voting of refund400k from 50M to 1.48M, so I delete my old post

[Samupaha]

On a side note , false development is no development at all . ( dilution and tons of AGS fund has funded a lot of things in 1.0 , and none of it was worth it because by the dev's own word ------1.0 was not usable to users . And graphene was paid by the developer's own dime. ) False development meaning development that just for "workers' sake" instead of those work that's really needed and will have lasting effect on the project instead of every work that has been paid and then be abandoned and move on to another new direction .

I really can't share this point of view.

Bitshares is something complitely new and we can be pretty much sure that it's impossible to get everything right at first try.

Succesful businesses aren't usually build easily. They need years of trials and errors to find out what works and what doesn't. So the formula for success is not to have a good idea but to have enough strength to endure fails after fails when trying to adjust the business to function as it should.

So do you think that Bitshares should have been abandoned when it become clear that 1.0 wasn't going to work?

How do you examine what works and what doesn't, if it's not allowed to make mistakes?

If Bitshares will become succesful some day, it will be because the developers didn't give up and tried new features again and again until they found the ones that work.

[Thom]

Markets love stability... that's one of the biggest reasons you see stock market gains when there is gridlock in Washington.  Gridlock = Stability, which gives everyone time to understand the rules and design systems around those rules.

BTS changes the rules and parameters so fast because the market cap isn't increasing, that it makes my head spin.  I'm not saying these changes are bad, and the best time to make changes is when valuation is low.  Hopefully we can find some sort of stability here in the next couple months, but with BM's track record (MAS, this new rate limited transaction thing, referral program restructuring) I doubt stability is coming this year.

Not to mention Crypto traders are idiot pump chasers... 90% don't care about what they are invested in as long as it keeps going up.  They just want to get rich quick and cash out to fiat.

 

[xeroc]

Markets love stability...

"Markets" also love Windows XP even though they could have a rolling-release Linux system

[lil_jay890]

Markets love stability... that's one of the biggest reasons you see stock market gains when there is gridlock in Washington.  Gridlock = Stability, which gives everyone time to understand the rules and design systems around those rules.

BTS changes the rules and parameters so fast because the market cap isn't increasing, that it makes my head spin.  I'm not saying these changes are bad, and the best time to make changes is when valuation is low.  Hopefully we can find some sort of stability here in the next couple months, but with BM's track record (MAS, this new rate limited transaction thing, referral program restructuring) I doubt stability is coming this year.

Not to mention Crypto traders are idiot pump chasers... 90% don't care about what they are invested in as long as it keeps going up.  They just want to get rich quick and cash out to fiat.

[Empirical1.2]

If you 're so certain the small amount of dilution we're currently spending to get all this accomplished will be worse than taking the hard-line, absolute zero dilution position, then show us your data that makes your case. Stop claiming you know it will hurt our rep AND marketcap despite the evidence to the contrary that others can dilute FAR more and grow. Show us the numbers that prove your point and we will listen.

Actually BTS has grossly underperformed the market since dilution was introduced despite spending much more on development than 90% of our competitors and despite the quality of that development being among the best, when you take into account how much money many cryptos spent on POW during that time, BTS under-performance is even more remarkable.

Even competitors like NXT with poor initial distribution, unpopular POS and no dilution since we started diluting (& spent CNX money on Graphene) are worth just 20% less than BTS.

This does not prove dilution for development is negative, but perhaps that the current model of dilution is bad and/or that BM/CNX, while among the best developers are not the best at understanding what the blockchain market needs.

My impression is that some are upset that CNX has yet to deliver users/revenue/profit but constantly seeks to justify continued dilution to sustain relatively high cost development mostly in the areas they prefer while chastizing 'speculators' for not giving them the long term resources to continue down this road.

As you say a lot of the pieces of the puzzle are in place and personally I believe if we adopt a system that allows the network or a BTS fund to sell BitAssets, perhaps with a daily limit at 1-1, our fortunes could rapidly change.

