DPOS thought

[Mysto]

I don't think btsx is a Decentralized Autonomous Anything (DAA) at the moment. btsx is centralized at the moment and the rules are being changed all the time. Right now I would consider btsx to be in an open beta phase so rules and other things can be change. But when it is finally finished it will be a DAC. All the rules will be final and the cap will be unchangeable.

[Empirical1.1]

Let's worry about the tyranny of the minority in the present before we assume stupidity and tyranny of the majority in the future.

Unfortunately, we are already faced with a situation where the good intentioned majority may change the rules https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9603.0

Crypto-currencies are not best as DACs they are best as DA's

DACs will be popular for well, 'companies'

DAs will be popular as crypto-currency.

There is a difference between crypto equity and crypto money but BitShares has been interchanging them.

BTSX has some blurred lines.

I'm trying to understand the difference between a DA (decentralised application)? and a DAC.
My current understanding would be that DA's are like OpenBazzar for Bitcoin? And Bitcoin is a DAC where the shares issued are crypto-equities that are merely promoted as currency, hence why we call it a crypto currency.

Thanks in advance for any response.

Oh sorry that's just me using abbreviations badly/wrongly. I was justing using DA to describe a decentralised autonomous company without the company part.

So, yeah a DAC is a decentralised autonomous company and under the current definition, BM would describe Bitcoin as a DAC and that Bitcoins are shares used as currency.

I'm making up a new thing that says until someone changes the supply rules it's just a DA - 'Decentralised Autonomous ...' and users are actually exchanging digital money.

If shareholders changed the initial supply rules then Bitcoin would no longer have performed like a money but would now be a company (DAC) and its units better described as shares.

So Gold could be a money & Silver could be a money because shareholders can't change the supply.

Right now we haven't changed the supply rules so BTSX has fixed features like a money, a digital gold but once we alter that, it has features more comparable to a share in a company.

[bitAndy]

Let's worry about the tyranny of the minority in the present before we assume stupidity and tyranny of the majority in the future.

Unfortunately, we are already faced with a situation where the good intentioned majority may change the rules https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9603.0

Crypto-currencies are not best as DACs they are best as DA's

DACs will be popular for well, 'companies'

DAs will be popular as crypto-currency.

There is a difference between crypto equity and crypto money but BitShares has been interchanging them.

BTSX has some blurred lines.

I'm trying to understand the difference between a DA (decentralised application)? and a DAC.
My current understanding would be that DA's are like OpenBazzar for Bitcoin? And Bitcoin is a DAC where the shares issued are crypto-equities that are merely promoted as currency, hence why we call it a crypto currency.

Thanks in advance for any response.

[Ben Mason]

No, I'm hoping BM will see the difference between ounces of gold and shares in a company, (DA's and DACs) and the conflict trying to combine the two creates.

I don't understand what your concern is if you are interested in digital gold, or more generally a cryptocurrency (currencies should have price stability, which BTSX and BTC do not have). BitShares X already has what you want, it's called BitGLD. So, bytemaster already sees the difference between ounces of gold (BitGLD) and shares in a company (BTSX). Even if BitShares X implements dilution, the value you keep as BitGLD will not be inflated away at all.

Who knows what shareholders will vote for with regard to BitGLD. Banks 'should' act in the customers best interest and be transparent...

Anyway gold is just an analogy. A crypto-money has many advantages over gold.

The only properties a crypto-money shares with gold is that most of the initial rules can't or are incredibly likely to ever be changed, like the '21 million BTC'

Most current crypto-currencies can be described as crypto-money in that they'd have a hard time changing their supply. That's what many of the market who are investing in Bitcoin are looking for, a crypto-money.

BitSharesX is probably better suited to being a crypto-equity but there is an opportunity for a crypto-money spin off. It's possible in future the crypto-money would win the day. I mean do you want to hold a gold derivative with JP Morgan backed by shares of JP Morgan? Or do you want it backed by limited crypto-money?

