Topic: BitShares? interesting ! bullish - page 9. (Read 16417 times)

Darkwallets, mixing services, coinjoin,shared send...........these things are all ready here. Much like the fact that diamonds can be a reasonable untraceable way to move large amounts of money. Lets not also forget uncle sams greenbacks, which if not declared are a great way to move large amounts of currency un-traceable y. 

Fact is I doubt FinCEN was pro bitcoin or any kind of "digital commodity" but once a crowd gets large enough it is hard to ignore and thus it is better to try to regulate what you can not fight. Criminals will be criminals no matter what the technology or the means that they will use.

I respect the fact that you aren't interested but to call a wonderful new piece of technology a scam because it doesn't KISS is a bit silly.

Cool. Thanks for the interesting discussion. 

Well I wish you luck.

My experience is the more complexity, the greater the odds of a hack and/or scams that take advantage of mis-understandings.

And it looks overly-complex to me, and difficult to comply with trading regulations.

Especially things like TITAN which allegedly make it un-traceable. I don't think FinCEN will like that.

I'm glad you can acknowledge that it is a constant fight that is why you should appreciate DPOS. 


https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=6102.msg81499#msg81499

Yes that's what I'm saying - if you want to trade commodities, stocks and currencies currently you need to trust centralised entities.

So while you may not see the value in trading via 'a currency that is used as collateral for fake assets that represent real assets.'

We the people, not the 1%, do see that value.

Those who control the flow of money have the power.
Decentralization puts that power in the hands of we the people, not the 1%

I'm looking for as much decentralization as I can get, because as we can see with what ASICs and mining pools have done with bitcoin, keeping decentralization is a constant fight.

What level of decentralisation are you aiming for and why?

Once you achieve the goals of decentralisation you're just adding expense, slowing down the network and consuming resources unnecessarily.  



You can if you trust centralised entities.

That benefit is de-centralized control over the network.

That's of little benefit to people who want power over the network.

-=-

Maybe I don't understand banking - as I said, I like things KISS because then I can't get scammed because there was some detail I did not properly understand.

As I said, this appears to be un-necessary complexity to meet a need that I don't have.

I can trade without needing yet another currency that is used as collateral for fake assets that represent real assets.

The complexity of this system is not something I think is safe for me nor needed for me.

You want it to streamline your playing day trader, that's fine - but it is definitely not another bitcoin.

Bitcoin has utility everyone can use, everyone can understand - it is digital cash.

This on the other hand doesn't seem to.

If your purpose in crypto-currencies is to trade them around trying to make a buck, maybe it has utility, but if your purpose in crypto-currencies is to trade them around and make a buck, then it is just a shell game to increase your fiat and that's not why I'm into crypto.

So this has no utility for me, none whatsoever. And I wouldn't be surprised if this had legal trouble, like it or not regulation of exchanges is coming (and actually is already here), if this doesn't comply then it definitely has absolutely no utility for me.

Aside from founding CoDA the legal advisor to the BitShares team is Andy Beal.

But legality aside, you clearly don't understand money or banking. Any USD that is not a physical dollar is a pretend USD. More than 95% of of the money supply is merely digits on computer screens recorded as debt. All these digital dollars are IOUs and banks are using a fraudulent system of fractional reserve banking to create USD out of thin air without adequately collateralizing them. If the government wants to shut down the first bank that is fully transparent, self regulated and uses a 200% reserve system as opposed to a 10% reserve system, let them. The people in the countries that appreciate this innovation will be far better off.

Mining does consume vast resources for little social benefit so it is not slick talk in my opinion. Your counter that 12% inflation and massive resource waste is needed to keep control of the network de-centralised is false imo too.

DPOS decentralises the network to up to 101 unique delegates, that are voted for by users, all for the cost of fees and no inflation.
Decentralisation is a means not an end.  (Personally I would choose a 101 Shareholder voted delegate system over 1000+ unknown miners who get control of the system just by buying equipment and 101 trusted validators is much cheaper and can validate quicker too.)

Having said that you make some interesting points about the legal side. I've kind of treated it like Bitcoin up to now. Will have to see how that plays out.

However the reason BitShares won't crumble is that if an incident happens where new developers are required, shareholders will vote for delegates who direct their fees towards towards paying other developers. (Future DAC's will also make use of equity release too)

People will soon be able to decide if they want an expensive system of unknown miners that charge them 12% a year + fees with painfully slow to validate transactions or if they want a system with no inflation that's super fast with trusted delegates. (The added advantage being shareholder voted validators can be used to direct funds in the best interest of shareholders too.) The market will decide.

Bitcoin didn't pretend to be USD - BitUSD even has USD in the name.

With all the money going in to your IPO, if you haven't had a lawyer look over the legalities and write on it, then you have a management problem.
That kind of money needs lawyers.

No, I've never seen that word before. But answer me this, why was that clause you cited not used to shut down Bitcoin? What would make the government all of a sudden decided that they needed or even could shut down the voluntary exchange of digital currencies?

I agree, ASICs that hashed sha256 didn't exist.

Complex proof of work solves that problem.
At least for now.

Do you understand the meaning of intent?

If the purpose of mining is to keep control of the network de-centraalized, then it has failed. Haven't you been watching the rise of giant mining farms and massive mining pools.

My Block Eruptors that I paid good Btc for a little while after they came out are pretty well useless (as were the cards before them).

Mining is an ineffective and resource wasteful way of securing a blockchain.  

M

What is decentralized about Ghash.io having more than 50% of the Bitcoin hashing power?

What you cited is specifically about metals and could not be interpreted in any other way...

Give a listen to Let's talk Bitcoin! episode 129.  Starts around 12 minute mark with the lead dev Dan.  This should help clear up some idea's around the BitShares platform.

http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/lets-talk-bitcoin-129-dogeparty-and-delegated-proof-of-stake

Simple, you get lots of people to buy your bitshares before it all crumbles.

Mining has a very important purpose - that purpose is to keep control over the network de-centralized. That's basic, and that's what they are paid for.

To try and frame it as a worthless drag on society, getting something for nothing, is slick talk.

A judge can decide otherwise.
They have the power to interpret intent of the law.