Author Topic: The Benefits of Proof of Work [BLOG POST]  (Read 26195 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline liondani

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3737
  • Inch by inch, play by play
    • View Profile
    • My detailed info
  • BitShares: liondani
  • GitHub: liondani
For instance, a user could lock up some bts for 1 year but also create bitassets out of that locked bts to be traded on the dex for that period of 1 year.  A margin call would cancel this contract.  Perhaps users who do this could be paid more.  This would give the network the full benefit of those bts by also providing liquidity to the dex.

 +5% +5% +5%
 
I agree that the locked funds could give much more value if they are used to work for the blockchain and not just sitting there... the bitAsset creation is a wonderful example for a blockchain that gives priority to a DEX (like BTS)... For another chain it could be something very different but related to its chain existence...
« Last Edit: April 07, 2016, 12:41:19 pm by liondani »

Offline FreeTrade

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
For anyone who might have missed it, HOdlcoin has been running since the start of the month and it's main features are term deposits, similar to the ideas set out by Dan in his blog post. It also includes interest on every balance, and big bonus interest rates for early adopters. It's quite a simple, elegant fork of the Bitcoin 0.11.2 codebase and it's a 'no moving goalposts' project. Fixes where needed, of course, but no changes to distribution or rewards. No ICO or pre-mine or any of that nonsense.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1317918.0
“People should be more sophisticated? How are you gonna get that done?” - Jerry Seinfeld reply to Bill Maher

Offline Moon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
    • View Profile
"We" have a great idea,but lack of money    --------PTS
Oh wait!
"We" haven't get enough fund through the rule we make !
blame to the envil miner!
it 's fine,let 's change the rule  to...              --------AGS
yeah!we have money now....whatever you can do to contribute the community we can offer you a big sum of money!
brian page,toast,the bitgold gateway guy....
It 's all right,cause we are the "new money" guy!
Oh shit! We are running out of fund!
it 's fine,let 's change the rule  to...              --------merge+delegate pay
pay by the "blockchain"!(or the poor invetment people who got involved since 2013?)  genius?haha!?
Oh,no! the price keeps going down!why?this is such a good product!
we should blame for the market!it has noting to do with the merge and dilution...
but the delegate pay can't fit our STOMACH now!
it 's fine,let 's change the rule  to...              ------worker propsal
you poor investment people don't vote for me to get a big sum of money
I will leave the product half cooked and we  can go to the ideal of communism together and forget our invetment

now again,I have a great new idea.     
                                                            it has nothing to do with dilution...



666

Offline Riverhead


Sort of a double edged sword I guess. Blogging as Dan means that people will think everything written will find its way into Bitshares. Posting with a pen name that no one knows pretty much assures no one will read the blog.


Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
I've been out of touch with this forum for some months, so I may have certain things incorrect or out of context. However, I feel I must express my concerns over this blog post concept, despite the disclaimers that this is just conceptual and not an idea for implementation (yet), so that hopefully others can offer me an alternative perspective.

I am concerned that any implementation of this blog post idea would detract significant value from BTS. I do not feel it would reward behaviour of any material value, that it would unfairly penalise smaller BTS experimenters.

There is a presumption that long term investors add value to liquidity demanders, but I feel this conflates the separate economic concepts of market liquidity and interest. I would offer a different view around each of these as follows:

In economics, the cost of demanding liquidity is the market spread. The provider of that liquidity is the market maker, who receives the spread. The hoarder has no part in this equation, and is not present in the market at all. As a result, BTS users need to source liquidity from other parties, and it is those parties that earn the spread return.

Regarding interest, interest is demanded by capital providers to accommodate time preference - that is, the preference, all else equal, to consume today rather than in the future. While its reasonable for parties willing to lend an asset to demand interest, interest is to be paid by the party borrowing that capital or good for current use. Interest is not paid by all holders of the asset to long term investors/lenders, because the service provided (use or consumption of the asset) is not a common good from which all parties have benefited. (I should add that simple hoarding of an asset does not add any utility or income on that asset to other owners, even if there is a marginal support for the price at the point of initial purchase by such investors, offset by the marginal pressure on price at the point such investors exit in order to realise their investment).

