BitShares scam2.0, Still scamming

[StanLarimer]

For business

Paypal is cheaper

stopped reading there. you obviously have no idea on fee structures of payment processors.

paypal's fee is a lot less than 20%

The business they grow is the business they own - and for this the BitSharesholders charge 20% for maintaining the world's most cost effective blockchain platform.

The fee is not 20%,
the blockchain charges 20% of the small user fees,
which are independently set
by the developer of each asset or service
at competitive market rates.
The owners of the fee backed asset get the other 80%.

[entertheabyss]

You obviously do not understand how Nubits or Bitshares holds its peg if you think this. This statement is pure blasphemy I'm not even going to waste my time refuting it. Everyone can do their own research.

I bet I can throw piles of shit at the glass also. Maybe even with the elegant rhetorical technique you display. Yet in the church of baghodlers i am fine with being a blasphemer. Maybe you can tone it down, maybe even have a civil conversation with me. Im not resorting to ad hominims yet (well maybe a little). Let us both settle this with intellect and grace not our dick size (cuz you know ill win ).

[CoinHoarder]

You obviously do not understand how Nubits or Bitshares holds its peg if you think this. This statement is pure blasphemy I'm not even going to waste my time refuting it. Everyone can do their own research.

I bet I can throw piles of shit at the glass also. Maybe even with the elegant rhetorical technique you display. Yet in the church of baghodlers i am fine with being a blasphemer. Maybe you can tone it down, maybe even have a civil conversation with me. Im not resorting to ad hominims yet (well maybe a little). Let us both settle this with intellect and grace not our dick size (cuz you know ill win ).

Sorry, I am used to having to defend myself from trolls on here so often that I treat everyone as such until I know they are not a troll. I thought for certain you were a troll because the bolded is false, and shows either an attempt at FUD or a misunderstanding of how Nubits works. Nubits does indeed have systematic risks. The italicized is also an opinion, but it seemed you were stating it as fact.

No one, because they can buy 1 bitUSD for $1.053 USD right now on Bitshares' decentralized exchange.

$1.053 USD is a 5.3% variance. As i check on coinmarketcap now i see it listed at 1.04usd or a 4% variance.
Compare that to Tether (USDT) at 1.00 USD and NuBits (NBT) at $ 0.997296 or .27% variance.

NuBits is a superior system as it more closely maintains the peg (according to data on CMC)and does not have the systematic risk associated with BitUSD and other bitshares collateralized assets.

I am not arguing that Nubits more closely maintains the peg, as it does. It also has liquidity better figured out. I think both solutions have different pros and cons and there is no one superior solution.

I see smartcoins' pros as allowing for the easy issuance of many different assets (gold, silver, nasdaq, s&p, etc.. unlimited), and that they are collateralized at least by 200% worth of BTS. To create many different Nubits-style assets is unrealistic and there is a reason they (NuShares) are only planning on releasing a few FIAT Nubit-style tokens. It also allows for leveraged trading among other things... Smartcoins can earn interest, etc...

[entertheabyss]

You obviously do not understand how Nubits or Bitshares holds its peg if you think this. This statement is pure blasphemy I'm not even going to waste my time refuting it. Everyone can do their own research.

I bet I can throw piles of shit at the glass also. Maybe even with the elegant rhetorical technique you display. Yet in the church of baghodlers i am fine with being a blasphemer. Maybe you can tone it down, maybe even have a civil conversation with me. Im not resorting to ad hominims yet (well maybe a little). Let us both settle this with intellect and grace not our dick size (cuz you know ill win ).

Sorry, I am used to having to defend myself from trolls on here so often that I treat everyone as such until I know they are not a troll. I thought for certain you were a troll because the bolded is false, and shows either an attempt at FUD or a misunderstanding of how Nubits works. Nubits does indeed have systematic risks. The italicized is also an opinion, but it seemed you were stating it as fact.

No one, because they can buy 1 bitUSD for $1.053 USD right now on Bitshares' decentralized exchange.

$1.053 USD is a 5.3% variance. As i check on coinmarketcap now i see it listed at 1.04usd or a 4% variance.
Compare that to Tether (USDT) at 1.00 USD and NuBits (NBT) at $ 0.997296 or .27% variance.

NuBits is a superior system as it more closely maintains the peg (according to data on CMC)and does not have the systematic risk associated with BitUSD and other bitshares collateralized assets.

I am not arguing that Nubits more closely maintains the peg, as it does. It also has liquidity better figured out. I think both solutions have different pros and cons and there is no one superior solution.

I see smartcoins' pros as allowing for the easy issuance of many different assets (gold, silver, nasdaq, s&p, etc.. unlimited), and that they are collateralized at least by 200% worth of BTS. To create many different Nubits-style assets is unrealistic and there is a reason they (NuShares) are only planning on releasing a few FIAT Nubit-style tokens. It also allows for leveraged trading among other things... Smartcoins can earn interest, etc...

NuBits and any other cryptocoin also allow leverage. The Systematic risk i am referring to is the black swan 50% drop. This happens pretty often in the cryptocurrency scene. I think it is a major risk that is glossed over.

It is true that Nubit style assets are more difficult to create and maintain, but it really depends on the size of the crypto-marketplace. If things were to grow substantially to the size of main stream marketplace. then i could see 10s or 100s  of assets. the issue is that atm there simply isnt a strong demand so its not practical. I don't hold any of either. But i think for scalability Nubits is a much more elegant design.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

You say the Larimers are in control, yet in actuality Bitshares stakeholders are happy to have CNX in control. This is evidenced by witness voting, as CNX can be overruled at any time if the stakeholders so choose (since they own less than a 13% stake.) Bitshares stakeholders trust CNX to do the right thing and deliver because they have in the past and have proven themselves, and in the event they do not then stakeholders can remove them from power. That is the beauty of delegated proof of stake, and how it is supposed to work.

