Topic: EOS - Asynchronous Smart Contract Platform - (Dan Larimer of Bitshares/Steem) - page 152. (Read 189738 times)

You must not be looking very hard - there's a ton of information. What kind of information are you seeking about the project? I'd be happy to point you in the right direction or provide some links.


Something you should like: the money raised is purportedly slated for reinvestment into the EOS ecosystem

There will be the ability for a d'app or project to create a custom token.


Dev team is active... on what information are you basing this assertion?


This is by design and has nothing with the progress/viability of the project. 

you don't lose any benefit. tokens acquired through official distribution vs. exchange are the same.

regardless of where you get them, be sure to register your ethereum address with an eos address so you can claim/take control of native eos tokens when the blockchain is launched.

A helpful resource

And i don't know are they serious to build the project due to it is still trials and how much their experience in the technology behind of blockchain, if be compared with dan larimer as we know dan is founder of bitshare and steemit,
He has good experience in technology behind of blockchain, his skills doesn't doubt in this technology. I will make updating if i have found something new about the Red Belly blockchain.

Is cheaper to buy EOS from Exchanges now, right? Do I lost any benefit doing so?

Disagree for two reasons.

1. The flaw is in Dan’s ability/desire to do comprehensive game theory analysis (actually someone claimed on Twitter they had warned them about the propensity of such flaws). There are at least two or three instances of that already.

2. @smooth and I discussed upthread the potential for spamming EOS (DPoS) by whales and why the whales could still hypothetically profit even if the price catered. So ETH is more fair because perhaps more or less anybody can spam it, whereas potentially EOS will be even more totalitarian and only the whales can steal everything. Which is pretty much been my analysis and complaint against Steem and all of Dan’s designs. (Note I do not want to put words in @smooth’s mouth so please re-read his equivocations)

Of course they try to turn this bad news around and hype as some benefit of their technology. Another case of them distorting material facts which I believe are fraud under securities laws. But given they were willing to take $300 million from anonymous sources, I do not know how they expect to escape the 20 year felony (20 years for each instance!?!) in the USA for accepting money with a criminal lineage (even though the law does say they need to have knowledge of the criminality of the funds received, I believe the token sale to the public-at-large requires them to register a MSB). The only rationale I can think of is they’re running a criminal enterprise (buying off regulators, etc). If I suddenly get suicided or assassinated, maybe I will realize I should not have posted in this thread, huh.

Why didn’t Vitalik do an ICO to his own ETH base and collect several $billions into a huge money pot? Probably because he has been advised it is illegal. And note when we see serious looking investors at a recent conference listening to presentations by Brock Pierce and Block.one, afaik those attendees are there to see presentations by many entities and are not necessarily representative of who participated the EOS token sale.

Therefore, this is my last comment about the EOS token sale.

Good luck.


What experience does Dan have as a venture capitalist and picking winners and losers in terms of software applications.

It is somewhat analogous to giving the government a lot of money and then they spend $100,000 per public toilet.

“An elephant: A mouse built to government specifications.” — Lazarus Long

Instead why not allow the applications to compete in a free market which allocates the capital to the winners and losers. The free market is composed of many decentralized actors which each make localized decisions optimized by local information which the top-down entity can not accurately appraise. This why ice when cooled slowly has fewer cracks (related to simulated annealing) because the localized molecules are able to have more time to rearrange themselves optimally based on local gradients.


Just like DPoS (EOS, Steem, Lisk, etc), Byteball, and Tendermint, this RBB also relies on a permissioned set of delegates, aka a “consortium blockchain”.

What makes proof-of-work (and my upcoming decentralized ledger) different is they’re permissionless participation. This is important because we discussed upthread that selecting a set of permissioned delegates always implies an oligarchy or centralization due to the Iron Law of Political Economics.

Permissioned and centralized is what we’re trying to eliminate.

Whale controlled clusterfucks just puts us right back into all the corruption and failure that the world is collapsing into. If we’re going to innovate out of this, we need truly decentralized systems.

Also I have argued that centralized clusterfucks do not scale out economically due to the point about corruption, infighting between whales, lack of degrees-of-freedom and level playing field for non-whales.

The reason this matters is because ecosystems with centralized overlords who play favouritism are not trusted and invested in generally.

Ian Grigg provides another perspective on the distinction between permissioned and permissionless. His Constitution without walls is my decentralized ledger design, except he has a mistake. He wants to do it with voting, elections, delegates, but that is known to fail to be fair due to the Iron Law of Political Economics and the power vacuum. However, my solution is algorithmic and deals with this more effectively I think. To the extent that the Constitution is algorithmically objective then no forks are created. Also I think he is formulating a false dichotomy by concluding that win-lose is correlated to a permissionless decentralized ledger.