As a result, it's not clear to me why any owner of BTS would be willing to bear up to 15% dilution, paid to holders that are not clearly contributing any value back to them (ie. it's not clear what real work, for the common benefit, has been performed). This forces all owners to either lock away funds to avoid dilution, or to exit and not participate in the system at all. This would seem to repel potential users who may want to use BTS for everyday transactions (e.g. wages, services, purchase etc), smaller stakeholders wishing to experiment with BTS, as well as value-adders such as service providers, and market-makers.

Rather than reward those locking away funds, for whom there is no beneficiary, I'd focus on rewarding contributions to the network. While prima-facie it seems that running an army of computers around the world to solve exotic mathematical problems might be an unnecessary cost to secure a network, certainly a meaningful cost is required to secure the network whether that is PoW or PoS. I'd always thought that for PoS that is the strength of the governance structure that supports the selection and monitoring of the block producers. Greater investment in that governance structure creates higher barriers to attack. If there were a way to reward all the contributors to that governance structure, apart from just the block-producers themselves, that to me would seem to strengthen the overall network, and be a cost owners would be willing to bear.

Also, from the DAC perspective, there is value in work done to support the development and future utility of the network and BTS. That seemed to be the purpose of the introduction of initial dilution on BTS.

However, the blog post suggests rewarding for behaviour directed at neither of these outcomes, and may merely centralise ownership/control even further over time and away from many other stakeholders that have supported this project through using and experimenting with BTS. If the market perceives this the same way, I feel the negative impact on BTS would outweigh any perceived advantage seen from locking away a portion of the supply.

We've made it clear every way we know how that this is NOT something being remotely considered for BitShares.  Bytemaster reemphasized this at Friday's mumble.

It was merely to get well reasoned inputs like you just provided, for possible future projects, nothing else.
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline starspirit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
  • Financial markets pro over 20 years
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: starspirit
I've been out of touch with this forum for some months, so I may have certain things incorrect or out of context. However, I feel I must express my concerns over this blog post concept, despite the disclaimers that this is just conceptual and not an idea for implementation (yet), so that hopefully others can offer me an alternative perspective.

I am concerned that any implementation of this blog post idea would detract significant value from BTS. I do not feel it would reward behaviour of any material value, that it would unfairly penalise smaller BTS experimenters.

There is a presumption that long term investors add value to liquidity demanders, but I feel this conflates the separate economic concepts of market liquidity and interest. I would offer a different view around each of these as follows:

In economics, the cost of demanding liquidity is the market spread. The provider of that liquidity is the market maker, who receives the spread. The hoarder has no part in this equation, and is not present in the market at all. As a result, BTS users need to source liquidity from other parties, and it is those parties that earn the spread return.

Regarding interest, interest is demanded by capital providers to accommodate time preference - that is, the preference, all else equal, to consume today rather than in the future. While its reasonable for parties willing to lend an asset to demand interest, interest is to be paid by the party borrowing that capital or good for current use. Interest is not paid by all holders of the asset to long term investors/lenders, because the service provided (use or consumption of the asset) is not a common good from which all parties have benefited. (I should add that simple hoarding of an asset does not add any utility or income on that asset to other owners, even if there is a marginal support for the price at the point of initial purchase by such investors, offset by the marginal pressure on price at the point such investors exit in order to realise their investment).

As a result, it's not clear to me why any owner of BTS would be willing to bear up to 15% dilution, paid to holders that are not clearly contributing any value back to them (ie. it's not clear what real work, for the common benefit, has been performed). This forces all owners to either lock away funds to avoid dilution, or to exit and not participate in the system at all. This would seem to repel potential users who may want to use BTS for everyday transactions (e.g. wages, services, purchase etc), smaller stakeholders wishing to experiment with BTS, as well as value-adders such as service providers, and market-makers.

Rather than reward those locking away funds, for whom there is no beneficiary, I'd focus on rewarding contributions to the network. While prima-facie it seems that running an army of computers around the world to solve exotic mathematical problems might be an unnecessary cost to secure a network, certainly a meaningful cost is required to secure the network whether that is PoW or PoS. I'd always thought that for PoS that is the strength of the governance structure that supports the selection and monitoring of the block producers. Greater investment in that governance structure creates higher barriers to attack. If there were a way to reward all the contributors to that governance structure, apart from just the block-producers themselves, that to me would seem to strengthen the overall network, and be a cost owners would be willing to bear.

Also, from the DAC perspective, there is value in work done to support the development and future utility of the network and BTS. That seemed to be the purpose of the introduction of initial dilution on BTS.

