Topic: More Bitshares Greed - page 7. (Read 12233 times)

Wow, I finally agree with Newmine:


So, how about helping us get the word out about its awesome potential rather than spreading harmful disinformation like your posts in this thread?  

After all, when you scare new people away falsely, you hurt:

1.  The hardworking developers who are working for annual salary of $22K right now.
2.  The hundreds of people in the BitShares community who are helping out every way they can.
3.  The thousands of people who hold BitShares and want to see those 5 cents soon too.
4.  The people you scared away - who will never get to know what everybody else at bitsharestalk.org knows (or will learn it too late, like most of us learned about Bitcoin too late.)

Of course, when we grow by that 5 cents, that's 400% gain at the cost of the less than 2% being spent on salaries at the moment.  Then we can either:

1.  Stop issuing equity in exchange for that work - spectacular growth doesn't have to go on forever, or
2.  Say, how about spending another few percent to get another 400% gain?

In any case, it will be the people who hold the BTS that will decide when they've had enough growth.  

I actually think BitReserve is worse. The thing I loved about BitShares is the fact that there is no counterparty risk with the assets. BitReserve operates on a promise that they will deliver, and Bitshares has made those promises too. And broken and altered them. So if a relatively quasi decentralized project breaks and alters promises, what could stop a fully centralized company, which according to some has a shady CEO or founder, from breaking promises. Post Mt.Gox and now BitStamp, I don't think it is impossible or improbable that some other huge player/business will scam or be hacked. Notice how the protocol is never the problem with BTC these days, it's just the centralized infrastructure built around it that causes all the problems.  If Bitshares had 1001 delegates and a sweeping all encompassing delegate vote/fire system it would be pretty decentralized. I.e a system where users can set parameters to auto de-vote people when certain reliability or performance flags are raised without having to manually do it upon community request. 

In the meantime Bitshares needs to focus on what they have and build that up so they don't have to worry about what they are going to be paid in the future. The whole "I want to make the world a better place, but I won't do it with out getting paid" crap is total bullshit. If you concentrate on trying to make Bitshares worth 5 cents more, 5 freaking cents more your now $2k a month salary turns into $8.4K a month. Or what you were supposed to rely on, your 100 million shares or more, they would be worth $6.5 million and you wouldn't have had to tax the blockchain at all because you got a lifetime salary from AGS donations.  But instead of working on the exchange and building worth, Bitshares is being blogged about, not marketed, diluted for some bullshit that we all know will never be what was sold to the Koolaid drinkers as it was going to be, has a now guaranteed constant sell pressure as with POW miners (at least everyone in POW has the ability to extrapolate some amount of coins and decide to sell or hold), and forked so I3's pockets can be fatter now and fatter than Gate's and Buffet's wallets if the pie in the sky rhetoric ever comes true.

Yes BitReserve have assets in a bank that are audited. Pity that banks work on fractional reserve, usually with 10% or less collateral and that collateral is questionable & many Western ones have made plans for bail-ins.

The beauty of funds on a blockchain is they're all 100% accountable no fractional reserve and in terms of BitAssets they have an average of 300% BTS collateral behind them.

http://www.bitsharesblocks.com/assets/asset?id=USD - Collateral and it's history is shown in nearly real time, I much prefer blockchain auditing.

I've always had a raised eyebrow.  So many levels of money from day one, to even just using the platform, and so many promises not met.  In fact, just about everything that is promised changes in some way. 

On a different note, I found bitreserve.  They do in one simple easy step what bitshares is trying to do in multiple steps.  Yes, it is centralized, but they in real time update their reserves so there is no fear of a whale jumping the Bitshares ship and crashing the market. 

I for one would much rather use Bitreserve than Bitshares anyday.  So much simpler and easier. 

@sumantso:
I will continue to sporadically defend 2Kool...not against accusations of trollness ('coz, well, he is, kinda) but against the greed accusation.
He's pulled a lot of trollish stuff, but I really don't believe that greed is his main motivation. Good old-fashioned decentralised crypto-anarchy is.

Anyhow, not going to turn this into an off-topic session of 'Yes, he is' versus 'No, he isn't'
I am sorry that your experience with 2Kool soured you on NXT, I'd just like to point out that NXT has a lot of other viewpoints and beliefs contained within its community, and we do our best to be inclusive, not exclusive. 

If you want to come on over to Nxtforum.org again and have another look, check this out and maybe contribute:

https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/price-speculation/msg146011/#msg146011
https://nxtforum.org/pub-crawl/live-free-or-die!!!!/

You'd be more than welcome.....

My own personal position on the philosophy underlying crypto-currency is, btw, pretty much in line with 2Kools, but I'm somewhat more tolerant of other approaches.

Its getting off-topic so I will try to keep it short. We can continue over PM if you so wish.

I was interested in NXT sometime after the initial launch after I had overcome the disappointment of not getting in early and a decent portion of my portfolio in it. I had some trouble with the wallet so I checked out nxtforum to see if anybody else is having a problem, and during that time I saw that coolschool guy. He came across to me as childish who keeps shouting and making fun of others only to serve his own interests. Now, there are people like that everywhere, but I was quite shocked to see the other members supporting him and joining in with him and I decided to end my NXT interest there.

I'm a puny investor and you didn't lose anything, but don't try to portray him as something more than a greedy troll.

The difference is when you put $10 million into BTS/NXT/BTC/Doge you increase the value of the coins for the holders, with mining you make mining & power companies rich and usually coin holders get poorer as they're diluted via mining to pay for it.

Also you can look at the sell wall for any crypto... If the CAP is $40 million, $10 million doesn't buy you a 1/4 of the stake, it will buy you very, very little. Even with huge pacing.

Getting 25% of Bitcoin,  3.5 million Bitcoins would be very hard and make BTC holders very rich, meanwhile Ghash and others have shown getting 40%+ of hashing power is quite possible, while not making Bitcoin holders wealthier in the process at all.

It wasn't a bet but, I'll bet you 5 bitUSD (easy amount, I will follow through with) if a Dev controls (by control I mean ends up with a majority of the shares per block produced by that delegate as some people are acting as surrogate delegates already) more than one delegate or some unknown 100% paid delegate appears to be voted in, a mystery delegate.

You can buy stake the same way you can buy hash power, with money. If I had $10 million to buy mining equipment for BTC, couldn't I take that $10 million and buy 1/4 or the BTS shares instead?

That's just silly. I am not an I3 member, nor have I ever met one. But I have been involved with this project since the very first day of mining PTS (and even before that, when I read the white paper and articles on Let's Talk Bitcoin).

And EVERY change has been debated and has turned out to be to the advantage of my wallet as well. The Larimers are by far the most transparent and honest people in the crypto space. Their integrity shines through every action and decision.

Something entirely different adds an obnoxious odor to your postings, Newmine.

This is a very good point however in the case of a blockchain, I'll take voting over mining pools any day of the week.  At least all stakeholders have a vote where as anyone can buy hash power and simple non mining users have no say.

By the way, if you'd like to use these new innovations to launch your own self-funding decentralized start-up, read how to do it the BitShares way here:  http://bitshares.org/regulation-proof-self-funding-dacs/

The entire core dev team is currently paid automatically by the blockchain in a slow trickle of about 50 BTS (71 cents) every 17 minutes. This works out to about $22K per year at today's prices.

Last year, they wound up with Google-equivalent salaries for the top tier alpha-geeks they all are.
This year, they just get paid in equity worth 20% to 25% of what they had been making.

Thus, they are highly motivated to increase the BTS price to get their salaries back up to where they were!  

I think you'll find that 2cool4skool (if DE is him, which really wouldn't surprise me   ) is driven by a very serious philosophical belief in decentralisation and the original vision of Satoshi N., so dismissing him (and other Nxt'ers like myself) as simple trolls is getting dangerously close to being FUD.

I have no idea on the OP's intentions with this thread  (probably not very BTS-friendly, though) but I've got no real interest in kicking BTS unless there's a good reason for it, and I reckon I've treated BTS fairly on this point. I don't see BTS as a threat to NXT in any way, the world of crypto (and the financial 'real world' ) is more than big enough to support a good selection of crypto currencies/platforms, and NXT and BTS don't seem to be sharing all that much common market space.
 
BTW: $50,000 ? Fukinell......that seems like lots to me. How much cash are the core BTS devs pulling down per month?

Stan,

No dark clouds of conspiracy here. I am just pointing out that every major change as of late is only to the benefit of the I3 Teams wallets.

As for an outstanding propagandist, thank you. And just think of the wonders I could've done had I been incentivized to toe the line with a 3 million bts bonus...😉

Everything that was done was publicly disclosed and auditable.  Once employees are paid with donated funds (as intended by the donors) then the funds are theirs to buy lattes or donate to BitShares as they see fit.  Not a double dip at all - and all traceable on the blockchains and explained on public ledgers.  100% of all donations (and their resulting sharedrop dividends) are dedicated to developing the industry.  Zero profits were retained by Invictus and developers were paid merely average salaries.  Their year end bonuses bring them up to full pay for people of their caliber but they will have to live off those earnings for a while, because now they are all in elected positions that pay 1/4 of what they had been making.

There was no premine.  The very first ProtoShares (PTS) block was actually mined by Super3 of StorJ fame.  Our developers had to buy and rent their own mining equipment just like everyone else.  Most of our mining equipment, in fact, never got turned on because because it arrived three weeks late, after an overwhelming number of miners jumped into the action in those early weeks.  So, it was a classic mining gold-rush distribution where everybody got the same shot.  And that well accepted fair distribution was used by our innovative "share drop" approach to distribute shares fairly in future DACs.  Another innovation was our version of simulated mining (AGS) where an alternative fair distribution profile was generated via in a 200 day donation contest.  Now we had two very fair distribution profiles (one for miners and one for donors) which were used to sharedrop tokens in BTSX (now BTS) instead of using wasteful mining over and over again.

I could go on, but suffice it to say that every move has been debated and vetted transparently on bitsharestalk.org. 

NewMine is an outstanding propagandist.  He has an amazing ability to take everything that happened in broad daylight and turn it into a dark conspiracy theory.  You can believe his vandalistic tales if you want.


Or you can come on over to bitsharestalk.org and do your own research. 

The problem with voting is, it's fundamentally flawed, because most people are fundamentally stupid and have no idea what's best let alone to do research on what's being proposed.

I am not sure about an initial stake or premine, I don't think they did that.

They did take donations in BTC and PTS(protoshares) and the PTS was a double dip because they then got to keep the BTS allocated for all those PTS shares, which turned out to be a lot.

There was also some evidence of Devs being paid with donated BTC and then donating it right back which was a double dipping on two levels: 1. It artificially inflated the amount of donated BTC and caused other investors to not be able to get the "biggest bang for their buck"' 2. The Devs double dipped and had nothing at risk by basically giving BTC back that they "earned" the first time knowing it would go right back to the pot that pays them next time. It was kind of like a no risk loan for BTS shares because every BTC would be coming right back to them after they gave it to themselves and re-donated. (This is probably where the "bonus" came from)