While BM is pushing for max 5BTS/Sec dilution with this post http://bytemaster.github.io/article/2016/02/09/The-Currency-Distribution-Problem/

I think a lower but locked in max rate may be optimal, if CNX need more than that they will have to look to FBA's/Be more frugal/Raise the value of BTS. A lower max rate which is 'locked in' as much as possible may give the market more certainty, stability, confidence and trust that BTS isn't simply there to maintain CNX with $X per year regardless of the value they add to the share price or users they bring in. (I also like that if you google 'currency distribution' that blog post is a first page result, for me anyway.)

Personally I'm fairly interested in DECRED which attempts to allow more consensus on changes than BTC but locks in its supply structure via the DECRED constitution https://wiki.decred.org/Decred_Constitution which is what I advocated for BTS back in the day - https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,10828.0.html. Also unlike BTC, 10% of the block subsidy goes to a development organisation
in order for it to be self funding. So we'll see how that does.
 

[Thom]

Why is it that I am the bad guy here painted with "divider"? This entire thread is down on efforts being made by so many, anti-progress is a common theme I see in this thread via ZERO dilution.

Not a single person that replied to my post addressed any of the substance in it, not a single point, rather the replies are all basically an ad hominem attack with a label of community divider. The language is indeed an issue, I find some of the meaning very difficult to discern. What is "Just do it" DSN, xeroc?  DO WHAT? Be explicit and stop with the subliminal innuendo.

I most want to say is: please do not use China, the United States, Europe to divide our community,...

It wasn't I who raised the issue of nationality, please, get your facts straight. Read MY post again.

My question was why is anyone making an issue about dilution right now? Rather than deal with that question, go ahead, label the one asking it a divider and then you can avoid addressing the question. That doesn't fly in a rational discussion. I can only conclude this isn't a rational discussion.

I have been wondering, why the AGS funds so soon  dry up, that's a big sum of money. I thought he would be able to support three or four years.

I'd say you haven't paid much attention to the volitile price of Bitcoins then. When the price was high, sure looked like funding was secured for at least a couple of years. After the bottom fellv out of the market it was an entirely different story. That's what happened. I'm definitely NOT saying money was spent furgally, there were plenty of bad decisions and expenditures IMO.

Why all the complaining right now at this point? Look at all the innovative ideas coming forth, look at our rising marketcap. I think you really need to think about the reason for any dilution and not just dogmatic economic theory. Also consider that BM & the dev staff of BitShares 1.0 could have walked away or popped up under a new name to run "another" scam pump & dump, but instead they regrouped, found another plan of attack and the means to put food on the table while developing graphine, which was rolled out with FAR less problems than 1.0 was.

I'm not excusing the blunders and mistakes, but I also am not going to give up right when I start to see the fruits of all the labor start to pay off. You have efforts like:

1) BitShares mobil wallet and OpenPOS that kencode and chris4210 are doing
2) Stealth GUI additions and FBA about to be released
3) Abit's rate limiting enhancements to implement FREE transactions
4) Numerous GUI improvements nearly every single week
5) Xeroc's docs - growing day by day

It's taken quite awhile, but I'm finally beginning to see some real community enthusiasm. Why you bring up this old issue and threaten to stop all this momentum and progress, just as we begin to see marketcap impact? It makes little sense.

If you 're so certain the small amount of dilution we're currently spending to get all this accomplished will be worse than taking the hard-line, absolute zero dilution position, then show us your data that makes your case. Stop claiming you know it will hurt our rep AND marketcap despite the evidence to the contrary that others can dilute FAR more and grow. Show us the numbers that prove your point and we will listen.

thank you for playing so many words to explain

read this page replies, I most want to say is: please do not use China, the United States, Europe to divide our community, and should be the point of view A, B, C. We came here not because of the geographical location, but for some ideals and goals.

We (the western parts of the community) mean no harm to anyone, lets settle the issues gently and find a solution .. there are many ways to do so, we mostly need people like you to connect both languaes which is our biggest issue.

In contrast to ethereum, we already have a chinese community eagerly waiting to get involved. Lets just do it!

[Empirical1.2]

Show me at least one worker who take responsibility for the shareholder,please.
proposal like:"I will develop a function,one year after this function launch,the market cap will be twice to now,or I won't get any bts as payment.

Daniel pushed hard for bringing privacy to the front of the development que, he believes it will attract a lot of users and hopefully pull BTS ahead of DASH. Obviously Stealth was privately funded, but it gets released soon, so lets see if he's right this time...