However, the blog post suggests rewarding for behaviour directed at neither of these outcomes, and may merely centralise ownership/control even further over time and away from many other stakeholders that have supported this project through using and experimenting with BTS. If the market perceives this the same way, I feel the negative impact on BTS would outweigh any perceived advantage seen from locking away a portion of the supply.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2016, 07:19:30 am by starspirit »

Offline MrJeans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 599
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: mrjeans
Other alt coin didn't spend millions of dollars to "build features that adds values" . You can't seriously compare the downtrend with zero development shitcoins . Otherwise , you'll demonstrating that development did bitshares no good than other shitcoins .

Sometimes value is outside the control of things which are logical

Classic quote!  :)

Meme coins only have one life - they last as long as you can keep the meme going.

BitShares is a platform with as many lives as there are business models to be built on it.

Whenever I see a down day, I always remember this:  Are we better off now than we were when we started in 2013?

If we were willing to start a new business back then with nothing but Bitcoin to build on, how much more willing are we to start a new business today with the BitShares platform and community and team and experience to build on?  How much less does it cost to start a business with all that infrastructure in place than it did when we had nothing?

So, from our perspective, we can now do exciting new things with 10% of the resources it took to do the first one.  And so can everyone else with a vision.  Each can have its own brand and business model at a fraction of the startup costs. 

As a general purpose platform, BitShares is obviously much more useful and lower risk today than it was back when it was just a white paper. 

Those are the First Principles behind BitShares' ultimate value. 

Would we decide to invest again?  Yes!  Several times a year for the foreseeable future.
+5%
Some very good points!
Its almost too easy to come up with a crazy, industry shattering business ideas that builds ontop of Bitshares. Its a case of more entrepreneurs needing to discover the tools. And the regulatory stuff gets people scared. And its confusing, I've pitched some ideas to investors and a VC. They lost interest because they said it sounds risky and they dont really know what I'm talking about haha.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2016, 07:12:42 pm by MrJeans »

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile

I am tired of playing nice with you FUDers.

Picture of guy with gun

As funny as pictures can be, we must remember that this is a non-violent community. We solve problems through dialogue and consensus, not through use of arms. Non-violence is the most powerful weapon.

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
@Empirical1.2 You are right, I feel like now it is different due to the dynamics.

A. The price has been falling for a very long time now. Over a year ago it had only been falling for a short amount of time. Now we need to be more weary than ever of public perception.

B. There was only one dividing issue in the community at that time regarding dilution. Today, it seems to be a Neverending list, which gives the perception that Bitshares has nothing to offer and people should dump their BTS holdings. At least.. that is what I would gather as a casual observer or newcomer after reading these forums and the threads about bitshares.on Bitcointalk.

Ps: I did sell all my stake back then. I just recently started acquiring BTS again wI thin the past few months. So, I have not experienced being a stakeholder in the long downturn.. maybe I should be easier on folks around here.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2016, 04:56:49 pm by CoinHoarder »
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

Offline Empirical1.2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1366
    • View Profile
You need to learn patience, it is a good skill to have in life. We can't build a billion dollar company without dilution to fund the development of our product. Ending dilution (and therefore development) this early in the game would be a death sentence to Bitshares. If you don't like it please sell your stake and let those that share the vision reap the rewards.

Caring so much is a good indication you have not diversified your cryptocurrency portfolio sufficiently. The only coin I own more than 6% of my portfolio in is Bitcoin.


BitShares is a platform with as many lives as there are business models to be built on it.

Whenever I see a down day, I always remember this:  Are we better off now than we were when we started in 2013?

A fundraising mechanism to pay BM's rent is not a business model. Business models require profit. Where are the profits?

BitShares is the reason I dont have any Bitcoin right now, so Im not sure Im better off than in late 2013.

You've been an investor in Bitshares since 2013, yet you just show up a few months ago to state your disdain for the direction the project is headed. Whose fault is that, really?  ::)

You've had plenty of chances to shape the direction of the project. Being too lazy to sign up for a forum and voice your opinion is not an excuse.

I am tired of playing nice with you FUDers.



Lol  :) Not that I agree with oldmine's sentiments but you chose to leave BTS and stop helping shape the direction of project for 11 months from Nov 2014 to Oct 2015 & also your last post in 2014, expressed the complete opposite view of the one you are saying now.

