Author Topic: Now that Daniel Larimer (aka bytemaster) is gone...  (Read 44159 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chris4210

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 431
  • Keep Building!
    • View Profile
    • www.payger.com
  • BitShares: chris4210
Soooooooo how about that Bitshares thing huh? :)

WHAT do YOU want?

Privacy.

Ordinary people using it as an online banking system.

Traders using it for forex, speculation.

Savers using BitETFs and Smartcoins to store wealth.

I want to be able to store wealth privately on the blockchain, to trade, save, invest, speculate, to do with my hard earned money what I please.

I want to be able to pay online using BitUSD.
I want to be able to send 500 BitUSD to a friend who needs a break instantly, across the world.

I want to use the dishonest, corrupt, extorting banking system as little as I have to.
I'll take ownership of my finances.

Fantastic.. now on a scale from 1 - 5, because I counted 5 things there, what order of importance do you think those things should be introduced? 1 being MOST important, and 5 being least.

This seems like a pretty good short term roadmap...

Thank you Bytemaster for finalizing a roadmap...

step 1: implement zero fees
step 2: subsidize liquidity
step 3: implement margin trading and simplify initial visible smartcoin markets to:

bitUSD/BTS
bitGOLD/BTS
bitGOLD/bitUSD


 +5% Sounds good


I added the roadmap to our roadmap list: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Xw4o-99EXCPg301mzE6CCm6XOOHGqVVfpeQiWilZkXM/edit#
Vote Chris4210 for Committee Member http://bit.ly/1WKC03B! | www.Payger.com - Payments + Messenger | www.BitShareshub.io - Community based fanpage for the BitShares Blockchain

Offline BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode

Good thread. BTS is the only chain besides BTC that I actually use for its practical utility to me. That really says it all.

I've been pondering ways to "revive" bitshares (more like "give it momentum again" - it isn't and was never profitable, though we're getting close now that we are not inflating).

Jakrub disappears (again).. Toast reappears.. what planets aligned to cause this?! :D
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
www.Peerplays.com | Decentralized Gaming Built with Graphene - Now with BookiePro and Sweeps!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Offline karnal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1068
    • View Profile
Would you like some toast with your bitshares?

Offline cube

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
  • Bit by bit, we will get there!
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: bitcube
I've been pondering ways to "revive" bitshares (more like "give it momentum again" - it isn't and was never profitable, though we're getting close now that we are not inflating).

Nice to have you back.  :)
ID: bitcube
bitcube is a dedicated witness and committe member. Please vote for bitcube.

Offline vegolino

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 450
  • Reality is Information
    • View Profile

Offline blahblah7up

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 192
    • View Profile

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
Good thread. BTS is the only chain besides BTC that I actually use for its practical utility to me. That really says it all.

I've been pondering ways to "revive" bitshares (more like "give it momentum again" - it isn't and was never profitable, though we're getting close now that we are not inflating).
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline lil_jay890

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
    • View Profile
Finally, I just wanted to say to @jakub that re-branding isn’t an issue at the moment. It wasn’t a bad idea and it sparked a good discussion, but there is no need for anyone to be mean to each other or replying in cheeky ways just to take the piss out of people who have different opinions.

If you haven't noticed, I've been only harsh to people who deliberately wanted to derail this thread or undermine my credibility to raise the issue, or completely misunderstood my genuine intentions.
And if I've been cheeky it's only because I do care, as BitShares has been an important part of my life for the last 2.5 years.

In my view, the future of BitShares now hinges on the success of a couple of business initiatives (OpenLedger, OpenPOS, bitCash or SollywoodTV) but *even if* any of them succeeds, for me this is no valid substitute for true leadership and brand identity needed in this ecosystem.

In this respect I completely agree with those two posts recently published on steem:
https://steemit.com/bitshares/@ steem1/rebrand-bitshares-to-dex-before-its-too-late
https://steemit.com/bitshares/@ help-yourself/why-has-bitshares-failed

As I've realized that this community does not feel the necessity to move on, I need to move on.
It's been a great privilege to be here.

Good luck, thank you and good-bye.

PS. If anyone needs to contact me, @abit has all the details.

Jakub, I've had you set as my proxie but I don't get this quit, comeback, quit thing you are doing.  Is this because a few people did not agree we should re brand?

