Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: BitsharesFunding: How DPOS inadvertently creates a decentralised startup fund  (Read 420 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline matt608

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 878
    • View Profile

As far as I can tell in the future 3rd parties will have 3 options. 

1.  Propose their business plan to BTS stakeholders with the aim of becoming a delegate and receiving funding via dilution and become part of BTS
2.  Go independent and offer a snapshot to either AGS + PTS or BTS or some combination as they choose.
3.  Go independent and and not snapshot anyone.

Option 3 isn't preventable and we can just ignore it.

Option 1 is something BTS holders are incentivised to facilitate in order to reduce competition and increase growth.  Each startup which is part of the superDAC is like a new road to our bitasset shop coming from somewhere new.  The more inroads the better, as long as these roads are purchased for a fair price. 

Ethereum is aiming to attract developers to build on its platform.  There will inevitably be forks of Ethereum too (option 3) and they don't have a 'snapshotting' as a tradition so I don't think that there's an option 2 for them either.  They are all about attracting DAAP developers (what I am calling 'startups').  Now that BTS is united, we need to do the same.  The ideals of free market competition are not violated by conglomeration, in fact they are strengthed.  We would not really be competing if we deliberately allowed competition to flourish against us, just to give the competition a fair chance.  Ethereum is the competition, it's time we realized that.

Now, onto why would a startup or DAPP team bother 'campaigning' to become a delegate?  That's never happened before.  Let me tell you,

Funding.

Every startup needs funding.  DPOS inadvertently provides a few a new funding option for all startups, call it say, blockchain-funding, or BitsharesFunding, as opposed to equity-crowdfunding.  Rather than marketing its potential product to the Internet at large to gain funding, now, thanks to DPOS startups can target their crowfunding efforts to stakeholders of BTS.  They need go nowhere else.  If they can get enough stakeholders to vote for them, they get funding, access to a decentralised bank with the strongest bitassets available, the support of all BTS stakeholders (including Invictus developers who will be delegates themselves) as well as all the business partnerships BTS has made.

A huge incentive.

It also means they have incentive to co-operate with other BTS teams, which is good for BTS.

Want funding?  Make your pitch to BTS stakeholdrs at *insertawesomenewBTScrowdfudingssite.p2p*

The only downside for prospective startups is that they skip the high-risk high-return phase, as their share price will be the BTS price.  So even if they are very successful, they will not earn as much, but if their startups is a complete failure, their BTS will still be worth something.

If their startup/DAAP is a failure BTS stakeholders will vote them out of receiving more funding.

So BTS will have become a decentrased start-up seed funding network. 

Pretty awesome if you ask me.

Im not sure this conclusion has been reached by many yet.  It brings to light how important a platform for prospective delegates to propose their plans may be.  If its too difficult to pitch proposals to BTS we will end up with a load of competitors who could have been allies.  People are trying to remedy this concern with snapshotting AGS/PTS/BTS, which is fair enough, but another way to get a stake in all future bitshares DACs is to own BTS and make it easy for prospective DAC startups to pitch for funding.

Therefore, alternatively to snapshotting, BTS third parties could (and I will say should) be encouraged to pitch their startup/DAAP to BTS holders with the aim of becoming delegates funded via dilution.

It does prevent a problem for Chinese/English, as they would have to make their pitch in both languages.  It will be a new adventure.

Feedback, thoughts on this idea?  :)

Edit:  If a DAAP became so big its team decided it could go independent with its own BTSX style exchange, then it could be rolled off as an independant and provide a snapshot to BTS.

Edit 2: Not saying a successful vote for dilution to fund a delegate would happen often, maybe just several times a year or less.  This is just an idea for what direction could be taken.  I don't want to bombard an already very busy team with more stuff just wanted to put this out there as I thought it could be important.  There's no bigrush to get this 'platform' I'm imagining ready, just maybe something to consider?
« Last Edit: October 25, 2014, 01:32:10 PM by matt608 »

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2809
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BTS: Stan
As far as I can tell in the future 3rd parties will have 3 options. 