Now, even though the dilution is more controlled (you can only dilute for developers, marketers, etc), it is still dilution and something  I.. as a very small shareholder..  have no control over.

A couple controversial things have happened in recent history that I personally (I know I'm not alone) and others do not agree with. Those things have to do with dilution and altering the social contract. Whether you agree with this or not.. I do not care.. but it has had some affect on the price and public perception.

Trust me, I want good things for Bitshares shareholders.. I just cannot continue to sit back and bite my tongue on some issues. Think for yourselves people, as the saying goes.. more heads are better than one... echoing thoughts and opinions doesn't help anyone... specifically getting Bitshares to where it needs to be. An echo chamber is not what makes successful communities, companies, or currencies. Yes, I have been incredibly hard on Bitshares lately, but that is because I feel like hardly anyone else in this community is, and that is what is required to be successful.

Do you see me complaining about the direction of the projec? Am I not allowed to change my opinion after thinking it over for a year. I took a break from the cryptocurrency community for about a year because it is such a hostile and toxic environment. I was going through a rough time in my life and didn't need the negativety. So that negates my opinions now?

I fought hard against dilution and lost. I didn't get my way, but I learned to accept it and eventually was able to.see the pros instead of just the cons. I see here and now people that feel like they are not getting their way and they are giving up, FUDing, or selling their stake and it frustrates me. Enough with all the negativity already. At the time I was objecting to diilution.. that was the big debate at the time... everyone was picking one side or the other.

Now, everyone's complaining about everything. You guys are fooling yourselves if think this public discourse does not negatively effect the price. We are under attack on Bitcointalk which is negatively effecting public perception (go take a look for yourself), and we are under attack on our forums. Enough already.

Ps.. at work and typing on phone.. sorry no time to formulate my sentences and thoughts properly and grammar and such.. this post annoyede so much I felt the need to.respond now.

Yeah, no worries I reply quickly sometimes too.

Personally I see it as what I see a lot here, when you/other agree with the direction and the pros they chastize others and tell them to either be positive and support it or sell as you are saying now...
Quote
'If you don't like it please sell your stake and let those that share the vision reap the rewards.'

Meanwhile if you happen to be in the position of not supporting the current direction then you/other take the position as you did in 2014 
Quote
'An echo chamber is not what makes successful communities, companies, or currencies.Yes, I have been incredibly hard on Bitshares lately, but that is because I feel like hardly anyone else in this community is, and that is what is required to be successful' 

At the time people were telling you (& me) to sell if you didn't like it and understand the vision...You've obviously explained your position in your response and why you think the situation is different, which is fair enough, but my position is that I still find that approach a bit hypocritical but I see others doing it a lot more actually.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2016, 04:26:04 pm by Empirical1.2 »
If you want to take the island burn the boats

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile
You need to learn patience, it is a good skill to have in life. We can't build a billion dollar company without dilution to fund the development of our product. Ending dilution (and therefore development) this early in the game would be a death sentence to Bitshares. If you don't like it please sell your stake and let those that share the vision reap the rewards.

Caring so much is a good indication you have not diversified your cryptocurrency portfolio sufficiently. The only coin I own more than 6% of my portfolio in is Bitcoin.


BitShares is a platform with as many lives as there are business models to be built on it.

Whenever I see a down day, I always remember this:  Are we better off now than we were when we started in 2013?

A fundraising mechanism to pay BM's rent is not a business model. Business models require profit. Where are the profits?

BitShares is the reason I dont have any Bitcoin right now, so Im not sure Im better off than in late 2013.

You've been an investor in Bitshares since 2013, yet you just show up a few months ago to state your disdain for the direction the project is headed. Whose fault is that, really?  ::)

You've had plenty of chances to shape the direction of the project. Being too lazy to sign up for a forum and voice your opinion is not an excuse.

I am tired of playing nice with you FUDers.



Lol  :) Not that I agree with oldmine's sentiments but you chose to leave BTS and stop helping shape the direction of project for 11 months from Nov 2014 to Oct 2015 & also your last post in 2014, expressed the complete opposite view of the one you are saying now.

Now, even though the dilution is more controlled (you can only dilute for developers, marketers, etc), it is still dilution and something  I.. as a very small shareholder..  have no control over.

A couple controversial things have happened in recent history that I personally (I know I'm not alone) and others do not agree with. Those things have to do with dilution and altering the social contract. Whether you agree with this or not.. I do not care.. but it has had some affect on the price and public perception.

