What's the available supply of Bitshares X?
I was reading the wiki and all the terminology becomes confusing.
BitUSD, BitBTC...
How many different asset names will there be?
The client looks good, I can say that much.
Topic: Bitshares-PTS to double/triple in price in the next 45 days!!? - page 6. (Read 15264 times)
I am looking forward to BitShares release on live net.
Aren't we ALL !?
I have a strong feeling it will be sooner than later.
I am looking forward to BitShares release on live net.
Not quite. It relies on stakeholders' vested interest to keep the network running, at a profit or not. At a profit is better but not necessary. It's hard to tell what the fees will be in the future and how many txs the network will be processing, so it's hard to tell what that profit might be. My point was that forging is not to gain profits from it. Forging and running nodes does help profits indirectly, because it makes network stronger, which makes NXT stronger, but profits are only a side effect.
Now I have a question for you. Who subsidizes delegates in BitShares? Where do they get profits from or at least how do they cover their hardware expenses if the fees are planned to be very very low? Isn't this also relying on inflated (in fiat) tx fees in the future?
You're right about there being more value than simple profits. However, "Vested interest" also sounds perhaps like economics are not there for forgers with low stakes - so you say they are gaining value personally from securing the network. That works.
We've never said the fees are "very very low", but that there will be only 101 delegates who are taking a part of the transaction fees. There will likely be other candidates waiting to step up when they are voted in and these will be the guys losing money until the point of their election. In DPOS, 101 nodes get all the transaction fees equally, according to what they do for the network. In any stake proportional block-signing variant of POS the problem being discussed exists. So either the fees are inflated for the little guys and perhaps more for the big guys, or the smaller stakes have to operate nodes at a loss. I don't know which is the case for any of these types of POS, because I would have to find average transaction fees collected on each network along with the total currency supply etc and compare transaction fees.
Personally I think if someone enjoys running a node then that should be payment enough. There is nothing wrong with charity. If you believe in your currency, then go for it. I've volunteered a lot of time to Bitshares.
However if I do try and run a block-signer aka Delegate, I can either give up after not being elected or know that my profits are a result of running a professional node. The profit will not be proportional to how much capital I had to invest in the currency itself. So if I am just a fan without a large stake, I can setup a professional VPS and try my luck at being a delegate without risking anything more than the delegate registration fee and my VPS costs.
It is decentralization relying on the goodwill of the miners or relying on inflated transactions fees.
Not quite. It relies on stakeholders' vested interest to keep the network running, at a profit or not. At a profit is better but not necessary. It's hard to tell what the fees will be in the future and how many txs the network will be processing, so it's hard to tell what that profit might be. My point was that forging is not to gain profits from it. Forging and running nodes does help profits indirectly, because it makes network stronger, which makes NXT stronger, but profits are only a side effect.
Now I have a question for you. Who subsidizes delegates in BitShares? Where do they get profits from or at least how do they cover their hardware expenses if the fees are planned to be very very low? Isn't this also relying on inflated (in fiat) tx fees in the future?
The cost of running a full node at every level of TPS is lower for BitShares than it is for NXT. Having transactions that are 10kB does not scale... The fees can be substantially less for BitShares while still proving profitable to delegates. Whereas under the same level of operation the same cannot be said of each individual forger. Additionally, since the system is limited to 101 delegates the average pay per block producer is greater than the average pay per forger, if you are to expect 350+ forgers per round.
It is decentralization relying on the goodwill of the miners or relying on inflated transactions fees.
Not quite. It relies on stakeholders' vested interest to keep the network running, at a profit or not. At a profit is better but not necessary. It's hard to tell what the fees will be in the future and how many txs the network will be processing, so it's hard to tell what that profit might be. My point was that forging is not to gain profits from it. Forging and running nodes does help profits indirectly, because it makes network stronger, which makes NXT stronger, but profits are only a side effect.
Now I have a question for you. Who subsidizes delegates in BitShares? Where do they get profits from or at least how do they cover their hardware expenses if the fees are planned to be very very low? Isn't this also relying on inflated (in fiat) tx fees in the future?
People try to do analysis using past figures all the time, you're free to do it. Only future will show if an analysis had anything to do with reality. Often it doesn't.