1.  Propose their business plan to BTS stakeholders with the aim of becoming a delegate and receiving funding via dilution and become part of BTS
2.  Go independent and offer a snapshot to either AGS + PTS or BTS or some combination as they choose.
3.  Go independent and and not snapshot anyone.

Option 3 isn't preventable and we can just ignore it.

Option 1 is something BTS holders are incentivised to facilitate in order to reduce competition and increase growth.  Each startup which is part of the superDAC is like a new road to our bitasset shop coming from somewhere new.  The more inroads the better, as long as these roads are purchased for a fair price. 

Ethereum is aiming to attract developers to build on its platform.  There will inevitably be forks of Ethereum too (option 3) and they don't have a 'snapshotting' as a tradition so I don't think that there's an option 2 for them either.  They are all about attracting DAAP developers (what I am calling 'startups').  Now that BTS is united, we need to do the same.  The ideals of free market competition are not violated by conglomeration, in fact they are strengthed.  We would not really be competing if we deliberately allowed competition to flourish against us, just to give the competition a fair chance.  Ethereum is the competition, it's time we realized that.

Now, onto why would a startup or DAPP team bother 'campaigning' to become a delegate?  That's never happened before.  Let me tell you,

Funding.

Every startup needs funding.  DPOS inadvertently provides a few a new funding option for all startups, call it say, blockchain-funding, or BitsharesFunding, as opposed to equity-crowdfunding.  Rather than marketing its potential product to the Internet at large to gain funding, now, thanks to DPOS startups can target their crowfunding efforts to stakeholders of BTS.  They need go nowhere else.  If they can get enough stakeholders to vote for them, they get funding, access to a decentralised bank with the strongest bitassets available, the support of all BTS stakeholders (including Invictus developers who will be delegates themselves) as well as all the business partnerships BTS has made.

A huge incentive.

It also means they have incentive to co-operate with other BTS teams, which is good for BTS.

Want funding?  Make your pitch to BTS stakeholdrs at *insertawesomenewBTScrowdfudingssite.p2p*

The only downside for prospective startups is that they skip the high-risk high-return phase, as their share price will be the BTS price.  So even if they are very successful, they will not earn as much, but if their startups is a complete failure, their BTS will still be worth something.

If their startup/DAAP is a failure BTS stakeholders will vote them out of receiving more funding.

So BTS will have become a decentrased start-up seed funding network. 

Pretty awesome if you ask me.

Im not sure this conclusion has been reached by many yet.  It brings to light how important a platform for prospective delegates to propose their plans may be.  If its too difficult to pitch proposals to BTS we will end up with a load of competitors who could have been allies.  People are trying to remedy this concern with snapshotting AGS/PTS/BTS, which is fair enough, but another way to get a stake in all future bitshares DACs is to own BTS and make it easy for prospective DAC startups to pitch for funding.

Therefore, alternatively to snapshotting, BTS third parties could (and I will say should) be encouraged to pitch their startup/DAAP to BTS holders with the aim of becoming delegates funded via dilution.

It does prevent a problem for Chinese/English, as they would have to make their pitch in both languages.  It will be a new adventure.

Feedback, thoughts on this idea?  :)

Edit:  If a DAAP became so big its team decided it could go independent with its own BTSX style exchange, then it could be rolled off as an independant and provide a snapshot to BTS.

Edit 2: Not saying a successful vote for dilution to fund a delegate would happen often, maybe just several times a year or less.  This is just an idea for what direction could be taken.  I don't want to bombard an already very busy team with more stuff just wanted to put this out there as I thought it could be important.  There's no bigrush to get this 'platform' I'm imagining ready, just maybe something to consider?

Nice analysis.  It may be that the self-funding SuperDAC is the biggest innovation yet.  It is the catalyst that makes everything else able to happen at previously unheard-of speeds. 
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
Spot on! I'm glad that people are beginning to realize the enormous potential we are dealing with. Once we get the ball rolling, we will acquire and integrate everything into our own giant, transparent, trust-abundant organization.

Also we will inevitably acquire ethereum, their team is probably the technically best in the industry, with vitalik being an absolutely brilliant researcher. I guess only bytemaster is a more valuable member to the crypto community. Our stakeholders will most definitely vote to share drop onto ethereum investors if that means we can get vitalik and his team (and whatever is leftover of their funds is burned as BTS), because we know that they are all very interested and serious users of next gen blockchain tech, and would be extremely valuable to have on board as stakeholders. Kinda the same logic as why share dropping to PTS is an advantage.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2014, 02:13:20 PM by Rune »

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2809
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BTS: Stan
It was not inadvertent.   :)
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
It was not inadvertent.   :)

The name Larimer will be remembered by history alongside names like Einstein and Newton. Must be pretty crazy to think about.

Offline Troglodactyl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 943
    • View Profile
It was not inadvertent.   :)

I was going to say, seemed pretty advertent to me...

Offline luckybit

As far as I can tell in the future 3rd parties will have 3 options. 

1.  Propose their business plan to BTS stakeholders with the aim of becoming a delegate and receiving funding via dilution and become part of BTS
2.  Go independent and offer a snapshot to either AGS + PTS or BTS or some combination as they choose.
3.  Go independent and and not snapshot anyone.

Option 3 isn't preventable and we can just ignore it.

Option 1 is something BTS holders are incentivised to facilitate in order to reduce competition and increase growth.  Each startup which is part of the superDAC is like a new road to our bitasset shop coming from somewhere new.  The more inroads the better, as long as these roads are purchased for a fair price. 

Ethereum is aiming to attract developers to build on its platform.  There will inevitably be forks of Ethereum too (option 3) and they don't have a 'snapshotting' as a tradition so I don't think that there's an option 2 for them either.  They are all about attracting DAAP developers (what I am calling 'startups').  Now that BTS is united, we need to do the same.  The ideals of free market competition are not violated by conglomeration, in fact they are strengthed.  We would not really be competing if we deliberately allowed competition to flourish against us, just to give the competition a fair chance.  Ethereum is the competition, it's time we realized that.

Now, onto why would a startup or DAPP team bother 'campaigning' to become a delegate?  That's never happened before.  Let me tell you,



There are more than these 3 options. Think outside the box.

But I do think these 3 options are the main options. I do think Ethereum has an advantage in that it can attract people who have a lot of resources in the traditional establishment. Every third party DAC is a startup and we are all part of startup culture.

Delegates are going to become a sort of highly sought after position, a sort of DAC equity in itself. Developers, thought leaders, (key players), should become delegates. Delegates have the ability to get shit done using their professional connections, their audience, their coding skills, whatever resources they can bring to the DAC.

The only problem I see with the self funding SuperDAC model is that it doesn't have an effective way for the high net worth establishment players to contribute resources to projects. There are some billionaires, millionaires, who probably could be convinced to gift millions of dollars but who don't know what Bitcoin is and who shouldn't have to be part of the crypto-currency space to support it. I think we need bridges.




« Last Edit: October 25, 2014, 04:23:34 PM by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline CLains

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • View Profile
  • BTS: clains
Delegates can team up with large investors to get funded ahead of time. Investor takes the risk that the delegate will be and stay elected for Y% of delegate pay. The delegate thus promises away some of his salary to get funds up front, to avoid personal risk, and to better the chance of getting elected.

Offline jsidhu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1337
    • View Profile
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10385.0

I think fluxxer made a nice proposal which i think is what your going for plus more in detail... You want ppl to invest and it is a risk as always.. Bts are burned during investing and returned if dac is merged everyone wins investors get more bts than spent and you have some deflation to go with inflation...
Hired by blockchain | Developer
delegate: dev.sidhujag

 

Google+