My "gut" tells me that crypto-diehards are looking for an easy to use ANONYMOUS currency and those of us that are freedom loving actually want and need this.  Our current lack of privacy is a turnoff to many in the crypto and banking world.

If we have the best of breed privacy then it will put us well ahead of the competition.  Hopefully helping pull us up to Dash.

It is a much needed feature, but I fail to see it bringing in a ton of new users. Ironically, the anonymous technology he is implementing will only be "the best of breed" for a matter of months. Zerocash (Xcash) and RingCT (Monero) will be superior.

I still think Daniel was right when he claimed MAS was the way forward for Bitshares. People in the cryptocurrency community have already made up their minds one way or another about Bitshares. Bitshares needs features that pull in outsiders into the ecosystem, and MAS is one of the best ideas I have ever heard to do so.

I had full faith in Daniel's ability to lead Bitshares to the promised land. However, now that he has retreated after being repeatedly, harshly, and constantly harassed, and let you guys "run Bitshares"... I fear the worst. Bitshares as-is is going no where. It is a dead end that will end in tears. Development and dilution must continue for the time being, or Bitshares is certain to die a slow death. All of this crying about dilution is ridiculously short sided. If you guys don't figure out how to properly spend the dilution soon, it will all end in tears anyways.

I think privacy has value too, especially in hopefully allowing third party developers to create more 'grey area' FBA's on the platform.
However yes from what I gather it won't be best of breed, will charge 10x more than competitors and there is very little to use it with atm so I certainly wouldn't have put it first in the development que. (Edit: Though given the new money on Polo, wouldn't be surprised if BTS gets another little price bump pre release.)

I know you're a fan of MAS but I'm not, I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole, I would say so someone can prove me wrong in future, 'MAS resembling any of its current description will not be popular/successful'. I think I have enough evidence from how hard it is for a group of shareholder to manage a DAC that they will be unable to effectively risk assess, fraud prevent or claim validate to any acceptable degree in a decentralized manner. 

Personally I believe BTS will be built (& could be funded) on the back of BitAssets. So that's my number 1 development priority. Though I'm not a fan of MAKER. I think the system of requiring an independent short and long to meet in each market makes it very hard to maintain a tight liquid commercially viable peg. Instead I'm a fan of recently floated ideas like using the reserve pool or a BTS Bond. I think BTS is the party that benefits the most from the network effect and adoption of BTS via Smartcoins so their efforts and funds and are best spent providing or incentivizing additional collateral.

NO Fear, FULL faith

when stuff is ready we the bts comunitty should give bts his first push

its so easy if each of us take 5 family members in, next week go for 5 friends and the next week go for 5 bussines.

yeah its a interest conflict, comunity never ever take BTS .... why must they promote ? if coders without delegate no code, why the fuck comunitty must do nothing without delegate ?

I RARELY recommend anything but so many people were asking me what's the next Bitcoin because I did very well off that in 13. I went on a limb and suggested BTSX. It was heading for a billion dollar valuation and had increasing network effect in China and low waste, to the point it could have even challenged BTC purely from a currency standpoint. I had no way of knowing the founders didn't understand the fundamentals of crypto and why adding dilution, esp. variable dilution was a massive value destroyer. So it damaged my reputation and I won't be doing it again anytime soon, especially because I think for all their talent they still don't understand the fundamentals of certainty, stability, predictability and trust which must form the backbone of decentralized endeavours. (Though one of Daniel's latest blog posts is a step in that direction... http://bytemaster.github.io/article/2016/02/09/The-Currency-Distribution-Problem/ )

[chryspano]

comunity never ever take BTS .... why must they promote ? if coders without delegate no code, why the fuck comunitty must do nothing without delegate ?

Some roles are more important than others, without enought coders we would have at most a crude CLI version, good luck to the community trying to promote that!

Coders and maybe some other roles make everything 100x easier to promote and communicate, they are the engine and without an engine a car is useless, it's one thing to conserve some fuel at the midle of the crypto-race and it's another thing to completly stop the engine claiming that this way you can win the crypto-race.


