It's my hope that Bitshares XT and at least 1 or 2 other DACs will be launched and fully tested/debugged well before the Beyond Bitcoin conference in early July. That way, some Bitshares flagship DACs can be marketed in the lead-up to the conference. Even better if Bitshares X will have been launched by then, but that may be asking for a lot...
It'd be a shame not to use this giant, upcoming opportunity to showcase some things!
The Beyond Bitcoin conference was canceled as far as I know.
Deferred, not canceled, until we have several DACs in the top ten at coinmarketcap.com. 
lol
Hey Adam, I've been a listener since last mayish and I came here because of you. I'm not trying to attack you or anything, just wondering why you have such an attitude on these forums. Yes the products are late, we have also been kept up to date the whole time on the reasoning (DPOS) and progress being made. We are on the edge of breakthrough here and I can't figure out why you're being so negative. I'm not looking for a fight, I just want to know where your coming from?
Because Invictus has set and broken many many many self imposed deadlines, adopted an investment strategy I wholly disagree with and provided what I feel was a better and less restrictive (for invictus) model and feel their decision has delivered bad results with development dominated by the one player who already proved to miss deadlines and not be able to do many things at once.
Most recently, Dan has bet the entire project on an experimental lower level transaction processing technology (DPOS) before the actual point of the project (Betting, Assets, etc) can be developed. This came after a previous attempt at doing the same thing with a new experimental lower level transaction processing technology (TAPOS) that was worked on for a few weeks and then abandoned when they ran into unforeseen problems.
There is nothing stopping that from being the case with DPOS, it just hasn't happened yet. Even worse would be to launch quickly with the completely untested tech, have it "used with real money" as they say it needs to be in order to test it, and then people get that "real money" stolen due to a previously unknown exploit.
I'm a long time supporter, but projects like this have forum turnover where new users aren't aware of the history of promises made and broken before they joined the project. With that context, things look less optimistic. Invictus could turn things around but I'm results oriented and so far the results from invictus have been atrocious.
Now they've spent enough time and collected enough money that there is incredible pressure being brought to bear on them to produce results, I'm a squeaky wheel not Invictus's real problem by any means. People do not develop well under that sort of pressure, I don't have high hopes.
I have been pounding on these same issues with Invictus for a very long time, so my exasperation is exactly that - exasperation. It is frustrating as hell to see them walk into the same predictable landmines. Do you know how long it took them to get a Blog to centralize important information about Bitshares for people who have invested? Nearly six months. My concern about Angelshares is Invictus was on the one side making it harder for people to get them "for free" during the initial bootstrap of the Bitshares network, but also the risk of sucking up all the money available for investment and Invictus BECOMING the ecosystem rather than becoming a catalyzing player in the ecosystem. We've now seen how Invictus becoming the ecosystem has smothered it since they have so much going on they don't have time to make good decisions to steward its growth.
I'm still here because, among other things, Bitshares is the only project who still holds my investment trapped. Angelshares have not delivered as advertised, Protoshares have had their value smooshed so it's in my economic best interest to stick around and try to correct the boat on Bitshares. I am a squeaky wheel, I'm not special but I do tend to be early so the fact that the situation with Invictus is as troubling to a guy like me should be a warning sign.
I can't quote from this thread, but you can see the early discussion about Invictus starting something like Angelshares. I went by Lighthouse at the time. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1397.0
Ok. Thanks, now I understand where you are coming from. Those are valid points. The broken deadlines are also very frustrating for me. I see the progression of proof of.... as extremely important to both reinforcing the "company" metaphor, and ensuring that anyone who wants to launch a new chain can without worrying about mining and security. I'm not trying to counter your points as I think they are valid, I just draw a different conclusion. To me it seems that invictus made the mistake of promising deadlines while trying to push the envelope. They have failed to meet them, but it is hard to deny the progress that has been made, one can just check github. With DPOS we can have block chains compete at the service level as opposed to the block chain infrastructure level. It seems to me that we are right on the edge of a breakthrough in block chain tech that will result in a breakthrough in the 2.0 space (famous investor last words haha). I guess we will see this weekend if DPOS holds up. That will be a deciding moment in this journey.
As far as your rep, I should have said I came here due to info I heard on your show. Obviously I don't hold you responsible for my crypto investments.
Yes except all you can do is see the progress Bytemaster has made, not the problems or issues he hasn't yet discovered. You won't know about those until he does. It was the same with TAPOS (Transactions as Proof of Stake) until it wasn't. Things change fast so just because we're currently developing doesn't mean there isn't a show-stopper coming tomorrow. This is new, untested tech - not even alpha, and only even conceptualized a month or two ago.
I've been waiting for the release of Bitshares now for several months, I don't even pay attention to the deadlines invictus sets for itself except to wave as they sail by on the side of the road.
I'm still here because, among other things, Bitshares is the only project who still holds my investment trapped.
I have lost a lot of money in the past because my investments was not "trapped"...
How would be the feeling to experience exactly the opposite?
What are you talking about? If we hadn't had the PTS Snapshot event two months ago PTS would have kept their value and AGS would have been a more effective fundraiser. Every other token I decide to own I have the ability to sell if the project concerns me to the point where I think my investment is unsafe.
If I lose money because I make a bad decision and don't take steps when they need to be taken, that is my fault. If Invictus fails before launching the product they promised and I wanted to sell a month ago for concerns of this but they had taken steps to devalue my investment, I do not have that option. AGS is obviously trapped and would be worthless if Invictus failed. That is unique in the world of cryptocurrency and I think very negative as it insulates the team from the community repercussions of their decisions. Again, look at how many people here aren't avid supporters who generally think Invictus is doing a good job. By any quantifiable or comparable measure they are not.
When you say you want community inclusion but really just want community validation so it's not your fault but you get to do what you want, you tell people who actually have a valuable opinion that is not consistent with the leaderships that they should leave because they are not valued, they are inconvenient. They are trolls or troublemakers, and so they leave.
Topic: Mid May.Future? (Read 26352 times)