Trust me, I want good things for Bitshares shareholders.. I just cannot continue to sit back and bite my tongue on some issues. Think for yourselves people, as the saying goes.. more heads are better than one... echoing thoughts and opinions doesn't help anyone... specifically getting Bitshares to where it needs to be. An echo chamber is not what makes successful communities, companies, or currencies. Yes, I have been incredibly hard on Bitshares lately, but that is because I feel like hardly anyone else in this community is, and that is what is required to be successful.

Do you see me complaining about the direction of the projec? Am I not allowed to change my opinion after thinking it over for a year. I took a break from the cryptocurrency community for about a year because it is such a hostile and toxic environment. I was going through a rough time in my life and didn't need the negativety. So that negates my opinions now?

I fought hard against dilution and lost. I didn't get my way, but I learned to accept it and eventually was able to.see the pros instead of just the cons. I see here and now people that feel like they are not getting their way and they are giving up, FUDing, or selling their stake and it frustrates me. Enough with all the negativity already. At the time I was objecting to diilution.. that was the big debate at the time... everyone was picking one side or the other.

Now, everyone's complaining about everything. You guys are fooling yourselves if think this public discourse does not negatively effect the price. We are under attack on Bitcointalk which is negatively effecting public perception (go take a look for yourself), and we are under attack on our forums. Enough already.

Ps.. at work and typing on phone.. sorry no time to formulate my sentences and thoughts properly and grammar and such.. this post annoyede so much I felt the need to.respond now.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2016, 03:29:24 pm by CoinHoarder »
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Thanks for the detailed and thoughtful inputs.   
I've inserted comments in blue  below.



Why is our platform essentially being overlooked?

That's the easiest question to answer this board has ever seen.  It's because Bitshares is designed by engineers for engineers.

1)  Bitshares is a lifestyle rather than a currency - The consensus mechanism requires constant user input and attention when the #1 thing people want out of a currency is straightforward simplicity.  If you wanted to keep voting for some reason, you would need a fallback mechanism that occurs when people don't vote, like automatically voting for whoever puts up the largest amount of collateral locked for an extended period of time.  Larimer's new blog post about PoW even favors scraping voting entirely for a collateral bid system where users are required to lock coins for a duration in order to be selected as miners/delegates.

On the other hand...
BitShares is a platform full of currencies of all types.  You don't need to vote to use any of them.   One of the currencies represents ownership in the platform.  If you hold that you can vote, but that is not required or desired if you are just making a quick trade with BTS for some reason.  Mose users won't even know about BTS unless they dig into it.  So this constitutes no deterrent to casual users.

2)  Bitshares is anti-new user with high barrier of entry - To lure in large amounts of new capital, it's required that people be able to buy their way in as delegates instead of having to campaign to become one.  The essence of all proof of stake systems relies on large investors not trying to destroy their investments on purpose, so it's completely foolish to try and diverge from that idea.  The campaigning part also creates centralization by having information gatekeepers control the election process, which currently consists of one website (this one).  You control the flow of information and you control the election process.

On the other hand...
Most whales have no interest in being a witness (there are no delegates) and if they do want control they can buy their way in by owning a percent of the voting shares. 

Are you saying the flow of info is in any way restricted on this forum?  What about reddit and bitcointalk and beyondbitcoin, et. al?

3)  The "shares" terminology probably never should have even been used in the first place - The native currency of any crypto will always be more important than any of it's derivatives.  "Smart coins" are by definition just a bucket shop.  The platform should be focused on the value of it's native currency over anything else.  Having an exchange or whatever is just a side benefit.

On the other hand...
"Shares" quickly communicates that they represent ownership in the blockchain implying voting rights and revenue sharing. The value of the native currency is a function of how much demand there is for it. Some of that demand comes from a desire for voting rights.  Most of it comes from speculation about growth in demand.  In the future demand will come from desire to share in the revenue in various ways.  All the other specialty coins give people reasons to use the exchange to generate that revenue.

4)  Larimer insistence on running a business the opposite of how any normal business is run - Businesses in the real world run at a loss until they can attract clients.  Larimer keeps insisting Bitshares run at a profit when there are no actual customers using the platform for the system to generate profit from.  If there's only 1 user instead of your expected million users, you don't raise transaction fees on the 1 user to make up for it.