Actually, you can't remove them from power because Bitshares DPoS is vulnerable to Sybil attacks and even if it wasn't, you still don't know what potential voting alliances exist to manipulate the elections via strategic voting.  13% of stake in DPoS allows for them to control over 50% of the elections via strategic voting.

That's cool if you don't like that, but to call them liars and thieves and/or Bitshares a scam because of that is disingenuous in the least considering everything is out in the open and done transparently.

I call them liars, cheaters and thieves because they have changed the terms on their investors so many times that I've lost count.  The change of terms is always to their benefit.  If you can't see this, you're deluding yourself.

They also continually attempt to market Bitshares as "Safer than a Swiss Bank" and "Your own Fort Knox!" when they know it is subject to the flaw mentioned below.

Besides, srsly, who is going to buy 1 BitUSD for 2 real USD?

No one, because they can buy 1 bitUSD for $1.053 USD right now on the Bitshares' decentralized exchange. All of your statements are grossly exaggerated with the purposed to spread FUD about Bitshares. I'm not sure exactly what your motives are, and maybe I'm wrong about you trying to prop up your Nxt investment, but your intentions are crystal clear.

If you don't get what I'm talking about, go read Preston Byrne's analysis of Bitshares.

BitSharesX: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
Well I’ll be damned: BTSX BitAsset market failure after only 5 days
Those who cannot remember last week are condemned to repeat it

Preston Byrne is an idiot FUDer that just wanted attention like you, and he has been proven wrong thus far since SmartCoins (formerly bitAssets) have maintained their peg for almost two years now. Linking to those blog posts, which are heavily weighted in personal opinion, as definitive proof that Smartcoins are broken is hilarious. Especially considering there is factual data that proves Smartcoins have closely resembled the value of their real life counterparts for almost 2 years. Yet, those opinion pieces are obviously correct so lets disregard all of the factual data and base our opinion on someone else's opinion.  

Preston Byrne's pieces aren't just his personal opinion.  He makes a very good point on why Bitshares is fundamentally flawed.  Nobody from Bitshares has ever addressed this because they know it is fatal.

http://prestonbyrne.com/2014/08/24/what-goes-up/

In the case of a substantial fall in value of BTSX, BitAssets will be under-collateralised and will start trading under par as they (being BTSX derivatives, and not actual assets) will not entitle the holder of the in-the-money side of the trade to obtain sufficient USD on settlement to actually recover the expected dollar equivalent of what they are entitled to under the contract. The collateral pool will, at some point, run out of firepower. Price-fixing through unilateral delegate intervention will result in market failure as mispriced trades will be unable to find a counterparty. Nobody is going to spend $1.00 to buy BitUSD which they will only be able to dispose of for, e.g., $0.25.

Irrespective of supply-side intervention through the “DAC” (printing new BTSX/BitAssets or removing them from circulation), if the market abandons the platform in a “black swan” event (which to date virtually every single cryptocurrency in existence, including arguably Bitcoin, has experienced) depositors, investors, and BitAsset holders alike would, in my view, incur substantial losses. These losses would arise not only from the collapse in the value of the BitAssets themselves as described above but also from the fall in value of the BTSX collateral which is locked up in these transactions, as against a reference unit of value with an independent existence outside of the BTSX ecosystem (USD/Bitcoin/whatever).

No asset rises in price forever, including BTSX. To think otherwise is folly. The relevance of the issue is that BitSharesX does not benefit from protections available to users of deposit-taking banks or other financial institutions, such as guaranteed deposits or claims in insolvency. If BTSX collapses, unless the laws of economics have somehow been suspended, depositor value may evaporate without any recourse being available.

You are such a hypocrite, as further evidenced by you recently championing Synereo when they have yet to prove anything to anyone.. there is much more risk in Synereo at this point than an established cryptocurrency like Bitshares.

How does my support for Synereo, a decentralized social network, make me a hypocrite?  Here's the link to github https://github.com/synereo/.  As far as I know, there are no backdoors and nobody can confiscate anybody's AMPs.

Synereo is largely unproven at this point. So you're telling me you've read the source code line for line and understand it already? LOL. You should probably give it more than a few months before declaring that there are no backdoors.. no one reputable has been able to review the source code yet. Let's wait and see if they deliver before championing them, because at this point it's vaporware. Many projects have released open sourced code and have yet to launch after years of development. Stating vaporware is a better investment than a cryptocurrency that is battle and time tested, has built a network effect, community, services, supporting companies and ecosystem, etc... is a ridiculous statement in which rationality is negated by your personal vendetta against Bitshares.

I'm saying that project run by people who haven't proven themselves to be unethical is a better investment than a project run by people who time and again have proven themselves to be unethical.

[CoinHoarder]

NuBits and any other cryptocoin also allow leverage.

Not in the usual sense of the term, and not in a decentralized manner with the amount of leverage provided by Smartcoins.

The Systematic risk i am referring to is the black swan 50% drop.

That's nice, but "systematic risk" is a blanket statement and that doesn't change the fact your proclamation that "Nubits doesn't have any systematic risk" is false. Go read the last paragraph of the Nubits whitepaper if you think there is no systematic risk, you still seem to have a gross misunderstand of how Nubits works. You need to trust someone will but a Nubit back for approximately $1, and there is a lot of systematic risk involved with that and the process that holds the peg.

This happens pretty often in the cryptocurrency scene. I think it is a major risk that is glossed over.