The shareholders cannot change anything with respect to BitAssets or the peg would break, destroying their utility.

[Mysto]

Who knows what shareholders will vote for with regard to BitGLD. Banks 'should' act in the customers best interest and be transparent...

Anyway gold is just an analogy. A crypto-money has many advantages over gold.

The only properties a crypto-money shares with gold is that most of the initial rules can't or are incredibly likely to ever be changed, like the '21 million BTC'

Most current crypto-currencies can be described as crypto-money in that they'd have a hard time changing their supply. That's what many of the market who are investing in Bitcoin are looking for, a crypto-money.

BitSharesX is probably better suited to being a crypto-equity but there is an opportunity for a crypto-money spin off. It's possible in future the crypto-money would win the day. I mean do you want to hold a gold derivative with JP Morgan backed by shares of JP Morgan? Or do you want it backed by limited crypto-money?

This is the way I understand it. Right now btsx is centralized so I3 can choose to increase the 2 billion cap. But as time goes on btsx will become less centralized and when it does it will be more like bitcoin (have a hard cap that can't be changed by anyone). This is the kid (btsx) learning to ride a bike and I3 is the training wheels. Once the training wheels come off nobody has control over market rules, or the cap. At least that's the way I understand it.

[Ben Mason]

Ok good question.  I don't have the answer....but I would hope the answer would be that the bitshares toolkit core support would extend to all versions of BTSX.  Beyond that, the launching entity or equivalent to dacsunlimited (in the case of btsx) would launch the alternative.  The health of the Bitshares ecosystem would be measured in use/uptake of bitshares toolkit.

Keep in mind support is more than technical support even though that is incredibly important as well. It includes things like getting partners who provide on-ramps for BTSXdilution but not BTSXnodilution. Pushing merchants to support accepting BTSXdilution (while ignoring to mention BTSXnodilution at all). Paying for the cashback credit card reward and referral system that bytemaster talked about which would only work with BTSXdilution. Essentially building real world infrastructure and network effect (the sticky stuff unlike forkable code) around BTSXdilution. Sure, BTSXnodilution is able to free ride off of a lot of the hard work paid for by BTSXdilution holders beyond just the codebase (marketing can help people grok BTSXdilution, but then it also becomes super easy for them to also grok BTSXnodilution; once merchants setup accepting BitUSD on the BTSXdilution chain it isn't much of a burden for them to also accept BitUSD on the BTSXnodilution chain). However, it is still a huge risk to BTSXnodilution holders in terms of not getting enough user adoption and network effect, and at what cost? Perhaps double the fractional ownership of the stake? Doesn't mean very much if the market cap of BTSXnodilution ends up being 1000 times smaller than BTSXdilution.

Ideally it doesn't have to come down to a split of BTSX into BTSXdilution and BTSXnodilution. We could be all better off if we stay united and keep the larger network effect rather than compete with one another for user adoption and network effect. However, if staying united forces us to make bad decisions that can be an existential risk to BitShares X (remember in these early stages a fork of the code by stakeholders with much stronger network effect can easily kill us), then the best decision would be to split and let the smartest decision win.

mmmm all good points. Fortunately i'm left with a sense of hope!  I have been fortunate enough to witness the growth of this incredible community...born from the vision, integrity and technical skills of invictus and taken up by the legion of like-minded people they have attracted from all over the world.  I feel confident that the right choice will be reached.  I still think we have a lot left to try before dilution....

[Empirical1.1]

No, I'm hoping BM will see the difference between ounces of gold and shares in a company, (DA's and DACs) and the conflict trying to combine the two creates.

I don't understand what your concern is if you are interested in digital gold, or more generally a cryptocurrency (currencies should have price stability, which BTSX and BTC do not have). BitShares X already has what you want, it's called BitGLD. So, bytemaster already sees the difference between ounces of gold (BitGLD) and shares in a company (BTSX). Even if BitShares X implements dilution, the value you keep as BitGLD will not be inflated away at all.

Who knows what shareholders will vote for with regard to BitGLD. Banks 'should' act in the customers best interest and be transparent...

Anyway gold is just an analogy. A crypto-money has many advantages over gold.

The only properties a crypto-money shares with gold is that most of the initial rules can't or are incredibly likely to ever be changed, like the '21 million BTC'

Most current crypto-currencies can be described as crypto-money in that they'd have a hard time changing their supply. That's what many of the market who are investing in Bitcoin are looking for, a crypto-money.

BitSharesX is probably better suited to being a crypto-equity but there is an opportunity for a crypto-money spin off. It's possible in future the crypto-money would win the day. I mean do you want to hold a gold derivative with JP Morgan backed by shares of JP Morgan? Or do you want it backed by limited crypto-money?

[arhag]

Ok good question.  I don't have the answer....but I would hope the answer would be that the bitshares toolkit core support would extend to all versions of BTSX.  Beyond that, the launching entity or equivalent to dacsunlimited (in the case of btsx) would launch the alternative.  The health of the Bitshares ecosystem would be measured in use/uptake of bitshares toolkit.

Keep in mind support is more than technical support even though that is incredibly important as well. It includes things like getting partners who provide on-ramps for BTSXdilution but not BTSXnodilution. Pushing merchants to support accepting BTSXdilution (while ignoring to mention BTSXnodilution at all). Paying for the cashback credit card reward and referral system that bytemaster talked about which would only work with BTSXdilution. Essentially building real world infrastructure and network effect (the sticky stuff unlike forkable code) around BTSXdilution. Sure, BTSXnodilution is able to free ride off of a lot of the hard work paid for by BTSXdilution holders beyond just the codebase (marketing can help people grok BTSXdilution, but then it also becomes super easy for them to also grok BTSXnodilution; once merchants setup accepting BitUSD on the BTSXdilution chain it isn't much of a burden for them to also accept BitUSD on the BTSXnodilution chain). However, it is still a huge risk to BTSXnodilution holders in terms of not getting enough user adoption and network effect, and at what cost? Perhaps double the fractional ownership of the stake? Doesn't mean very much if the market cap of BTSXnodilution ends up being 1000 times smaller than BTSXdilution.

Ideally it doesn't have to come down to a split of BTSX into BTSXdilution and BTSXnodilution. We could be all better off if we stay united and keep the larger network effect rather than compete with one another for user adoption and network effect. However, if staying united forces us to make bad decisions that can be an existential risk to BitShares X (remember in these early stages a fork of the code by stakeholders with much stronger network effect can easily kill us), then the best decision would be to split and let the smartest decision win.

[Empirical1.1]

It requires a small paradigm shift but once you understand that, the world becomes clear and everything makes sense again.

There will definitely be two chains. One for BitSharesX the digital money and one for BitSharesX the crypto equity. (The digital money will need an enshrined constitution of sorts.)

Both have amazing potential! But once you get the difference you will see that they are different.

The chain as digital money already exist, it's called Bitcoin.

Yes but it's a poor digital money. It has high inflation and centralisation.

BTSX the digital money can replace Bitcoin. It has no inflation, it is decentralised, anonymous, fast & even profitable. (However it ceases to be digital money when its supply rules can be changed easily by shareholders, then it is a company not a money. So if BTSX diluted it would lose that market.)

BTSX the DAC is different. It cares less about being a money and more about selling the product 'BitAssets'. For BTSX the DAC it does make sense that a competitive company needs to be able to respond to the market and use tools like dilution (which may not necessarily be best at this stage) when there is consensus.

So now you have a case for BTSX the DAC and BTSX the money imo.

[Ben Mason]

That said, If someone wants to fork the code to launch BTSXDilution, good luck to them. Conversely, if the BTSX equity holders in majority want to change BTSX to BTSXDilution, so be it. We can re-launch BTSXnodillution.

So here's the trillion dollar question: if Dan and I3 support BTSXDilution and reject providing any additional support to BTSXnodilution other than "our code is on GitHub," what would you do then?

Ok good question.  I don't have the answer....but I would hope the answer would be that the bitshares toolkit core support would extend to all versions of BTSX.  Beyond that, the launching entity or equivalent to dacsunlimited (in the case of btsx) would launch the alternative.  The health of the Bitshares ecosystem would be measured in use/uptake of bitshares toolkit.

I might add that I hope BTSX remains unified and that these discussions are largely exploratory...

[BldSwtTrs]

It requires a small paradigm shift but once you understand that, the world becomes clear and everything makes sense again.

There will definitely be two chains. One for BitSharesX the digital money and one for BitSharesX the crypto equity. (The digital money will need an enshrined constitution of sorts.)

Both have amazing potential! But once you get the difference you will see that they are different.

The chain as digital money already exist, it's called Bitcoin.

[arhag]

No, I'm hoping BM will see the difference between ounces of gold and shares in a company, (DA's and DACs) and the conflict trying to combine the two creates.

I don't understand what your concern is if you are interested in digital gold, or more generally a cryptocurrency (currencies should have price stability, which BTSX and BTC do not have). BitShares X already has what you want, it's called BitGLD. So, bytemaster already sees the difference between ounces of gold (BitGLD) and shares in a company (BTSX). Even if BitShares X implements dilution, the value you keep as BitGLD will not be inflated away at all.

[Empirical1.1]

That said, If someone wants to fork the code to launch BTSXDilution, good luck to them. Conversely, if the BTSX equity holders in majority want to change BTSX to BTSXDilution, so be it. We can re-launch BTSXnodillution.

So here's the trillion dollar question: if Dan and I3 support BTSXDilution and reject providing any additional support to BTSXnodilution other than "our code is on GitHub," what would you do then?

Pfft, Do you know what I am capable of?
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=8190.msg108164#msg108164


No, I'm hoping BM will see the difference between ounces of gold and shares in a company, (DA's and DACs) and the conflict trying to combine the two creates.

[arhag]

That said, If someone wants to fork the code to launch BTSXDilution, good luck to them. Conversely, if the BTSX equity holders in majority want to change BTSX to BTSXDilution, so be it. We can re-launch BTSXnodillution.

So here's the trillion dollar question: if Dan and I3 support BTSXDilution and reject providing any additional support to BTSXnodilution other than "our code is on GitHub," what would you do then?

[Empirical1.1]

Dilution represents a critical move away from the key principals that original BTSX participants used to evaluate their investment. It also clearly sets a precedent within the BTSX network.

That said, If someone wants to fork the code to launch BTSXDilution, good luck to them. Conversely, if the BTSX equity holders in majority want to change BTSX to BTSXDilution, so be it. We can re-launch BTSXnodillution.

Network participants will put value where they think it should be....the overall network effect will continue to increase (based on utility) and eventually one network may become stronger than the other. There could be many versions of BTSX, all of which could keep changing the rules along with some that don't, it's all good as long as over time, more people are attracted to crypto in general and society benefits from the power of money being more widely distributed.

I'm pretty confident the way BM has been viewing Bitcoin as a DAC is incorrect. I think some of the stuff he will say in Vegas, by thinking along those lines is incorrect too.

I've really had a Eureka moment, this is really fundamental to understand...

There is a difference between crypto equity and crypto money but BitShares has been interchanging them.

BTSX has some blurred lines.

It requires a small paradigm shift but once you understand that, the world becomes clear and everything makes sense again.

There will definitely be two chains. One for BitSharesX the digital money and one for BitSharesX the crypto equity. (The digital money will need an enshrined constitution of sorts.)

Both have amazing potential! But once you get the difference you will see that they are different.