Author Topic: "cyberShares" cooperative cross-blockchain dapp dev community thing  (Read 14542 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag

And they cut you in for 10%, so who's complaining?  :-X
With all honour i don't understand this logic. We don't use toolkit. We invest in fact our personal money, time and expertise to do something we believe is useful for EVERYBODY. We don't ask your money, time or something else. Take it. Use it. Do whatever you want.
There is funny fact. 10% from nothing is nothing. 10% from something to complain is already your valuation. If there is valuation so value added. Our team is voluntary, full time and take all risks don't asking nobody, nothing. And, of course, want to be rewarded. Is it bad?

I understand we logic behind Ander
But more seriously, if this cyberShares is taking a significant %age of the total (which they are), they need to be adding a LOT of value through development work, marketing, integration, etc.  Are they?  If they are, this coin could be good, though it does seem pretty weighted in favor of giving its devs coins.
I want to remember that this is a project, not the state. 10% for building project at this point of competitiveness we perceive as fair and almost any project operate it.
What about revolver?. We are happy to fairly share 10% of devs bag with everybody who join. Really. We need it.
If you join would you vote for 7%, 5%? If there will be the case - ok. We will change terms. Anybody want to offer better way to produce fair dev's bag? Welcome.

Here is my recommendation:
But more seriously, if this cyberShares is taking a significant %age of the total (which they are), they need to be adding a LOT of value through development work, marketing, integration, etc.  Are they?

Exactly. But more importantly we now have a way to pay for devs, marketing, etc. without having to allocate a huge stake initially to some group of people. If they want to work for the new DAC they can get elected as delegates and get paid for their services. If the stakeholders don't like what they are doing, they can vote them out and they no longer receive any extra funds. Allocating a significant percentage of the stake to them for the promise that they are going to add value in the future is no longer necessary IMO.

Instead of arbitrarily deciding a percentage to reward yourself for the integration/development/marketing work you are planning on doing and wondering if you picked the right number to not piss too many people off, you let the stakeholders themselves decide who to pay and how much for the value that they add. You campaign as delegates to work on the new coin and the stakeholders vote for you if they think you can do a good job. If it turns out some of you are doing a poor job, the stakeholders vote you out.

If you allocate 10% to a group and it turns out they do a bad job, the stakeholders don't have a way of getting that stake back from you. They either have to accept being "robbed" of their value or they just give up and dump the coin and try with again with another coin by another group.

Of course, this doesn't solve all the issues. You still need to arbitrarily decide which projects to sharedrop on and how to allocate the percentages between them. There will always be disagreement with that as well. I don't know of a nice solution to that problem however. And once again, nothing guarantees that the projects you sharedrop on are going to give up on their original token and use your new one. They just as likely might dump the tokens you gift to them and use it to buy more of the ones that you sharedropped on.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2015, 06:02:36 am by arhag »

Offline 21xhipster

How I understand the terms, you take a snapshot (or possibly multiple snapshots of multiple chains) when you are doing a sharedrop.

snapshot = the freeze-frame of a chain-state, where balances at a particular blockheight are recorded
sharedrop = a new token allocated to a single snapshot or collection of snapshots
Yes.
https://cyber.fund/ - Decetnralized Investment Platform

Offline 21xhipster


And they cut you in for 10%, so who's complaining?  :-X
With all honour i don't understand this logic. We don't use toolkit. We invest in fact our personal money, time and expertise to do something we believe is useful for EVERYBODY. We don't ask your money, time or something else. Take it. Use it. Do whatever you want.
There is funny fact. 10% from nothing is nothing. 10% from something to complain is already your valuation. If there is valuation so value added. Our team is voluntary, full time and take all risks don't asking nobody, nothing. And, of course, want to be rewarded. Is it bad?

