Author Topic: Now that Daniel Larimer (aka bytemaster) is gone...  (Read 44172 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bitsharesbrazil

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
When we consolidate in a bull run we should thino bigger n have our price being mentined in coindesk, an active tread in bitcointalk, that brings a lot of attention, but its not a priority but sure should be part of a plan in the future.
bitcointalk ANN https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1084460.0
chat, post, promote it!!!!!!!! Stan help to improve OP!

Offline bitsharesbrazil

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
I.was taking a look at some data n openledger s slowing gaining some traction, lacks users feom russia, in the future i will try to do.something here, no community in brazil, a lot to get from here.
bitcointalk ANN https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1084460.0
chat, post, promote it!!!!!!!! Stan help to improve OP!

Offline Empirical1.2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1366
    • View Profile
3. There is one huge challenge ahead of us: addressing the decision making and governance issue, with the additional difficulty of cultural splits. After all the experiments we've had with DPOS and worker proposals, it looks to me that without someone taking on the role of a community leader there is little chance for much progress. We can stay stagnant for a couple of months but eventually the competition will catch on and our technological advantage will be gone. Ideally, someone like abit or xeroc will need to step up: combining a strong commitment to BitShares, technical expertise and a good relationship with most of the community. We as a community should encourage this to happen and be very generous in terms of financial rewards: it's a tough role which should be rewarded accordingly. We can dream about decentralization, but I'm not aware of a business project that has succeeded without a clear leadership. For me, decentralization means that we can survive when a leader is gone, but still we cannot move forward without having one.

Perhaps a list would be good that we could ultimately poll.

I think it should be a well paid position, possibly more of a manager than a pure developer as good interaction, acumen and a pretty thick skin (for the frequent critics like me) are required. If I recall a lot of developers prefer that level of separation as well.

BitCrab could be good, he seems to have a lot of Chinese support, is already running a business on BTS and the measured way in which he's handling a proposed BitCNY change I think shows his community respect and interaction skills are very strong https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,22416.0.html

KenCode possibly. I think he's managing a team doing BTS related work. I haven't followed their progress lately but I seem to recall them getting quite a lot done quickly on a tight budget.

Ronny is a machine so he could be good, given he's already focusing on OL presumably with adequate incentives it might be best to bring in someone else.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2016, 01:46:37 am by Empirical1.2 »
If you want to take the island burn the boats

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan

My reply stated that based on recent articles/statements by BM and yourself, that you 'seem' to have come to the conclusion that the decentralized BTS/DPOS funding model was critically flawed.

Proposals are based in part on what resources are available to work on them.
Resources are hired based on the availability of stable funding.
A constant battle over who controls the funding light switch means no one dares hire against any line item.
So the resources remain allocated elsewhere.

Voting is overrated.  I wouldn't want to ride on an aircraft controlled by voting passengers.
Give me a benevolent whale any day.

Your quote in it's entirety clearly concludes that a system in which decentralized shareholders control the proposal funding light switch, as is the case in the current BTS model, is critically flawed as does BM's DAO article.  So I don't think I've taken those statements out of context.

I also didn't reference the apparent large scale selling of BM, (& the whole Larimer family for that matter https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,22098.msg287807.html#msg287807 -  a few days prior to the April 1st STEEM announcement) which adds further credence to your potential lack of confidence in the BTS model at the time.

It's true that BM sold off some significant portion of his BTS holdings prior to formally announcing his departure to Steemit, but I guess it's been obvious for some time that he was dumping shares (with BitShares being so transparent, moves by whales are usually noticed within hours and BM's accounts were closely watched).

If your position now is that you continue to have enormous faith in BTS and work on it relentlessly behind the scenes & that I should be ashamed for drawing those completely false, 'careless, shameful and malicious' conclusions that's fine.

My words speak for themselves and do not require reinterpretation.

My brother, mother, and I own more BTS today than we did at the time of that last round of uninformed speculation.

I don't know what BM's status is, but its pretty clear he has a payroll to meet and is doing things with his resources that allow him to stay active at the bleeding edge -- while leaving other work to other people with skills better suited to taking an operational blockchain to the next level.  Dan is still doing what he does best rather than wasting his skills on that which he does not do best.  And because he has stepped back a bit here, others that do have the necessary skills BitShares needs are encouraged to step forward. 

