Author Topic: On Marketing and Priorities  (Read 16000 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline unimercio

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 245
  • The opportunity of a lifetime comes by every 7 day
    • View Profile
    • Conscious Entrepreneurship Foundation (CEF)
  • BitShares: unimercio
Unless you meant that it would be semi-centralized and not really a DAC

 +5% agreed, no need to be a purest. We need results, fast and cheap. Great idea though.
Conscious Entrepreneurship Foundation (CEF)

Offline fuzzy

I honestly think it's much easier to just convince I3 to give you guys a bunch of money to spend at your discretion. I would only devote precious DAC development resources to actual profitable DACs. Definitely a good idea in theory though.

If centralized job or bounty auctions are profitable, and centralized exchanges are profitable, why wouldn't it be profitable to build a decentralized job/bounty auction site and have a decentralized exchange?

Also once again why should the community exclusively rely on I3 to give us a bunch of money when we can just develop a DAC to decentralize the process of resource allocation? We can come up with an algorithm that we agree upon by consensus to be the most fair and then let the market go to work.

If people think shares in a DAC which handles resource allocation and bounties would be valuable why not develop it? I do agree it would take a lot of time and there are probably many other more important DACs to build first but I think if we are going the route of streamlined decentralization why shouldn't we go all the way?

If people in the community want to automate the process of crowd funding and allocating resources as much as possible why wouldn't that agenda be considered noble? It would make / allow DACs to organically build themselves from idea to finished product with an algorithm sending out shares according to Proof of Contribution. It of course would not be 100% autonomous because human beings would be working for the DAC doing things that cannot be automated but resource allocation is something which can be automated and Bitcoin proves that.

I think in the long term it's worth it to build it. In 5 years someone could come along, post an Angel address, people send money to it, and the DAC would take it from there. The autonomous agent would collect the funds and then start distributing it according to a pre-defined algorithm because certain tasks have to be repeated for every launch.

Make a power point presentation/whitepaper.
Make a main website.
Make a Facebook page.
Put website in signatures.
Create wiki.
Create articles promoting the DAC.
Debug and test the code.
Make blockexplorer.

All of the grass roots stuff could be simplified down to a script, and for humans a readable set of instructions which if followed step by step will create a fully functioning DAC. All of these tasks could be incentivized by distribution algorithm.

My lord, this would be amazing.  It would simplify the process for anyone coming after the initial creation and would serve as a launching point for "remixed" versions of each task stated above...
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
I honestly think it's much easier to just convince I3 to give you guys a bunch of money to spend at your discretion. I would only devote precious DAC development resources to actual profitable DACs. Definitely a good idea in theory though.

If centralized job or bounty auctions are profitable, and centralized exchanges are profitable, why wouldn't it be profitable to build a decentralized job/bounty auction site and have a decentralized exchange?

Also once again why should the community exclusively rely on I3 to give us a bunch of money when we can just develop a DAC to decentralize the process of resource allocation? We can come up with an algorithm that we agree upon by consensus to be the most fair and then let the market go to work.

If people think shares in a DAC which handles resource allocation and bounties would be valuable why not develop it? I do agree it would take a lot of time and there are probably many other more important DACs to build first but I think if we are going the route of streamlined decentralization why shouldn't we go all the way?

If people in the community want to automate the process of crowd funding and allocating resources as much as possible why wouldn't that agenda be considered noble? It would make / allow DACs to organically build themselves from idea to finished product with an algorithm sending out shares according to Proof of Contribution. It of course would not be 100% autonomous because human beings would be working for the DAC doing things that cannot be automated but resource allocation is something which can be automated and Bitcoin proves that.

I think in the long term it's worth it to build it. In 5 years someone could come along, post an Angel address, people send money to it, and the DAC would take it from there. The autonomous agent would collect the funds and then start distributing it according to a pre-defined algorithm because certain tasks have to be repeated for every launch.

Make a power point presentation/whitepaper.
Make a main website.
Make a Facebook page.
Put website in signatures.
Create wiki.
Create articles promoting the DAC.
Debug and test the code.
Make blockexplorer.

All of the grass roots stuff could be simplified down to a script, and for humans a readable set of instructions which if followed step by step will create a fully functioning DAC. All of these tasks could be incentivized by distribution algorithm.

« Last Edit: March 04, 2014, 07:04:44 am by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline bytemaster

I thought the initial fund raising ended with the feb. 28 snapshot. I3 has accumulated more than $2 million in the past 6 weeks from ags donations. I do not see how fundraising is what is necessary right now either. What is and has always been necessary is putting out a product.
Nope, fund-raising is scheduled to go for 199 days starting from Jan 1st. The 28th snapshot was just the freeze for BTS block chain.

Invictus has been pretty successful so far in raising money, I think, but I suppose there will be plenty of competition that can also raise a lot of money. I agree with you about the need to get out products, but I'd like to see us hire more people in order to speed up product development. Ideally, we should have enough marketing support from the community that Bytemaster can devote most of his time to product development, for example.