I understand we logic behind Ander
But more seriously, if this cyberShares is taking a significant %age of the total (which they are), they need to be adding a LOT of value through development work, marketing, integration, etc.  Are they?  If they are, this coin could be good, though it does seem pretty weighted in favor of giving its devs coins.
I want to remember that this is a project, not the state. 10% for building project at this point of competitiveness we perceive as fair and almost any project operate it.
What about revolver?. We are happy to fairly share 10% of devs bag with everybody who join. Really. We need it.
If you join would you vote for 7%, 5%? If there will be the case - ok. We will change terms. Anybody want to offer better way to produce fair dev's bag? Welcome.
https://cyber.fund/ - Decetnralized Investment Platform

Offline fluxer555

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 749
    • View Profile
How I understand the terms, you take a snapshot (or possibly multiple snapshots of multiple chains) when you are doing a sharedrop.

snapshot = the freeze-frame of a chain-state, where balances at a particular blockheight are recorded
sharedrop = a new token allocated to a single snapshot or collection of snapshots

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag

Guys, I am going to take a snapshot of BTS and the Ethereum genesis stake and create AwesomeCoin.

 :D

Do it. Do it better. If you solve upcoming industry problems better - we will join. Everybody will.
But please don't confuse snapshot and sharedrop. Snapshot != Sharedrop. Problem with snapshot is that you wont get 100% conversion rate. With sharedrop you will. Snapshot is cheaper (almost free). Sharedrop costs fees. Snapshot require time and expertise (You still dont understand that this is the biggest problem?) for people. Sharedrop is native and cost nothing to people. No time, no costs, no expertise. You just receive it and that is it. You can destroy asset, sell, hold, try to forget it. But anyway you'll touch.

My definition of snapshot and sharedrop are identical. What is your definition of a sharedrop?

How could you possibly guarantee a 100% conversion rate? That is impossible. Nothing prevents the previous owners from continuing the old blockchain while also taking advantage of the new tokens you gifted them (see our recent example with PTS for evidence).

Offline 21xhipster


Guys, I am going to take a snapshot of BTS and the Ethereum genesis stake and create AwesomeCoin.

 :D

Do it. Do it better. If you solve upcoming industry problems better - we will join. Everybody will.
But please don't confuse snapshot and sharedrop. Snapshot != Sharedrop. Problem with snapshot is that you wont get 100% conversion rate. With sharedrop you will. Snapshot is cheaper (almost free). Sharedrop costs fees. Snapshot require time and expertise (You still dont understand that this is the biggest problem?) for people. Sharedrop is native and cost nothing to people. No time, no costs, no expertise. You just receive it and that is it. You can destroy asset, sell, hold, try to forget it. But anyway you'll touch.
https://cyber.fund/ - Decetnralized Investment Platform

Offline 21xhipster


Looks like a promise the moon type coin/project then give yourself a healthy sharedrop.  Like SuperNet, it'll do everything.  Invest early and don't miss out on another game changer.

We do not like SuperNet for:
- Centralised accounts which hold reserves
- James, who don't timely hold promises
We do like SuperNet for:
- James, who in fact first who begin to utilise digital assets creating rich internal economy of network. BitShares still don't understand the power of internal economy created through UIA.
- Pace, vision and passion - guys try to do and personally i believe that some of their efforts will reach success. Its hard to be the first.

it'll do everything.
We don't plan to do everything. We will build basic infrastructure in terms of digital marketing to make possible efficient and measurable resource allocation. Nobody do it now. But here is potential and its stupid do not to use it.
https://cyber.fund/ - Decetnralized Investment Platform

Offline 21xhipster

What will your sharedrop percentages be? And how will you track the success of these 2.0's
You can check droproadmap :-) of cyber•Fund team here. We cannot and would not setup percentages. There is better "market" solution. Founders will define this in any particular case. Similar to Adwords - more you drop - more attention. You can test, but it costs and confuse. You can ask(!). There will be tools to analyse and measure.

Are you planning to hold a basket of shares or is this an index fund?
We already do, but that is not about cyber•Shares. cyber•Fund will work as index with quasi decentralized principle. Investors do not touch assets, but there is proof of reserve. cyber•Pie will work as trustless personal one-click portfolio which will overperfom Bitcoin.
https://cyber.fund/ - Decetnralized Investment Platform

