Estimated Price of 1 Bitshare

[progmac]

So, now the cost of BTSX is 2$ a share at most (AGS funding via BTC).
Toast has pledged to prop it up to at least 5$. (I would probably do the same)
That's a 150 % gain in 4 weeks with the only risk being bytemaster & Co. doing the runner with 3 million $ worth in Angel funding

Has everybody run out of BTC or why are Angelshares so cheap at the moment?

you mean cheap compared to their future value or cheap compared to what they were 2 weeks ago? 

they aren't cheap now! yesterday BTC only yielded about 45 AGS. It was twice that a couple weeks ago.

[jae208]

So, now the cost of BTSX is 2$ a share at most (AGS funding via BTC).
Toast has pledged to prop it up to at least 5$. (I would probably do the same)
That's a 150 % gain in 4 weeks with the only risk being bytemaster & Co. doing the runner with 3 million $ worth in Angel funding

Has everybody run out of BTC or why are Angelshares so cheap at the moment?

you mean cheap compared to their future value or cheap compared to what they were 2 weeks ago? 

[santaclause102]

So, now the cost of BTSX is 2$ a share at most (AGS funding via BTC).
Toast has pledged to prop it up to at least 5$. (I would probably do the same)
That's a 150 % gain in 4 weeks with the only risk being bytemaster & Co. doing the runner with 3 million $ worth in Angel funding

Has everybody run out of BTC or why are Angelshares so cheap at the moment?

you mean cheap compared to their future value or cheap compared to what they were 2 weeks ago? 

[vikram]

Happily coding away on unforeseen problems that come with the concept of a distributed exchange.

As I don't have time to follow everything every where, I would love to know what problems they have encountered.

how much time it will take to make a snapshot on Feb 28th? 30 minutes?
and as i know the snapshot will be done on 00:00 Feb 28th,right? but which time zone?

He won't make the snapshot on the same day; I don't see why it matters how long it takes. Probably after a day or two at least. Anyway, snapshots should be automatically generated every day assuming this bounty gets completed: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2869.0

The snapshot will be taken for PTS and AGS using the last blocks in PTS and BTC blockchains that were mined before Feb 28, midnight UTC.

[CLains]

Here we go.. 

[ww0207]

Happily coding away on unforeseen problems that come with the concept of a distributed exchange.

As I don't have time to follow everything every where, I would love to know what problems they have encountered.

how much time it will take to make a snapshot on Feb 28th? 30 minutes?
and as i know the snapshot will be done on 00:00 Feb 28th,right? but which time zone?

[sumantso]

Happily coding away on unforeseen problems that come with the concept of a distributed exchange.

As I don't have time to follow everything every where, I would love to know what problems they have encountered.

Mostly to do with sweeping up orders and not paying up. The original orders don't lose the money and they are returned after the time to pay up has expired, but the order book gets cleaned up.

[bytemaster]

Happily coding away on unforeseen problems that come with the concept of a distributed exchange.

As I don't have time to follow everything every where, I would love to know what problems they have encountered.

[sumantso]

Which is nice of course for the fools that burned their money away

 

[toast]

That's a 150 % gain in 4 weeks with the only risk being bytemaster & Co. doing the runner with 3 million $ worth in Angel funding

Another risk is if the test chain fails later than march then there will be a second snapshot and latecomers will get part of your current share

[Markus]

Toast has pledged to prop it up to at least 5$. (I would probably do the same)

"Pledge" to "prop" only makes sense with enough BTS, and I'm making no claims about BTS holdings

[toast]

Toast has pledged to prop it up to at least 5$. (I would probably do the same)

"Pledge" to "prop" only makes sense with enough BTS, and I'm making no claims about BTS holdings

[Markus]

So, now the cost of BTSX is 2$ a share at most (AGS funding via BTC).
Toast has pledged to prop it up to at least 5$. (I would probably do the same)
That's a 150 % gain in 4 weeks with the only risk being bytemaster & Co. doing the runner with 3 million $ worth in Angel funding

Has everybody run out of BTC or why are Angelshares so cheap at the moment?

[bytemaster]

Is anyone considering the risk that this release is a test and might be reset any time?
What are your thoughts on the probability of that happening?

If I were a betting man... I would guess at least 50/50 chance which means the initial price should be significantly discounted, however, within the first week the odds of a reset will drop dramatically and after a month it will be likely not require a reset.  My intent is to fail quickly, fix it, and then restart it.   Any resets in March will use the same snapshot.   Any resets in April will use a snapshot on March 31.

So only true gamblers looking to make a nice profit (or huge loss) will be speculating in the first few days...   This is why I recommend everyone only trade 'on chain'... you can trade assuming the chain will work, if it fails then no one gains and no one loses.  If it works then it is for keeps.   

If you trade with someone off chain... well, that is just risky.

[Markus]

Is anyone considering the risk that this release is a test and might be reset any time?
What are your thoughts on the probability of that happening?

[johncitizen]

my 5%:

I just received a newsletter from Ethereum that didn't contain the news that was promised. IPO still postponed until further notice.

Counterparty is doing a great job at its Alpha release. Happily coding away on unforeseen problems that come with the concept of a distributed exchange. I'm quite sure the III team is watching and learning. XCP meanwhile is selling at 5x the IPO price. Which is nice of course for the fools that burned their money away, but also tells us the community is still very much anticipating DEX' advent. While Counterparty is the first functional DEX its very far from a finished product.

IDK where MSC and NXT are at at the moment but I think that should III manage to release a coherent, functional and user friendly DEX within the next 2-3 months or so you need not worry on the ROI of your Angelshares. Funding crypto IPO's is a very high risk business, and the market tends to reward bravery rather generously (NXT, MSC, XCP all made a minimum 500% ROI directly after the IPO).

Considering that all DEX related cryptos went through the Mt. Gox crash without a glimpse I don't really see where this could go wrong other than Bytemaster ODing on Twinkies and Mountain Dew.