The builders of a fighter jet are not the same people needed to fly that jet into battle.  Different skills.  Send the builders back to work on the next generation of jets and let the skilled Top Gun's of this world operate those already deployed.

Dan and I have long divided up the work according to our individual skills.  So far, it's pretty clear that he is holding up his half of the bargain (designing new jets) very well.   The only question that remains is whether my team and others like us will succeed with our half.

Perhaps you could rephrase your criticism to, "Come on, guys, succeed faster."

:)







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 crypto4ever

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
    • View Profile
I am currently working full time on business development for BitShares (with many people you all know) providing the very services you imply I have abandoned.

Shame on you for speaking, whether with malicious intent or careless neglect, to harm others reputations about things going on Behind the Scenes of which you know nothing.

I have comments for both of you:

Stan, that's impressive. That's good news that you're working on business development for Bitshares like that, thank you for your effort.  In the future, many of us will really thank you.   Please don't get discouraged.

Empiricle, you obviously hit a sore spot with that April 19th quote.  It's now June.  Things change, can change, will change.

This is a never ending issue:  When Dan & Stan talk too much, they get in trouble by the community.  When they go silent, they get in trouble by the community. Finally, when they do say "a little", it's given too much focus from posters who keep quoting their words and using it against them on an ongoing basis.

Let's concentrate on today going forward.  We're all interested in things improving, and I see good things on the horizon already.

I know I've said things that I look back a year later, and have changed my mind from the first time I said something.  That's human behavior.  Stan and Dan aren't machines.  They're human too.  Give them a little breathing room and let's not run them out of town.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2016, 10:40:50 pm by crypto4ever »

Offline onceuponatime

He has no longer any significant stake in BTS.
Is this proven or just rumored?

BM sold several millions of BTS back in March and also transferred 6M BTS to onceuponatime as a compensation for failing to deliver STEALTH - this is visible on cryptofresh.

It's true that BM sold off some significant portion of his BTS holdings prior to formally announcing his departure to Steemit, but I guess it's been obvious for some time that he was dumping shares (with BitShares being so transparent, moves by whales are usually noticed within hours and BM's accounts were closely watched).

Dan has to pay his bills Jakub - he sold his personal holdings. Cryptonomex (the company) and Stan personally still own plenty of bitshares.The money Dan paid me for STEALTH was a very appreciated gesture of goodwill since the project couldn't be completed safely within the given timeframe in a way that I would get the income from it I was expecting. That would have been disastrous because I was expecting that income to fund other BitShares projects (which I have been working on while you were (somewhere?) on hiatus from BitShares activity (not answering Committee enquiries etc and leaving people in the lurch).

He sold his personal shares, which many others still here bitching have done long ago. And this HAD TO BE DONE in order partially to end the stalemate here at BitShares of those unwilling to pay workers. How was he supposed to hold a team together?

And how can you be so blind as to not see that a good deal of development money will go into the hands of BitShares project developers who simply take the trouble to post their projects and their progress on steemit.com? Or do you begrudge this workaround to get funding to the likes of KenCode and Fuzzy? (and others). Have you not noticed how well Cryptoctpus (known as rgcrypto here on this forum) has done on steemit.com? He has earned over $20,000 in just two weeks (after beating his head against the wall trying to online market BitShares earlier). I am pretty damn sure that he will be bringing his newfound funds and experience back to BitShares in the future (as will all the rest of us taking advantage of Dan's newly created opportunity).

Posting negativity here in this forum does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to add value to BitShares - but hey, it is helping to keep share prices down and I have been buying up bitshares on the cheap continuously for weeks. Thank you (I guess).

Offline bitsharesbrazil

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
Im very new here but I really liked the way work proposals works, treshold, vesting, etc.... Passionate about it, you cant.just be a worker/put food on.the tableyou have to be a believer, investor
bitcointalk ANN https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1084460.0
chat, post, promote it!!!!!!!! Stan help to improve OP!