It is likely to happen to coins that have low volume, adoption, and liquidity. However, Bitshares since its inception has been a top 5ish coin in regards to volume. Price drops of over 50% in a day do not "happen pretty often" to top 10 market cap, top 5 volume coins. A black swan is a risk that Smartcoins face, however all cryptocurrencies face this possibility. Any cryptocurrency's value can plummet on any certain day, so your problem seems to be with cryptocurrencies in general. Maybe you should simply use FIAT and forget about cryptocurrencies altogether if you want to avoid risk. Faulting Bitshares for being risky yet supporting other cryptocurrencies is hypocritical to say the least.

It is true that Nubit style assets are more difficult to create and maintain, but it really depends on the size of the crypto-marketplace. If things were to grow substantially to the size of main stream marketplace. then i could see 10s or 100s  of assets. the issue is that atm there simply isnt a strong demand so its not practical. I don't hold any of either. But i think for scalability Nubits is a much more elegant design.

Smartcoins are wayyy easier to scale as far as the number of assets that can trade than Nubits. For Nubits to expand into many other assets would require a very convoluted network of custodians and voting systems. It would take a small army of people working to hold the peg to issue many different Nubits-styled assets, meanwhile with Bitshares' Smartcoins a small team could do so (and it would require 0 maintenance unlike Nubits' solution.) With smartcoins it takes a few minutes to launch new assets, and then a few more minutes to update the price feed scripts for delegates... after that there is no other work required.. delegates simply run price feed scripts and the free market does the rest. It is clear you still don't understand how Nubits works and the complexity of how it holds its peg if you think Nubits scales better.

I like both Nubits and Smartcoins for different reasons and each have their own weaknesses, but you seem to not know how either of them works (or are simply trolling.) Please go read up on it before responding because I'm not here to spoon feed you. I am spending way too much time in this thread than I would like already... I just hate to see all this FUD go uncontested.

[CoinHoarder]

You say the Larimers are in control, yet in actuality Bitshares stakeholders are happy to have CNX in control. This is evidenced by witness voting, as CNX can be overruled at any time if the stakeholders so choose (since they own less than a 13% stake.) Bitshares stakeholders trust CNX to do the right thing and deliver because they have in the past and have proven themselves, and in the event they do not then stakeholders can remove them from power. That is the beauty of delegated proof of stake, and how it is supposed to work.

Actually, you can't remove them from power because Bitshares DPoS is vulnerable to Sybil attacks and even if it wasn't, you still don't know what potential voting alliances exist to manipulate the elections via strategic voting.  13% of stake in DPoS allows for them to control over 50% of the elections via strategic voting.

13% stake can be easily overruled by the remaining 87% of stakeholders. Most delegates are known people in the community and Sybil has been mostly mitigated. If someone formed a strategic alliance to rig the voting then that would be dumb on their part, because it would greatly and negatively affect the value of their stake once the other shareholders caught on. They would certainly catch on eventually.. secrets are impossible to keep secret if they involve multiple parties.

That's cool if you don't like that, but to call them liars and thieves and/or Bitshares a scam because of that is disingenuous in the least considering everything is out in the open and done transparently.

I call them liars, cheaters and thieves because they have changed the terms on their investors so many times that I've lost count.  The change of terms is always to their benefit.  If you can't see this, you're deluding yourself.

All changes needed stakeholder approval. It is unfortunate you didn't get your way and don't agree with the direction the project has gone, however it is ridiculous that you cry about it for the rest of Bitshares' existence. There are many people that have been around since day one that do not feel this way, so the fact that you think they are "liars, cheaters and thieves" is your personal opinion that you are trying to convey as fact.

They also continually attempt to market Bitshares as "Safer than a Swiss Bank" and "Your own Fort Knox!" when they know it is subject to the flaw mentioned below.

No one has used that terminology in a very long time, and your use of the word "continually" in that statement makes the statement a lie. It is simply an exaggeration of a past gripe you have with the way Bitshares was originally marketed. These slogans have not been used for a long time, and Bitshares is more careful nowadays to be politically correct. Even still, you cannot fault a technology or a decentralized cryptocurrency because of the words said by a few of its stakeholders. If that is the case, you shouldn't be using any cryptocurrency because there are trolls, liars, cheaters, and thieves in any certain community. For instance, you are one of the most FUD-happy community members around, but I do not fault Nxt (.... a decentralized cryptocurrency ....) for the opinions, propaganda, and writings of one of their users. That is only the sane thing to do.

Besides, srsly, who is going to buy 1 BitUSD for 2 real USD?

No one, because they can buy 1 bitUSD for $1.053 USD right now on the Bitshares' decentralized exchange. All of your statements are grossly exaggerated with the purposed to spread FUD about Bitshares. I'm not sure exactly what your motives are, and maybe I'm wrong about you trying to prop up your Nxt investment, but your intentions are crystal clear.

If you don't get what I'm talking about, go read Preston Byrne's analysis of Bitshares.

BitSharesX: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
Well I’ll be damned: BTSX BitAsset market failure after only 5 days
Those who cannot remember last week are condemned to repeat it

Preston Byrne is an idiot FUDer that just wanted attention like you, and he has been proven wrong thus far since SmartCoins (formerly bitAssets) have maintained their peg for almost two years now. Linking to those blog posts, which are heavily weighted in personal opinion, as definitive proof that Smartcoins are broken is hilarious. Especially considering there is factual data that proves Smartcoins have closely resembled the value of their real life counterparts for almost 2 years. Yet, those opinion pieces are obviously correct so lets disregard all of the factual data and base our opinion on someone else's opinion.  

Preston Byrne's pieces aren't just his personal opinion.  He makes a very good point on why Bitshares is fundamentally flawed.  Nobody from Bitshares has ever addressed this because they know it is fatal.

All cryptocurrencies are inherently risky. There is a risk that any cryptocurrency's value on any certain day can plummet to zero. To fault Bitshares specifically for this risk when all other cryptocurrencies share the same risks is blasphemous. The Bitshares community has addressed black swan events. It was discussed long before Preston brought it up inside the Bitshares community, he simply popularized everyone's knowledge of it. The Bitshares community admits that this risk exists, and as always no one should invest more than they can afford to lose. This goes with any investment.. cryptocurrencies, commodities, stocks, etc... and is common sense. Although the risk exists, it is in my opinion unlikely that it will ever happen. Cryptocurrencies with the volume, liquidity, and market cap of Bitshares simply do not lose over 50% of their value in one day. Smartcoins have worked well for approximately two years now, and have closely followed the value of their real life counterparts- even in a long time bear market Bitshares has experienced. It would take something catastrophic for a black swan event to happen, and again that risk is inherent with any investment- cryptocurrency or not. Hell, that risk even exists with FIAT and many traditionally "safe" holdings.

You are such a hypocrite, as further evidenced by you recently championing Synereo when they have yet to prove anything to anyone.. there is much more risk in Synereo at this point than an established cryptocurrency like Bitshares.

How does my support for Synereo, a decentralized social network, make me a hypocrite?  Here's the link to github https://github.com/synereo/.  As far as I know, there are no backdoors and nobody can confiscate anybody's AMPs.

Synereo is largely unproven at this point. So you're telling me you've read the source code line for line and understand it already? LOL. You should probably give it more than a few months before declaring that there are no backdoors.. no one reputable has been able to review the source code yet. Let's wait and see if they deliver before championing them, because at this point it's vaporware. Many projects have released open sourced code and have yet to launch after years of development. Stating vaporware is a better investment than a cryptocurrency that is battle and time tested, has built a network effect, community, services, supporting companies and ecosystem, etc... is a ridiculous statement in which rationality is negated by your personal vendetta against Bitshares.

I'm saying that project run by people who haven't proven themselves to be unethical is a better investment than a project run by people who time and again have proven themselves to be unethical.

That is again your opinion passed off as fact. There are many in the Bitshares community that do not feel this way. Again, I'm sorry you don't like the direction that the Bitshares project has taken, but it is ridiculous to FUD it for the rest of its existence because of that. This is why I think you must have some ulterior motive, because no sane person would dedicate their life to doing so. You stated you were an early Bitshares investor, so I assume you dumped Bitshares at the top and now (since it closely competes with your large Nxt holdings) you have dedicated your life to discrediting it.... which is sad and pathetic. My apologies if you are simply insane.

[smoothie]

It always amazes me how little understanding there is about the Facts of Life in business.

You start a business, you raise a small amount of funds, you build an alpha prototype, you raise a second round, you build a beta, you raise another round, and you continue to bootstrap your business until it gets traction.  Along the way you look for products and services you can sell to raise funds to keep going without further fund raising.  Eventually you become self-sustaining and start to turn a profit for all your investors.

If you want to attract great talent and keep them making rapid progress they expect to be paid.  So you negotiate some combination of salary and equity that they are willing to take a great risk for.  That varies over time and with what suits each individual.

Without funding, you are limited to the pool of talent that is willing to work part time or for free. Because of our fundraising, BitShares actually has a mix of both.  It has tons of volunteers and third party entrepreneurs doing their own things.  And it has Cryptonomex doing the heavy lifting on the core development with a small team of professional developers.

Throughout this whole process, progress has been observable by all stakeholders in an open source Github library where knowledgable programmers can evaluate the steady progress.  100% of the money raised so far has gone into developing the platform, PLUS a ton of sweat equity and private investor funds on top of that.  

As of last fall, the decentralized business we call "BitShares" was turned over to its shareholders who are now determining its future path.  They are free to hire Cryptonomex, one of several software development companies associated with BitShares, to continue development or select any mix of other developers.  Whether Cryptonomex is hired by BitShares or not (we have been) Cryptonomex plans to build all sorts of new business models on top of the public BitShares platform over time.  These businesses become tenants on the BitShares platform which is how the platform makes money via a share of fees.  So as we add businesses, the profitability of BitShares grows.  And you gradually build up a network effect just like every big company you've ever heard of.

But it's no longer just a Cryptonomex project.  We welcome other entrepreneurs who want to take advantage of all the technical and business infrastructure the BitShares community has already put in place.  All the on/off ramps and other services that are already available so that a person with a cool idea doesn't have to develop all that from scratch.

That's our business model.  Like building a shopping mall and installing a few anchor businesses and then opening it up to all sorts of other businesses that want to move into a ready-built infrastructure.  Only this mall is designed to scale, with virtually unlimited space for new businesses over time.

So, at this point, we are just getting started.  

So "just getting started" meaning you are going to raise more money so you can finally "get started"? lol

The lame BS that people will say to portray a sense of confidence when they continue to take in funds and not deliver exactly what they promised.

[RaginglikeaBoss]

I do have a solution, but a dumb fucking pleb such as myself doesn't need you, but for everyone else:  it's called USD - yeah, they are new and come in both physical and digital form.  They are the perfect peg for those wanting to hedg their cryptocurrency holdings with fiat currencies such as the USD.



Now remind me why BitUSD isn't an inherently useless asset, that borderline a on scam, let alone running an unlicensed and uninsured securities exchange (because that's exactly what assets on BitShare are), and the fact we have no way of speaking with the team's lawyers to request LEGALLY REQUIRED paperwork upon request regarding an investor prospectus.

Kthbai.

A USD can be seized and taken from you with force. A bitUSD lives on the blockchain and can not be seized. Would you trust your BTC with a 3rd party that has control of it or in your wallet with a private key that only you have? That's the difference between USD and bitUSD. Your bitUSD can't be seized or taken from you.

What are you selling sex slaves?  Who the fuck is the evil empire coming for your precious USD which you claim are useless and collapsing.

Luckily you can keep BitUSD's that continuously lose value as a whole overtime by the requirement to transfer via BTS into BTC.

Jesus, you do realize transactions on any blockchain are by definition public.  That same boogie man could come anyway.  Hide yo kids, hide yo wife, you conspiracy boner.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

Actually, you can't remove them from power because Bitshares DPoS is vulnerable to Sybil attacks and even if it wasn't, you still don't know what potential voting alliances exist to manipulate the elections via strategic voting.  13% of stake in DPoS allows for them to control over 50% of the elections via strategic voting.

13% stake can be easily overruled by the remaining 87% of stakeholders. Most delegates are known people in the community and Sybil has been mostly mitigated. If someone formed a strategic alliance to rig the voting then that would be dumb on their part, because it would greatly and negatively affect the value of their stake once the other shareholders caught on. They would certainly catch on eventually.. secrets are impossible to keep secret if they involve multiple parties.

"Sybil has been MOSTLY mitigated"  Lol  Except for that one time when one person convinced everybody he was five independent delegates/witnesses... Except for that one time when god knows who else has managed to convince everyone he was multiple independent parties.  The fact is that it is impossible to mitigate Sybil attacks in Bitshares without requiring every single delegate/witness to submit their government ID.  Even with this enacted you cannot prevent multiple individuals from forming strategic voting blocks.  These strategic voting blocks will always be present in Bitshares and everybody won't catch on to their existence.  This is the inherit problem with DPoS verses PoS.  With PoS, you actually have to own the stake to control the chain.  With DPoS, you only have to convince others with stake to vote you into power to control the chain.  This makes Bitshares' DPoS susceptible to these types of strategic voting attacks which are bound to happen.  The fact that some members of your community, like Roach, think that "corporate fascism" existing on Bitshares' blockchain is a good thing just shows how removed the system really is from the original intent of crypto.

I call them liars, cheaters and thieves because they have changed the terms on their investors so many times that I've lost count.  The change of terms is always to their benefit.  If you can't see this, you're deluding yourself.

All changes needed stakeholder approval. It is unfortunate you didn't get your way and don't agree with the direction the project has gone, however it is ridiculous that you cry about it for the rest of Bitshares' existence. There are many people that have been around since day one that do not feel this way, so the fact that you think they are "liars, cheaters and thieves" is your personal opinion that you are trying to convey as fact.

All changes didn't get "stakeholder approval".  A lot of them were unanimously declared by the Larimers.

They also continually attempt to market Bitshares as "Safer than a Swiss Bank" and "Your own Fort Knox!" when they know it is subject to the flaw mentioned below.

No one has used that terminology in a very long time, and your use of the word "continually" in that statement makes the statement a lie. It is simply an exaggeration of a past gripe you have with the way Bitshares was originally marketed. These slogans have not been used for a long time, and Bitshares is more careful nowadays to be politically correct.

What is a long time to you?  Nine months ago?

BitShares. 
Safer than a Swiss Bank. 
(Ask me why!)

Regardless of the exact terminology they use, they portray Bitshares as "safer" than traditional methods of storing your USD (or other assets) when it is in fact extremely dangerous for individuals to do so.  If the marketcap of Bitshares ever drops below the entire market capitalization of all the bitAssets, the holders of such bitAssets will not be able to redeem them at face value, because the contracts will be under-collateralized.  This means there will be a run on all assets as people attempt to recover 70 cents on the dollar, 60 cents on the dollar, 50 cents on the dollar, 30 cents on the dollar, 10 cents on the dollar, all the way down to zero.  They market Bitshares as such because they only care about their own bottom line and not the risk that they are inducing to others.

All cryptocurrencies are inherently risky. There is a risk that any cryptocurrency's value on any certain day can plummet to zero. To fault Bitshares specifically for this risk when all other cryptocurrencies share the same risks is blasphemous. The Bitshares community has addressed black swan events. ... Although the risk exists, it is in my opinion unlikely that it will ever happen. Cryptocurrencies with the volume, liquidity, and market cap of Bitshares simply do not lose over 50% of their value in one day.

All cryptocurrencies do not expose their holders the same systematic risk that exists in Bitshares' bitAssets.  That's right Bitshares simply does not lose over 50% of its value in one day.  It loses 34% of its value in one day like we just saw a few days ago.

[StanLarimer]

Actually, If you are going to quote me, you ought to quote the whole thing...  

Heh, I remember as a kid hearing my mother hum the jingle to this famous ad as she did the laundry:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFZK5VkQes4

(Hint:  It's the last four notes in the 1968 classic rock song "Touch me" by the Doors.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bKSqKpdEFI

Funny, I don't remember her ever telling my dad that

1.  "The tensile strength of this soap powder far exceeds that of dirt."
2.  "This detergent's oder is far more powerful than the smell of your work socks."
3.  "Did you know that Ajax can do the same thing as Atlas -- without shrugging?"

So, from nearly sixty years of training in front of the old boob tube, I've become an expert at recognizing the purpose of a good advertising slogan.

If you can get people to ask, "Oh really?  In what way exactly is Ajax stronger than dirt?", then you have solved half the marketing battle.