Offline 21xhipster

There are cybershares on Coinprism, NXT, Counterparty and etc. How do you plan to make them interchangeable? They naturally have different price so 1 cybershare on NXT is not equal to 1 cybershare on Coinprism or Counterparty.
That is the most hard issue of the project and to be honest i still don't know the right answer inspite of the fact that upcoming DApps industry with or without cyber•Shares should solve it. I have assumptions for solution. There could be 2 approaches:
(1) Fixed supply. Works for real word cases with security placements. This approach will get different prices. It is not harmful for cyber•Shares itself, but it is not the best solution for startups which will use crosschain community for promoting. Nobody wants the fragmented price across logically same entity. Thus, any DApp developer who want use crosschain approach anyway will need flexible supply.
(2) Flexible supply. There is 2 cases to understand:
(2.1) Alice wants to move token from NXT (fixed supply by design) to Open Assets (OA) (flexible supply by design). She sends NXT token to contract. Contract lock NXT token, issue OA token and send to Alise.
(2.2) Alice wants to move token from OA to NXT. She sends OA token to contract. Contract destroy OA token, take token from locked and send to Alice.
I forsee Proof-of-Origin as set of tools which will make possible entities to effectively regulate supply of tokens across protocols. So cyber•Shares start from ready to use fixed supply, but after Ethereum launch will implement trustless (now its not) Proof-of-Origin.

Update: typofixes
« Last Edit: January 08, 2015, 06:40:17 am by 21xhipster »
https://cyber.fund/ - Decetnralized Investment Platform

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
But more seriously, if this cyberShares is taking a significant %age of the total (which they are), they need to be adding a LOT of value through development work, marketing, integration, etc.  Are they?

Exactly. But more importantly we now have a way to pay for devs, marketing, etc. without having to allocate a huge stake initially to some group of people. If they want to work for the new DAC they can get elected as delegates and get paid for their services. If the stakeholders don't like what they are doing, they can vote them out and they no longer receive any extra funds. Allocating a significant percentage of the stake to them for the promise that they are going to add value in the future is no longer necessary IMO.

Offline Ander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3506
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Ander

Looks like a promise the moon type coin/project then give yourself a healthy sharedrop.  Like SuperNet, it'll do everything.  Invest early and don't miss out on another game changer.

Guys, I am going to take a snapshot of BTS and the Ethereum genesis stake and create AwesomeCoin. The allocation is as follows: 49% to BTS, 49% to ETH, and 2% to me. What? What's the issue? BitShares and Ethereum together will be an unstoppable force with a superior network effect. What does it matter if both communities get 49% rather 50%? Don't squabble over minor percentage differences when we have order of magnitude gains in price to realize. And my stake of 2% isn't significant enough to compromise delegate voting or other stakeholder voting consensus.

 :D

...I would totally support AwesomeCoin. :P

But more seriously, if this cyberShares is taking a significant %age of the total (which they are), they need to be adding a LOT of value through development work, marketing, integration, etc.  Are they?  If they are, this coin could be good, though it does seem pretty weighted in favor of giving its devs coins.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2015, 01:43:22 am by Ander »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BitShares: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag

Looks like a promise the moon type coin/project then give yourself a healthy sharedrop.  Like SuperNet, it'll do everything.  Invest early and don't miss out on another game changer.

Guys, I am going to take a snapshot of BTS and the Ethereum genesis stake and create AwesomeCoin. The allocation is as follows: 49% to BTS, 49% to ETH, and 2% to me. What? What's the issue? BitShares and Ethereum together will be an unstoppable force with a superior network effect. What does it matter if both communities get 49% rather 50%? Don't squabble over minor percentage differences when we have order of magnitude gains in price to realize. And my stake of 2% isn't significant enough to compromise delegate voting or other stakeholder voting consensus.

 :D

Offline Vizzini

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: vizzini

Looks like a promise the moon type coin/project then give yourself a healthy sharedrop.  Like SuperNet, it'll do everything.  Invest early and don't miss out on another game changer.

And they cut you in for 10%, so who's complaining?  :-X
Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line.

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile

Looks like a promise the moon type coin/project then give yourself a healthy sharedrop.  Like SuperNet, it'll do everything.  Invest early and don't miss out on another game changer.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
https://github.com/cyberFund/cyberShares/wiki

Thanks for that link, which I'd missed before. So it's a wallet, a fund, ...? Still a bit fuzzy to me, but I like the combination of different 2.0's so far.