On the other hand...
It's a balancing act.  There needs to be enough revenue to offset some of the expenses of customer acquisition and development.  One man's "run at a loss" is another man's "dilution" and so we set the fees to keep everyone equally unhappy.

5)  Referral system - The vast majority of crypto users see the referral system as some kind of late night infomercial scheme that severely devalues the integrity of the product in general and will cause people to avoid Bitshares entirely

On the other hand...
The referral system can come in many flavors since the sales pitch is determined by whoever is doing the referring.  Those with a distasteful style will go out of business.  Those who stay in business must not be that distasteful.  So in the long run, the referral program will evolve to what works best via natural selection.

The list goes on....
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc

BitShares is a platform with as many lives as there are business models to be built on it.

Whenever I see a down day, I always remember this:  Are we better off now than we were when we started in 2013?

A fundraising mechanism to pay BM's rent is not a business model. Business models require profit. Where are the profits?

BitShares is the reason I dont have any Bitcoin right now, so Im not sure Im better off than in late 2013.
Have you seen a worker that pays BM a single BTS?

Offline Empirical1.2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1366
    • View Profile
You need to learn patience, it is a good skill to have in life. We can't build a billion dollar company without dilution to fund the development of our product. Ending dilution (and therefore development) this early in the game would be a death sentence to Bitshares. If you don't like it please sell your stake and let those that share the vision reap the rewards.

Caring so much is a good indication you have not diversified your cryptocurrency portfolio sufficiently. The only coin I own more than 6% of my portfolio in is Bitcoin.


BitShares is a platform with as many lives as there are business models to be built on it.

Whenever I see a down day, I always remember this:  Are we better off now than we were when we started in 2013?

A fundraising mechanism to pay BM's rent is not a business model. Business models require profit. Where are the profits?

BitShares is the reason I dont have any Bitcoin right now, so Im not sure Im better off than in late 2013.

You've been an investor in Bitshares since 2013, yet you just show up a few months ago to state your disdain for the direction the project is headed. Whose fault is that, really?  ::)

You've had plenty of chances to shape the direction of the project. Being too lazy to sign up for a forum and voice your opinion is not an excuse.

I am tired of playing nice with you FUDers.



Lol  :) Not that I agree with oldmine's sentiments but you chose to leave BTS and stop helping shape the direction of project for 11 months from Nov 2014 to Oct 2015 & also your last post in 2014, expressed the complete opposite view of the one you are saying now.

Now, even though the dilution is more controlled (you can only dilute for developers, marketers, etc), it is still dilution and something  I.. as a very small shareholder..  have no control over.

A couple controversial things have happened in recent history that I personally (I know I'm not alone) and others do not agree with. Those things have to do with dilution and altering the social contract. Whether you agree with this or not.. I do not care.. but it has had some affect on the price and public perception.

Trust me, I want good things for Bitshares shareholders.. I just cannot continue to sit back and bite my tongue on some issues. Think for yourselves people, as the saying goes.. more heads are better than one... echoing thoughts and opinions doesn't help anyone... specifically getting Bitshares to where it needs to be. An echo chamber is not what makes successful communities, companies, or currencies. Yes, I have been incredibly hard on Bitshares lately, but that is because I feel like hardly anyone else in this community is, and that is what is required to be successful.

« Last Edit: January 08, 2016, 02:03:30 pm by Empirical1.2 »
If you want to take the island burn the boats

Offline CoinHoarder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
  • In Cryptocoins I Trust
    • View Profile

BitShares is a platform with as many lives as there are business models to be built on it.

Whenever I see a down day, I always remember this:  Are we better off now than we were when we started in 2013?

A fundraising mechanism to pay BM's rent is not a business model. Business models require profit. Where are the profits?

BitShares is the reason I dont have any Bitcoin right now, so Im not sure Im better off than in late 2013.

You've been an investor in Bitshares since 2013, yet you just show up a few months ago to state your disdain for the direction the project is headed. Whose fault is that, really?  ::)

You've had plenty of chances to shape the direction of the project. Being too lazy to sign up for a forum and voice your opinion is not an excuse.

I am tired of playing nice with you FUDers.

« Last Edit: January 08, 2016, 01:15:18 pm by CoinHoarder »
https://www.decentralized.tech/ -> Market Data, Portfolios, Information, Links, Reviews, Forums, Blogs, Etc.
https://www.cryptohun.ch/ -> Tradable Blockchain Asset PvP Card Game