So, if we can get the ordinary, non-crypto-aware consumer to ask a similar question, "Oh really, In what way exactly is BitShares safer than a Swiss Bank?" than we will have done our marketing job.

So, I would appreciate it if you would continue to complain everywhere you can about my favorite marketing slogan.  I'd like to see everyone's mother humming that jingle on the way to collect her yield on her unconfiscatable, unrehypothicatable, un-bail-in-able, uninflatable and unbetrayable savings.

BitShares.  
Safer than a Swiss Bank.  
(Ask me why!)

[StanLarimer]

While I was at it, I found this one right beside it that I kind of liked...

In DE's defense, he has done more than anyone else to raise the visibility of BitShares on this forum.

(And at great expense to his anonymous reputation.)

But we still greatly admire his, possibly fictitious, polite and honorable inverse twin sister, um, Daisy.   



I continue to hope he will mellow out and join our community at BitShares (where everybody knows our names).

[DecentralizeEconomics]

Actually, If you are going to quote me, you ought to quote the whole thing... 

Heh, I remember as a kid hearing my mother hum the jingle to this famous ad as she did the laundry:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFZK5VkQes4

(Hint:  It's the last four notes in the 1968 classic rock song "Touch me" by the Doors.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bKSqKpdEFI

Funny, I don't remember her ever telling my dad that

1.  "The tensile strength of this soap powder far exceeds that of dirt."
2.  "This detergent's oder is far more powerful than the smell of your work socks."
3.  "Did you know that Ajax can do the same thing as Atlas -- without shrugging?"

So, from nearly sixty years of training in front of the old boob tube, I've become an expert at recognizing the purpose of a good advertising slogan.

If you can get people to ask, "Oh really?  In what way exactly is Ajax stronger than dirt?", then you have solved half the marketing battle.

So, if we can get the ordinary, non-crypto-aware consumer to ask a similar question, "Oh really, In what way exactly is BitShares safer than a Swiss Bank?" than we will have done our marketing job.

So, I would appreciate it if you would continue to complain everywhere you can about my favorite marketing slogan.  I'd like to see everyone's mother humming that jingle on the way to collect her yield on her unconfiscatable, unrehypothicatable, un-bail-in-able, uninflatable and unbetrayable savings.

BitShares. 
Safer than a Swiss Bank. 
(Ask me why!)

Glad to see that you still endorse this message Stan.

They also continually attempt to market Bitshares as "Safer than a Swiss Bank" and "Your own Fort Knox!" when they know it is subject to the flaw mentioned below.

No one has used that terminology in a very long time, and your use of the word "continually" in that statement makes the statement a lie. It is simply an exaggeration of a past gripe you have with the way Bitshares was originally marketed. These slogans have not been used for a long time, and Bitshares is more careful nowadays to be politically correct.

Stan just used it again about thirty-six minutes ago.  You better reset the clock.

[RaginglikeaBoss]

Stan, why is BitShares safer than a Swiss Bank?

[testz]

Stan, why is BitShares safer than a Swiss Bank?

Very simple, because Swiss Bank doesnt safe at all.

[StanLarimer]

unconfiscatable, unrehypothicatable, un-bail-in-able, uninflatable and unbetrayable

It is safer than a Swiss Bank when it comes to all the corruption associated with the modern banking system.

Much safer than a Swiss Bank from being Enron'ed, MF Global'ed, Cyprus'ed, and Mt. Gox'ed.

It used to be, back in the Day, that Swiss Banks were famous for their privacy and immunity from unscrupulous acts by governments and the global banksters.  Not anymore.  All the Swiss banking laws have been updated to comply with The Global System which no longer recognizes a banking customer's privacy or even property rights.

Nowhere am I saying that there are zero risks.  BitShares (and other cryptos) just provide a new form of safety that consumer's should consider for diversification against these risks.  And since the "Safer than a Swiss Bank" is aiming to get the attention of non-crypto-savvy consumers, it is a perfectly reasonable attention getting headline.  Naturally, when used, it is important to make sure that the other risks are clearly stated.

But we haven't used this slogan yet in any advertisement anywhere.  We just discussed it on bitsharestalk.org as a possible way to reach the unwashed masses.  A few of The Usual Suspects grabbed it from there and tried to make something of it out of context here.  Nice try.

Just like the general public knows (or should know) that they should diversify against the risk of any single investment vehicle, crypto's provide diversification from many the common mode risks of the Global Financial System.

Surely you know all this.

[Scamlarimer]

= bitshares 2.0 NOT safer the a swiss bank..

But as you all know bitshares 3.0 will be safer then a bank on the moon.

Who wants some mooncheese points?

unconfiscatable, unrehypothicatable, un-bail-in-able, uninflatable and unbetrayable

It is safer than a Swiss Bank when it comes to all the corruption associated with the modern banking system.

Much safer than a Swiss Bank from being Enron'ed, MF Global'ed, Cyprus'ed, and Mt. Gox'ed.

It used to be, back in the Day, that Swiss Banks were famous for their privacy and immunity from unscrupulous acts by governments and the global banksters.  Not anymore.  All the Swiss banking laws have been updated to comply with The Global System which no longer recognizes a banking customer's privacy or even property rights.

Nowhere am I saying that there are zero risks.  BitShares (and other cryptos) just provide a new form of safety that consumer's should consider for diversification against these risks.  And since the "Safer than a Swiss Bank" is aiming to get the attention of non-crypto-savvy consumers, it is a perfectly reasonable attention getting headline.  Naturally, when used, it is important to make sure that the other risks are clearly stated.

But we haven't used this slogan yet in any advertisement anywhere.  We just discussed it on bitsharestalk.org as a possible way to reach the unwashed masses.  A few of The Usual Suspects grabbed it from there and tried to make something of it out of context here.  Nice try.