 +5%

I agree with the idea that we as a community, as investors, can and should take the initiative with marketing. Imagine if each of us were to upload very informative youtube videos on what this whole DAC concept is and what Bitshares are. Not only would we be saving valuable Angleshare money for infrastructure but we would also be helping in accelerating and increasing our returns.

I have a Youtube channel where I have about 2,000 subscribers and 700,000 views. I haven't been very active on my channel recently but that can change and perhaps I can help with uploading videos about Bitshares/Invictus Innovations/DACS/Bitshares PTS.

I'm open to suggestions

+1
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 toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
Unless you meant that it would be semi-centralized and not really a DAC
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
I honestly think it's much easier to just convince I3 to give you guys a bunch of money to spend at your discretion. I would only devote precious DAC development resources to actual profitable DACs. Definitely a good idea in theory though.
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
The basic idea seems to be similar to MyHammer, right?
http://www.myhammer.co.uk/
http://www.my-hammer.de/
http://techcrunch.com/2009/03/17/two-new-ways-to-find-a-job-auction-yourself-off-at-jobaphile-or-do-a-twitterjobsearch/
No not at all. The bounty exchange idea is based around the concept of a bounty auction. The purpose of a bounty auction is to reduce the costs of labor but it's not necessary good for long term jobs, or for quality.  Having it on an exchange could automate the process so we don't have to do it on a forum in the most centralized fashion.

The decentralized task list is a way to simulate mining using human labor to earn credits or shares in a DAC. This will allow a DAC to use an algorithm to allocate shares based on some Proof of Contribution.

Jobaphile is an example of the bounty auction idea in practice. It's called a job auction but it's supposed to serve the same function as the idea below only using cryptocurrency, pseudo-anonymous, decentralized, and the DAC itself gets some kind of fee for every completed job (fee structure could be figured out later but it's supposed to be a kind of job auction exchange business).

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=998.0

Any developers interested in the DAC ideas I presented, go to my threads on the subject and give suggestions. How could we kickstart the process? I believe once it's started it will be something which can ideally fund itself in the same way Bitshares is doing, or Bitcoin. The first step in the process that I can think of to kickstart is to offer a bounty for anyone who can figure out how to build this DAC in the form of a technical specification. The idea I put on the forum is the most basic outline but like I said before how exactly do you manage the angelfunds without centralization? You solve that problem and we can build the DAC.

For Bitcoin no one has to be paid to market it because as we market it the price goes up and the places we can spend it increases. So we get rewarded like employees indirectly. For Bitshares it's going to be harder because there is no network effect to rely on, but in other ways its going to be easier because Bitshares as a technology can do things Bitcoin cannot do such as be the launchpad for actual DACs with profit motives.


« Last Edit: March 04, 2014, 05:18:24 am by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline jae208

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 525
    • View Profile
I thought the initial fund raising ended with the feb. 28 snapshot. I3 has accumulated more than $2 million in the past 6 weeks from ags donations. I do not see how fundraising is what is necessary right now either. What is and has always been necessary is putting out a product.
Nope, fund-raising is scheduled to go for 199 days starting from Jan 1st. The 28th snapshot was just the freeze for BTS block chain.

Invictus has been pretty successful so far in raising money, I think, but I suppose there will be plenty of competition that can also raise a lot of money. I agree with you about the need to get out products, but I'd like to see us hire more people in order to speed up product development. Ideally, we should have enough marketing support from the community that Bytemaster can devote most of his time to product development, for example.

 +5%

I agree with the idea that we as a community, as investors, can and should take the initiative with marketing. Imagine if each of us were to upload very informative youtube videos on what this whole DAC concept is and what Bitshares are. Not only would we be saving valuable Angleshare money for infrastructure but we would also be helping in accelerating and increasing our returns.

I have a Youtube channel where I have about 2,000 subscribers and 700,000 views. I haven't been very active on my channel recently but that can change and perhaps I can help with uploading videos about Bitshares/Invictus Innovations/DACS/Bitshares PTS.

I'm open to suggestions
http://bitsharestutorials.com A work in progress
Subscribe to the Youtube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/BitsharesTutorials

Offline Markus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 366
    • View Profile
The basic idea seems to be similar to MyHammer, right?
http://www.myhammer.co.uk/
http://www.my-hammer.de/

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
Lucky, I would put PTS towards this if it gave me back the platforms token.   Is my understanding correct?

Yeah it would take in PTS and give out the platforms tokens using the same angel process to used to generate BTS. From there the bounty distribution mechanism would make the platform build itself as it's funded. The human participants would be paid in shares.

I presented this idea to the Mastercoin and Counterparty teams. It's going to be implemented independently by both of these teams. I originally posted the idea on this forum but no one paid much attention to it at the time. Bytemaster did comment on it but said he did not like the voting aspect of it but I see no better way of doing it besides with Proof of Stake voting.

I had wanted bounties to replace mining so that people have a way to mine with their labor in a way.

Lucky, that's a fantastic idea!  What's preventing this from being developed at the moment?

