Author Topic: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting  (Read 9121 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jwiz168

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
    • View Profile
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #18 on: December 26, 2014, 07:55:33 pm »
Sounds like the rebirth of PTS is a bunch of fucking criminals trying to pull off a scam.
Jog on, PTS is dead.

I  think you just need to educate what PTS for . PTS evolves into DPOS , which in my opinion is a DAC. Definitely PTS is not dead . As an independent developer, any one of these talented programmers can use it to make a DAC and be able to honor the social contract.  It is the sole discretion of the developer to make the sharedropping scheme at his or her own will. That doesn't make him or her a criminal. He or she simply makes the most out of PTS and its DPOS technology. That, my friend, is technological innovation. Two or three years from now it will make a standard for business that is autonomous and decentralized.

Offline matt608

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 878
    • View Profile
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #17 on: December 26, 2014, 07:36:23 pm »
If you think the issues with BTS snapshots are complicated now just wait until things really get rolling.

Let's say BTS has a multi billion dollar market cap, a thousand UIAs, hundreds of millions of BTS locked up in collateral and cold storage, institutional investors owning large stakes in BTS, etc.

Now something like PLAY or MUSIC comes along and wants to AirDrop to an engaged crypto community. Is BTS the best answer? I think it'd be an absolute nightmare.

I'm trying to look at this and find which is really the best snapshot token. 

Non-technical me (as you know:p) doesn't know how hard it will be to just snapshot all the BTS in collateral and cold storage.  Is that a big undertaking?  Not sure that UIAs would effect it.  The other side effect of BTS being a snapshot token is that people who only want to buy a snapshot token have to buy the much more expensive BTS, which they might not want to do.

The main problem I see with PTS is it's so easily manipulated.  A price increase from dropping on BTS will be much smaller so it's harder for the developer to pump up the price with the project announcement.  The bigger the market cap of the receiver the less powerful the insider info about the drop is, so that's an objective plus for BTS. 

Other potential pluses for BTS are the high market cap which could potentially be made use of by a DAC which snapshotted it heavily enough to win voters approval.  e.g.  A BTS delegate could fund the new DAC if it dropped heavily on BTS.  Also the BTS community is very large and very active.

Active voters are needed for DPOS to succeed.  Does anyone know the difference between the levels of voter activity in BTS vs PTS?  Higher voter activity is great argument to receive a sharedrop.  BTS must have far higher numbers of individual voters as there are considerably more active users.  It's possible PTS will still have a high percentage of active stake, but it will be owned by far fewer people I would think, which is what matters for a DPOS chain looking for active individual voters to sharedrop on.

With such a weak social consensus, if any, still existing, on what 3rd parties should do, there's no safe way to invest in all future DACs.   Buying PTS and hoping for a stake is a gamble if there's no solid social consensus - which no one has the power to declare.  If there is disagreement then the consensus is gone, sadly, or not depending on your position.

Ironically if PTS hadn't been revived there would probably be a consensus that BTS should be snapshotted as there would be nothing to dispute.

So now people who want to invest in all future (bitshares-toolkit) DACs, there is no clear path.  All that's left is fighting between BTS and PTS.  How can the two be brought out of conflict so there is no competition for future 3rd party sharedrops?

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #16 on: December 17, 2014, 08:39:45 pm »
Sounds like the rebirth of PTS is a bunch of fucking criminals trying to pull off a scam.
Jog on, PTS is dead.

I am very sorry to see that you have nothing better to do than disparage the hard work of others. We all know that Dan, Stan, Testz, the exchanges, delegates, and service-providers would not support "criminals trying to pull off a scam." This was simply a badly needed upgrade away from the PoW chain which was producing literally 1 block per day. No change to the allocation whatsoever. I'm sorry to disappoint, but I hope you will find a good hobby to pass the time. In other words, go fly a kite.

Offline cryptillionaire

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
    • View Profile
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #15 on: December 17, 2014, 07:13:45 pm »
Sounds like the rebirth of PTS is a bunch of fucking criminals trying to pull off a scam.
Jog on, PTS is dead.

Offline Riverhead

Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2014, 03:32:55 pm »

The upgrade got the nod from Bytemaster, Stan, Toast, Testz, and a number of other community members. That's good enough for me. The detractors are people I respect and value as members of the community but well meaning people can, and often do, disagree without resolution.

Offline biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 880
  • Professor of Computer Science
    • View Profile
    • My Academic Website
  • BitShares: biophil
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #13 on: December 16, 2014, 03:21:43 pm »
We already had the snapshot drop to end all snapshots, but now we have the walking zombie PTS as well. What we need is a new Social Consensus. A BTS drop is most important, since that represents most of the community now, but it could also include the new PTS as well as AGS to balance that. Hey, maybe you'd throw MUSIC and PLAY drops in there too! Anyone want to commission a poll?

I had this suggestion

I was going to suggest that. Both AGS and PTSers represent the sharedrop group which follow BTS. Unifying them gives a wider representation and makes it tempting for future developers to sharedrop on.

I would even extend it to make it 30-40% PTS, 30-40% AGS and distribute the remaining among other 2.0 projects like NXT, XCP, NEM etc. The NEM shareholder list in particular is quite interesting as it covers most of the Bitcointalk group.

In this way we make it easy for any developer to have an easy sharedrop target. I would even go ahead and ditch the 20% and ask for 'only' 10% to fulfill the social consensus. The idea is to make this as attractive as possible as a sharedrop target and would benefit us all in the long run.

Of course, alphabar and co. doesn't want to consider anything else, they seem to think that projects are just lining up to sharedrop on PTS. In anycase, IMO DPoS PTS defied the social consensus and have no right to try and preach others about that.

Sumantso, I have a lot of respect for you as a long-standing forum member, but I wish you'd stop going on about this supposed "violation." It seems like your rejection of the concept of an upgrade is just for the sake of being pedantic. What if the markets accept DPOS PTS as an upgrade (I.e., old PoW stops trading and DPOS replaces it)? Would you finally accept that the DPOS PTS project was no more a "new DAC" than a simple hard fork would be?

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

Support our research efforts to improve BitAsset price-pegging! Vote for worker 1.14.204 "201907-uccs-research-project."

sumantso

  • Guest
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #12 on: December 16, 2014, 03:18:46 pm »
then you point the finger at us for violating the social consensus (!).

I believe you did, you clearly feel you didn't. As BM says, free market decision is what counts - you will be lobbying with projects to sharedrop on your Alphabar PTS, I will be badgering them not to, lets see what happens.

You had the chance to create the perfect sharedrop vehicle (IMHO, of course), and you didn't take it.

sumantso

  • Guest
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #11 on: December 16, 2014, 03:13:54 pm »
First you claim that PTS should simply be absorbed by BTS and die (which would be a clear violation of the social consensus), then you point the finger at us for violating the social consensus (!). Early on Dan did initially propose that the merged BTS may "absorb" PTS, but this was simply a proposal. We see proposals every day in this forum. Can we simply label one of them as fact and pretend that it must be so?

Did I ask PTS to die? Maybe (I don't recall, tbh), but as you said opinions change.

Messing with the allocation would be a violation of the social consensus as it would skew the sharedrop percentages of future DACs and would pollute the separate but overlapping demographics of each sharedrop instrument (PTS and AGS).

As suggested by Fuzzy and others, could've just made it 50/50. Both were supposed to be sharedrop targets for I3 and projects using the toolkit. Unifying them made more sense.

And just to hammer the point, the AGS holders who donated to the AGS fund with PTS were refunded all of their AGS and are in a position to profit more than any single group.

Easily solved by alloting only to BTC AGS. Could've even made it 50% PTS/30% AGS/ 20% others (NXT, XCP, NEM, BTS etc...)

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #10 on: December 16, 2014, 02:58:25 pm »
We already had the snapshot drop to end all snapshots, but now we have the walking zombie PTS as well. What we need is a new Social Consensus. A BTS drop is most important, since that represents most of the community now, but it could also include the new PTS as well as AGS to balance that. Hey, maybe you'd throw MUSIC and PLAY drops in there too! Anyone want to commission a poll?

I had this suggestion

I was going to suggest that. Both AGS and PTSers represent the sharedrop group which follow BTS. Unifying them gives a wider representation and makes it tempting for future developers to sharedrop on.

I would even extend it to make it 30-40% PTS, 30-40% AGS and distribute the remaining among other 2.0 projects like NXT, XCP, NEM etc. The NEM shareholder list in particular is quite interesting as it covers most of the Bitcointalk group.

In this way we make it easy for any developer to have an easy sharedrop target. I would even go ahead and ditch the 20% and ask for 'only' 10% to fulfill the social consensus. The idea is to make this as attractive as possible as a sharedrop target and would benefit us all in the long run.

Of course, alphabar and co. doesn't want to consider anything else, they seem to think that projects are just lining up to sharedrop on PTS. In anycase, IMO DPoS PTS defied the social consensus and have no right to try and preach others about that.

This is just plain wrong - you are latching on to some obsolete information. First you claim that PTS should simply be absorbed by BTS and die (which would be a clear violation of the social consensus), then you point the finger at us for violating the social consensus (!). Early on Dan did initially propose that the merged BTS may "absorb" PTS, but this was simply a proposal. We see proposals every day in this forum. Can we simply label one of them as fact and pretend that it must be so?

As for your claim that we should sharedrop to AGS, this was discussed at length. PTS is not a "new DAC" - it is simply an upgrade to the existing PTS chain with no modification to the allocation. Messing with the allocation would be a violation of the social consensus as it would skew the sharedrop percentages of future DACs and would pollute the separate but overlapping demographics of each sharedrop instrument (PTS and AGS). And just to hammer the point, the AGS holders who donated to the AGS fund with PTS were refunded all of their AGS and are in a position to profit more than any single group.

sumantso

  • Guest
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #9 on: December 16, 2014, 10:09:45 am »
We already had the snapshot drop to end all snapshots, but now we have the walking zombie PTS as well. What we need is a new Social Consensus. A BTS drop is most important, since that represents most of the community now, but it could also include the new PTS as well as AGS to balance that. Hey, maybe you'd throw MUSIC and PLAY drops in there too! Anyone want to commission a poll?

I had this suggestion

I was going to suggest that. Both AGS and PTSers represent the sharedrop group which follow BTS. Unifying them gives a wider representation and makes it tempting for future developers to sharedrop on.

I would even extend it to make it 30-40% PTS, 30-40% AGS and distribute the remaining among other 2.0 projects like NXT, XCP, NEM etc. The NEM shareholder list in particular is quite interesting as it covers most of the Bitcointalk group.

In this way we make it easy for any developer to have an easy sharedrop target. I would even go ahead and ditch the 20% and ask for 'only' 10% to fulfill the social consensus. The idea is to make this as attractive as possible as a sharedrop target and would benefit us all in the long run.

Of course, alphabar and co. doesn't want to consider anything else, they seem to think that projects are just lining up to sharedrop on PTS. In anycase, IMO DPoS PTS defied the social consensus and have no right to try and preach others about that.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #8 on: December 15, 2014, 11:03:54 pm »
We already had the snapshot drop to end all snapshots, but now we have the walking zombie PTS as well. What we need is a new Social Consensus. A BTS drop is most important, since that represents most of the community now, but it could also include the new PTS as well as AGS to balance that. Hey, maybe you'd throw MUSIC and PLAY drops in there too! Anyone want to commission a poll?

Offline alphaBar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #7 on: December 15, 2014, 10:58:38 pm »
If you think the issues with BTS snapshots are complicated now just wait until things really get rolling.

Let's say BTS has a multi billion dollar market cap, a thousand UIAs, hundreds of millions of BTS locked up in collateral and cold storage, institutional investors owning large stakes in BTS, etc.

Now something like PLAY or MUSIC comes along and wants to AirDrop to an engaged crypto community. Is BTS the best answer? I think it'd be an absolute nightmare.
So litterally the only purpose of the new PTS is to act as a crypto that can be snapshotted?
Well.. so can any other crypto (excluding BTS). And are you stating that BTS will not be used for snapshots on behalf of the BTS community? Will my previous PTS not be merged into BTS now? What on earth are you pulling here?!

Sharedropping has a lot to do with your target demographic. PTS will continue to operate as a sharedrop instrument according to the social consensus. Furthermore, PTS is the first coin having the following properties: (1) deflationary DPoS token ideally suited for use as a currency-DAC, (2) ideal sharedrop instrument due to 100% PoW distribution and no premine or allocation tampering, (3) reference implementation of the Bitshares Toolkit (easy-to fork, 3rd party DAC community support, DAC-agnostic features such as "import by signed msg" which was recently shipped, etc.).

Offline Riverhead

Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2014, 07:27:29 pm »
If you think the issues with BTS snapshots are complicated now just wait until things really get rolling.

Let's say BTS has a multi billion dollar market cap, a thousand UIAs, hundreds of millions of BTS locked up in collateral and cold storage, institutional investors owning large stakes in BTS, etc.

Now something like PLAY or MUSIC comes along and wants to AirDrop to an engaged crypto community. Is BTS the best answer? I think it'd be an absolute nightmare.
So litterally the only purpose of the new PTS is to act as a crypto that can be snapshotted?
Well.. so can any other crypto (excluding BTS). And are you stating that BTS will not be used for snapshots on behalf of the BTS community? Will my previous PTS not be merged into BTS now? What on earth are you pulling here?!

BTS AirDropping on your PTS has nothing to do with PTS continuing on as an AirDrop target. You still get all the BTS coming to you as a result of the AirDrop. Much like you'll get all the Sparkle (assuming you didn't dump after the BTS AirDrop).

What people need to understand is that a Crypto Token can't be killed by fiat, only abandoned by its community, or burned. If someone wanted to fire up the old BTSX code and get that going it'd work just fine providing they had enough delegates and coins to keep the delegates voted in. As a community we decided that we'll support BTS and no longer support BTSX and it faded to black.

A good number of the community dumped PTS after the BTS AirDrop on PTS/DNS/VOTE/BTSX but not everyone. The term "Merger" has done more to confuse the issue. If this was a true merger all the PTS tokens would have had to be mined, bought, and burned in exchange for BTS tokens.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2014, 07:32:15 pm by Riverhead »

Offline cryptillionaire

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
    • View Profile
Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2014, 07:21:01 pm »
If you think the issues with BTS snapshots are complicated now just wait until things really get rolling.

Let's say BTS has a multi billion dollar market cap, a thousand UIAs, hundreds of millions of BTS locked up in collateral and cold storage, institutional investors owning large stakes in BTS, etc.

Now something like PLAY or MUSIC comes along and wants to AirDrop to an engaged crypto community. Is BTS the best answer? I think it'd be an absolute nightmare.
So litterally the only purpose of the new PTS is to act as a crypto that can be snapshotted?
Well.. so can any other crypto (excluding BTS). And are you stating that BTS will not be used for snapshots on behalf of the BTS community? Will my previous PTS not be merged into BTS now? What on earth are you pulling here?!

Offline Riverhead

Re: PTS vs BTS Snappshotting
« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2014, 05:24:14 pm »
If you think the issues with BTS snapshots are complicated now just wait until things really get rolling.

Let's say BTS has a multi billion dollar market cap, a thousand UIAs, hundreds of millions of BTS locked up in collateral and cold storage, institutional investors owning large stakes in BTS, etc.

Now something like PLAY or MUSIC comes along and wants to AirDrop to an engaged crypto community. Is BTS the best answer? I think it'd be an absolute nightmare.