Just like the general public knows (or should know) that they should diversify against the risk of any single investment vehicle, crypto's provide diversification from many the common mode risks of the Global Financial System.

Surely you know all this.

[altcoinUK]

unconfiscatable, unrehypothicatable, un-bail-in-able, uninflatable and unbetrayable

It is safer than a Swiss Bank when it comes to all the corruption associated with the modern banking system.

Much safer than a Swiss Bank from being Enron'ed, MF Global'ed, Cyprus'ed, and Mt. Gox'ed.

It used to be, back in the Day, that Swiss Banks were famous for their privacy and immunity from unscrupulous acts by governments and the global banksters.  Not anymore.  All the Swiss banking laws have been updated to comply with The Global System which no longer recognizes a banking customer's privacy or even property rights.

Nowhere am I saying that there are zero risks.  BitShares (and other cryptos) just provide a new form of safety that consumer's should consider for diversification against these risks.  And since the "Safer than a Swiss Bank" is aiming to get the attention of non-crypto-savvy consumers, it is a perfectly reasonable attention getting headline.  Naturally, when used, it is important to make sure that the other risks are clearly stated.

But we haven't used this slogan yet in any advertisement anywhere.  We just discussed it on bitsharestalk.org as a possible way to reach the unwashed masses.  A few of The Usual Suspects grabbed it from there and tried to make something of it out of context here.  Nice try.

Just like the general public knows (or should know) that they should diversify against the risk of any single investment vehicle, crypto's provide diversification from many the common mode risks of the Global Financial System.

Surely you know all this.

I understand you are salesman and you have to do the sales pitch, but can we stop such nonsense on this forum please ?

You are quite correct in saying that the banking system as well as the stock market is absolutely corrupt, but how does the corrupt banking system makes viable and feasible the fundamentally flawed "decentralized" crypto currency concept? The latest never ever was safe, decentralized nor allows anonymous transactions and most likely never will be. Bitcoin and in fact all crypto currencies a God given gift of tool for government to expose more control on society, to have the perfect financial monitoring system that records even the smallest 0.0000001 BTC/NXT/BitShares/ETH/etc spending. More importantly, Bitcoin and the blockchain are the perfect tool to implement the ultimate tax collection regime (go and check out why this is happening, Martin Armstrong, David Stockman etc. explain that). No wonder all big banks and central banks have been slowly but surely embracing the blockchain and more or less Bitcoin and perhaps Ethereum. If you understand the concept at least on basic level - and I know you do - you must know that the government CAN expose full control on all digital currencies including but not limited to control the access to the blockchains, control mining as well as trace all transactions, which latest by definition is the main attribute of the blockchain anyway.

Only a delusional 17 years old enthusiasts (see above that opinion about confiscation of cash vs. crypto currency) think that the current implementation of digital currencies terms of confiscability are safer than having cash or gold. No wonder government so keen to move away from cash, eliminate cash forever and to implement an electronic transaction only finance system. Bitcoin and perhaps a few other crypto currencies will be the crown jewellery top on that totalitarian, absolutely government controlled system.

Now, I guess you understand this. You expect that such centralization by goverment is coming, otherwise you wouldn't role out your centralized system a few months ago. Which is fine, business wise it make sense to comply with laws and regulations and to build a system/business that provides financial regulators, law enforcement and tax departments with full control on the blockchain. But in this case please don't spread the BS about the myth of safe and decentralized digital currency.

On the note of inflation, of course that's another myth. In order to increase the supply or go to PoS the BTC protocol - just as any other protocols that will be big enough at the time and important enough for the government - will be modified in a heartbeat when the government and central banks will request such modification, and miners as well as users will be happily using the hard fork. No other way around that government control.

The only hope if some idealistic but super intelligent individual like TPTB_need_war will build a system that solve the decentralization issue as well as eliminate the CAP theorem flaw, Byzantine generals problem and many other issues that needs to be solved in order to implement a safe and decentralized system. Personally, I doubt such system can be designed, Satoshi, Szabo, etc have not even tried to design such system, but lets hope some smart people are capable to do that.

[CoinHoarder]

I see the sock puppets are out in full force today, wonderful!  

I do have a solution, but a dumb fucking pleb such as myself doesn't need you, but for everyone else:  it's called USD - yeah, they are new and come in both physical and digital form.  They are the perfect peg for those wanting to hedg their cryptocurrency holdings with fiat currencies such as the USD.



Now remind me why BitUSD isn't an inherently useless asset, that borderline a on scam, let alone running an unlicensed and uninsured securities exchange (because that's exactly what assets on BitShare are), and the fact we have no way of speaking with the team's lawyers to request LEGALLY REQUIRED paperwork upon request regarding an investor prospectus.

Kthbai.

A USD can be seized and taken from you with force. A bitUSD lives on the blockchain and can not be seized. Would you trust your BTC with a 3rd party that has control of it or in your wallet with a private key that only you have? That's the difference between USD and bitUSD. Your bitUSD can't be seized or taken from you.

What are you selling sex slaves?  Who the fuck is the evil empire coming for your precious USD which you claim are useless and collapsing.

Luckily you can keep BitUSD's that continuously lose value as a whole overtime by the requirement to transfer via BTS into BTC.

Jesus, you do realize transactions on any blockchain are by definition public.  That same boogie man could come anyway.  Hide yo kids, hide yo wife, you conspiracy boner.

