Author Topic: NOTE value after snapshot  (Read 9774 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline woolcii

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile

Offline roadscape

tonyk do you have a proposed solution for a stable crypto that can be used by the music industry?

The only "solution" I see is a merger with the main BTS chain. So coding up the Automatic Royalty Payment Splitter into BTS 2.0 and having everything run on Bit_USD (collateralized by BTS)
This would be great for liquidity no doubt and make it cheaper (less nodes to pay) and grow the network effect. But there are a bunch of other problems imo.
1st We want MUSE to be a blockchain for the Music industry. Meaning a global database that finally takes care of the mess with global royalty payments and copyrights for music.
2nd have it "owned" by the music industry.  The "board of directors" aka people that have been delegated voting power (through proxy voting) should know a thing or two about that ridiculously complicated world.
3rd The business model of BTS is different. BTS has high fees and paid memberships with the referral program. It makes total sense when you are undercutting E-trade, Questrade and the like. But we are entering a different market. We want fees to be a competitive as possible in the music market. We want little Jimmy to trade his Beiber Notes with little Jenny from his mobile App without paying 20 cents or buying a lifetime membership at 80$.

What are your thoughts? A separate blockchain to me seemed like the best solution for our needs. But I'm not the smartest guy in the room by a long shot! Long long long shot :)

I have thoughts...and sometimes solutions too. Unfortunately my efforts are the only ones that apparently do not deserve compensation around here...hell even the clueless traveling  *scapes got free trips for the only effort of being coooool.

So, yes for this pay I can only repeat what I said and try to earn money by using my knowledge otherwise (instead of sharing it for free) :

 
"Own,  in-house, museUSD is a suicidal decision for the MUSE blockchain."

tonyk, I used to like your posts.. they kept out the riff-raff. Now they are the riff-raff.

You're not a fan of our documentary project... ok. I don't have a problem with that.

What I do have a problem with is your endless personal attacks. It's unprofessional, toxic, malicious.... and way out of line.
http://cryptofresh.com  |  witness: roadscape

Offline Riverhead

I have doubled my amount of notes that i purchased last year during the auction crowdsale over the last months.

You and me both. Here's hoping it was a good play :).

I have faith in Cob because of what I've seen in the various posts and panel discussions where he's gone toe to toe with others in the space. I have faith in Eddie because he came up through the ranks and has managed to keep his hat in the ring by thinking way outside the box. I don't have a lot of exposure to the other members of the team.

At this point faith is all it is because, as Cob said earlier, the music industry is fucking nuts complicated.

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
smart asset like bitUSD is great but still with high risk.
another problem is the supply.

simple asset like CCEDK-USD is stable, and easy to understand.
I think trust dependency will not be a problem at music industry.

tonyk do you have a proposed solution for a stable crypto that can be used by the music industry?

The only "solution" I see is a merger with the main BTS chain. So coding up the Automatic Royalty Payment Splitter into BTS 2.0 and having everything run on Bit_USD (collateralized by BTS)
This would be great for liquidity no doubt and make it cheaper (less nodes to pay) and grow the network effect. But there are a bunch of other problems imo.
1st We want MUSE to be a blockchain for the Music industry. Meaning a global database that finally takes care of the mess with global royalty payments and copyrights for music.
2nd have it "owned" by the music industry.  The "board of directors" aka people that have been delegated voting power (through proxy voting) should know a thing or two about that ridiculously complicated world.
3rd The business model of BTS is different. BTS has high fees and paid memberships with the referral program. It makes total sense when you are undercutting E-trade, Questrade and the like. But we are entering a different market. We want fees to be a competitive as possible in the music market. We want little Jimmy to trade his Beiber Notes with little Jenny from his mobile App without paying 20 cents or buying a lifetime membership at 80$.

What are your thoughts? A separate blockchain to me seemed like the best solution for our needs. But I'm not the smartest guy in the room by a long shot! Long long long shot :)

Offline Marky0001

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 207
    • View Profile
Let's see how the next months play out!

I have doubled my amount of notes that i purchased last year during the auction crowdsale over the last months.