I think you do have some good ideas, but I don't understand this "take my ball and go home" attitude.  We are not going to get 100% of what we want 100% of the time... especially when it comes to bitshares

Offline bitsharesbrazil

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
I GONNA MISS. You jqkub, but you gonna leave now? At the best of the party?

BITSHAREEEEEEEEEERRRRREEEEEESSSS

HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLD STROOOOOOOOOONG
bitcointalk ANN https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1084460.0
chat, post, promote it!!!!!!!! Stan help to improve OP!

Offline kenCode

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
    • View Profile
    • Agorise
According to @kenCode, stealth needs funding, but I still don’t see any proposal about the backups. Isn’t there anyone that would like to make a proposal for this very important feature, so that we can progress with stealth afterwards? Because I am feeling that part of the reason we are stuck with Stealth is that there were 3 more things that had to be done on Bitshares before adding stealth which were not considered appropriately in terms of funding.

Hi @tarantulaz :)
Yes, Stealth needs funding and we will be presenting a plan for this in the next few days I think, watch for it in the General thread.
IPFS will be used and I am now confident that we can finish the work that was started. The last few weeks my team has been getting very savvy with graphene, ipfs/ipns and all the other repos with existing tools that we can use for this. Anyway, watch for the announcement there and I will also post it to Steemit.com.
kenCode - Decentraliser @ Agorise
Matrix/Keybase/Hive/Commun/Github: @Agorise
www.PalmPay.chat

jakub

  • Guest
Finally, I just wanted to say to @jakub that re-branding isn’t an issue at the moment. It wasn’t a bad idea and it sparked a good discussion, but there is no need for anyone to be mean to each other or replying in cheeky ways just to take the piss out of people who have different opinions.

If you haven't noticed, I've been only harsh to people who deliberately wanted to derail this thread or undermine my credibility to raise the issue, or completely misunderstood my genuine intentions.
And if I've been cheeky it's only because I do care, as BitShares has been an important part of my life for the last 2.5 years.

In my view, the future of BitShares now hinges on the success of a couple of business initiatives (OpenLedger, OpenPOS, bitCash or SollywoodTV) but *even if* any of them succeeds, for me this is no valid substitute for true leadership and brand identity needed in this ecosystem.

In this respect I completely agree with those two posts recently published on steem:
https://steemit.com/bitshares/@ steem1/rebrand-bitshares-to-dex-before-its-too-late
https://steemit.com/bitshares/@ help-yourself/why-has-bitshares-failed

As I've realized that this community does not feel the necessity to move on, I need to move on.
It's been a great privilege to be here.

Good luck, thank you and good-bye.

PS. If anyone needs to contact me, @abit has all the details.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2016, 06:08:55 am by jakub »

Offline abit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4664
    • View Profile
    • Abit's Hive Blog
  • BitShares: abit
  • GitHub: abitmore
It's ok that market orders are all public data (though if that could be improved, even better) since if stealth'd funds can be sent to/from these accounts for trading, then it is still possible to maintain privacy.

I don't trust the current stealth mechanism for hiding the metadata linking your various accounts (that send funds to one another) together. Blockchain analysis can easily reveal the link with high probability in most cases. In my view, using the current system would give users a false sense of privacy of their metadata. It is better to focus (in the short term) on the GUI enabling only transfers with blinded balances. That way users could trust that the amount you hold (not the amount you trade or have in orders) could be private as well as the amount you transfer to accounts (like to centralized exchanges). Stealth going beyond blinded amounts that hides metadata as well is a harder problem that I think should be left for later. IMO it requires on-blockchain decentralized coin mixing using something like RingCT. This could also allow you to actually have a secret trading account (with public balances in the order books) that is kept disassociated from your normal account which has fully blinded balances.
Good points.
BitShares committee member: abit
BitShares witness: in.abit

tarantulaz

  • Guest
I am glad to see people fighting to see Bitshares improve, but personal attacks and arguments on such an important topic really unnecessary. An entire page was dedicated on arguments about steem and another one on personal attacks. Most of the people here want to see Bitshares shine, even if they have different agendas for their projects or visions.

In my opinion there is no need to vote for a leader. We have proxies and a committee whose role could be extended to giving some insight. These people are voted there for a reason, and if you can trust them to who they are going to elect as a witness etc, then you should be able to trust them on development issues as well. If that’s not enough for you and I know many people would dislike what I will say, but I would prefer @fuzzy as a ‘’leader’’. Not because of his vision, but because he really really wants to see this project succeed and he really tries to get the community together, definitely more than anybody else. I would also like to see @abit and @xeroc being a bit more vocal on what has to be done, as they have almost everyone’s trust. And if they make a worker proposal, vote for it!

