Dan's Next Project - EOS Rears its Head

[fluxer555]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about what's leaked about EOS, not Ethereum.

[Permie]

I think it probably will be good news for BitShares 2.0

I do not think that Dan will have spent another 18months of his valuable time redoing what he achieved with BitShares 2.0.
I'm confident that EOS will benefit BTS 2.0 shareholders.

But what if it doesn't? This isn't Dan's baby anymore and the decision is for the shareholders

I completely agree with your idea of staying as independent as possible. The chance that eos will be opensource is pretty high, so even in a worst case scenario, we are at least able to glean some technical inspiration from it. Hell from the looks of it, bitshares is in way better shape than projects like ethereum. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes, if even half of what's been leaked is true.

Then again ethereum apparently never had any problems with funding and hype, which of course had nothing to do with these big and nasty hidden powers behind the project, that have absolutely no nefarious agenda at all. Those powers would of course never use any untowards means to insure their monopoly.

I don't follow the Ethereum at all (why bother ), what has been leaked?
Could you give me your quick summary?

I remember your attitude on shareholder freedom over the years, I was hoping you'd chime in

[Thom]

I'm surprised that the mere mention of a certain individual makes people here discuss the question of dropping BTS for something about which very little is known at this time, basically that it will be called EOS and is some new idea of BM.

But if EOS is a system that completely undermines the wealth of BTS 2 shareholders, then what's to say that Dan won't find cryptonitesupercode language better suited to blockchains in 2 years time? And replaces EOS again?
...
I know you can't release certain information; but is 'Don't worry BTS 2 shareholders, we aren't going to fuck you over' that much to ask for?

IMO it's a safe bet that Dan will sooner or later leave EOS behind. He's got a history of doing that.
And you won't hear a "we aren't going to fuck you over", because I think that BM worries very little about the *people* here.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that EOS is going to be an amazing piece of technology, and I'm sure that BM does not intend to "fuck anyone over". But that doesn't mean you won't feel like having been fucked over, after he's left.

Well said @pc, well said. 

[MisO69]

So EOS doesn't have anything with BTS or STEEM?

it connects chains. let that sink for a second

Could this be what truly decentralizes Bitshares where there is no need for a third party to make BTC into Open_BTC? It sure would be nice to see something like this happen.

[JoeyD]

I think it probably will be good news for BitShares 2.0

I do not think that Dan will have spent another 18months of his valuable time redoing what he achieved with BitShares 2.0.
I'm confident that EOS will benefit BTS 2.0 shareholders.

But what if it doesn't? This isn't Dan's baby anymore and the decision is for the shareholders

I completely agree with your idea of staying as independent as possible. The chance that eos will be opensource is pretty high, so even in a worst case scenario, we are at least able to glean some technical inspiration from it. Hell from the looks of it, bitshares is in way better shape than projects like ethereum. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes, if even half of what's been leaked is true.

Then again ethereum apparently never had any problems with funding and hype, which of course had nothing to do with these big and nasty hidden powers behind the project, that have absolutely no nefarious agenda at all. Those powers would of course never use any untowards means to insure their monopoly.

[pc]

I'm surprised that the mere mention of a certain individual makes people here discuss the question of dropping BTS for something about which very little is known at this time, basically that it will be called EOS and is some new idea of BM.

But if EOS is a system that completely undermines the wealth of BTS 2 shareholders, then what's to say that Dan won't find cryptonitesupercode language better suited to blockchains in 2 years time? And replaces EOS again?
...
I know you can't release certain information; but is 'Don't worry BTS 2 shareholders, we aren't going to fuck you over' that much to ask for?

IMO it's a safe bet that Dan will sooner or later leave EOS behind. He's got a history of doing that.
And you won't hear a "we aren't going to fuck you over", because I think that BM worries very little about the *people* here.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that EOS is going to be an amazing piece of technology, and I'm sure that BM does not intend to "fuck anyone over". But that doesn't mean you won't feel like having been fucked over, after he's left.

[Permie]

If some of the leaked statements about EOS are true, then at the very least we have a roadmap target of potential bandwidth increase and/or a possibly easily accessible new community of potential customers if we play this right.

I don't immediately see this as bad news for bitshares. Dare I say the opposite or am I going to far then?

I think it probably will be good news for BitShares 2.0

I do not think that Dan will have spent another 18months of his valuable time redoing what he achieved with BitShares 2.0.
I'm confident that EOS will benefit BTS 2.0 shareholders.

But what if it doesn't? This isn't Dan's baby anymore and the decision is for the shareholders

[JoeyD]

If some of the leaked statements about EOS are true, then at the very least we have a roadmap target of potential bandwidth increase and/or a possibly easily accessible new community of potential customers if we play this right.

