BitShares PTS2 - Community Input Thread

[Stan]

All DACs have snapshots that honor something.
Upgrade DACs honor their predecessor.
New DACs honor their industry parent which honor PTS/AGS.
If a DAC is the first in a new industry, it honors PTS/AGS directly, just like XT did on February 28.

When an upgrade occurs it can be done either by hard fork if there is delegate consensus or as an alternative chain if not. 

When an alternative chain is offered, everybody gets shares in both via the snapshot mechanism.  As long as there are users for both, they can co-exist like Coke Classic and New Coke a few decades ago.  The expectation is that one or the other of the products will win and the other will fade to zero - but that is up to the market to decide.

Been sitting quietly on the sidelines watching this forum everyday. Recently there was a thread: Today I loose confidence in I3. I thought come on guys, just be patient some great products will come. And so far your logic always made sense.

But the coexistence of PTS and PTS2 just seems like a quick money scheme, the fact that you're considering to do this even before the AGS funding is over, makes me think you're having funding problems. Another million would be enough for now, but what will you come up with, when those funds have dried up?

For investors your making the deal more complicated than it already is, now they have to choose between holding PTS and PTS2, because DAC's can choose to honor either one

PTS will drop from the top 10 coin market list, because it has effectively lost half it's value.

Sorry to be cynical, I still believe in I3, but this just doesn't make any sense.

No one is able to 'shut down' the PTS that exists among the p2p network, which means PTS and PTS2 have to coexist for sure till the hash rate drops to zero.

But 3i can change the SCSL to make developers honor PTS2 rather than PTS after the hard fork.
https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/BitShares/blob/master/LICENSE.md

Exactly.  DACs are autonomous.  You can't kill them until the last person stops running their code.

We can't "make" developers do anything.  We can only point out why it is in their best interest to honor the demographic defined by a particular chain.  It is conceivable that their could be two different demographics emerging - one that won't let go of mining even if it only produces a block a day, and another that represents a more adventurous group of early adopters.  Perhaps some developers will want to honor a mix of both.

However, I think this is all just a thought experiment.  The chain is too slow now - which is the main reason we are upgrading it (as this community has passionately demanded for months).  I think PTS will last about a week past PTS2, but who knows?

But that honoring PTS2 is also an option will be included in SCSL after which is launched, right？

Absolutely!  We want to make sure its as clear as possible in as many ways as possible.

[Stan]

everyone seems confused - me too!

10% PTS and 10% AGS at least for new DACs from Invictus so far

what happens when PTS 2 is released?

PTS2 is an upgrade so it must honor its predecessor 1 for 1.  A mere upgrade should never siphon value from an existing chain to give to another group.

Now, if you are releasing a new chain, you want to attract all the competitive advantages for it you can.  Honoring PTS 10% and AGS 10% gets you their support and our support.  That leaves you 80% to go after other demographic groups, fund development, fund marketing, or whatever.

[muse-umum]

All DACs have snapshots that honor something.
Upgrade DACs honor their predecessor.
New DACs honor their industry parent which honor PTS/AGS.
If a DAC is the first in a new industry, it honors PTS/AGS directly, just like XT did on February 28.

When an upgrade occurs it can be done either by hard fork if there is delegate consensus or as an alternative chain if not. 

When an alternative chain is offered, everybody gets shares in both via the snapshot mechanism.  As long as there are users for both, they can co-exist like Coke Classic and New Coke a few decades ago.  The expectation is that one or the other of the products will win and the other will fade to zero - but that is up to the market to decide.

Been sitting quietly on the sidelines watching this forum everyday. Recently there was a thread: Today I loose confidence in I3. I thought come on guys, just be patient some great products will come. And so far your logic always made sense.

But the coexistence of PTS and PTS2 just seems like a quick money scheme, the fact that you're considering to do this even before the AGS funding is over, makes me think you're having funding problems. Another million would be enough for now, but what will you come up with, when those funds have dried up?

For investors your making the deal more complicated than it already is, now they have to choose between holding PTS and PTS2, because DAC's can choose to honor either one

PTS will drop from the top 10 coin market list, because it has effectively lost half it's value.

Sorry to be cynical, I still believe in I3, but this just doesn't make any sense.

No one is able to 'shut down' the PTS that exists among the p2p network, which means PTS and PTS2 have to coexist for sure till the hash rate drops to zero.

But 3i can change the SCSL to make developers honor PTS2 rather than PTS after the hard fork.
https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/BitShares/blob/master/LICENSE.md

Exactly.  DACs are autonomous.  You can't kill them until the last person stops running their code.