A more reasonable response. I still take issue with your picking at the original analysis. NXT just isn't that volatile to invalidate the reasoning. You claimed the analysis can't be done, because NXT may all at once shoot to the moon or some such. The analysis to me was an interesting and novel point, that NXT fees have to be inflated to have a positive ROI for people with lower stakes.
It is like buying an out of date SHA256 miner for the same price as something pumping out a terahash. Yea, we can't analyze ROI because we don't know the value of BTC in the future!
You said analysis couldn't be done, but lets be honest here. NXT people and any other POS using a similar "mine by stake portion" will have a similar issue with their system and would really love to see this point glossed over.
It is decentralization relying on the goodwill of the miners or relying on inflated transactions fees.
Your reasoning is logically equivalent to saying any stock investment can not be analyzed because no one knows what the value of a stock would be. Nonsense.
I am not talking about average fees per block. I am talking about how much that would be in fiat in the future, we don't know that. We don't know how much fees per block will be in the future. All this 'analysis' based on past events is not relevant. It could well justify renting a VPS, labor is not a lot, 30 mins per month(?), NXT is already quite stable. Especially funny if someone projects fees based on their testnet, as in the case of BitShares.
So no analysis can be done using past figures. Everything needs to be done using the unknown future? Is that what you are saying?
Are you a dev at NXT by any chance ?
I once tried running a NXT node. This was before the AE release. The thing ended up taking up 5 gigs of memory after a couple of weeks. I'm not sure what was going on, but it was nuts.
30 minutes = $20 for an average developer or admin. So that makes it $25 a month now. Just take the average fees in a month and see what sort of stake is required to make $25 a month. Do you know what the average fees charged per month is ? Oh wait, we can't use facts. My bad.
Is it true or not true, that if I wanted to do an expensive operation, I could rewrite the wallet to put my transaction on a block that I am forging ? A selfish-miner of sorts and thereby taking away fees from others ?
People try to do analysis using past figures all the time, you're free to do it. Only future will show if an analysis had anything to do with reality. Often it doesn't.
No, I am not a dev at NXT.
NXT could not be considered stable before AE release, it's much more stable now, and will get more stable in 1.3.xx when some code will be reworked. It's still beta quality, just like most software it should get better with time.
30 mins is to upgrade NXT 2-3 times a month as new releases (bugfixing or new features) come out. Of course, in the future, new releases will not come out that often, it's still in beta stage, so you should understand it's all beta-testing going on now, that's why have to spend time on it, just like beta testers work on BitShares. The difference is BitShares delays releasing to live net, is that good or not, opinions can differ. In any case, the main point of running a node is to forge on it and support the network. You gain not from forging mostly, but from being invested in NXT and assets on the exchange and price appreciation, so if someone's looking to profit from forging, they should re-think their strategy.
Here is a link to see distribution of forgers:
https://nxtblocks.info/#section/blockexplorer_charts
When you check the blockchain, the 'Others' that make 41% constitute more than 300 accounts, so there are 300+ accounts in NXT network that successfully produce blocks. We'll have to see how this changes in the future.
A block with the highest cumulative difficulty wins, not sure what you mean by 'rewrite the wallet'. For more info and specific questions you should better visit nxtforum.org and ask experts.
Here is a whitepaper on NXT:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2948110/Nxt/NxtWhitepaper_v122_rev4.pdf
someone's still working on it, so it's far from complete.
I am not talking about average fees per block. I am talking about how much that would be in fiat in the future, we don't know that. We don't know how much fees per block will be in the future. All this 'analysis' based on past events is not relevant. It could well justify renting a VPS, labor is not a lot, 30 mins per month(?), NXT is already quite stable. Especially funny if someone projects fees based on their testnet, as in the case of BitShares.
So no analysis can be done using past figures. Everything needs to be done using the unknown future? Is that what you are saying?
Are you a dev at NXT by any chance ?
I once tried running a NXT node. This was before the AE release. The thing ended up taking up 5 gigs of memory after a couple of weeks. I'm not sure what was going on, but it was nuts.
30 minutes = $20 for an average developer or admin. So that makes it $25 a month now. Just take the average fees in a month and see what sort of stake is required to make $25 a month. Do you know what the average fees charged per month is ? Oh wait, we can't use facts. My bad.
Is it true or not true, that if I wanted to do an expensive operation, I could rewrite the wallet to put my transaction on a block that I am forging ? A selfish-miner of sorts and thereby taking away fees from others ?