 Also to what lil-jay said

[lil_jay890]

NO Fear, FULL faith

when stuff is ready we the bts comunitty should give bts his first push

its so easy if each of us take 5 family members in, next week go for 5 friends and the next week go for 5 bussines.

yeah its a interest conflict, comunity never ever take BTS .... why must they promote ? if coders without delegate no code, why the fuck comunitty must do nothing without delegate ?

Bts is still way too speculative, volatile, and expensive to get into.  Ive told family members about spec investments before and found out that if thing don't go right, it really puts a lot of stress and awkwardness on the relationship.

My advise, get rich yourself and then give to your family. Don't have them risk their money, because the consequences of it not working out is far worse than the reward of a success.

[infovortice2013]

NO Fear, FULL faith

when stuff is ready we the bts comunitty should give bts his first push

its so easy if each of us take 5 family members in, next week go for 5 friends and the next week go for 5 bussines.

yeah its a interest conflict, comunity never ever take BTS .... why must they promote ? if coders without delegate no code, why the fuck comunitty must do nothing without delegate ?

[CoinHoarder]

Show me at least one worker who take responsibility for the shareholder,please.
proposal like:"I will develop a function,one year after this function launch,the market cap will be twice to now,or I won't get any bts as payment.

Daniel pushed hard for bringing privacy to the front of the development que, he believes it will attract a lot of users and hopefully pull BTS ahead of DASH. Obviously Stealth was privately funded, but it gets released soon, so lets see if he's right this time...

My "gut" tells me that crypto-diehards are looking for an easy to use ANONYMOUS currency and those of us that are freedom loving actually want and need this.  Our current lack of privacy is a turnoff to many in the crypto and banking world.

If we have the best of breed privacy then it will put us well ahead of the competition.  Hopefully helping pull us up to Dash.

It is a much needed feature, but I fail to see it bringing in a ton of new users. Ironically, the anonymous technology he is implementing will only be "the best of breed" for a matter of months. Zerocash (Xcash) and RingCT (Monero) will be superior.

I still think Daniel was right when he claimed MAS was the way forward for Bitshares. People in the cryptocurrency community have already made up their minds one way or another about Bitshares. Bitshares needs features that pull in outsiders into the ecosystem, and MAS is one of the best ideas I have ever heard to do so.

I had full faith in Daniel's ability to lead Bitshares to the promised land. However, now that he has retreated after being repeatedly, harshly, and constantly harassed, and let you guys "run Bitshares"... I fear the worst. Bitshares as-is is going no where. It is a dead end that will end in tears. Development and dilution must continue for the time being, or Bitshares is certain to die a slow death. All of this crying about dilution is ridiculously short sided. If you guys don't figure out how to properly spend the dilution soon, it will all end in tears anyways.

[cass]

One team - one fight !

[cube]

I have been wondering, why the AGS funds so soon  dry up, that's a big sum of money. I thought he would be able to support three or four years.

I'd say you haven't paid much attention to the volitile price of Bitcoins then. When the price was high, sure looked like funding was secured for at least a couple of years. After the bottom fellv out of the market it was an entirely different story. That's what happened. I'm definitely NOT saying money was spent furgally, there were plenty of bad decisions and expenditures IMO.

Why all the complaining right now at this point? Look at all the innovative ideas coming forth, look at our rising marketcap. I think you really need to think about the reason for any dilution and not just dogmatic economic theory. Also consider that BM & the dev staff of BitShares 1.0 could have walked away or popped up under a new name to run "another" scam pump & dump, but instead they regrouped, found another plan of attack and the means to put food on the table while developing graphine, which was rolled out with FAR less problems than 1.0 was.

I'm not excusing the blunders and mistakes, but I also am not going to give up right when I start to see the fruits of all the labor start to pay off. You have efforts like:

1) BitShares mobil wallet and OpenPOS that kencode and chris4210 are doing
2) Stealth GUI additions and FBA about to be released
3) Abit's rate limiting enhancements to implement FREE transactions
4) Numerous GUI improvements nearly every single week
5) Xeroc's docs - growing day by day

It's taken quite awhile, but I'm finally beginning to see some real community enthusiasm. Why you bring up this old issue and threaten to stop all this momentum and progress, just as we begin to see marketcap impact? It makes little sense.