We can't "make" developers do anything.  We can only point out why it is in their best interest to honor the demographic defined by a particular chain.  It is conceivable that their could be two different demographics emerging - one that won't let go of mining even if it only produces a block a day, and another that represents a more adventurous group of early adopters.  Perhaps some developers will want to honor a mix of both.

However, I think this is all just a thought experiment.  The chain is too slow now - which is the main reason we are upgrading it (as this community has passionately demanded for months).  I think PTS will last about a week past PTS2, but who knows?

But that honoring PTS2 is also an option will be included in SCSL after which is launched, right？

[Stan]

Personally , support to launch PTS2.0.

But , one thing critical should be clarified is how to distribute new DAC shares among PTS and PTS2.0 .

If we have decided to maintain PTS2.0 in a long run , My suggestion is just honuring PTS2.0 and let PTS go into history.

Everybody gets a copy of both.  The market will decide what they are worth.  The value proposition of PTS2 should make it a no-brainer.

[Stan]

Why the old PTS still exist ?Thats unnecessary .

DACs are autonomous.  You can't kill them if people still want to run the code.

Thanks for your explanation
So there will be a snapshot?After the snapshot?When will the PTS2 release?I don't want to wait a month after the snapshot.

Yes, we won't make that mistake again.  The code has to be ready before we announce the snapshot.

[Stan]

All DACs have snapshots that honor something.
Upgrade DACs honor their predecessor.
New DACs honor their industry parent which honor PTS/AGS.
If a DAC is the first in a new industry, it honors PTS/AGS directly, just like XT did on February 28.

When an upgrade occurs it can be done either by hard fork if there is delegate consensus or as an alternative chain if not. 

When an alternative chain is offered, everybody gets shares in both via the snapshot mechanism.  As long as there are users for both, they can co-exist like Coke Classic and New Coke a few decades ago.  The expectation is that one or the other of the products will win and the other will fade to zero - but that is up to the market to decide.

Been sitting quietly on the sidelines watching this forum everyday. Recently there was a thread: Today I loose confidence in I3. I thought come on guys, just be patient some great products will come. And so far your logic always made sense.

But the coexistence of PTS and PTS2 just seems like a quick money scheme, the fact that you're considering to do this even before the AGS funding is over, makes me think you're having funding problems. Another million would be enough for now, but what will you come up with, when those funds have dried up?

For investors your making the deal more complicated than it already is, now they have to choose between holding PTS and PTS2, because DAC's can choose to honor either one

PTS will drop from the top 10 coin market list, because it has effectively lost half it's value.

Sorry to be cynical, I still believe in I3, but this just doesn't make any sense.

No one is able to 'shut down' the PTS that exists among the p2p network, which means PTS and PTS2 have to coexist for sure till the hash rate drops to zero.

But 3i can change the SCSL to make developers honor PTS2 rather than PTS after the hard fork.
https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/BitShares/blob/master/LICENSE.md

Exactly.  DACs are autonomous.  You can't kill them until the last person stops running their code.

We can't "make" developers do anything.  We can only point out why it is in their best interest to honor the demographic defined by a particular chain.  It is conceivable that there could be two different demographics emerging - one that won't let go of mining even if it only produces a block a day, and another that represents a more adventurous group of early adopters.  Perhaps some developers will want to honor a mix of both.

However, I think this is all just a thought experiment.  The chain is too slow now - which is the main reason we are upgrading it (as this community has passionately demanded for months).  I think PTS will last about a week past PTS2, but who knows?

[lzr1900]

Why the old PTS still exist ?Thats unnecessary .

DACs are autonomous.  You can't kill them if people still want to run the code.

Thanks for your explanation
So there will be a snapshot?After the snapshot?When will the PTS2 release?I don't want to wait a month after the snapshot.

[muse-umum]

Personally , support to launch PTS2.0.

But , one thing critical should be clarified is how to distribute new DAC shares among PTS and PTS2.0 .

If we have decided to maintain PTS2.0 in a long run , My suggestion is just honuring PTS2.0 and let PTS go into history.

 

No one is able to 'shut down' the PTS that exists among the p2p network, which means PTS and PTS2 have to coexist for sure till the hash rate drops to zero.

But 3i can change the SCSL to make developers honor PTS2 rather than PTS after the hard fork.
https://github.com/InvictusInnovations/BitShares/blob/master/LICENSE.md

[Overthetop]

Personally , support to launch PTS2.0.