I consider myself a serious INVESTOR that's why I asked for helpful explanations!

But telling us that basically everything is BS won't help!

I hope this project can gain some momentum!

Offline CryptoPrometheus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
tonyk do you have a proposed solution for a stable crypto that can be used by the music industry?

The only "solution" I see is a merger with the main BTS chain. So coding up the Automatic Royalty Payment Splitter into BTS 2.0 and having everything run on Bit_USD (collateralized by BTS)
This would be great for liquidity no doubt and make it cheaper (less nodes to pay) and grow the network effect. But there are a bunch of other problems imo.
1st We want MUSE to be a blockchain for the Music industry. Meaning a global database that finally takes care of the mess with global royalty payments and copyrights for music.
2nd have it "owned" by the music industry.  The "board of directors" aka people that have been delegated voting power (through proxy voting) should know a thing or two about that ridiculously complicated world.
3rd The business model of BTS is different. BTS has high fees and paid memberships with the referral program. It makes total sense when you are undercutting E-trade, Questrade and the like. But we are entering a different market. We want fees to be a competitive as possible in the music market. We want little Jimmy to trade his Beiber Notes with little Jenny from his mobile App without paying 20 cents or buying a lifetime membership at 80$.

What are your thoughts? A separate blockchain to me seemed like the best solution for our needs. But I'm not the smartest guy in the room by a long shot! Long long long shot :)

I have thoughts...and sometimes solutions too. Unfortunately my efforts are the only ones that apparently do not deserve compensation around here...hell even the clueless traveling  *scapes got free trips for the only effort of being coooool.

So, yes for this pay I can only repeat what I said and try to earn money by using my knowledge otherwise (instead of sharing it for free) :

 
"Own,  in-house, museUSD is a suicidal decision for the MUSE blockchain."

Translation: Other people figured out how to game the system, and I am jealous that they got some free stuff. Since I have chosen to take this as a personal assault,  from now on I will reduce my (supposed) insights to short incomprehensible soundbites, and call people names when they dare to inquire further.

Nobody is asking you to be nice tonyk. We would be idiots to expect that.
"Power and law are not synonymous. In fact, they are often in opposition and irreconcilable."
- Cicero

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
tonyk do you have a proposed solution for a stable crypto that can be used by the music industry?

The only "solution" I see is a merger with the main BTS chain. So coding up the Automatic Royalty Payment Splitter into BTS 2.0 and having everything run on Bit_USD (collateralized by BTS)
This would be great for liquidity no doubt and make it cheaper (less nodes to pay) and grow the network effect. But there are a bunch of other problems imo.
1st We want MUSE to be a blockchain for the Music industry. Meaning a global database that finally takes care of the mess with global royalty payments and copyrights for music.
2nd have it "owned" by the music industry.  The "board of directors" aka people that have been delegated voting power (through proxy voting) should know a thing or two about that ridiculously complicated world.
3rd The business model of BTS is different. BTS has high fees and paid memberships with the referral program. It makes total sense when you are undercutting E-trade, Questrade and the like. But we are entering a different market. We want fees to be a competitive as possible in the music market. We want little Jimmy to trade his Beiber Notes with little Jenny from his mobile App without paying 20 cents or buying a lifetime membership at 80$.

What are your thoughts? A separate blockchain to me seemed like the best solution for our needs. But I'm not the smartest guy in the room by a long shot! Long long long shot :)

I have thoughts...and sometimes solutions too. Unfortunately my efforts are the only ones that apparently do not deserve compensation around here...hell even the clueless traveling  *scapes got free trips for the only effort of being coooool.

So, yes for this pay I can only repeat what I said and try to earn money by using my knowledge otherwise (instead of sharing it for free) :

 
"Own,  in-house, museUSD is a suicidal decision for the MUSE blockchain."
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
tonyk do you have a proposed solution for a stable crypto that can be used by the music industry?

