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: Bounty exchange platform  (Read 682 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline luckybit

Bounty exchange platform
« on: December 27, 2013, 06:00:01 PM »

How about a bounty exchange platform with an Ask/Bid?

This is essentially a bounty auction and exchange platform. It is completely algorithmic in approach and completely automated. It determines the true market price of any kind of labor by reaching the equilibrium point between the supply and demand through the bid/ask.

It would be centralized at first but could be made decentralized, it's also a way to determine who would be selected for the bounty in a completely automated fashion.

It may even allow workers to trade jobs on the exchange provided they do so before the expiration date. This way if a worker bit off more than he could chew he could exchange his bounty with someone else and they'd get paid in his place if they complete it.

Instructions
As the employer first you'd put up your bidding price which is the highest you're willing to pay, then a bunch of potential bid fillers put up their asking price and according to the algorithm it would meet in the middle according to supply and demand at an equilibrium point. This would give the market the true price of the labor.
Input: Employers enter a job description and bidding price to be displayed as the maximum bounty reward.
Input: Employees/Job hunters enter their asking prices, mapped to their Keyhotee IDs.
DAC: An algorithm selects the employee willing to work for the lowest asking price (lowest bounty reward)
DAC: A bot sends an encrypted message to the public key of the Keyhotee ID address and sends a bounty token to their wallet.
DAC: The transaction and exchange exist entirely in a blockchain so that if necessary anyone with that bounty token can exchange their bounty token for anyone else's.
Output1: The job is completed by the expiration date on the bounty token, and the bounty token is redeemed at the true price of labor in the market.
Output2: The job is not completed by the expiration date and the bounty token is never redeemed, therefore it is invalid and expired.
Social Contract: 50% Protoshares, 45% Angelshares, 5% Promotion, Discount and Giveaway shares

What could go wrong? Someone could lose their bounty token and then the bounty would expire wasting valuable time. On the other hand it would save time if someone can trade their received bounty with another person or split their bounty with another person all in automated fashion by using the divisibility of the bounty token. So if I did 90% of the labor and I could not do that final 10% then I could break off 10% of the bounty token and give it to anyone willing to work for it.

Let me know if this idea could work?
« Last Edit: December 27, 2013, 06:27:59 PM by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline pgbit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: Bounty exchange platform
« Reply #1 on: December 27, 2013, 06:31:38 PM »
Nice idea. It would surely work. Bear in mind though, that price for services isn't the bottom line for everyone. The cheapest of anything, may not offer the best service, so it might be an idea to incorporate aspects of value distinct from price offered by having a detailed public feedback system (risks of manipulation), and by allowing requesting services to submit a detailed specification (a universal template) or minimum standard expected for service.

Offline phoenix

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
    • View Profile
Re: Bounty exchange platform
« Reply #2 on: December 27, 2013, 07:48:34 PM »
I had a similar idea, but instead of limiting the bounty to one person, I thought you should allow anyone to claim the bounty, as long as the majority of the people who donated towards the bounty(weighted by the amount they contributed to the given bounty) agreed that the individual submitted a legitimate claim. Here's how the system would work:

1, somebody puts up a bounty, with a complete description of what the requirements are
2, anybody that wants to encourage the bounty can then donate to the bounty address. By donating to this address, your address is given a certain % of control of the bounty address, equal to the % of funds that you donated. If you donate 2 BountyShares out of 20 BountyShares that were donated to the total bounty, you would have 10% control
3, anyone can then submit a claim for the bounty, but they have to pay a small fee to prevent spam
4, if within a set amount of time (1 week?) a minimum % of the people that donated, weighted by the amount they donated, have voted to accept the bounty as legitimate, then the bounty will be transferred to the developers address.
5, if the claim isn't accepted, then the fee is put towards the bounty, and the cycle continues.

Advantages:
-this could work with more than just code. People could create graphics bounties, music bounties, etc.
-All bounties are visible on a block-chain, anybody can use the works submitted to improve their own projects

Potential issues:
-somebody could submit a massive donation, followed by a claim that's absolutely worthless. Since they now have majority control, they can take the full bounty. (perhaps this could be solved by linking to Keyhotee IDs?)
Protoshares: Pg5EhSZEXHFjdFUzpxJbm91UtA54iUuDvt
Bitmessage: BM-NBrGi2V3BZ8REnJM7FPxUjjkQp7V5D28

Offline bytemaster

Re: Bounty exchange platform
« Reply #3 on: December 27, 2013, 09:34:57 PM »
Keyhotee IDs do not eliminate Sybil attacks, they just make them more expensive.