Offline Empirical1.2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1366
    • View Profile
On a side note, Dan Larimer has not been gone from BitShares for anywhere near as long, nor anywhere near as completely, as Jakub (the OP) was when he was mia for many months. No doubt Jakub was off doing valuable research and work - although he gave us no intimation of that. Should we expect any less of Bytemaster, who's hiatus will likely much benefit BitShares in the long run?

Please everyone take that into consideration when evaluating this thread.

All that's left of BM is his "promise" to offer worker proposals (in some undefined point in time) for the migration of his STEEM inventions *if* they prove to be successful.

He has no longer any significant stake in BTS.
He has no plans to offer any worker proposals, apart from emergency fixes.   
And he's not even willing to promote OpenLedger as a trading platform for STEEM.

For me this is enough to call it "gone".

Yeah Dan and Stan seem to have both come to similar conclusions about decentralization, BTS & DPOS. 

https://steemit.com/crypto-news/@dan/is-the-dao-going-to-be-doa

Quote
Smart Contracts cannot fix Dumb People BitShares had all of the tools, the talent, and the money to do great things if only the BTS holders could agree on what should be done, who should be paid, and how much should be spent.

Voting is overrated.  I wouldn't want to ride on an aircraft controlled by voting passengers.
Give me a benevolent whale any day.

So I wish them luck with their centralized, benevolent whale blockchain, combined with all BM's tools & talent, I'm sure they'll be a Darwinian guaranteed success. BTS, LSK, DAO, DASH etc. don't stand a chance :)

(While I agree many aspects of it are challenging, I think they've come to some wrong conclusions by ignoring/discounting the role they played in the state of affairs BTS found itself and I also believe it's those that continue to develop the tools and incentives to make that process effective that will be the most rewarded.)

Boy, you just won't let that go, will you?
You must have quoted that line a dozen times, as if it is somehow controversial.
It is obvious that passengers on planes and ships don't get to vote on operational matters - for good reasons.
Don't make it out to be a global statement against shareholder's choosing their leaders and high level policy preferences.
Never said that.

Read Ronny's brilliant article about the value of having someone in charge of operations that the shareholders can hold accountable:

http://www.maxkeiser.com/2016/06/digital-leadership-is-a-major-benefit-of-the-decentralised-conglomerate-over-the-dao/


Shame on you for speaking, whether with malicious intent or careless neglect, to harm others reputations about things going on Behind the Scenes of which you know nothing.

I didn't say anything about choosing leaders or making high policy preferences.

My reply stated that based on recent articles/statements by BM and yourself, that you 'seem' to have come to the conclusion that the decentralized BTS/DPOS funding model was critically flawed.

Proposals are based in part on what resources are available to work on them.
Resources are hired based on the availability of stable funding.
A constant battle over who controls the funding light switch means no one dares hire against any line item.
So the resources remain allocated elsewhere.

Voting is overrated.  I wouldn't want to ride on an aircraft controlled by voting passengers.
Give me a benevolent whale any day.

Your quote in it's entirety clearly concludes that a system in which decentralized shareholders control the proposal funding light switch, as is the case in the current BTS model, is critically flawed as does BM's DAO article.  So I don't think I've taken those statements out of context.

I also didn't reference the apparent large scale selling of BM, (& the whole Larimer family for that matter https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,22098.msg287807.html#msg287807 -  a few days prior to the April 1st STEEM announcement) which adds further credence to your potential lack of confidence in the BTS model at the time.

It's true that BM sold off some significant portion of his BTS holdings prior to formally announcing his departure to Steemit, but I guess it's been obvious for some time that he was dumping shares (with BitShares being so transparent, moves by whales are usually noticed within hours and BM's accounts were closely watched).

If your position now is that you continue to have enormous faith in BTS and work on it relentlessly behind the scenes & that I should be ashamed for drawing those completely false, 'careless, shameful and malicious' conclusions that's fine.

It's fortunate that those with intractably bitter attitudes want to stay here on BitSharesTalk where no one will see their posts and only positive, optimistic people want to move their constructive, forward thinking opinions into the bright, puffy cloud of Steem where snide comments quickly sink into oblivion.

Unfortunately we're not on Steem, so my snide (critical?) comments won't quickly sink into oblivion but fortunately I posted on BitSharestalk where no-one will see it anyway :)
« Last Edit: June 03, 2016, 10:15:38 pm by Empirical1.2 »
If you want to take the island burn the boats

jakub

  • Guest
He has no longer any significant stake in BTS.
Is this proven or just rumored?