Maybe you missed what happened in Cyprus when many innocent people had the funds stored in banks stolen?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012%E2%80%9313_Cypriot_financial_crisis

Civil Forfeiture is practically government-sanctioned stealing for the "greater good", and there are many silly laws that governments can use to steal your money.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States

Governments forcing citizens to pay for services they don't wish to fund, and/or they don't agree with, and/or is against their religion... is stealing from innocent people. Such as Obamacare, Catholics paying for birth control, paying for someone to sit around and drink beer or do drugs all day while you have to work your ass off (welfare), etc...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

You do not have to be a criminal to have your money stolen by your government, private entities or other people. The examples I listed are only instances of government theft of innocent people's money, not even one instance of private entities or people doing or causing that as well. I could go on and on all day, but my job is not to educate the uneducated, and you guys are wasting enough of my time already having to refute your idiocy-laden posts. Furthermore, Phoenike only mentioned one benefit of Smartcoins, of which there are many. Although, this thread only focuses on negative things about Bitshares so I won't mention them... and as I said, you can do your own research as I'm already wasting too much time here (or just don't do the research and keep FUDing along with your agenda... whatever.)

[StanLarimer]

unconfiscatable, unrehypothicatable, un-bail-in-able, uninflatable and unbetrayable

It is safer than a Swiss Bank when it comes to all the corruption associated with the modern banking system.

Much safer than a Swiss Bank from being Enron'ed, MF Global'ed, Cyprus'ed, and Mt. Gox'ed.

It used to be, back in the Day, that Swiss Banks were famous for their privacy and immunity from unscrupulous acts by governments and the global banksters.  Not anymore.  All the Swiss banking laws have been updated to comply with The Global System which no longer recognizes a banking customer's privacy or even property rights.

Nowhere am I saying that there are zero risks.  BitShares (and other cryptos) just provide a new form of safety that consumer's should consider for diversification against these risks.  And since the "Safer than a Swiss Bank" is aiming to get the attention of non-crypto-savvy consumers, it is a perfectly reasonable attention getting headline.  Naturally, when used, it is important to make sure that the other risks are clearly stated.

But we haven't used this slogan yet in any advertisement anywhere.  We just discussed it on bitsharestalk.org as a possible way to reach the unwashed masses.  A few of The Usual Suspects grabbed it from there and tried to make something of it out of context here.  Nice try.

Just like the general public knows (or should know) that they should diversify against the risk of any single investment vehicle, crypto's provide diversification from many the common mode risks of the Global Financial System.

Surely you know all this.

I understand you are salesman and you have to do the sales pitch, but can we stop such nonsense on this forum please ?

You are quite correct in saying that the banking system as well as the stock market is absolutely corrupt, but how does the corrupt banking system makes viable and feasible the fundamentally flawed "decentralized" crypto currency concept? The latest never ever was safe, decentralized nor allows anonymous transactions and most likely never will be. Bitcoin and in fact all crypto currencies a God given gift of tool for government to expose more control on society, to have the perfect financial monitoring system that records even the smallest 0.0000001 BTC/NXT/BitShares/ETH/etc spending. More importantly, Bitcoin and the blockchain are the perfect tool to implement the ultimate tax collection regime (go and check out why this is happening, Martin Armstrong, David Stockman etc. explain that). No wonder all big banks and central banks have been slowly but surely embracing the blockchain and more or less Bitcoin and perhaps Ethereum. If you understand the concept at least on basic level - and I know you do - you must know that the government CAN expose full control on all digital currencies including but not limited to control the access to the blockchains, control mining as well as trace all transactions, which latest by definition is the main attribute of the blockchain anyway.

Only a delusional 17 years old enthusiasts (see above that opinion about confiscation of cash vs. crypto currency) think that the current implementation of digital currencies terms of confiscability are safer than having cash or gold. No wonder government so keen to move away from cash, eliminate cash forever and to implement an electronic transaction only finance system. Bitcoin and perhaps a few other crypto currencies will be the crown jewellery top on that totalitarian, absolutely government controlled system.

Now, I guess you understand this. You expect that such centralization by goverment is coming, otherwise you wouldn't role out your centralized system a few months ago. Which is fine, business wise it make sense to comply with laws and regulations and to build a system/business that provides financial regulators, law enforcement and tax departments with full control on the blockchain. But in this case please don't spread the BS about the myth of safe and decentralized digital currency.

On the note of inflation, of course that's another myth. In order to increase the supply or go to PoS the BTC protocol - just as any other protocols that will be big enough at the time and important enough for the government - will be modified in a heartbeat when the government and central banks will request such modification, and miners as well as users will be happily using the hard fork. No other way around that government control.

The only hope if some idealistic but super intelligent individual like TPTB_need_war will build a system that solve the decentralization issue as well as eliminate the CAP theorem flaw, Byzantine generals problem and many other issues that needs to be solved in order to implement a safe and decentralized system. Personally, I doubt such system can be designed, Satoshi, Szabo, etc have not even tried to design such system, but lets hope some smart people are capable to do that.

No, I don't concede that.

I agree that we are in a never ending arms race and there will always be more problems to solve.

But the progress being made and the roadmaps I've seen give me confidence that the goal of improving, if not perfecting, the security of life, liberty, and property (or at least two out of those three) is within reach.

You don't need to achieve perfection to have something be worth doing, and the first solution you come up with is not a limitation on what can be achieved through persistence over time.  The battle is asymmetrical and a small innovation can have a disproportionately large impact on the balance of power.

I prefer to encourage fellow members of the crypto community to continue to innovate rather than engaging in the fratricide that so many on this forum seem to think is useful or somehow gratifying.  Our brothers and sisters in the other tribes of cryptodom are not the enemy, and pouring cold water on everyone else's efforts (clearly without knowing what you are talking about) is self defeating. 

I won't be a part of that nasty parochial attitude.