I don't immediately see this as bad news for bitshares. Dare I say the opposite or am I going to far then?

[Permie]

It's like moving our store from inside our own house to the shopping mall of someone else to operate under their new rules and not ours.
Today BitShares shareholders do have 100% control over the application, the blockchain itself and its settings. That's power we would probably lose running on EOS.
It's like moving a centralized exchange to BitShares ^^
Not saying it does not come with benefits but also not without risks.

I've known this to be true for years but right now is the first time I truly appreciate 100% shareholder control.
Is BTS 2.0 the first company in history to be able to say that with 100% confidence?

But think a little while how well Bitshares has worked so far... From technical standpoint there shouldn't be anything that prevents it being a TOP5 blockchain. But the community hasn't been able to use the technology to grow the ecosystem.

Would it be really a bad thing if a community like that would lose some of the control? What's the point of having control if it's used ineffectively?

The "invisible hand" guides the market, are you suggesting you have forsight greater than an omnipotent all-knowing "entity" that represents the aggregate subjective decisions made by an economic community?

Are you suggesting Redistribution of wealth?
I would hope such an idea is rather unpopular on a forum with history of NAP and austrian school of economic theory.

Where's the proof it's the fault of the current shareholders?
Even if it was their fault, who's to say that a current shareholder would not learn from their mistakes and have knowledge that a newly appointed receiver of stolen goods would not possess?

The bts price would have dumped into the ground long ago and it would not have had the capital to employ or incentivize anyone.
Iif the shareholders of the previous 2 years did not risk their wealth to bring it to fruition, this project would be nothing.
This project IS the shareholders. The community.

The fact that BitShares "Has the potential to be a TOP 5 blockchain" is directly BECAUSE of the investment of the "current" shareholders.
Liquidity, collateral asset value, results of worker proposal voting, testing early product, community discussion participation are all the result of efforts made by the shareholders.

====

The whole essence of this project, the real asset that brings BitShares' monumental growth potential, is in it's founding principles and enablance of freedom.

I should hope that the Freedom from sneaky rug-pulling is included.

[nmywn]

So what's the deal with EOS token?

[Samupaha]

It's like moving our store from inside our own house to the shopping mall of someone else to operate under their new rules and not ours.
Today BitShares shareholders do have 100% control over the application, the blockchain itself and its settings. That's power we would probably lose running on EOS.
It's like moving a centralized exchange to BitShares ^^
Not saying it does not come with benefits but also not without risks.

I've known this to be true for years but right now is the first time I truly appreciate 100% shareholder control.
Is BTS 2.0 the first company in history to be able to say that with 100% confidence?

But think a little while how well Bitshares has worked so far... From technical standpoint there shouldn't be anything that prevents it being a TOP5 blockchain. But the community hasn't been able to use the technology to grow the ecosystem.

Would it be really a bad thing if a community like that would lose some of the control? What's the point of having control if it's used ineffectively?

[fav]

Would it be possible to do an atomic trade (?) transfer between BTS 2.0 and EOS-BTS2.0 so that 1bts is always equal to and immediately tradeable for 1bts.eos ?

So the success of BTS.EOS pays exactly into BTS 2.0 shareholders?
Even if BTS 2.0 became redundant, an investor who goes AFK from now and for the next 10+ years can always return and view their portfolio without any potentially complicated re-education about EOS?

What I mean to say is that BTS 2.0 shareholders fund and pay for building a BTS 2.0 clone using EOS software, and also code in a 1:1 peg from bts to bts.eos hard coded into the genesis block along with a sharedrop.

Fund it and claim it for BTS 2.0

Is this a technically viable option?

should be. you'd feed a smartcontract with all BTS IDs and balances and make it claimable. there's no deadline

[Permie]

Would it be possible to do an atomic trade (?) transfer between BTS 2.0 and EOS-BTS2.0 so that 1bts is always equal to and immediately tradeable for 1bts.eos ?

So the success of BTS.EOS pays exactly into BTS 2.0 shareholders?
Even if BTS 2.0 became redundant, an investor who goes AFK from now and for the next 10+ years can always return and view their portfolio without any potentially complicated re-education about EOS?

What I mean to say is that BTS 2.0 shareholders fund and pay for building a BTS 2.0 clone using EOS software, and also code in a 1:1 peg from bts to bts.eos hard coded into the genesis block along with a sharedrop.

Fund it and claim it for BTS 2.0

Is this a technically viable option?

[karnal]

I think we should keep running our own network .. but then again details on this new EOS project are severely lacking right now.

[xeroc]

Btw .. dan mentioned to me that bitshares is not in a hurry .. it will take many months for eos to be as performant and rovust as bitshares (which has 2+ years of solid history)