IMO, PTS/AGS has provided us with some price discovery for bitshares or at least a better idea of where it will begin trading.  The offerings you mention didn't really have any.  MSC and XCP are trading well below where it opened.  People were buying XCP for .01 on the first day and now you can pay around .005.  Same with MSC and the price is still falling.

I follow NXT closely, the devs are quite on the forums but they are meeting all their investors expectations. I see a positive future for them at the current rate and can see a niche market for the technology. I cant see them as a threat. None of the others gain particular appeal from my observations but I like to keep my bases covered.

From an analytical view I do believe invictus have the ability to succeed. *Our largest obstacle may become legal/regulatory.

As for many of the others... I wish crypto the best, but I know some projects will possibly decay. This is a sad prospect but you have it or you don't.

[Mrrr]

I don't expect BTS to start trading for 0.045 (average BTC/AGS*5) but I do expect it, if BTS is properly released, to trade above 0.009 for the simple reason that people who are funding the IPO now are taking a sigificantly higher risk than people who will buy afterwards. For a change III has something more to vouch for it than a bitcointalk forum post so that negates the risk factor significantly, but I can't image an initial price below IPO.

Since its a small step from 0.009 to 0.016 I'll put my money where my mouth is and use BTC to buy more AGS, and then use more BTC to buy more PTS since they are, according to my own logic, currently undervalued.

[JakeThePanda]

my 5%:

I just received a newsletter from Ethereum that didn't contain the news that was promised. IPO still postponed until further notice.

Counterparty is doing a great job at its Alpha release. Happily coding away on unforeseen problems that come with the concept of a distributed exchange. I'm quite sure the III team is watching and learning. XCP meanwhile is selling at 5x the IPO price. Which is nice of course for the fools that burned their money away, but also tells us the community is still very much anticipating DEX' advent. While Counterparty is the first functional DEX its very far from a finished product.

IDK where MSC and NXT are at at the moment but I think that should III manage to release a coherent, functional and user friendly DEX within the next 2-3 months or so you need not worry on the ROI of your Angelshares. Funding crypto IPO's is a very high risk business, and the market tends to reward bravery rather generously (NXT, MSC, XCP all made a minimum 500% ROI directly after the IPO).

Considering that all DEX related cryptos went through the Mt. Gox crash without a glimpse I don't really see where this could go wrong other than Bytemaster ODing on Twinkies and Mountain Dew.

IMO, PTS/AGS has provided us with some price discovery for bitshares or at least a better idea of where it will begin trading.  The offerings you mention didn't really have any.  MSC and XCP are trading well below where it opened.  People were buying XCP for .01 on the first day and now you can pay around .005.  Same with MSC and the price is still falling.

[toast]

If it's under $5 I'm shorting bitUSD with 100% of my BTS

[Mrrr]

my 5%:

I just received a newsletter from Ethereum that didn't contain the news that was promised. IPO still postponed until further notice.

Counterparty is doing a great job at its Alpha release. Happily coding away on unforeseen problems that come with the concept of a distributed exchange. I'm quite sure the III team is watching and learning. XCP meanwhile is selling at 5x the IPO price. Which is nice of course for the fools that burned their money away, but also tells us the community is still very much anticipating DEX' advent. While Counterparty is the first functional DEX its very far from a finished product.

IDK where MSC and NXT are at at the moment but I think that should III manage to release a coherent, functional and user friendly DEX within the next 2-3 months or so you need not worry on the ROI of your Angelshares. Funding crypto IPO's is a very high risk business, and the market tends to reward bravery rather generously (NXT, MSC, XCP all made a minimum 500% ROI directly after the IPO).

Considering that all DEX related cryptos went through the Mt. Gox crash without a glimpse I don't really see where this could go wrong other than Bytemaster ODing on Twinkies and Mountain Dew.

[JakeThePanda]

$5-10 first few days, no investor will sell at negative ROI

I don't see it like that.  BitsharesX is the first dividend of owning PTS/AGS with the hope of many more to come.  There will definitely be some sellers at launch looking to fund some of their initial investment in PTS/AGS.  With any new offering, there are always buyers looking to flip it at the open. Bitshares isn't any different.

[Brent.Allsop]

What are people paying for them now?  I did a quick back of the napkin calculation and it seems people are getting the right to one Bitshare for about $1, using bitcoin to bid on Angel shares on an average day.  But I probably am missing something?

If that's true, I'd say somewhere between $1 and $5.  It will take a while to get the kinks worked out of the system, and build trust in the technology, all of which just takes time.  Once that is achieved, I think Bitshares could get on board with the "Law of the Crypto Coin" described here:

http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/154/2

I think it would be interesting to get all the arguments, for the different prices being predicted, concisely stated in camps, and then see how many people are in which camp, and track how this changes over time.

[toast]

$5-10 first few days, no investor will sell at negative ROI

[JakeThePanda]

It will open at about $5 or .007 BTC.

[sfinder]

15-20$ after launch and will increase to 50-60 in 3 months.  12 months later ,we will see 100$ per share

What do you think the price of a single Bitshare will be once it is launched?
How did you reach this conclusion?

After 4 pages this thread has received exactly two answers to the initial question.
Come on guys, its only a couple of weeks til the launch of Bitshare XT. Let's start a proper prediction (market):

johncitizen: 15 $
Giga: 200 $
and now me: 5 $

[Markus]

What do you think the price of a single Bitshare will be once it is launched?
How did you reach this conclusion?

After 4 pages this thread has received exactly two answers to the initial question.
Come on guys, its only a couple of weeks til the launch of Bitshare XT. Let's start a proper prediction (market):

johncitizen: 15 $
Giga: 200 $
and now me: 5 $

[jae208]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

Sometimes weird stuff happens.

For example yesterday you could burn 1 BTC to have 1 000 XCP. Today trades happen at 100 XCP @ 1BTC, just because the burn period is over.

I also think that 200$ is too optimistic, but I don't think that PTS price is a good indicator.  Who knows what might happen once people realize that Bitshares supply is fixed.

I was just thinking that $1,000 was a bit too 'pessimistic'
Well not at launch obviously
The supply of Bitshares is only going to be a fraction of the Bitcoin supply AND it
will have much more advanced features too!

