Author Topic: New Stealth Transfer Worker ($1000)  (Read 59942 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tuck Fheman

  • Guest
Nothing in this statement says anything about any possible future sharedrops but a lot of people in here are buying these Brownies in the expectation and hope of those sharedrops.

They were sharedropped to 4 times yesterday. ;)

Offline onceuponatime

1) BM issues the UIA with a fixed amount and price so total market cap is $45k
2)  people buy into that via bitusd and bts
3) BM uses converts the bitusd and bts in usd
4) Owners of the UIA "may" receive the fees from the stealth transfers for life
5) Problem solved right?

Everything is based on trust.No legal binding. No "security"
I'm not sure the "may" would hold up. If BM refused to distribute any fees, a court may enforce it because the implied expectation was materially relied upon.

a proper disclaimer associated with the UIA solves any legal issues I think...
I don't think that there is any legal binding with Brownies
"Brownie points in modern usage are a hypothetical social currency, which can be acquired by doing good deeds or earning favor in the eyes of another, often one's superior.
Issued by bytemaster".
 Nothing in this statement says anything about any possible future sharedrops but a lot of people in here are buying these Brownies in the expectation and hope of those sharedrops..No matter what happens no one can claim that this is a security because of the implied expectation by some people..

Bitshares is a free society based on free gifts from one to the other. We are building a gift economy here. I don't think you can drive BM to the court if he issues an asset that people buy in with the expectation to receive fees for life and then he refuses to distribute those fees. All you can do in this case is never trust him ever again..I think we overcomplicate things for no reason..

I don't think that your analysis holds true with regards to BROWNIEPTS. Bytemaster was never selling Brownies to raise money for anything. He was freely giving them away.

Offline mf-tzo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
    • View Profile
1) BM issues the UIA with a fixed amount and price so total market cap is $45k
2)  people buy into that via bitusd and bts
3) BM uses converts the bitusd and bts in usd
4) Owners of the UIA "may" receive the fees from the stealth transfers for life
5) Problem solved right?

Everything is based on trust.No legal binding. No "security"
I'm not sure the "may" would hold up. If BM refused to distribute any fees, a court may enforce it because the implied expectation was materially relied upon.

a proper disclaimer associated with the UIA solves any legal issues I think...
I don't think that there is any legal binding with Brownies
"Brownie points in modern usage are a hypothetical social currency, which can be acquired by doing good deeds or earning favor in the eyes of another, often one's superior.
Issued by bytemaster".
 Nothing in this statement says anything about any possible future sharedrops but a lot of people in here are buying these Brownies in the expectation and hope of those sharedrops..No matter what happens no one can claim that this is a security because of the implied expectation by some people..

Bitshares is a free society based on free gifts from one to the other. We are building a gift economy here. I don't think you can drive BM to the court if he issues an asset that people buy in with the expectation to receive fees for life and then he refuses to distribute those fees. All you can do in this case is never trust him ever again..I think we overcomplicate things for no reason..

Offline Chronos

-You buy $45k of BTS off the market
-You get paid back by a worker proposal that pays you back over a few months

Result is that your added buy pressure helps fund CNX via their worker positions.
Yes, it makes sense to me a worker role would be somehow involved in the solution here. It was designed for this purpose (funding new work).

EDIT: did you miss a "step 1b: burn BTS" or does the investor keep the bought BTS? I want to receive a worker role for buying BTS, haha.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2015, 08:05:46 pm by Chronos »

Offline oldmine

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
@oldmine   I am having trouble understanding what your contribution is adding to the search for solutions as to how to fund new features..

What was wrong with my previous suggestion?
-You buy $45k of BTS off the market
-You get paid back by a worker proposal that pays you back over a few months

Result is that your added buy pressure helps fund CNX via their worker positions.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2015, 07:39:34 pm by oldmine »

Offline Chronos

1) BM issues the UIA with a fixed amount and price so total market cap is $45k
2)  people buy into that via bitusd and bts
3) BM uses converts the bitusd and bts in usd
4) Owners of the UIA "may" receive the fees from the stealth transfers for life
5) Problem solved right?