If you want a piece of every alt-company to come out in the next few years than buying AGS and PTS is a very good move. If you want to purchase stake in Bitshares X you can do so at at a lower price than people paid for it prior to the February snapshot on bter.com and btc38.com. Bitshares X is currently trading at a market cap of a little less than $25 million. That is a steal, if you ask me.
100% Agree.Good you are informing the community even before the AGS fundraising has ended! Nobody should complain he could not be part of this. Nobody should complain that only the insiders had the oportunity
to invest prior the prices going up. If you ask me, anybody that will be informed this period will look after 1 year as an insider too. $20-25$ million cap is maybe the cheapest entry point for BTSX...
Thing about these facts:
1.BTSX is not yet out. (On Dry Run 8, succesfull testing phase,My prediction is that this month they will come out...)
2.Because of DPOS impementation ( a new blockchain from scratch) they are 4 months late (normaly BitSharesX would be ready idle of March)
3.They have a team that works day and night to get this beast out BUT they don't do any marketing work! (They will after the "product" is ready!)
4.They implemented futures like TITAN http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/TITAN and nobody knows it yet! For insiders only http://i.imgur.com/BJFMUDp.jpg
5.DPOS http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/DPOS
for this and several other reasons I think it is common logic that it can go only up after/before launch...
Let's hope you're not too optimistic with your assessments
@FandangledGizmo,
I understand all this, moreover, I believe myself that bail-ins (a la Cyprus style) will spur another big rush to cryptos, but I don't see how it can be trillion dollar markets. This kind of money is controlled by hedge funds, which are highly regulated. If they are not allowed to invest into cryptos, which they won't be allowed (just look at the EU provisions issued a few days ago), it means the general public is not invested in cryptos, the general public has to invest their pension savings into crappy bonds and stocks thru pension and hedge funds. Individually, investors can go to cryptos, but that's not trillion dollar markets.
@clout,
I may underestimate a bit. But you overestimate cryptos too much
$10 bln->$100 bln in the next 5 years is still exponential, but even 100 tx/sec will be an overkill for that.
I understand all this, moreover, I believe myself that bail-ins (a la Cyprus style) will spur another big rush to cryptos, but I don't see how it can be trillion dollar markets. This kind of money is controlled by hedge funds, which are highly regulated. If they are not allowed to invest into cryptos, which they won't be allowed (just look at the EU provisions issued a few days ago), it means the general public is not invested in cryptos, the general public has to invest their pension savings into crappy bonds and stocks thru pension and hedge funds. Individually, investors can go to cryptos, but that's not trillion dollar markets.
@clout,
I may underestimate a bit. But you overestimate cryptos too much
$10 bln->$100 bln in the next 5 years is still exponential, but even 100 tx/sec will be an overkill for that.
While some industries may be slow to adopt useful innovations. If there are significant benefits to trading on deregulated exchanges, finance is one of the few that will rapidly maximise that edge imo. (Libor Scandal, London Whale, gold/HFT/Dark Pool manipulation, General insider trading..)
Also while the other systems don't currently offer a viable alternative to an ownership structure for a regular company, DPOS does. With shareholder elected representatives distributing slow release equity according to shareholder wishes. Many firms can be created or transferred to DAC ownership models. Given the future risk factors already cited above, this could also be a possibility. The current CAP of the worlds stock markets is circa $70 trillion, so again even a minuscule move here could be significant. Also considering over $20 trillion is in offshore tax havens, which are being targeted to, it all adds to potential. Optimistic maybe, but it's there.
@FandangledGizmo,
I understand all this, moreover, I believe myself that bail-ins (a la Cyprus style) will spur another big rush to cryptos, but I don't see how it can be trillion dollar markets. This kind of money is controlled by hedge funds, which are highly regulated. If they are not allowed to invest into cryptos, which they won't be allowed (just look at the EU provisions issued a few days ago), it means the general public is not invested in cryptos, the general public has to invest their pension savings into crappy bonds and stocks thru pension and hedge funds. Individually, investors can go to cryptos, but that's not trillion dollar markets.
@clout,
I may underestimate a bit. But you overestimate cryptos too much
$10 bln->$100 bln in the next 5 years is still exponential, but even 100 tx/sec will be an overkill for that.