I really believe that the concept of voting is flawed because it means giving control over your contribution to a mob who may vote to use it in a way that you think is wasteful.   Taken to an extreme, lets imagine that everyone felt a police force was necessary so they all volunteered to put money into a POT and then vote proportional to their contribution. 

Some people vote to enforce drug laws and those against the drug laws end up funding the police oppression.  While better than taxes, this is still a terrible way to allocate funds voluntarily contributed.

Voting is 0 risk and therefore there is no counterforce to discourage voting untruthfully.   In other words, I do not think that voting can reveal truth.  Markets on the other hand can reveal truth.  Someone who attempts to lie to the market by bidding up the value of something will end up swamped with sell offers.  Then they try to sell absent their demand they will lose money.   Market manipulation is only possible when the market participants lack information upon which to make a real value judgement and instead rely upon short-term market fluctuations to make decisions.   In a prediction market on something like, "what color is the sky on a clear day?" you would NEVER be able to manipulate that market to say the sky is green for any length of time without a flood of people rushing in to take the free money you are offering them.  Once you are bankrupt the market will revert to indicating the sky is blue.

On the other hand, if you put money in a pot to get the answer to the question, "what color is the sky?" and then ask participants to vote on the best answer to award the Pot then there is no cost to voting wrong and it would be easily manipulated any time there was profit to be made from it.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline luckybit

Re: Bounty exchange platform
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2013, 02:41:16 AM »
Nice idea. It would surely work. Bear in mind though, that price for services isn't the bottom line for everyone. The cheapest of anything, may not offer the best service, so it might be an idea to incorporate aspects of value distinct from price offered by having a detailed public feedback system (risks of manipulation), and by allowing requesting services to submit a detailed specification (a universal template) or minimum standard expected for service.

Badges and reputation can be used to measure competence and honor so that a competent and honorable worker has different options. This system would be set up for when there is a lot of work to be done and not a lot of time to try and sort it or dish out the work. It basically it an automated job auction system which would allow for people to log into it at any time and find some work to do for credits.

Keyhotee IDs do not eliminate Sybil attacks, they just make them more expensive.

I really believe that the concept of voting is flawed because it means giving control over your contribution to a mob who may vote to use it in a way that you think is wasteful.   Taken to an extreme, lets imagine that everyone felt a police force was necessary so they all volunteered to put money into a POT and then vote proportional to their contribution. 

Some people vote to enforce drug laws and those against the drug laws end up funding the police oppression.  While better than taxes, this is still a terrible way to allocate funds voluntarily contributed.

Voting is 0 risk and therefore there is no counterforce to discourage voting untruthfully.   In other words, I do not think that voting can reveal truth.  Markets on the other hand can reveal truth.  Someone who attempts to lie to the market by bidding up the value of something will end up swamped with sell offers.  Then they try to sell absent their demand they will lose money.   Market manipulation is only possible when the market participants lack information upon which to make a real value judgement and instead rely upon short-term market fluctuations to make decisions.   In a prediction market on something like, "what color is the sky on a clear day?" you would NEVER be able to manipulate that market to say the sky is green for any length of time without a flood of people rushing in to take the free money you are offering them.  Once you are bankrupt the market will revert to indicating the sky is blue.

On the other hand, if you put money in a pot to get the answer to the question, "what color is the sky?" and then ask participants to vote on the best answer to award the Pot then there is no cost to voting wrong and it would be easily manipulated any time there was profit to be made from it.

I support a hybrid of democratic and market processes. For example you do need people to vote on the quality of someone's contribution and on whether or not the job is complete. That process is a necessary function which can only be accomplished by a vote of some kind. A multi-signature transaction can be used along with escrow which releases or not depending on the up or down vote signal.

Here is the important point:

A badge system allows you to use the mechanism of inclusion to imbue an inner circle with special voting privileges. To earn a badge the candidate would have to be proven by passing the test and voted in by their peers, or the badge could be earned by being honorable allowing them to get special Honorshares, or anything the DAC creator wants. This allows the DAC creator to program the DAC to reward through inclusion the values that the DAC creator wants to bake into the DAC.

So if you do not support the drug war policies then you can simply set your DAC up to give Honorshares to anyone who has a proven track record of making contributions to DACs which do not support the drug war policies. There are probably more ways to do this but the badge system is powerful and should not be discounted.

« Last Edit: December 28, 2013, 02:59:40 AM by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

 

Google+