---

I tried listening that CEO of Block.one and Dan, but they bored the fuck out of me. The CEO dude appears to be a technological neophyte. And Dan speaks far too slowly for me (I was falling asleep). This Brock Pierce dude is quite articulate and seems astute, but unfortunately he goes on about decentralization but doesn’t seem to factor in the impact that EOS’s consensus algorithm is centralized due to the political economics of voting. Brock Pierce is correct though to point out that potential for decentralization can in some cases be present at other scopes of a model.

That Block.one CEO dude is nodding his head affirmatively when another person says the blockchain must track all our identities and by implication we should not have any privacy any more! Even if they refer to pseudonymous identity, it should still be optional in many cases.

Dan made an astute generative essence point that decentralized ledgers enable an equity model instead of a debt model.

Exactly, this is why I start to be not so much supporter, the info for the project are very few.. and they raised tons of money.. Do not like this

I think it is too far to talk about that since the eos does not finish the ICO yet. The dev team seems not so active and the market performance is also not so good.

Quite cool, but EOS will do 1 million Ts/sec. with 100 CPUs according to Dan:


And don't forget that EOS is more than just transactions. It has a virtual machine to run contracts. Just like ethereum's EVM only faster. I don't know if that project from Sydney is about transactions or that it also has a virtual machine in it....

University of Sydney’s Red Belly Blockchain Scales 660,000 Transactions/Sec; 11.5x of Visa, 94,000x of Bitcoin. https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/university-sydneys-red-belly-blockchain-scales-660000-transactionssec/
New trials from the University of Sydney’s Red Belly Blockchain have found that it can process financial transactions 50 times faster than originally thought, making it quicker than Visa for worldwide payments.
The next stage for the Red Belly Blockchain is to make it available to all Internet users and eos may no longer be needed.

They are taking such a long time to do things that it should be amazing, the team is amazing anyway. Can't wait for it to be On Air!

Yes they are developing and ahead of schedule.

Here's their GitHub: https://github.com/EOSIO/eos

Over 40 people have contributed to the code so far: https://github.com/EOSIO/eos/graphs/contributors

The idea is to launch the software somewhere june 2018. But at the end of this year we should already see a testnetwork.

Will EOS have a feature of ERC20 token found in Ethereum? I mean will it allow to create a custom token ?

i saw all kind of prediction in price...in general, EOS price will fall to the0.5$ per eos...but some say that soon eos will be worth 25$...who knows...

my question:

During the ico time, do eos team  devoping any stuff? I saw that eos investments in temporary more on believe than in the reall fact. So people that say that soon will be 25$, there should be some fact behind it, that thay say that..i saw that in the mid sept. they will announcement some thing, but do not know what. can anyone know?

if there is no any annoncement of developing until end of ico, than price can drop more then 0,5$...if i understand, when ico is finnished, eos blockchain should go live and will be fully ready. right?

What's really interesting is that the flaws are in Ethereum. Not that much in the contract. If you can spam the network so easy that others get pushed away and you get your discount than something is really wrong with Ethereum.




Dan larimer talked in the Telegram group about using 100 CPU's to reach 1 million transactions per second on 1 chain. He also talked about several chains in parallel. But as far I understand that was delayed for now and they focus on 1 chain allowing all the transactions.

 

Does anyone know if there's a theoretical limit to how many threads EOS can utilize?

Well that did not take long, because in general I expect Dan to deprioritize the economic and game theory analysis that applies to centralization as he has done before (as I documented for example for the Steem voting design), and prioritize how to hype the system (e.g. crab bucket and jealously by design of outsized rewards for the few as mentioned in the Steem whitepaper):


You should expect that there are lot of smart people looking to find flaws when someone attempts a collectivized and centralized money grab, because it is the antithesis of principles that guided our interest in blockchains in the first place (and because a huge pot of honey will attract flies).


https://twitter.com/jimmysong/status/922929791082401792 <---- more juicy discussion

There’s only 1 way to do this correctly. And y’all do not know it.  

There is no amount of money or resources that can give you the advantage …

Gaming the EOS crowd sale:

https://coindecode.io/how-swim-made-thousands-gaming-the-eos-crowdsale/

I understand it will be open source so you should be free to fork it and run your own modified copy.

When will we see a project update and a production of the EOS?

And who is buying everyday on their new ICO period?

Am just hoping to get an answer especially on the second question, as its related as to how they hold the price up.