I understand all this, moreover, I believe myself that bail-ins (a la Cyprus style) will spur another big rush to cryptos, but I don't see how it can be trillion dollar markets. This kind of money is controlled by hedge funds, which are highly regulated. If they are not allowed to invest into cryptos, which they won't be allowed (just look at the EU provisions issued a few days ago), it means the general public is not invested in cryptos, the general public has to invest their pension savings into crappy bonds and stocks thru pension and hedge funds. Individually, investors can go to cryptos, but that's not trillion dollar markets.
@clout,
I may underestimate a bit. But you overestimate cryptos too much
$10 bln->$100 bln in the next 5 years is still exponential, but even 100 tx/sec will be an overkill for that.
@clout,
I see your point, but it's not about how much the network will be able to handle, it's about how much it will need to handle. I don't see the need for 10000 txs/sec, those numbers cannot be achieved without centralization, that's true. But I don't see such wide adoption of cryptos in the future that would necessitate these numbers. Basically, getting to $10 bln combined marketcap for all cryptos took 5 years, getting to $100 bln combined marketcap will take another 5 years, unless, of course hyperinflation makes all those $$$ fiat numbers irrelevant.
I see your point, but it's not about how much the network will be able to handle, it's about how much it will need to handle. I don't see the need for 10000 txs/sec, those numbers cannot be achieved without centralization, that's true. But I don't see such wide adoption of cryptos in the future that would necessitate these numbers. Basically, getting to $10 bln combined marketcap for all cryptos took 5 years, getting to $100 bln combined marketcap will take another 5 years, unless, of course hyperinflation makes all those $$$ fiat numbers irrelevant.
I think you underestimate how rapidly things will change because you are not looking at these networks as companies. Each of these networks including Bitcoin and Nxt, offer the same services as centralized companies and at a fraction of their current price. Bitshare X is looking to be a bank and exchange that can compete with largest banks in the world including JP morgan and Bank of America, by allowing for faster money transfers, lower fees, and substantially higher interest rates (5%). The user experience offered by BitShares X over the course of the next couple years, given the advent of crypto-currency atms, will be far greater than current banks. And given that it is a global derivatives trading platform it will need to be able to scale to these levels. (Also important to note that because bitshares x is 200% reserve bank, its market capitalization must be at least 3 times the value its deposits).
Additionally only 1/3 of the worlds population has internet access. Google and Facebook have vowed to provide internet access to the rest of the world by 2020. I expect that once these individuals, most of whom are unbanked and will gravitate to an online bank like bitshares, get access to the internet, payment networks will need to process substantially more than the average 2,000 tps of visa and the peak load will have to be greater than 10,000tps.
Also I don't think hyperinflation is inevitable but there will certainly be a financial crisis out of china and global economic depression within the next two years. I don't believe very many people will want to hold deposits in national currencies, which is why ppl will want to have deposits in BitAssets (BitGLD, BitSLV, BitOIL etc).
Looking at it from a global perspective it is inevitable that this industry exceeds several trillion in the next few years. Bitcoin's growth has certainly been exponential but we haven't seen anything yet.
Guys offering user issued assets like NXT, BC, XCP + many others, will be fine with lower tps for a while. But BitShares X will be offering currency, commodity & stock trading using market-pegged bitassets, & even though they will be split across multiple chains, those are each trillion dollar markets with high volumes. Even minor success in penetrating them will require very high performance, low cost blockchains.
Why do you think it will be trillion dollar markets? Trillion dollar markets means institutional investors are going to enter those. I don't see institutional investors enter unregulated exchanges. Exchanges are either regulated or not. If it's the former - it's centralized, then what's the difference with regular centralized stock exchanges? If it's the latter, then institutional investors won't touch it with a ten-foot pole.
$100 bln. combined marketcap in 5 years is a realistic number in my opinion, but that means the combines tx/sec capacity required will be no more than 100 (and that's for all cryptos combined). I fail to see how trillion dollars can pour into unregulated exchanges. Unless, like I said above, hyperinflation takes place and fiat depreciates hundreds of percentage points per year. But in that case, people will rather go to barter than to crypto currencies.
This is my opinion I've already summarised below,
'Given the current global financial instability, geopolitical tensions & high levels of government debt, holding sizeable deposits of fiat, stocks or commodities is becoming increasingly risky within the current financial system. Therefore, BitShares X may need very little real-world proving under its belt, before it is seen by some very big players as an appealing hedge for a portion of their portfolio. Indeed should those centralised risk factors get worse or even materialise - such as significant deposit confiscations - BitShares X will be in a dominant position to displace a large part of a multi-trillion dollar industry virtually overnight.
In the West they're also discussing various forms of IRA confiscations, bond exit fees, high taxes and of course asset confiscation. So there are a lot of factors that could push high volume traders and even some institutions who wish to remain competitive & protect their clients funds onto deregulated exchanges.
Potential risks in the current system that could positively affect the rapid adoption of BitShares X
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-16/fed-prepares-bond-fund-runs-looking-imposing-bond-exit-fees-gates
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-15/these-offshore-tax-havens-may-be-hazardous-your-deposit-confiscation-health
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-26/nirp-strikes-spain-create-tax-bank-deposits
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-07/guest-post-don%E2%80%99t-dismiss-possibility-gold-confiscation
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-11/land-rising-bail-deposit-confiscation-coming-japan-next
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-29/ira-confiscation-its-happening
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-05/guest-post-short-history-currency-swaps-and-why-asset-confiscation-inevitable
Significant events just this week..
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-10/genius-imf-pronounces-bulgarias-banks-safe-just-2-weeks-bank-run
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-09/germany-blesses-bail-deposit-confiscation-plan-failing-eu-banks
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-09/portugals-largest-bank-misses-bond-payment-bonds-collapse
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-10/new-laws-allow-government-seize-savings-deposits-during-crisis
Guys offering user issued assets like NXT, BC, XCP + many others, will be fine with lower tps for a while. But BitShares X will be offering currency, commodity & stock trading using market-pegged bitassets, & even though they will be split across multiple chains, those are each trillion dollar markets with high volumes. Even minor success in penetrating them will require very high performance, low cost blockchains.
Why do you think it will be trillion dollar markets? Trillion dollar markets means institutional investors are going to enter those. I don't see institutional investors enter unregulated exchanges. Exchanges are either regulated or not. If it's the former - it's centralized, then what's the difference with regular centralized stock exchanges? If it's the latter, then institutional investors won't touch it with a ten-foot pole.
$100 bln. combined marketcap in 5 years is a realistic number in my opinion, but that means the combined tx/sec capacity required will be no more than 100 (and that's for all cryptos combined). I fail to see how trillion dollars can pour into unregulated exchanges. Unless, like I said above, hyperinflation takes place and fiat depreciates hundreds of percentage points per year. But in that case, people will rather go to barter than to crypto currencies.
@clout,
I see your point, but it's not about how much the network will be able to handle, it's about how much it will need to handle. I don't see the need for 10000 txs/sec, those numbers cannot be achieved without centralization, that's true. But I don't see such wide adoption of cryptos in the future that would necessitate these numbers. Visa and Mastercard are not going anywhere.
Basically, getting to $10 bln combined marketcap for all cryptos took 5 years, getting to $100 bln combined marketcap will take another 5 years, unless, of course hyperinflation makes all those $$$ fiat numbers irrelevant. This means that there is no need to artificially centralize design to achieve a very high tx/sec capacity, if that capacity is not going to be used even at 5%, while the centralization may seem unfavorable to many investors.
I see your point, but it's not about how much the network will be able to handle, it's about how much it will need to handle. I don't see the need for 10000 txs/sec, those numbers cannot be achieved without centralization, that's true. But I don't see such wide adoption of cryptos in the future that would necessitate these numbers. Visa and Mastercard are not going anywhere.
Basically, getting to $10 bln combined marketcap for all cryptos took 5 years, getting to $100 bln combined marketcap will take another 5 years, unless, of course hyperinflation makes all those $$$ fiat numbers irrelevant. This means that there is no need to artificially centralize design to achieve a very high tx/sec capacity, if that capacity is not going to be used even at 5%, while the centralization may seem unfavorable to many investors.
Guys just offering user issued assets like NXT, BC, XCP + many others will be fine with lower tps for a while. But BitShares X will also be offering currency, commodity & stock trading using market-pegged bitassets, & even though they will be split across multiple chains, those are each trillion dollar markets with high volumes. So their scalable, high performance, low cost DPOS blockchains are a necessity, not a luxury imo.
You mean the bitshares X that was supposed to be released back in February? The one where, everyone like you bought up PTS from people like me to get it before the snap shot but then never got anything for it? That bitshares X? Getting burned once wasn't enough, you need to come back for more?