[jae208]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

It may not be worth $200 on launch but I think that may be possible a year or two from now. The thing is that the mainstream has only just found out about Bitcoin and so I think it'll be a while before people find out about Bitshares. Once people find out about Bitshares and what it will do you will see the price go through the roof.

[pgbit]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

It's hard to judge the opening value. I've looked at the current price of Mastercoin and the total coin amount, from that you might easily estimate an approx price if the two were equivalent - but clearly they are not. My understanding is that Bitshares will be released with the immediate added DAC functions; how much people are aware of and appreciate the added benefits will add to the price. The timing of announcements about future DACs from III will be worth paying attention to, as if they announce more of these prior to Bitshares X release this might likely affect Bitshares PTS, with a flurry of accumulation likely to occur in the coming weeks. Its quite a smart system, as this could very positively influence the opening Bitshares X value.

[santaclause102]

I think Bitshares (and counterparty) have such tremendous potential and can get way bigger in market cap than bitcoin IF EVERYTHING GOES AS PLANNED. If Bitshares works you need A LOT OF COLLATERAL (Bitshares)...

[luckybit]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

Sometimes weird stuff happens.

For example yesterday you could burn 1 BTC to have 1 000 XCP. Today trades happen at 100 XCP @ 1BTC, just because the burn period is over.

I also think that 200$ is too optimistic, but I don't think that PTS price is a good indicator.  Who knows what might happen once people realize that Bitshares supply is fixed.

XCP is underpriced. It's going for something like $100 USD because 100*10 = 1000 which is the street value for 1 BTC. I think XCP and PTS are both actually worth more like $1000 USD because there are only around 2 million and the upside is tremendous. $1000 USD will be considered dirt cheap a year from now while $100 USD is a steal.

The reason XCP is at $100 USD is because no one knows about it and no one is using it yet. When the next Bitcoin bubble happens and the price goes above $10,000 a Bitcoin the new investors will look for places to park their Bitcoins and XCP, PTS or Bitshares are all excellent places to park it.

There will be no inflation, and in the case of PTS and Bitshares the interest rate alone is a reason for people to buy it. If you look at Asicminer and Btct you'll find that shares easily reached Bitcoin parity and beyond. Asicminer reached almost 5 BTC, and Btct was offering shares in their exchange which I don't remember what the price of it was but it was well over 5 BTC.

I don't predict that XCP, PTS or BTS will be over 1 BTC this year or even next year, but at some point they will all reach parity and once that happens there wont be any going back. The best strategy is to buy and hold until it approaches parity with Bitcoin. 0.8-0.9 BTC per PTS by 2016.

[BldSwtTrs]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

Sometimes weird stuff happens.

For example yesterday you could burn 1 BTC to have 1 000 XCP. Today trades happen at 100 XCP @ 1BTC, just because the burn period is over.

I also think that 200$ is too optimistic, but I don't think that PTS price is a good indicator.  Who knows what might happen once people realize that Bitshares supply is fixed.

[JakeThePanda]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

Pts is severely undervalued atm, it will gain its real value once people witness III projects blossoming.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

You said on launch, not down the road.

[bytemaster]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

[Giga]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

Pts is severely undervalued atm, it will gain its real value once people witness III projects blossoming.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[JakeThePanda]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

You're going to be disappointed.  Let's think about this.  If they will be worth that much, than the price of PTS would be through the roof right now.  Look at where PTS is trading.  It will be worth less.

[Giga]

My hope and expectation is for each Bitshare to be worth about $200 on launch

[Brent.Allsop]

Having looked at the topics... Regarding questions like "is Jesus the Son of God?" (if that is a question that is derived from the topic "Jesus is the Son of God"): The truth you will find there will be 1000 perspectives always depending on your assumptions and the perspective from which you ask this question. The stated goal here should be exchanging perspectives / understanding each other and not finding the truth because the question as such is as such that there can not be an answer to it.
Also questions often imply a lot of assumptions already...
Those questions have been debated in scientific and in non scientific arenas and probably millions of pages worth reading have been written about it. So I would see such a project not as a means to finally come to a conclusion but it can serve to organize debates better (and show who has which financial ties etc. in order to put things in perspective) and make them more accessibly. If applied right there might be a scientific use. Something like: Summarizing papers I have written that answer a question and then put a link on the respective canonizer sub-page referring to this link.

Brilliant

[Brent.Allsop]

Requiring people to use their real world identities also might have disadvantages and limitations

Currently, with the prototype, people can chose to "support" and "contribute" to camps, using an anonymous id.  And it would be nice to be able to implement a canonizer that would filter anonymous support, and/or one that would focus on that, should people chose to do so.

I like your project!

Thanks!

[santaclause102]

The camps seem like a realistic approach to me that reflects the ambiguity of reality perception but labeling it as a sure way to finally find "the truth" doesn't reflect this realism

No!  I continuously point out that Canonizer.com has nothing to do with "the truth".  You quote that as if I said or "labeled" it as "the truth"?

Canonizer.com is only building and measuring for consensus, and for what people currently think they want, concisely, quantitatively, and in real time - nothing more.

Ok. So you mean truth less in the sense of "the truth" but more in a logical sense as "1" (as opposed to 0)... The first meaning is more common language the latter more scientific... I would emphasize though that some of the topics discussed are not those where only one perspective will remain.
Requiring people to use their real world identities also might have disadvantages and limitations but this way you could also let people prove that they are or are not associated with a lobby/interest group...Nontransparent lobbying is the biggest thread/disease for a democracy imo
I like your project!

Edit: Having looked at the topics... Regarding questions like "is Jesus the Son of God?" (if that is a question that is derived from the topic "Jesus is the Son of God"): The truth you will find there will be 1000 perspectives always depending on your assumptions and the perspective from which you ask this question. The stated goal here should be exchanging perspectives / understanding each other and not finding the truth because the question as such is as such that there can not be an answer to it.
Also questions often imply a lot of assumptions already...
Those questions have been debated in scientific and in non scientific arenas and probably millions of pages worth reading have been written about it. So I would see such a project not as a means to finally come to a conclusion but it can serve to organize debates better (and show who has which financial ties etc. in order to put things in perspective) and make them more accessibly. If applied right there might be a scientific use. Something like: Summarizing papers I have written that answer a question and then put a link on the respective canonizer sub-page referring to this link.