But , one thing critical should be clarified is how to distribute new DAC shares among PTS and PTS2.0 .

If we have decided to maintain PTS2.0 in a long run , My suggestion is just honuring PTS2.0 and let PTS go into history.

[Stan]

stan, I just want to know that the agser whether could get the pts2.0 through their amount of ags?

Upgrade DACs honor the predecessor they hope to replace.
Otherwise, every upgrade would dilute the current owners.

[lzr1900]

Why the old PTS still exist ?Thats unnecessary .

DACs are autonomous.  You can't kill them if people still want to run the code.

[sudo]

Announcing BitShares PTS2

Shortly after we released PTS in November, Bytemaster reserved the right to release an upgrade when the technology was available.  That time has arrived.  As soon as DPOS finishes its validation trials and BitShares XT is released, we will turn our attention to PTS2 (which, thanks to the new DPOS toolkit, should be rather easy to do.)

PTS2 will honor all shares of PTS one-for-one, with the remaining unmined PTS shares mapped to a "reverse angel" marketing fund to help grow the value of PTS2 - and all its children.

The value proposition PTS2 has over PTS is as follows:

• Much faster transaction times.
• A profitable business model.
• All the other benefits DPOS has over mining.
• A million dollar promotion fund to help grow its value for those who hold its shares.

(Of course, the dollar value of this fund depends on whether the market value of PTS2 is greater or less than the value of PTS.  Assuming that it is the same, the fund will be worth over a million dollars. As the use of this promotional fund begins to take affect, the value could increase to, say, 2 million dollars.  Or it could be worth zero.  It depends on what we come up with together.)

PTS and PTS2 will compete in the free market. 
Every PTS share holder will get a PTS2 snapshot share as well.
It is up to the free market to decide which shares to hold and which to sell.
It is also up to each developer to decide which PTS version they will honor.

We plan to sell PTS and honor PTS2, but everyone is free to choose otherwise.

This is all we have settled on so far.  We turn to the community for ideas about how to best use a genesis block "reverse angel address" to grow the value of a new DAC - especially a Grand ProtoDAC that is likely to get you shares in many other DACs that you can already see being developed in real time.  Clearly, anything we do to increase demand for any of the children also increased demand for the parent - so there are many, many ways to do this.

We will be sharing some ideas of our own, but are very interested in getting community ideas and buy-in.  The final plan will undoubtedly be a hybrid of the best of the best.

A lot of ideas have been discussed and debated over the past few months.  Here's where we all can post the ones we like liked best - and hammer out a promo-plan that most of us can whole-heartedly support.

1.BTS X released & Dpos verified
2.if  AGS donate is not finished  then danate pause
3.PTS2.0（DPos） use Proof of burn
① set a new address
② give PTSer some time such as two weeks
③ PTSer  donate PTS1.0  to the “new address”
④ PTS2.0  honor  the donater in  the list
⑤ the rerest PTS holded by community for development
4 AGS donate restart with PTS2.0

just like  the gov  release the new version paper currency  & callback the old one  @1:1 ratio

[gyhy]

 

[Harvey]

I think the idea of PTS2 is clear.
Everyone have the choose between PTS and PTS2. But 3I will hold PTS2 and abandon PTS (sell their PTS).

As a PTS/AGS holder, I will sell PTS and hold PTS2.
I doubt there will be anyone have much interest to buy the PTS after the PTS2 is launch.

[donkeypong]

Been sitting quietly on the sidelines watching this forum everyday. Recently there was a thread: Today I loose confidence in I3. I thought come on guys, just be patient some great products will come. And so far your logic always made sense.

But the coexistence of PTS and PTS2 just seems like a quick money scheme, the fact that you're considering to do this even before the AGS funding is over, makes me think you're having funding problems.

I don't think so. Since Bitshares will have the DPOS, it just makes sense to have the coin use this. To upgrade, they need to fork. Since forks are messy and piss off a lot of holders, they've decided to keep PTS active and just add a second currency, PTS2. As Stan said, let the market decide.

I would like to see an earlier poster's question answered, though. And I'll logically extend it by asking: how does PS2 affect the social contract (minimum 10% each to PTS and AGS)? Can a DAC now choose to allocate that PTS 10% to EITHER PTS or PTS2? That choice makes the most sense, since PTS holders are getting both. At least, it makes sense until one of them possibly dominates and the other one withers away, though they may both continue for all eternity.