There are a lot of very useful things that can be added to Bitshares like

1) Stealth, 2) Bond Market, 3) Liquidity/Parking Rewards, 4) Limited Rate Fees, 5) MetaTrader Support, 6) Sidechains, 7) Backups

And we’ve been talking about these things for more than 4 months now and not much has been done. However patience is key. Do you want all of them done soon? Find 0.5M$ and put it all in Bitshares. Even if we started doing everything now it would take at least 6 months until everything is implemented.

Being part of a DAC is tough and often things don’t go as we want. 90% of startups fail, but here we are, 2.5 years later, still alive and ready to move even further.

According to @kenCode, stealth needs funding, but I still don’t see any proposal about the backups. Isn’t there anyone that would like to make a proposal for this very important feature, so that we can progress with stealth afterwards? Because I am feeling that part of the reason we are stuck with Stealth is that there were 3 more things that had to be done on Bitshares before adding stealth which were not considered appropriately in terms of funding.

Rate limited fees are almost there. Either abit’s implementation or the upcoming one on steem could be used at some point.

Regarding sidechains, I made a post about a month ago and I was told from @bunkerchainlabs that they were going to do this through peerplays and hopefully Jonathan is going to keep his word and implement sidechains successfully (something that I don’t doubt).

I know everyone is talking about the 5th of November as if it the Bitcoin halving, but it is nowhere near the same as Bitcoin. With the Merger, value was instantly added to Bitshares, by adding AGS and PTS to BTSX (as well as VOTE and DNS). In Bitcoin though, you don’t count coins that are going to be mined as if they are adding value to the existing coins. Again, when the merger stops we’ll probably see some things moving, not because the dilution is going to be less, but because people’s wrong perception of the dilution will come to an end.

Finally, I just wanted to say to @jakub that re-branding isn’t an issue at the moment. It wasn’t a bad idea and it sparked a good discussion, but there is no need for anyone to be mean to each other or replying in cheeky ways just to take the piss out of people who have different opinions.

Have a nice day guys and thanks for your time!

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
It's ok that market orders are all public data (though if that could be improved, even better) since if stealth'd funds can be sent to/from these accounts for trading, then it is still possible to maintain privacy.

I don't trust the current stealth mechanism for hiding the metadata linking your various accounts (that send funds to one another) together. Blockchain analysis can easily reveal the link with high probability in most cases. In my view, using the current system would give users a false sense of privacy of their metadata. It is better to focus (in the short term) on the GUI enabling only transfers with blinded balances. That way users could trust that the amount you hold (not the amount you trade or have in orders) could be private as well as the amount you transfer to accounts (like to centralized exchanges). Stealth going beyond blinded amounts that hides metadata as well is a harder problem that I think should be left for later. IMO it requires on-blockchain decentralized coin mixing using something like RingCT. This could also allow you to actually have a secret trading account (with public balances in the order books) that is kept disassociated from your normal account which has fully blinded balances.

Offline Empirical1.2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1366
    • View Profile
Soooooooo how about that Bitshares thing huh? :)

WHAT do YOU want?

Privacy.

Ordinary people using it as an online banking system.

Traders using it for forex, speculation.

Savers using BitETFs and Smartcoins to store wealth.

I want to be able to store wealth privately on the blockchain, to trade, save, invest, speculate, to do with my hard earned money what I please.

I want to be able to pay online using BitUSD.
I want to be able to send 500 BitUSD to a friend who needs a break instantly, across the world.

I want to use the dishonest, corrupt, extorting banking system as little as I have to.
I'll take ownership of my finances.

Fantastic.. now on a scale from 1 - 5, because I counted 5 things there, what order of importance do you think those things should be introduced? 1 being MOST important, and 5 being least.

This seems like a pretty good short term roadmap...

Thank you Bytemaster for finalizing a roadmap...

step 1: implement zero fees
step 2: subsidize liquidity
step 3: implement margin trading and simplify initial visible smartcoin markets to:

bitUSD/BTS
bitGOLD/BTS
bitGOLD/bitUSD


 +5% Sounds good
If you want to take the island burn the boats