BM sold several millions of BTS back in March and also transferred 6M BTS to onceuponatime as a compensation for failing to deliver STEALTH - this is visible on cryptofresh.

It's true that BM sold off some significant portion of his BTS holdings prior to formally announcing his departure to Steemit, but I guess it's been obvious for some time that he was dumping shares (with BitShares being so transparent, moves by whales are usually noticed within hours and BM's accounts were closely watched).


Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
On a side note, Dan Larimer has not been gone from BitShares for anywhere near as long, nor anywhere near as completely, as Jakub (the OP) was when he was mia for many months. No doubt Jakub was off doing valuable research and work - although he gave us no intimation of that. Should we expect any less of Bytemaster, who's hiatus will likely much benefit BitShares in the long run?

Please everyone take that into consideration when evaluating this thread.

All that's left of BM is his "promise" to offer worker proposals (in some undefined point in time) for the migration of his STEEM inventions *if* they prove to be successful.

He has no longer any significant stake in BTS.
He has no plans to offer any worker proposals, apart from emergency fixes.   
And he's not even willing to promote OpenLedger as a trading platform for STEEM.

For me this is enough to call it "gone".

Yeah Dan and Stan seem to have both come to similar conclusions about decentralization, BTS & DPOS. 

https://steemit.com/crypto-news/@dan/is-the-dao-going-to-be-doa

Quote
Smart Contracts cannot fix Dumb People BitShares had all of the tools, the talent, and the money to do great things if only the BTS holders could agree on what should be done, who should be paid, and how much should be spent.

Voting is overrated.  I wouldn't want to ride on an aircraft controlled by voting passengers.
Give me a benevolent whale any day.

So I wish them luck with their centralized, benevolent whale blockchain, combined with all BM's tools & talent, I'm sure they'll be a Darwinian guaranteed success. BTS, LSK, DAO, DASH etc. don't stand a chance :)

(While I agree many aspects of it are challenging, I think they've come to some wrong conclusions by ignoring/discounting the role they played in the state of affairs BTS found itself and I also believe it's those that continue to develop the tools and incentives to make that process effective that will be the most rewarded.)

Boy, you just won't let that go, will you?
You must have quoted that line a dozen times, as if it is somehow controversial.
It is obvious that passengers on planes and ships don't get to vote on operational matters - for good reasons.
Don't make it out to be a global statement against shareholder's choosing their leaders and high level policy preferences.
Never said that.

Read Ronny's brilliant article about the value of having someone in charge of operations that the shareholders can hold accountable:

http://www.maxkeiser.com/2016/06/digital-leadership-is-a-major-benefit-of-the-decentralised-conglomerate-over-the-dao/


I am currently working full time on business development for BitShares (with many people you all know) providing the very services you imply I have abandoned.

Shame on you for speaking, whether with malicious intent or careless neglect, to harm others reputations about things going on Behind the Scenes of which you know nothing.

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 speedy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: speedy
He has no longer any significant stake in BTS.
Is this proven or just rumored?

And he's not even willing to promote OpenLedger as a trading platform for STEEM.
Yeah this is odd.

Offline Empirical1.2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1366
    • View Profile
On a side note, Dan Larimer has not been gone from BitShares for anywhere near as long, nor anywhere near as completely, as Jakub (the OP) was when he was mia for many months. No doubt Jakub was off doing valuable research and work - although he gave us no intimation of that. Should we expect any less of Bytemaster, who's hiatus will likely much benefit BitShares in the long run?

Please everyone take that into consideration when evaluating this thread.

All that's left of BM is his "promise" to offer worker proposals (in some undefined point in time) for the migration of his STEEM inventions *if* they prove to be successful.

He has no longer any significant stake in BTS.
He has no plans to offer any worker proposals, apart from emergency fixes.   
And he's not even willing to promote OpenLedger as a trading platform for STEEM.

For me this is enough to call it "gone".

Yeah Dan and Stan seem to have both come to similar conclusions about decentralization, BTS & DPOS. 

https://steemit.com/crypto-news/@dan/is-the-dao-going-to-be-doa

Quote
Smart Contracts cannot fix Dumb People BitShares had all of the tools, the talent, and the money to do great things if only the BTS holders could agree on what should be done, who should be paid, and how much should be spent.

Voting is overrated.  I wouldn't want to ride on an aircraft controlled by voting passengers.
Give me a benevolent whale any day.

So I wish them luck with their centralized, benevolent whale blockchain, combined with all BM's tools & talent, I'm sure they'll be a Darwinian guaranteed success. BTS, LSK, DAO, DASH etc. don't stand a chance :)

(While I agree many aspects of it are challenging, I think they've come to some wrong conclusions by ignoring/discounting the role they played in the state of affairs BTS found itself and I also believe it's those that continue to develop the tools and incentives to make that process effective as well as lower the barriers to entry that will be the most rewarded.)   


« Last Edit: June 03, 2016, 08:35:16 pm by Empirical1.2 »
If you want to take the island burn the boats

Offline crypto4ever

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
    • View Profile
The over riding theme here seems to be to try to generate some ideas on how we can make the bitshares token more valuable.

I disagree.   While that's a nice bonus, I think it's more involved in that..

I agree that a rebrand could be helpful, and calling it simply DEX is a great way to hammer home what it is. BitShares was quite confusing.

I've been following Bitshares ever since AGS.  I'm still confused, and I shouldn't need to spend a month learning and practicing how to use something properly.

As a DEX, at least at this stage, I get it.

Every wonder why Microsoft hides menus and settings behind an "ADVANCED" button or tab?

That's where other non DEX components should live.   We should roll out as a DEX, do that well, and then after you get the network effect and popularity, you can say "by the way....  we also have these too..."

Microsoft Outlook to this day, is principally an e-mail program.  Yes, it can do reminders, notes, calendars, etc, etc.  But most people recognize it for it's main purpose.

Bitshares has a similar problem.  We need it first and foremost to be a DEX and instantly recognized, and utilized this way.



« Last Edit: June 03, 2016, 08:04:30 pm by crypto4ever »

jakub

  • Guest
We should definitely offer a generous worker salary for taking the leadership role, as it is a demanding full-time job.
Ideally the person is a C++ coder (so that at least the "CTO" position is filled), already knows Graphene, speaks both English and Chinese and has a good reputation in the community.

I wish @abit was willing to take on this role as he is the only one I am aware of who ticks all the boxes. At least for the time being.
Or @xeroc (but he has declined once so the chances are low).

If we don't manage to elect anybody among ourselves, the only other option is to wait till some existing (or future) whale steps in and takes over the whole DAC.
This might be good or fatal, depending on our luck.
But I cannot imagine BTS making any progress in the long term without a clear leadership.

Offline Akado

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2752
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: akado
On a side note, Dan Larimer has not been gone from BitShares for anywhere near as long, nor anywhere near as completely, as Jakub (the OP) was when he was mia for many months. No doubt Jakub was off doing valuable research and work - although he gave us no intimation of that. Should we expect any less of Bytemaster, who's hiatus will likely much benefit BitShares in the long run?

Please everyone take that into consideration when evaluating this thread.

All that's left of BM is his "promise" to offer worker proposals (in some undefined point in time) for the migration of his STEEM inventions *if* they prove to be successful.

He has no longer any significant stake in BTS.
He has no plans to offer any worker proposals, apart from emergency fixes.   
And he's not even willing to promote OpenLedger as a trading platform for STEEM.

For me this is enough to call it "gone".

Satoshi is gone for Bitcoin as well... I think this does not have to be crippling... and as said, I think BitShares is so far ahead of the curve... for 10 years there should be no need to do any further development on the core. Services like OpenPOS from KenCode can now focus on a stable core and I think they would not appreciate too much if they would change the core substantially every 6 months...

Bitcoin didn't have tons of competing coins at that time.

Also the most important thing, which no other crypto has, real world usage. Bitcoin succeeded because it was used on satoshidice/gambling sites and silk road. that was >90% of volume at the time. No usage or utility > no adoption. It will only come out of necessity and that will take a long time.

What we need is services to be built on top of the chain like some are doing. If that keeps up then BitShares will increase in value
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads