Author Topic: Scamattempt @bitcointalk: [ANN]BitFund:Descendant of BitShares  (Read 2714 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline davidpbrown

Re: Scamattempt @bitcointalk: [ANN]BitFund:Descendant of BitShares
« Reply #15 on: March 12, 2014, 01:30:58 pm »
What would motivate a group to do this?

Group?.. I've not looked closely but would expect it's just an individual looking to cash in to those stupid enough to send BTC. If they get a few fractions of BTC, that's a days work done.

All the more reason to put effort into raising the profile of BitShares et al, in order that there is no easy confusion about what is backed by devs and support and what is not.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 841
  • Incentives run the world
    • View Profile
    • Sign up for a Bitshares account!
  • BitShares: zebulon
Re: Scamattempt @bitcointalk: [ANN]BitFund:Descendant of BitShares
« Reply #16 on: March 12, 2014, 01:40:07 pm »
Yay! Here's another one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=499277.0

WhatOund?? It doesn't even begin to make sense.

Of course, I "expressed interest."

Offline maqifrnswa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
Re: Scamattempt @bitcointalk: [ANN]BitFund:Descendant of BitShares
« Reply #17 on: March 12, 2014, 02:11:24 pm »
Bytemaster has decided not to have a license. This means it's up to the community to defend the social contract aggressively and relentlessly. Time to build a website which highlights all of these scams so they can be immediately flagged from the womb. Then reverse engineered, discredited, and forked.

??
Bytemaster has decided to have a license, and it is with the source code:
https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/BitShares/blob/master/LICENSE.md


EDIT: that thread is funny - it's very much a scam. dozens of posts by people with < 5 posts on BCT, no one is submitting txids for donations. I'm happy people have been getting smarter and not falling for this stuff
« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 02:22:23 pm by maqifrnswa »
maintains an Ubuntu PPA: https://launchpad.net/~showard314/+archive/ubuntu/bitshares [15% delegate] wallet_account_set_approval maqifrnswa true [50% delegate] wallet_account_set_approval delegate1.maqifrnswa true

sumantso

  • Guest
Re: Scamattempt @bitcointalk: [ANN]BitFund:Descendant of BitShares
« Reply #18 on: March 12, 2014, 02:45:08 pm »
Bytemaster has decided not to have a license. This means it's up to the community to defend the social contract aggressively and relentlessly. Time to build a website which highlights all of these scams so they can be immediately flagged from the womb. Then reverse engineered, discredited, and forked.

??
Bytemaster has decided to have a license, and it is with the source code:
https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/BitShares/blob/master/LICENSE.md

Interesting. I thought too Bytemaster decided to do away with the license; seeing as he cancelled the bounty.

Offline maqifrnswa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
Re: Scamattempt @bitcointalk: [ANN]BitFund:Descendant of BitShares
« Reply #19 on: March 12, 2014, 02:55:08 pm »
Bytemaster has decided not to have a license. This means it's up to the community to defend the social contract aggressively and relentlessly. Time to build a website which highlights all of these scams so they can be immediately flagged from the womb. Then reverse engineered, discredited, and forked.

??
Bytemaster has decided to have a license, and it is with the source code:
https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/BitShares/blob/master/LICENSE.md

Interesting. I thought too Bytemaster decided to do away with the license; seeing as he cancelled the bounty.

He cancelled the 2000 PTS bounty to write a new license that allows people to disregard IP if they don't believe in IP (since such a license is near impossible to write and enforce in a legal system which honours copyright). He did use use some work that came out of the thread, though, to modify a standard 3-clause BSD license to also include the SC.
maintains an Ubuntu PPA: https://launchpad.net/~showard314/+archive/ubuntu/bitshares [15% delegate] wallet_account_set_approval maqifrnswa true [50% delegate] wallet_account_set_approval delegate1.maqifrnswa true

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
Re: Scamattempt @bitcointalk: [ANN]BitFund:Descendant of BitShares
« Reply #20 on: March 12, 2014, 04:19:29 pm »
What would motivate a group to do this?

Group?.. I've not looked closely but would expect it's just an individual looking to cash in to those stupid enough to send BTC. If they get a few fractions of BTC, that's a days work done.

All the more reason to put effort into raising the profile of BitShares et al, in order that there is no easy confusion about what is backed by devs and support and what is not.

Maybe Max Keiser should Interview Brian or Daniel so it can be explained to a larger audience.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
Re: Scamattempt @bitcointalk: [ANN]BitFund:Descendant of BitShares
« Reply #21 on: March 12, 2014, 04:24:10 pm »
Bytemaster has decided not to have a license. This means it's up to the community to defend the social contract aggressively and relentlessly. Time to build a website which highlights all of these scams so they can be immediately flagged from the womb. Then reverse engineered, discredited, and forked.

??
Bytemaster has decided to have a license, and it is with the source code:
https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/BitShares/blob/master/LICENSE.md


EDIT: that thread is funny - it's very much a scam. dozens of posts by people with < 5 posts on BCT, no one is submitting txids for donations. I'm happy people have been getting smarter and not falling for this stuff

Bytemaster says that he does not believe in contracts and is promoting a post contract society so I don't know what the license he has up is even supposed to mean. Is the software protected by the social consensus license or not?

uh, this is still active right?

I have been putting some serious thought into this license and have concluded that any licenses short of placing this in the public domain may have undesirable regulatory consequences not to mention being against my own beliefs about intellectual property being invalid to begin with.  Therefore, I would like to tip everyone who helped participate in the discussion and who worked very hard evaluating this bounty.   It was an interesting idea  worthy of the discussion and time spent on it.

Barsizi... because you have so persistently pursued this and contributed to the cause I will throw 100 PTS your way. 
maqifrnswa... you have contributed extremely valuable ideas and I will also throw 100 PTS your way.
btclawyer...  as you are a lawyer and spent significant time advising us I will throw you 100 PTS tip as well.