The only "solution" I see is a merger with the main BTS chain. So coding up the Automatic Royalty Payment Splitter into BTS 2.0 and having everything run on Bit_USD (collateralized by BTS)
This would be great for liquidity no doubt and make it cheaper (less nodes to pay) and grow the network effect. But there are a bunch of other problems imo.
1st We want MUSE to be a blockchain for the Music industry. Meaning a global database that finally takes care of the mess with global royalty payments and copyrights for music.
2nd have it "owned" by the music industry.  The "board of directors" aka people that have been delegated voting power (through proxy voting) should know a thing or two about that ridiculously complicated world.
3rd The business model of BTS is different. BTS has high fees and paid memberships with the referral program. It makes total sense when you are undercutting E-trade, Questrade and the like. But we are entering a different market. We want fees to be a competitive as possible in the music market. We want little Jimmy to trade his Beiber Notes with little Jenny from his mobile App without paying 20 cents or buying a lifetime membership at 80$.

What are your thoughts? A separate blockchain to me seemed like the best solution for our needs. But I'm not the smartest guy in the room by a long shot! Long long long shot :)
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Riverhead


Export your wallet on Oct 12th and you'll likely never have to fire up the BTS client again.

?

i am serious... i have the feeling that it will be almost worthless, because no one will need notes to do business in muse.

I am serious too. Once the snapshot is taken BTS, NOTE, and anything else on the 0.9.x chain will be worthless. There may be a brief period where the chain stays alive due to some delegates continuing to run 0.9.x but unless an exchange supports the legacy pair they can't be sold.

Importing the keys you exported on the 12th to Graphene and Muse respectively is your only option.

Therefore you will likely never have to open your BTS [0.9.x] client again after exporting your keys. No attitude intended.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12920
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
NOTE market will be shutdown after the snapshot and not migrated to BTS 2.0 (BM today's mumble)
.. instead it will be migrated to the MUSE blockchain .. so
* no NOTE in BitShares 2.0
* NOTE will be renamed to MUSE
* Muse distribution (as of BitShares 1.0 NOTE balances) will be the initial genesis block for the MUSE blockchain

Offline fav

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4278
  • No Pain, No Gain
    • View Profile
    • Follow Me!
  • BitShares: fav
NOTE market will be shutdown after the snapshot and not migrated to BTS 2.0 (BM today's mumble)

jaran

  • Guest
I thought they made changes in 2.0 that are suppose to solve or at least help the bitusd liquidity problem?

described here https://bitshares.org/technology/price-stable-cryptocurrencies/

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
1 bitUSD worth about 1.1 USD now, without much demand for bitUSD.
so in MUSE, 1bitUSD maybe more than 1.1 USD.
yes, another big different is we'll have a new market engine, so I don't know what will happen.

what I know is the liquility is very important, and we'd better merge the liquility from multi chain if we can.
But I can't find the way. So I am just a little worry about what will happen if MUSE have it's bitUSD.

bitusd in BTS chain almost failure because of lack of liquility.
In my opnion, it's not a good time to separate the liquility for smart asset to multi chain.
so I don't think bitusd in MUSE can bring some advantage for now.
Instead,  bitUSD will bring  many confuse to understand and use MUSE.
You forget one big difference ... that is that MUSE will have peertracks actually USING(!!!) the muse_usd for their service ..
besides exchanges and gateways there is no much demand for bitUSD .. that may be different with muse_USD ..

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12920
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
bitusd in BTS chain almost failure because of lack of liquility.
In my opnion, it's not a good time to separate the liquility for smart asset to multi chain.
so I don't think bitusd in MUSE can bring some advantage for now.
Instead,  bitUSD will bring  many confuse to understand and use MUSE.
You forget one big difference ... that is that MUSE will have peertracks actually USING(!!!) the muse_usd for their service ..
besides exchanges and gateways there is no much demand for bitUSD .. that may be different with muse_USD ..

Offline alt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: baozi
bitusd in BTS chain almost failure because of lack of liquility.
In my opnion, it's not a good time to separate the liquility for smart asset to multi chain.
so I don't think bitusd in MUSE can bring some advantage for now.
Instead,  bitUSD will bring  many confuse to understand and use MUSE.