Anyways, as that guy said, there is little reason to argue about this. PTS is currently trading at 0.0069BTC on Cryptsy, we can all just come back in a month or two and see what new low it has achieved.
Anyways, as that guy said, there is little reason to argue about this. PTS is currently trading at 0.0069BTC on Cryptsy, we can all just come back in a month or two and see what new low it has achieved.
At least you managed to get in their private party. I am quite regular on this forum and completely missed it.
Thats because the forum has been flooded with junk. BitShares was announced a year ago. you can still donate funds to the ecosystem through BitShares AGS . BitShares has the longest and most open funding model of any of the next generation projects. I suggest you acquire AGS while they are still cheap and available. The AGS crowdfunding ends in less than two weeks.
I know you can invest now. It was devious how you rushed to allot yourselves the main product.
Allot yourselves quickly, then ask for money for the other 2nd rate products, excellent model.
You do realize that in the same way you see the proliferation of altcoins you will see the same phenomenon occur with alt-companies that utilize the bitshares toolkit and the DPOS blockchain. If you want a piece of every alt-company to come out in the next few years than buying AGS and PTS is a very good move. If you want to purchase stake in Bitshares X you can do so at at a lower price than people paid for it prior to the February snapshot on bter.com and btc38.com. Bitshares X is currently trading at a market cap of a little less than $25 million. That is a steal, if you ask me.
@clout,
I see your point, but it's not about how much the network will be able to handle, it's about how much it will need to handle. I don't see the need for 10000 txs/sec, those numbers cannot be achieved without centralization, that's true. But I don't see such wide adoption of cryptos in the future that would necessitate these numbers. Visa and Mastercard are not going anywhere.
Basically, getting to $10 bln combined marketcap for all cryptos took 5 years, getting to $100 bln combined marketcap will take another 5 years, unless, of course hyperinflation makes all those $$$ fiat numbers irrelevant. This means that there is no need to artificially centralize design to achieve a very high tx/sec capacity, if that capacity is not going to be used even at 5%, while the centralization may seem unfavorable to many investors.
I see your point, but it's not about how much the network will be able to handle, it's about how much it will need to handle. I don't see the need for 10000 txs/sec, those numbers cannot be achieved without centralization, that's true. But I don't see such wide adoption of cryptos in the future that would necessitate these numbers. Visa and Mastercard are not going anywhere.
Basically, getting to $10 bln combined marketcap for all cryptos took 5 years, getting to $100 bln combined marketcap will take another 5 years, unless, of course hyperinflation makes all those $$$ fiat numbers irrelevant. This means that there is no need to artificially centralize design to achieve a very high tx/sec capacity, if that capacity is not going to be used even at 5%, while the centralization may seem unfavorable to many investors.
You mean the bitshares X that was supposed to be released back in February? The one where, everyone like you bought up PTS from people like me to get it before the snap shot but then never got anything for it? That bitshares X? Getting burned once wasn't enough, you need to come back for more?
Anyways, as that guy said, there is little reason to argue about this. PTS is currently trading at 0.0069BTC on Cryptsy, we can all just come back in a month or two and see what new low it has achieved.
Anyways, as that guy said, there is little reason to argue about this. PTS is currently trading at 0.0069BTC on Cryptsy, we can all just come back in a month or two and see what new low it has achieved.
At least you managed to get in their private party. I am quite regular on this forum and completely missed it.
Thats because the forum has been flooded with junk. BitShares was announced a year ago. you can still donate funds to the ecosystem through BitShares AGS . BitShares has the longest and most open funding model of any of the next generation projects. I suggest you acquire AGS while they are still cheap and available. The AGS crowdfunding ends in less than two weeks.
I know you can invest now. It was devious how you rushed to allot yourselves the main product.
Allot yourselves quickly, then ask for money for the other 2nd rate products, excellent model.
PTS had already been mining a while and AGS had been running nearly 60 days by the time of the snapshot. It raised a few thousand BTC so it was one of the most public, longest & successful allotments to date.
This 'main product' you pretend they privately/quickly allotted themselves is pre-trading now on BTC38 & bter under the symbol 'BTSX' for circa 34000 BTC CAP! You can buy in now for less than what they were paying at the snapshot! Plus you haven't had to have your money tied up since Feb!?
Jump to: