of their product half as good as this team has demonstrated. What you don't want is developers without ambition, because that is all you're asking for with a more "realistic" and longer estimated development time.

This is the part of the calculation that must be done on the investor end (this is also the part that newmine is using to abuse those with less experience).

As far as I am concerned, and as someone who has been around everyday since the beginning (this is not meant to be said as holier-than-thou, merely that I have been around from the original promises to today - everyday), BTSX launch + immediate repairs = delivered product. What we are seeing with 2.0 is an extra and improved build on the original which has been had for mere scraps of dilution.

Whatever promises each investing individual were most valuing and counting on are also not clear - the fact that they are not set in stone is one of the most positive aspects of Bitshares and bytemaster's leadership. Bitshares has swerved and pivoted when new information became available. This development has been a continuous evolution, if bytemaster had been so hard headed as to stick to the initial day 1 plans, it's very possible this project would be all but dead and everybody's investment would be much closer to zero.

As far as I am concerned, Ethereum has not yet launched.

Can you imagine the backlash bytemaster and team would have received merely suggesting an "official" launch without a GUI?

[jsidhu]

I really don't get it...Who on earth is selling BTS at these prices? How is that even possible..
I can partially understand selling btc due to the whole confusion with XT maybe but why whould someone sell BTS now? I mean even CNX never comes out how is it possible that BTS is valued so low? We have a working platform with various bitassets and yet BTS is falling..I simply don't get this..

It really is preservation of capital.

With the stock markets dropping 5-10% in a day and bitcoin losing 30% in a few weeks, people are preserving capital and exiting the risky "investments" because fear is high.

Couple that with the complete uncertainty of Cryptonomex future alignments, aka the bank talk, and you have a recipe for stagnation. Let's also not forget about all the broken promises, failed deadlines, unusable current product and hints of grandiose things that never came to. People are rightfully skeptical and price has definitely reflected that.

There really is no mystery why.  There have been other good ideas by companies who were better run that failed too. Timing, marketing, competition are all categories that could cause failure and Bitshares whatever is failing with all three and more.

You could've just said "typical software development".

What is very unfortunate about the small holders that have been spooked by people like you (especially you) is that most of them have most probably never been involved in a software development project before and don't understand that these kind of delays are not only completely normal, but should be expected and planned for.

Pro tip: If any software developer promises delivery in 2 months, expect 4. 8 months? Expect 16.
Add extra cushion for degree of difficulty.

How many crypto decentralized exchanges had been built before Bitshares?
Yeah.

What's more interesting about Bitshares is that there actually exists a functioning client and blockchain that has been operating for over a year (with a functioning GUI  !!!) - and is about to release with a rewritten, more functional and streamlined version within the next 2-3 months (any somewhat experienced investor should not flinch if it were to take longer). The funny thing here is that you are probably the single most responsible one here at shaking out the weak hands (ie - making the poor, poorer and the rich, richer)

But keep at it, by all means - Mr. Numine - you have certainly helped people like me obtain far more BTS than I would have thought possible last year at this time. What you have been doing might be very good for you and the people that can easily see through you, but you are hurting those that can't - and you know what you are doing.

I just can't believe so many here let you slide with it until now.

It's one thing to take advantage of personal knowledge for personal gain - it's completely different to bait those lacking knowledge with FUD.

Monty

 

I think in amateur software yes but after you are experienced an estimate gets better.

[Ben Mason]

Pro tip: If any software developer promises delivery in 2 months, expect 4. 8 months? Expect 16.
Add extra cushion for degree of difficulty.

I agree, but the TS dev eam shouldve maybe tried to be a bit more realistic with their announcements.  They suffer from planning fallacy pretty bad it seems. 
Ethereum managed to be only like 6 months late, but Bitshares is closer to a year late on promises now.

Still, it just shows you how hard what we are doing is, and how difficult it will be for anyone else to copy it and compete.

This depends on your perception, I believe.

Project coordinators dream about having software developers with the work ethic, foresight and ability to continuously re-examine the current status of their product half as good as this team has demonstrated. What you don't want is developers without ambition, because that is all you're asking for with a more "realistic" and longer estimated development time.

This is the part of the calculation that must be done on the investor end (this is also the part that newmine is using to abuse those with less experience).

As far as I am concerned, and as someone who has been around everyday since the beginning (this is not meant to be said as holier-than-thou, merely that I have been around from the original promises to today - everyday), BTSX launch + immediate repairs = delivered product. What we are seeing with 2.0 is an extra and improved build on the original which has been had for mere scraps of dilution.

Whatever promises each investing individual were most valuing and counting on are also not clear - the fact that they are not set in stone is one of the most positive aspects of Bitshares and bytemaster's leadership. Bitshares has swerved and pivoted when new information became available. This development has been a continuous evolution, if bytemaster had been so hard headed as to stick to the initial day 1 plans, it's very possible this project would be all but dead and everybody's investment would be much closer to zero.

As far as I am concerned, Ethereum has not yet launched.

Can you imagine the backlash bytemaster and team would have received merely suggesting an "official" launch without a GUI?

Really well said. I couldn't agree more. Even without Bitshares2.0/Graphene, what the dev team and supporting community members have accomplished to date is monumental. For that reason, it feels like an ocean of potential will soon be released.

[Ander]

I do think what we will get in 2.0 is going to be worth all of this wait, for sure.  Most of the pivoting was a great idea, even if painful. 

While I wish the announced dates for things were closer to reality, by now I know that I jut have to wait until they are missed, and then buy cheap BTS, and then profit later when they actually happen.

[montpelerin]

Pro tip: If any software developer promises delivery in 2 months, expect 4. 8 months? Expect 16.
Add extra cushion for degree of difficulty.

I agree, but the TS dev eam shouldve maybe tried to be a bit more realistic with their announcements.  They suffer from planning fallacy pretty bad it seems. 
Ethereum managed to be only like 6 months late, but Bitshares is closer to a year late on promises now.

Still, it just shows you how hard what we are doing is, and how difficult it will be for anyone else to copy it and compete.

This depends on your perception, I believe.

Project coordinators dream about having software developers with the work ethic, foresight and ability to continuously re-examine the current status of their product half as good as this team has demonstrated. What you don't want is developers without ambition, because that is all you're asking for with a more "realistic" and longer estimated development time.

This is the part of the calculation that must be done on the investor end (this is also the part that newmine is using to abuse those with less experience).

As far as I am concerned, and as someone who has been around everyday since the beginning (this is not meant to be said as holier-than-thou, merely that I have been around from the original promises to today - everyday), BTSX launch + immediate repairs = delivered product. What we are seeing with 2.0 is an extra and improved build on the original which has been had for mere scraps of dilution.

Whatever promises each investing individual were most valuing and counting on are also not clear - the fact that they are not set in stone is one of the most positive aspects of Bitshares and bytemaster's leadership. Bitshares has swerved and pivoted when new information became available. This development has been a continuous evolution, if bytemaster had been so hard headed as to stick to the initial day 1 plans, it's very possible this project would be all but dead and everybody's investment would be much closer to zero.

As far as I am concerned, Ethereum has not yet launched.

Can you imagine the backlash bytemaster and team would have received merely suggesting an "official" launch without a GUI?