[Brent.Allsop]

The camps seem like a realistic approach to me that reflects the ambiguity of reality perception but labeling it as a sure way to finally find "the truth" doesn't reflect this realism

No!  I continuously point out that Canonizer.com has nothing to do with "the truth".  You quote that as if I said or "labeled" it as "the truth"?

The goal of Canonizer.com isn't to get to any "Truth".

Canonizer.com is only building and measuring for consensus, and for what people currently think they want, concisely, quantitatively, and how this changes in real time - nothing more.

[santaclause102]

The camps seem like a realistic approach to me that reflects the ambiguity of reality perception but labeling it as a sure way to finally find "the truth" doesn't reflect this realism

[Brent.Allsop]

Haven't digged much into it... But what makes canonizer different from wikipedia?

Wikipedia works great for encyclopedic consensus information that everyone agrees on.  But if there is any disagreement, at all, the focus and edit wars quickly focus on that, everyone gets hurt and leaves, unless you like spending your life flaming with endless edit wars.  Anything at all controversial (all important things) like global warming just don't work at all.

Also, there is no measure of the quality of information with Wikipedia, and for that matter, that is the problem with the entire internet and everything out there.

Canonizer.com solves both of these problems by adding "camps"  The I3 people create and wiki their camp and the Etherium people create their camp, and everyone indicates which one they currently have as their working hypothesis that it is the best one.

Each reader can select their experts by selecting their preferred canonizer algorithm on the side bar, and "canonize" things accordingly.  In other words, 80% of your chosen experts might be in the I3 camp, and 10% of them in the Etherium camp....

The scientific proof comes from the free market, falsifying the incorrect theory camps, and forcing everyone into the same one.  But of course, if the popularity swings to support a dumb currency, while smart/agile currencies are really better, the majority will join the dumb camp, at least temporarily, but such will not convert the smart experts.  Eventually the best camps will out perform dumb camps, the early minority supporters of such taking lots of money away from the flash and crash, pump and dump ones.

The goal of Canonizer.com is to measure, in real time, how much support there is for each theory, before expending the effort to do the real world experiment, putting it on the market.  Then you can track to find out which are the best experts, in the 'right' camps the earliest, once the experiments are completed, so you can trust them more the next time...

[CLains]

We know that it is possible to gather a huge amount of information through hundreds of thousands of hierarchical structures and integrate it all into an amazingly coherent representation where all conflict and ambiguity is resolved.

How do we know this? That's how we consciously perceive the world! 

#inspiration

[santaclause102]

Haven't digged much into it... But what makes canonizer different from wikipedia?

[Brent.Allsop]

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the feedback.  That helps.  And the following is just my current newbee opinion, so I would much enjoy any further feedback anyone may have.

Canonizer.com is just a small prototype, so yes, we haven't yet done much work to eliminate things like Sybil attack potentials.  But those kinds of things are fairly easy problems to solve.  For example Keyhotee IDs, integrated in the identity system would go a long way towards this, and there are other solutions.  It just hasn't been a problem or part of the minimum viable product yet.

Who the 'experts' are is determined by the users of Canonizer.com.  You do this by selecting the Canonizer algorithm on the side bar.  The goal is to give users the ability to configure, mix and match any canonizer algorithm they like.  The most popular 'expert' canonizers are the 'peer ranking' ones.  For example, all the "Mind Experts" are peer ranking each other for that Canonizer.  See: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/81 .  Canponizer.com is all about enabling everyone to recognize and trust the minority best experts as soon as possible.  It's about providing information to the experts and leaders about what the lagging crowd is still thinking, and why, and most importantly what will be required to convince them, so they can be more rapidly brought on board with the right thing to do.  That which you can measure, improves.

The goal of Canonizer.com isn't to get to any "Truth".  One goal is simply to enable large crowds to politely communicate, concisely and quantitatively, about controversial and painful topics.  With Canonizer.com Instead of heated debates, edit wars, and flame threads people just join and help wiki a camp, end of argument.  The nature of forums that talk about consciousness or any other controversial topic dramatically changes once Canonizer.com is introduced.  The crowd finally starts making progress instead of just eternal demoralizing arguments that drive everyone away.  Diversity in the crowd can then be valued and drive things forward instead of feared because it always drives everyone apart.

Canonizer.com is the most powerful consensus building system out there.  No matter how much agreement people have, they always find less important things to disagree and focus on.  Everyone gets hurt, nothing gets done and consensus is destroyed.  But Canonizer.com completely avoids this problem by enabling such lesser issues to be pushed out of the way to lower sub camps, where they are not lost or censored.  Such is valued, concisely and quantitatively measured.  This enables the focus to remain on what is most important, what everyone needs to be on board, and what the consensus needs to be about so the crowd can move forward and act, decisively and quickly.

As things progress, the more this crypto currency war will depend on the intelligence and agility of the competing currencies.  Dumb currencies that can't change will be weeded out very quickly when faced with currencies able to act more intelligently and rapidly.  Hierarchically managed currencies will be more intelligent, but the intelligence of any hierarchy is an extreme bottleneck, to say nothing of how this crowd will reject any such.  Leaders that aren't interested in knowing, concisely, quantitatively, and in real time, what everyone wants, will make many more mistakes driving away ever more potential supporters.

Right now, there are lots of people that think that a dumb hard coded can't change rate of introduction of the currency into the economy is a good thing.  So all those people will tend to flock to dumb flash in the pan currencies, avoiding more intelligent and agile ones able to make such drastic changes.  My prediction is that many currencies will continue to flash, crash and burn, with the holders of such loosing lots of money, till the crowd recognized the importance of intelligent and agile currencies.

Intelligent people will flock to the currencies that will win, long term, and make lots of money doing so.  Currencies that are able to attract and help amplify the wisdom of their holders in a consensus building leaderless way will do far better than the short term flash in the pan losers.  And if a currency can amplify and leverage that wisdom, to be far more intelligent than any hierarchy.  If a currency can train it's potential holders to build consensus and learn from and trust the wisdom of the crowd, faster and more completely than the holders of its competitors, Such a currency will ultimately be the final winner, easily blowing away all less intelligent competitors.

Upwards,

Brent Allsop

[bytemaster]

I hear and understand all the pros for removing uncertainty.

But don't forget that you'll have troubles motivating people to get involved in a test that doesn't count.  I'd have troubles getting motivated to be involved, and there is no way it would be anywhere close to the real thing test.

Another problem is, if one person makes the decision to start all over, you'll surely make some people mad, and lose their trust, and possibly their participation.

If you used a canonization survey process to find out, concisely and quantitatively, what everyone thinks, and let everyone provide input if they wanted, all crowd sourcing informing an expert decision of whether you should restart, or not, you could not only find out concisely and quantitatively, just how many people you'll piss off, and why, but you'll significantly reduce the number of people that would be pissed off, because everyone would better know, sooner, why a particular decision was being made.

Heck, it may take more than one restart to get things right.  And if the entire crowd agrees that a 3rd restart was better for everyone, making such a decision would be all the more easy.

Your process is very similar to a company I tried to start many moons ago.  The problem is that the process used by canonizer is not conductive to human nature.  I would suggest that less than 1 in 100 people would even consider using such a structured debate system because the reality is that most people don't care to find the "truth".   Most experts have financial ties to their current 'camps' and cannot change.  Cognitive Dissonance and Double Think apply to experts too and thus make the results from Canonizer questionable.   Canonizer is also subject to Sybil attacks and who gets to declare themselves an 'expert'? 

If you want 'expert consensus' that is what markets are for. 

[Stan]

I hear and understand all the pros for removing uncertainty.

But don't forget that you'll have troubles motivating people to get involved in a test that doesn't count.  I'd have troubles getting motivated to be involved, and there is no way it would be anywhere close to the real thing test.

Another problem is, if one person makes the decision to start all over, you'll surely make some people mad, and lose their trust, and possibly their participation.

If you used a canonization survey process to find out, concisely and quantitatively, what everyone thinks, and let everyone provide input if they wanted, all crowd sourcing informing an expert decision of whether you should restart, or not, you could not only find out concisely and quantitatively, just how many people you'll piss off, and why, but you'll significantly reduce the number of people that would be pissed off, because everyone would better know, sooner, why a particular decision was being made.

Heck, it may take more than one restart to get things right.  And if the entire crowd agrees that a 3rd restart was better for everyone, making such a decision would be all the more easy.

An even simpler approach is to let the market decide.  When any developer offers any upgrade the market always has the option of sticking with what they've got.  To smooth the transition, initialize the upgrade to match the last valid share distribution then get out of the way.

No artificial polling is required.  We have a free market!

[Brent.Allsop]

I hear and understand all the pros for removing uncertainty.

But don't forget that you'll have troubles motivating people to get involved in a test that doesn't count.  I'd have troubles getting motivated to be involved, and there is no way it would be anywhere close to the real thing test.

Another problem is, if one person makes the decision to start all over, you'll surely make some people mad, and lose their trust, and possibly their participation.

If you used a canonization survey process to find out, concisely and quantitatively, what everyone thinks, and let everyone provide input if they wanted, all crowd sourcing informing an expert decision of whether you should restart, or not, you could not only find out concisely and quantitatively, just how many people you'll piss off, and why, but you'll significantly reduce the number of people that would be pissed off, because everyone would better know, sooner, why a particular decision was being made.

Heck, it may take more than one restart to get things right.  And if the entire crowd agrees that a 3rd restart was better for everyone, making such a decision would be all the more easy.

[sumantso]

So why say that "maybe we will make a new snapshot" at all? You might as well commit to that snapshot and re-launch the chain with the same allocation if anything breaks

Thats an interesting idea and will remove a lot of uncertainity in investors minds. I created a topic in the AGS board with the title which includes 'may'. What I realised in the AGS board is that investors are already confused enough.

But I guess there may be a problem with the snapshot itself? In that case a new one has to be taken anyway.

[toast]

So why say that "maybe we will make a new snapshot" at all? You might as well commit to that snapshot and re-launch the chain with the same allocation if anything breaks

[bytemaster]

2. It will be more important that the product publicized to the public is working properly and is secure. A public scandal will be the worst possible outcome.

yes, this !

According to dan's last update he should have consensus mechanism done by the end of this week which means it's *possible* we'll have an MVP with time to try to break it before feb ~20 but the thought of the masses buying in only to find shit doesn't work as advertised is a bad thought and makes me nervous

The snapshot date is not the launch date.  We will hold of the launch if there are still bugs, but we want to make it clear that the XT network is supposed to be a test network with a high probability of finding bugs.  Anyone who holds AGS and PTS for the long haul will be in good shape, the only people that might get burned are the day traders.

[toast]

2. It will be more important that the product publicized to the public is working properly and is secure. A public scandal will be the worst possible outcome.

yes, this !

According to dan's last update he should have consensus mechanism done by the end of this week which means it's *possible* we'll have an MVP with time to try to break it before feb ~20 but the thought of the masses buying in only to find shit doesn't work as advertised is a bad thought and makes me nervous

[CLains]

We made it pretty public in Miami... Dan even interrupted happy hour to announce it.

 

As big as the event was it is still an insider kind of thing until it reaches a news site like Coindesk. Hopefully it reaches a wider audience with the upcoming Let's Talk Bitcoin episode!
With fans like Reggie Middleton and Adam B. Levine you can reach a great mass of people in no time.

[Stan]

Good work Brent.Allsop!

I agree with you that Invictus needs to get the word out lest they be accused of secrecy like NXT was. The NXT cloning that is currently going on is clearly in the spirit of spite against the percieved secrecy of the initial funding.

To avoid this Invictus needs to inform everyone about the time and date of the snapshot, as it may be the official one for Bitshares X.

At least 10 days in advance there should be:
News articles at coindesk and related cryptocurrency news outlets.
Huge threads at Bitcointalk.org,  NXT forums, and other major forums.
...

As Brent points out, this need not be a propaganda campaign. We just need to inform people that this is the first Test Chain, and that it may be the official Chain, and that help is appreciated, and that this is how you get involved, etc.


Arguments against Brent and myself:

1. It won't be the last Bitshares chain, as Invictus will keep releasing new chains and keep rewarding PTS/AGS holders with a stake. People don't miss out on a "final" everything.

2. It will be more important that the product publicized to the public is working properly and is secure. A public scandal will be the worst possible outcome.

...

We made it pretty public in Miami... Dan even interrupted happy hour to announce it.

 

[CLains]

Good work Brent.Allsop!

I agree with you that Invictus needs to get the word out lest they be accused of secrecy like NXT was. The NXT cloning that is currently going on is clearly in the spirit of spite against the percieved secrecy of the initial funding.

To avoid this Invictus needs to inform everyone about the time and date of the snapshot, as it may be the official one for Bitshares X.

At least 10 days in advance there should be:
News articles at coindesk and related cryptocurrency news outlets.
Huge threads at Bitcointalk.org,  NXT forums, and other major forums.
...

As Brent points out, this need not be a propaganda campaign. We just need to inform people that this is the first Test Chain, and that it may be the official Chain, and that help is appreciated, and that this is how you get involved, etc.


Arguments against Brent and myself:

1. It won't be the last Bitshares chain, as Invictus will keep releasing new chains and keep rewarding PTS/AGS holders with a stake. People don't miss out on a "final" everything.

2. It will be more important that the product publicized to the public is working properly and is secure. A public scandal will be the worst possible outcome.

...

[Brent.Allsop]

Folks,

I've created a new "What is the best currency" survey topic camp for Invictus Innovations Bitshares:

http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/150/7

And I've started a publicly editable wiki Google doc to produce the first draft of a statement:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GGswp7QM7GgCLxMkjBxlmP82_qK5ct-LIcb1WpqVWCU/edit?usp=sharing

and seeded it with a few of the crude ideas that make it one of the best currencies for me.

I'm hopping some of you experts can help significantly improve the first version of the statement.

And I hope more of you will support the camp at Canonizer.com so we can communicate to the world the significance of this.

Brent Allsop

[Markus]

[…]  Not only are there drastically fewer Bitshares, […]

If you think it is important where the decimal mark is I suggest 42coin. They are quite expensive though, one trades at 250 000 USD.

[Brent.Allsop]

Exactly... we will not start our major marketing push until we have it battle hardened.

Marketing and advertizing is very different than communication done in a peer reviewed, level playing field place like canonizaer.com.

If Ether is shit, and Bitshares are way better than Bitcoin, people need to know, concisely and quantitatively, how many people think this, and they need to know, concisely and quantitatively, how many people think differently, and they need to be able to track this consensus information in real time.  And people need to be able to invest in the right organization, not the wrong one, significantly increasing the efficiency and the speed of development of this market.

At least that's my Newbie opinion.

[Brent.Allsop]

Ethereum is an interesting academic exercise and a great way for people to explore the DAC space, but anything worthwhile that can be made into a "true" DAC will be cloned, made more profitable and scalable, and made to honor PTS =D

Shit, I just saw this:

"0.5X ether will be mined per year forever after that point (ie. permanent linear inflation)"

That's a 50% per year tax on the holders of Either, right?  I see more and more of these kinds of dumb things being done by that group, and they are loosing my trust, fast.  Nobody is going to want to pay that tax rate.  Why would they?

Also, the fact that Vitalic was involved in the "Dark Wallet", really destroys my trust.  We need to be as open as possible, and have a mantra that everyone know everything, if you ask me.  Dan Laramer, and Invictus Innovations is more open than any other organization I've seen, that's another reason I'm loving this camp better and better.

But yes BTS blows all altcoins out of the water, the only advantage BTC has is confidence in the code. I think we shouldn't be in a rush to market until the code is battle-hardened a bit

It's not advertizement, it's simply communication and being open.  Any secret thinking along these lines will destroy our reputation.  The reason the securities and exchange commission regulates the hell out of the IPO process is precisely to solve this problem:  people getting blindsided, and loosing lots of money.  Being open and communicating to everyone, in a trusted way, is the only way to avoid having the hell regulated out of the crypto currency market.  Without good communication, the general population will be thinking:

"Those bastard geeks just stole all my money, since I didn't know what they were up to, they should be thrown in jail, and all their money should be confiscated so this doesn't happen again for anyone else."

As much as possible, we need to make it so they think:

"Wow, I heard about that, and if I would have listened and sold then, I wouldn't have lost all this money.  Next time I will pay more attention, and I'll be the one profiting."

Sure the Invictus code isn't battle hardened yet.  We need to make sure all such is part of the communication, and this is the difference between advertizing.  We need to vet the ideas as much as possible, pros and cons, so everyone can know in a peer reviewed way, what is coming, before it comes, and also so any problems can be uncovered as soon as possible.  And Invictus code can be fixed, so that doesn't bother me, it's just a matter of time.

I propose we start a new camp to communicate what we are doing here, so people can see how the experts compare Bitshares to all other competitors as soon as possible:

http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/150

I propose a camp name of "Bitshares"

Are there any better experts than me that would be willing to make a first draft of a camp statement, or at least help with such, with all this information contained in it?

Brent Allsop

[bytemaster]

Can any expert out there make any justified argument that says Bitshares will not surpass Lite coin, Bitcoin, and every other coin out there, in a big way?  Is there any other investment out there that is better than, or even close to Bitshares?  Isn't Etherium about to start something similar?  How does it compare?  Others?

Brent Allsop

Ethereum is an interesting academic exercise and a great way for people to explore the DAC space, but anything worthwhile that can be made into a "true" DAC will be cloned, made more profitable and scalable, and made to honor PTS =D

But yes BTS blows all altcoins out of the water, the only advantage BTC has is confidence in the code. I think we shouldn't be in a rush to market until the code is battle-hardened a bit

Exactly... we will not start our major marketing push until we have it battle hardened.

[toast]

Can any expert out there make any justified argument that says Bitshares will not surpass Lite coin, Bitcoin, and every other coin out there, in a big way?  Is there any other investment out there that is better than, or even close to Bitshares?  Isn't Etherium about to start something similar?  How does it compare?  Others?

Brent Allsop

Ethereum is an interesting academic exercise and a great way for people to explore the DAC space, but anything worthwhile that can be made into a "true" DAC will be cloned, made more profitable and scalable, and made to honor PTS =D

But yes BTS blows all altcoins out of the water, the only advantage BTC has is confidence in the code. I think we shouldn't be in a rush to market until the code is battle-hardened a bit

[pgbit]

*[…]  Is anyone going mostly all in with angel shares?

Ask that guy who donates 10 BTC nearly every day 

How do you know this?  Is this information visible someplace publicly?
I'd like to put a lot more into Bitshares, but not sure the best way to do it.

Here's a link to the daily donation listings: http://www1.agsexplorer.com/

[Brent.Allsop]

When Invictus deliver, even owning a handful of bitshares will prove rewarding. There is much to accomplish but I believe in Invictus.

Using the PTS and AGS price, I estimate they are currently around 15 USD. In my opinion they are severely undervalued.

On launch I will not be surprised by $100+ USD.

Why only Lite coin?  Lite coin is just a clone of Bitcoin, with no significant differences.  While Bitshares is vastly superior in so many ways.  The most important way, according to investors, like me, is the amount of new coins coming into existence, which is like a tax on the holders.  Not only are there drastically fewer Bitshares, and where Bitcoin has 12% new coins each year, Bitshares has none of this.  So right out of the gate you have at least 10% better performance, just on this alone, to say nothing of all the other improvements.

Seems to me this must also blow away Bitcoin, not just Litecoin.

And if THIS is true, we need to get this information canonized, and communicated out to the public better.  One thing we don't want, for sure, is for something like this to blindside everyone.  It looks to me like we are all the only ones that know about this.  And once These are trading, it could, within a few days, kill Bitcoin and surpass it's market share, in a very messy way - with LOTS of people losing LOTS of money.

Sure we'll all profit from it, but think about what that will do to crypto currency in the eyes of the public.  They will view it as a bunch of nerds successively creating new better coins, selling the public on them, then secretly creating better coins to take all this money away from them.  The only way to avoid this is to publicize this kind of information in a trusted place like Canonizer.com, so it is very public information, otherwise the regulators, and public in general, are going to come after us big time.  For example, we should create a new topic describing why we all think Bitshares is superior to all other Bitcoins, and why here:

http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/150

Can any expert out there make any justified argument that says Bitshares will not surpass Lite coin, Bitcoin, and every other coin out there, in a big way?  Is there any other investment out there that is better than, or even close to Bitshares?  Isn't Etherium about to start something similar?  How does it compare?  Others?

Brent Allsop

[Brent.Allsop]

*[…]  Is anyone going mostly all in with angel shares?

Ask that guy who donates 10 BTC nearly every day 

How do you know this?  Is this information visible someplace publicly?
I'd like to put a lot more into Bitshares, but not sure the best way to do it.

[JakeThePanda]

*[…]  Is anyone going mostly all in with angel shares?

Ask that guy who donates 10 BTC nearly every day 

How do you know he's allin?  Maybe his net worth is like a billion dollars.

[Markus]

*[…]  Is anyone going mostly all in with angel shares?

Ask that guy who donates 10 BTC nearly every day 

[Bitcoinfan]

Dividends are no longer given up by the short seller.  its just a 5% fee, which does the same thing as giving up dividends in the end 

[toast]

Folks,

I still have a few questions about this valuation information:
* When will Bitshares start trading, and could this be delayed?

Unknown, my estimate is Q2

* Will protoshares cease to exist at that time, having been converted to Bitshares?

Protoshares will continue to exist and will by honored by future DACs

* As far as people that really understand this stuff, what is your target position for how much you be your target holdings?.  For example when the funding round closes, what percentage of your capital will be Bitcoin vs protoshares vs angel shares?  Is anyone going mostly all in with angel shares?

My BTS X snapshot allocation will be around 50/50 PTS/AGS, assuming PTS:AGS donation average gets pretty close to 1

* Will the security of Bitshares be equal to the Mining of Bitcoin?

We will see. Bytemaster can give you lots of theory about why BTS will be more secure.

* Once the financing round closes in a few months, would, or could there ever be any more Bitshares put into the economy?

There will be other chains under the "BitShares" brand, but we are actually talking about BTS X, the first chain which has mostly currencies. There will be no new BTS X (first chain base unit) after financing round

* Still struggling to understand who is paying this Bitshare interest.  What controls how much this will be?  Will it be the amount if interest and activity in futures contracts?

BitAsset only: directly from 5% short sell fee, +?% sacrificed BTS dividends from short sell
BTS: transaction fees, inactivity fees, maybe other "network cost" stuff

[valtr]

Folks,

I still have a few questions about this valuation information:
* When will Bitshares start trading, and could this be delayed?
* Will protoshares cease to exist at that time, having been converted to Bitshares?
* As far as people that really understand this stuff, what is your target position for how much you be your target holdings?.  For example when the funding round closes, what percentage of your capital will be Bitcoin vs protoshares vs angel shares?  Is anyone going mostly all in with angel shares?
* Will the security of Bitshares be equal to the Mining of Bitcoin?
* Once the financing round closes in a few months, would, or could there ever be any more Bitshares put into the economy?
* Still struggling to understand who is paying this Bitshare interest.  What controls how much this will be?  Will it be the amount if interest and activity in futures contracts?

Thanks!

Brent Allsop

Nobody knows the date of start. It depends on development. Maybe 3-5/2014?