Everyone else who participated in this thread I will throw 1 PTS per post tip your way... just provide me a post count and address.

These are his words. But does the license really protect the social consensus if he says it's supposed to be in the public domain?

Note this is all about moving to the post-contract society, and a software license is a contract.

Only Bytemaster can explain what he means by "Post-contract society". Is there a book which discusses this? Or is he going to offer up a video explanation as to what he means and what that means for the social consensus?

I want to go on record and say I understand why he might have the incentive to say that considering he is putting his neck out there as the head of Invictus, and why it might even be in the best interest for Bitshares from a regulatory concerns point of view, but it adds the wrong kind of ambiguity. Because of that ambiguity the social consensus will have to be enforced socially, and technically, not primarily using the law.

Some tools in our arsenal include

Strategic/tactical forks of the hostile fork.
Tactical information released about official (certified) chains.
Timing.
Tactical information withholding (you can withhold certain information to prevent a hostile fork).
Reverse engineering.
Watermarking and digital signatures (this probably wont be used, but if someone released an exact clone of Bitshares you might need this or some digital signature/md5 so people know the real version).
Community certification of some sort and a list of all DACs accepting the social consensus license (maybe add something like community loyalty % to the DAC index?)
Exposing hostile forks by warning investors of the red flags of a scam.

I think these current forks are amateurish and child like experiments to put the community to the test. The test seems to be to see whether or not the community will do anything to defend the social consensus.

So either the community will rise up and defend the social consensus, or when truly hostile actors backed by large banks get involved it will be too late to develop any defense mechanisms then.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 04:56:00 pm by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline maqifrnswa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
Re: Scamattempt @bitcointalk: [ANN]BitFund:Descendant of BitShares
« Reply #22 on: March 12, 2014, 05:21:19 pm »
Bytemaster says that he does not believe in contracts and is promoting a post contract society so I don't know what the license he has up is even supposed to mean. Is the software protected by the social consensus license or not?
I have been putting some serious thought into this license and have concluded that any licenses short of placing this in the public domain may have undesirable regulatory consequences not to mention being against my own beliefs about intellectual property being invalid to begin with.  Therefore, I would like to tip everyone who helped participate in the discussion and who worked very hard evaluating this bounty.   It was an interesting idea  worthy of the discussion and time spent on it.

These are his words. But does the license really protect the social consensus if he says it's supposed to be in the public domain?

Note this is all about moving to the post-contract society, and a software license is a contract.

Only Bytemaster can explain what he means by "Post-contract society". Is there a book which discusses this? Or is he going to offer up a video explanation as to what he means and what that means for the social consensus?

I want to go on record and say I understand why he might have the incentive to say that considering he is putting his neck out there as the head of Invictus, and why it might even be in the best interest for Bitshares from a regulatory concerns point of view, but it adds the wrong kind of ambiguity. Because of that ambiguity the social consensus will have to be enforced socially, and technically, not primarily using the law.

Some tools in our arsenal include

Strategic/tactical forks of the hostile fork.
Tactical information released about official (certified) chains.
Timing.
Tactical information withholding (you can withhold certain information to prevent a hostile fork).
Reverse engineering.
Watermarking and digital signatures (this probably wont be used, but if someone released an exact clone of Bitshares you might need this or some digital signature/md5 so people know the real version).
Community certification of some sort and a list of all DACs accepting the social consensus license (maybe add something like community loyalty % to the DAC index?)
Exposing hostile forks by warning investors of the red flags of a scam.

I think these current forks are amateurish and child like experiments to put the community to the test. The test seems to be to see whether or not the community will do anything to defend the social consensus.

So either the community will rise up and defend the social consensus, or when truly hostile actors backed by large banks get involved it will be too late to develop any defense mechanisms then.

As of now the software is protected by the license included with the software. That license includes the SC.

He didn't say he was putting it in the public domain, he said the only way he can 1) avoid excessive regulation and 2) stick to his post-contract society principles is if he release it in the public domain. But he didn't say he was going to release it into the public domain. Instead, it looks like he's compromising his post-contract society principles in order to work within the current legal framework and releasing it under a 3-clause BSD + SC clause license.

Here's something to read on what a post-contract society license would look like:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Copyfarleft

I, personally, don't agree with the idea of writing a license or trying to get software to work within a system of a post-contract society (when we are currently a copyright society) - but this isn't my software nor my company, so he's free to do what he wishes.

Legally, there is no ambiguity. The source code comes with a license and no statement saying it is in the public domain. Therefore, it is not in the public domain and everyone that obtains the source code must abide by the license.

I agree, though, you can't just depend on copyright enforcement. Having other tools is ideal.
maintains an Ubuntu PPA: https://launchpad.net/~showard314/+archive/ubuntu/bitshares [15% delegate] wallet_account_set_approval maqifrnswa true [50% delegate] wallet_account_set_approval delegate1.maqifrnswa true

Offline Troglodactyl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 960
    • View Profile
Re: Scamattempt @bitcointalk: [ANN]BitFund:Descendant of BitShares
« Reply #23 on: March 13, 2014, 02:28:56 am »
...

I agree, though, you can't just depend on copyright enforcement. Having other tools is ideal.

Particularly when someone can release a clone anonymously, copyright enforcement is tricky.  I don't remember where all I read this, but I believe the post contract society idea bytemaster has been advancing is based on rejecting dependence on the violent force of the state to bail us out when we make bad decisions about who to trust.  Rather than using state enforced contracts, people would make deals on handshakes, risking their reputations if they don't follow through and accepting the counterparty risks themselves.  The need for solid reputation management in this system is a driving force behind Keyhotee.