Everything is based on trust.No legal binding. No "security"
I'm not sure the "may" would hold up. If BM refused to distribute any fees, a court may enforce it because the implied expectation was materially relied upon.

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4664
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
I don't like implementing a hard fork to change fee allocation to go to a specific account. It's not very decentralized. Perhaps a UIA-based solution is better.

Yep it sounds shit.

@Chronos  If you could articulate how a UIA would escape the regulatory concern of issuing a "security" it would be helpful.

@oldmine   I am having trouble understanding what your contribution is adding to the search for solutions as to how to fund new features..

why a UIA would be considered a "security"? It can simply be a UIA like all the ones people create  with no real value like "goodidea" opensesame" ,"brownies" etc..with no strings attached like AGS was in the past. People decide to buy it because they believe it "may" have some value like earning fees from stealth transfers..I don't see any legal binding in all that or any kind of "security"..

1) BM issues the UIA with a fixed amount and price so total market cap is $45k
2)  people buy into that via bitusd and bts
3) BM uses converts the bitusd and bts in usd
4) Owners of the UIA "may" receive the fees from the stealth transfers for life
5) Problem solved right?

Everything is based on trust.No legal binding. No "security"
Legal issues.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline void

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Oh I thought this was a protocol change.  I don't mind how anything on top of that is funded...I don't think we should even create worker proposals for that..  3rd parties Can implement and make money from services.

If it's  a protocol change I Favour BTS reserve paying for. Failing that, an open ICO funding round.

Just my BTS's worth...

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4664
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
This is a proposal to put stealth transfers in the Graphene wallet. What about Moonstone and alternative wallets?

This.. solution is to only split fees generated by Graphene GUI wallet?
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

Offline mf-tzo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
    • View Profile
I don't like implementing a hard fork to change fee allocation to go to a specific account. It's not very decentralized. Perhaps a UIA-based solution is better.

Yep it sounds shit.

@Chronos  If you could articulate how a UIA would escape the regulatory concern of issuing a "security" it would be helpful.

@oldmine   I am having trouble understanding what your contribution is adding to the search for solutions as to how to fund new features..

why a UIA would be considered a "security"? It can simply be a UIA like all the ones people create  with no real value like "goodidea" opensesame" ,"brownies" etc..with no strings attached like AGS was in the past. People decide to buy it because they believe it "may" have some value like earning fees from stealth transfers..I don't see any legal binding in all that or any kind of "security"..

1) BM issues the UIA with a fixed amount and price so total market cap is $45k
2)  people buy into that via bitusd and bts
3) BM uses converts the bitusd and bts in usd
4) Owners of the UIA "may" receive the fees from the stealth transfers for life
5) Problem solved right?

Everything is based on trust.No legal binding. No "security"

Offline onceuponatime

I don't like implementing a hard fork to change fee allocation to go to a specific account. It's not very decentralized. Perhaps a UIA-based solution is better.

Yep it sounds shit.

@Chronos  If you could articulate how a UIA would escape the regulatory concern of issuing a "security" it would be helpful.

@oldmine   I am having trouble understanding what your contribution is adding to the search for solutions as to how to fund new features..

Offline oldmine

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
I don't like implementing a hard fork to change fee allocation to go to a specific account. It's not very decentralized. Perhaps a UIA-based solution is better.

Yep it sounds shit.

Offline Chronos

This is a proposal to put stealth transfers in the Graphene wallet. What about Moonstone and alternative wallets?

I don't like implementing a hard fork to change fee allocation to go to a specific account. It's not very decentralized. Perhaps a UIA-based solution is better.

Offline btstip

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 644
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: btstip-io
Hey EstefanTT, here are the results of your tips...
Curious about BtsTip? Visit us at http://sharebits.io and start tipping BTS on https://bitsharestalk.org/ today!
Created by hybridd

Offline Akado

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2752
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: akado
We just hired a new developer.  We have a lot of customers competing for our attention right now.  We are attempting to add capacity responsibly.

If it comes down to prioritization of scarce resources we will do whatever pays the most first (ECON 101).

This is nice to hear. Hope things keep up and you can hire a few more. Let's see what's the size of CNX team next year in 2017! *insert missing remind me in one year feature that reddit has*
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads