Siren Music

[AdamBLevine]

Marketing and strategic leadership are fundamentally different.  Bitshares lacks leadership.  Note that is different from decision-making, which can be done by just making an arbitrary decision.

A CEO is a leader, Daniel is a developer and the only reason he is the person with all the pieces in his head is because he's making it up as he goes and the plan keeps changing.  Have I mis-stated the situation?

[toast]

I agree that Bytemaster is best at focusing on the technical issues and he is doing that very well. However I think that if there is a different CEO in place even though I would love to see that happen, will take away from bytemaster's passion in the project and there might even be power struggle. Because the CEO will not be able to just pick a strategic direction, he will also have to convince Bytemaster that his decisions are the correct ones.

Agree, right now it seems like every single other team member is missing at least one piece of the puzzle. I would not choose to replace any of BM's competencies with a PR/marketing competency, would not add value IMO even though we are weak in that area now.

[bitmeat]

I agree that Bytemaster is best at focusing on the technical issues and he is doing that very well. However I think that if there is a different CEO in place even though I would love to see that happen, will take away from bytemaster's passion in the project and there might even be power struggle. Because the CEO will not be able to just pick a strategic direction, he will also have to convince Bytemaster that his decisions are the correct ones.

[AdamBLevine]

I think you'll find critique is not welcome from the community here, and providing any will make you the enemy.

So enjoy that.

This is why I don't understand you Adam.  You know I welcome critique and debate and yet you post things like this.

Bytemaster != the community. I know you do, Dan. But your father doesn't.

Indeed, I was talking about the community that defends you, not you.

Thanks for clarifying.   I think that the community as a whole is open minded, though at times we all lose site of the fact that we are all real people just trying to do our best with what we know.

My critique is this: You guys know what you want to do and have committed to this course, so critique whether welcome or not is ineffectual because you've got the resources to act on your vision and failing to run into an immovable object you're going to do what you've decided on.

Are there plans to replace you as CEO at any point?  I feel like you really want to be the CTO.

[bytemaster]

I think you'll find critique is not welcome from the community here, and providing any will make you the enemy.

So enjoy that.

This is why I don't understand you Adam.  You know I welcome critique and debate and yet you post things like this.

Bytemaster != the community. I know you do, Dan. But your father doesn't.

Indeed, I was talking about the community that defends you, not you.

Thanks for clarifying.   I think that the community as a whole is open minded, though at times we all lose site of the fact that we are all real people just trying to do our best with what we know. 

[AdamBLevine]

I think you'll find critique is not welcome from the community here, and providing any will make you the enemy.

So enjoy that.

This is why I don't understand you Adam.  You know I welcome critique and debate and yet you post things like this.

Bytemaster != the community. I know you do, Dan. But your father doesn't.

Indeed, I was talking about the community that defends you, not you.

[xeroc]

stan ones gave a nice analogy using pilot and passangers ... I might start citing that more often .. i fully support him on this

[toast]

I think you'll find critique is not welcome from the community here, and providing any will make you the enemy.

So enjoy that.

This is why I don't understand you Adam.  You know I welcome critique and debate and yet you post things like this.

Bytemaster != the community. I know you do, Dan. But your father doesn't.

Seriously? If anything I would say Stan is the one more receptive of criticism. What would you call these threads?

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4688.0
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4684.0

Again, not following advice does not equal ignoring advice.
It is literally impossible to follow 100% of advice you are given.

[bytemaster]

You're peaking my curiosity now. The obvious thing is that they collude with someone buying the lottery ticket and tell them the secret. Why wouldn't they do this? Is each delegate responsible for the funds of his personal lotto? That would be the obvious re-alignment, but you'd have to assume all delegates were interested in running lottos. If delegates have different ownership from shareholders there would be obvious agency problems.

Multiple delegates (say, 51% or even 100%) put in secrets towards a shared hash, so even one honest delegate ensures you cannot predict the result. The worst you can do is refuse to reveal in response a particular winner, but the clients can auto-fire if they detect that.

It is actually possible to have the lotto ticket buyers keep their tickets secret until after the number is drawn.  In this way no one can be sure who the real winner is until after it is too late to change it.

[bytemaster]

I think you'll find critique is not welcome from the community here, and providing any will make you the enemy.

So enjoy that.

This is why I don't understand you Adam.  You know I welcome critique and debate and yet you post things like this.

[toast]

If DPOS fails we can always use POW with miner rewards paid from dividends as was the very initial plan back when BTS X was just "bitshares"

That's actually exactly the point, we could have started with that and would have had the product long since out for testing, ideation and expansion.  Do you think it was better to do it in the order performed?

Where we are now, yes, though I'll admit that a priori there was no way of knowing if it was a good decision. But also I don't expect to be able to sell you on "the delays due to architecture improvements will pay dividends in the long run!" so I will shut up and go back to work.

[bitmeat]

I suggested that there is a way to do it in that order, but community backfired saying they would rather have it done right, and other argument was that it would introduce technical challenges when trying to switch from one to the other. Which is complete BS because you can just update the source code and make it a rule that after say block 10,000 or whatever we are comfortable with you start using he new algo.

[AdamBLevine]

If DPOS fails we can always use POW with miner rewards paid from dividends as was the very initial plan back when BTS X was just "bitshares"

That's actually exactly the point, we could have started with that and would have had the product long since out for testing, ideation and expansion.  Do you think it was better to do it in the order performed?

[toast]

If DPOS fails we can always use POW with miner rewards paid from dividends as was the very initial plan back when BTS X was just "bitshares"

[CLains]

You are clearly right that both dPOS and Bitshares X is an experiment (remember, so was NXT, and so was Namecoin, etc.).

If Bitshares X fails, dPOS chains can still bloom. If dPOS fails however, things are looking more bleak. If that is the case, then either they copy the code of someone else and still get Bitshares X and the other products up. Or, if both of those options fail, they still have a lot of the funding tied up in BTC, so if BTC goes up, they can keep working for a long time yet.

Now, if dPOS works there will be a lot of buzz around the new technology, even with just a test chain. Plus, LOTTO, .P2P and whatever else will raise the market cap of PTS and provide lots more funds to work with. If Bitshares X even so much as shows promise on top of that I think we are going to da moon and beyond.