If you 're so certain the small amount of dilution we're currently spending to get all this accomplished will be worse than taking the hard-line, absolute zero dilution position, then show us your data that makes your case. Stop claiming you know it will hurt our rep AND marketcap despite the evidence to the contrary that others can dilute FAR more and grow. Show us the numbers that prove your point and we will listen.

thank you for playing so many words to explain

read this page replies, I most want to say is: please do not use China, the United States, Europe to divide our community, and should be the point of view A, B, C. We came here not because of the geographical location, but for some ideals and goals.

We (the western parts of the community) mean no harm to anyone, lets settle the issues gently and find a solution .. there are many ways to do so, we mostly need people like you to connect both languaes which is our biggest issue.

In contrast to ethereum, we already have a chinese community eagerly waiting to get involved. Lets just do it!

  for attempting to unite rather than divide the community. 

Unite, we prosper. Divide, we fall.

[Empirical1.2]

Daniel has presented the inflation argument as an either/or argument.

Perhaps BitShares should decide once and for all whether it wants no inflation or maximum inflation (5 BTS/sec). Once the decision is made we can remove the inflation debate from the political discussion and move forward based upon this outcome. If a decision for maximum inflation is made then we can debate over what should be funded and who should get it. Either way the sell pressure from the inflation would be baked into the price and would no longer be relevant to the discussion.

http://bytemaster.github.io/article/2016/02/09/The-Currency-Distribution-Problem/

He'd prefer max inflation obviously

Rather than adjusting the supply, we could just commit to the maximum level of inflation and then allocate it as best as we can. This way any unexpected reductions in inflation can boost the price rather than fear, uncertainty, and doubt every time we vote for something.

However if shareholders are unhappy with the current amount of development, I think there is also the third option of lowering the max dilution of 5BTS/sec This would limit the amount BTS could develop but may make the people that are supporting alt/baozi more comfortable that BTS is not being wasteful even if they are not paying attention to every worker proposal.

[xeroc]

I have been wondering, why the AGS funds so soon  dry up, that's a big sum of money. I thought he would be able to support three or four years.

I'd say you haven't paid much attention to the volitile price of Bitcoins then. When the price was high, sure looked like funding was secured for at least a couple of years. After the bottom fellv out of the market it was an entirely different story. That's what happened. I'm definitely NOT saying money was spent furgally, there were plenty of bad decisions and expenditures IMO.

Why all the complaining right now at this point? Look at all the innovative ideas coming forth, look at our rising marketcap. I think you really need to think about the reason for any dilution and not just dogmatic economic theory. Also consider that BM & the dev staff of BitShares 1.0 could have walked away or popped up under a new name to run "another" scam pump & dump, but instead they regrouped, found another plan of attack and the means to put food on the table while developing graphine, which was rolled out with FAR less problems than 1.0 was.

I'm not excusing the blunders and mistakes, but I also am not going to give up right when I start to see the fruits of all the labor start to pay off. You have efforts like:

1) BitShares mobil wallet and OpenPOS that kencode and chris4210 are doing
2) Stealth GUI additions and FBA about to be released
3) Abit's rate limiting enhancements to implement FREE transactions
4) Numerous GUI improvements nearly every single week
5) Xeroc's docs - growing day by day

It's taken quite awhile, but I'm finally beginning to see some real community enthusiasm. Why you bring up this old issue and threaten to stop all this momentum and progress, just as we begin to see marketcap impact? It makes little sense.

If you 're so certain the small amount of dilution we're currently spending to get all this accomplished will be worse than taking the hard-line, absolute zero dilution position, then show us your data that makes your case. Stop claiming you know it will hurt our rep AND marketcap despite the evidence to the contrary that others can dilute FAR more and grow. Show us the numbers that prove your point and we will listen.

thank you for playing so many words to explain

read this page replies, I most want to say is: please do not use China, the United States, Europe to divide our community, and should be the point of view A, B, C. We came here not because of the geographical location, but for some ideals and goals.

We (the western parts of the community) mean no harm to anyone, lets settle the issues gently and find a solution .. there are many ways to do so, we mostly need people like you to connect both languaes which is our biggest issue.

In contrast to ethereum, we already have a chinese community eagerly waiting to get involved. Lets just do it!