Protoshares will not cease to exist ever. Holders will get 10% stake in any other DAC released by Invictus or based on Invictus software and released by 3rd party.
Bishares just spoken about are only the first chain with first 16 assets. More independent chains with different assets will be released step by step. The chain has space limit in MB.

The rest I don't know or I am not able to explain with my English.

[Brent.Allsop]

Folks,

I still have a few questions about this valuation information:
* When will Bitshares start trading, and could this be delayed?
* Will protoshares cease to exist at that time, having been converted to Bitshares?
* As far as people that really understand this stuff, what is your target position for how much you be your target holdings?.  For example when the funding round closes, what percentage of your capital will be Bitcoin vs protoshares vs angel shares?  Is anyone going mostly all in with angel shares?
* Will the security of Bitshares be equal to the Mining of Bitcoin?
* Once the financing round closes in a few months, would, or could there ever be any more Bitshares put into the economy?
* Still struggling to understand who is paying this Bitshare interest.  What controls how much this will be?  Will it be the amount if interest and activity in futures contracts?

Thanks!

Brent Allsop

[oco101]

Ok sorry got it !!

[toast]

What about the exchange rate of BTS to BTC? Does anybody want to speculate on what that may be?

Please correct if wrong.
Before the AGS funding round PTS was traded at 0.03 BTC, then every PTS would be awarded with 1 BTS. And there would be 20 million.

You mean 4 million BTS

before: 20m
after: 4m

[oco101]

What about the exchange rate of BTS to BTC? Does anybody want to speculate on what that may be?

Please correct if wrong.
Before the AGS funding round PTS was traded at 0.03 BTC, then every PTS would be awarded with 1 BTS. And there would be 20 million.

You mean 4 million BTS

[toast]

What about the exchange rate of BTS to BTC? Does anybody want to speculate on what that may be?

Please correct if wrong.
Before the AGS funding round PTS was traded at 0.03 BTC, then every PTS would be awarded with 1 BTS. And there would be 20 million.

The average daily BTC donation, prices AGS under 0.01BTC.

So not taking in to account that BTS is more scarce, and assuming BTS release would take 200 days (unlikely) This would be a factor 3 ROI.

This is a very low estimation, but I don't like to be over optimistic with investments. Also BTS should be considered the first dividend payout. There will be multiple BTS chains and DAC's which should pay at least 10% to the AGS holders.

And remember, that assumption is very conservative for only if you are trying to sell BTS right away. The longer after release the better deal it becomes because of the scarcity factor you are ignoring, because the new BTS will not be devalued down by 90% over time.

You can basically plot a function of time that would produce a multiplier for how much better the new allocation is in terms of BTS per PTS, it would start at 3x converge to something higher

[graffenwalder]

What about the exchange rate of BTS to BTC? Does anybody want to speculate on what that may be?

Please correct if wrong.
Before the AGS funding round PTS was traded at 0.03 BTC, then every PTS would be awarded with 1 BTS. And there would be 20 million.

The average daily BTC donation, prices AGS under 0.01BTC.

So not taking in to account that BTS is more scarce, and assuming BTS release would take 200 days (unlikely) This would be a factor 3 ROI.

This is a very low estimation, but I don't like to be over optimistic with investments. Also BTS should be considered the first dividend payout. There will be multiple BTS chains and DAC's which should pay at least 10% to the AGS holders.
 

[jae208]

What about the exchange rate of BTS to BTC? Does anybody want to speculate on what that may be?

[jae208]

The argument that is always made is against merchants accepting Bitcoin for payment is its volatility.

What no one is talking about yet is that Bitshares solves this problem - merchants can simply accept BitUSD as payment (and receive a great 5% interest on all their sales deposits).

Perhaps you just need one big merchant to do this, and who knows what could happen to the price...

I agree. I feel that to be able to use BitCurrencies for everyday payment is the key. But it depends on legality and that will be o big problem.

I honestly don't think that legality will be much of a problem in the long run. If enough people in a given country want something it doesn't matter what the government says the will of the people will always triumph. This needs to be developed and released as soon as possible though.

[valtr]

The argument that is always made is against merchants accepting Bitcoin for payment is its volatility.

What no one is talking about yet is that Bitshares solves this problem - merchants can simply accept BitUSD as payment (and receive a great 5% interest on all their sales deposits).

Perhaps you just need one big merchant to do this, and who knows what could happen to the price...

I agree. I feel that to be able to use BitCurrencies for everyday payment is the key. But it depends on legality and that will be o big problem.

[speedy]

The argument that is always made is against merchants accepting Bitcoin for payment is its volatility.

What no one is talking about yet is that Bitshares solves this problem - merchants can simply accept BitUSD as payment (and receive a great 5% interest on all their sales deposits).

Perhaps you just need one big merchant to do this, and who knows what could happen to the price...

[jae208]

Idk, if BitShare is actually Bitshares AGS and Protshares merged (4M in total thus) I would say it would be worth what that bitshare respesent.

I readed before they wanted to implent bGold, where one bGold would be worth 1 oZ of gold if it would follow the market price.

Therefore its hard to say, but I think I will supprass litecoin because of divident system and there will be only 4M in existance instead of 25M (if correct, again).

That is true
THe scarcity of Bitshares should cause the price of a single Bitshare to be really valuable.

[johncitizen]

When Invictus deliver, even owning a handful of bitshares will prove rewarding. There is much to accomplish but I believe in Invictus.

Using the PTS and AGS price, I estimate they are currently around 15 USD. In my opinion they are severely undervalued.

On launch I will not be surprised by $100+ USD.

[mx1000]

Idk, if BitShare is actually Bitshares AGS and Protshares merged (4M in total thus) I would say it would be worth what that bitshare respesent.

I readed before they wanted to implent bGold, where one bGold would be worth 1 oZ of gold if it would follow the market price.

Therefore its hard to say, but I think I will supprass litecoin because of divident system and there will be only 4M in existance instead of 25M (if correct, again).

[jae208]

What do you think the price of a single Bitshare will be once it is launched?
How did you reach this conclusion?