Funding and developers. It is likely being developed in the background in some form by the Mastercoin and Counterparty community but this is a DAC which is best suited for the Bitshares community because it's supposed to be profit driven.

If you can find a team of developers who are trustworthy enough, who have the right skills, then let's get started. One thing about Invictus being a corporation is you do have an easier time bootstrapping DACs.

The problem right now is how to bootstrap or crowd fund? There would need to be some sort of collateral or some trusted person behind it. Say we set up an angel fund then who is supposed to keep that fund safe? The technology isn't set up yet so that we can decentralize the management of funds so how would we do this? M of N transactions?

The bounty exchange is a lot easier though. We could build that as soon as Keyhotee and the reputation elements are in place to allow us to do ratings.


« Last Edit: March 04, 2014, 04:57:41 am by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline bitcoinba

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
I am interesting in investing and collaborating on this Luckybit.

Offline yellowecho

Lucky, that's a fantastic idea!  What's preventing this from being developed at the moment?
696c6f766562726f776e696573

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Lucky, I would put PTS towards this if it gave me back the platforms token.   Is my understanding correct?
« Last Edit: March 04, 2014, 04:40:23 am by AdamBLevine »
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
Why don't we do something similar to Peercoin's "Peer4Commit" project (http://peer4commit.com/)?
The community could basically vote with AGS/PTS which project they'd like next based on funding.  AGS could be forked and the chain used to fund projects but not otherwise tradable... or could be redeemed for PTS at a premium.


Here is my idea for a DAC which could solve these sorts of problems in an even more decentralized way.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=998.0

And it does not require a fork. All you have to do is create the DAC and then fill up a fund by using the angelshare process.

Below is how it works
Quote
Input: Human labor--> "Mining"
------------------------------------
DAC: Sort algorithm maintains a task list updated by humans stored in the blockchain, where the sort algorithm allows human beings to vote up or down to adjust the priority level "importance" of each task.
DAC: Value is determined by community voted task priority and popularity. If the task is very popular then "difficulty" shall rise to redirect the flow of labor to less desirable more important tasks.
DAC: Maintains a ledger or spreadsheet which constantly updates detailing which Keyhotee ID did which task.
DAC: Can hire human beings or scripts (autonomous agents) to do tasks either separately or working together. (Credits earned by a script can be used by the script to pay humans for the updating of the script)
------------------------------------
Keyhotee: Maintains reputations, allows for up or down votes, allows for notice of task completion which again receives up or down vote by a pool of trusted Keyhotee IDs to verify it as true or false. (As an administrator who verifies the work of others you would get paid to check whether or not others have completed their task and the greater your accuracy the better your credit rating or reputation for doing that particular task. You are like a referee for the system. This job may also involve preventing spammers, cheaters, other Keyhotee IDs will anonymously review your work and get paid on their accuracy as well)
------------------------------------
Output: Signature campaigns, website development, documentation, FAQs, tweets, YouTube videos, Facebook pages, memes, or anything else.

Output can be measured for success. If an output is considered a failure such as if it is spam, if someone did not follow the rules, or if it has a completely negative impact then that output can be reviewed during the verification process and credit score shall adjust based upon the result of that review. In most cases there should be nothing to review because reviewers would have to be compensated and the anonymous reviewers of those reviewers would have to get their cut as well so this action should be avoided unless a significant amount of people in the community vote for and pay for a review/audit.
------------------------------------
Social contract: Any DAC which wants to use the services of this DAC must set aside shares in their DAC to pay for its services. This DAC is to be set up for the benefit of the humans and autonomous agents who work for it and for the community as a whole to benefit from it.


Once the marketing fund is filled then the voters who filled it would determine how many shares are distributed for certain jobs. This DAC can later on be used for all kinds of tasks and the dividend can go to the initial shareholders who invested in the angel process.

Additional ideas which can be adopted right now and adapted to a decentralized marketing campaign. I don't think we should use Peer4Commit, why not use our own DAC technology to solve the centralization problem? If you're worried that power is being centralized into Invictus then use the DAC and angel process to decentralize it in a way which is profitable for angel investors (and that could include Invictus employees).

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?

In addition to the main idea
This idea is revised and refined here: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1413.msg15246#msg15246

A simple diagram could illustrate the conceptual infographic as:

Input: Human labor--> "Mining"
------------------------------------
DAC: Sort algorithm maintains a task list updated by humans stored in the blockchain, where the sort algorithm allows human beings to vote up or down to adjust the priority level "importance" of each task.
DAC: Value is determined by community voted task priority and popularity. If the task is very popular then "difficulty" shall rise to redirect the flow of labor to less desirable more important tasks.
DAC: Maintains a ledger or spreadsheet which constantly updates detailing which Keyhotee ID did which task.
DAC: Can hire human beings or scripts (autonomous agents) to do tasks either separately or working together. (Credits earned by a script can be used by the script to pay humans for the updating of the script)
------------------------------------
Keyhotee: Maintains reputations, allows for up or down votes, allows for notice of task completion which again receives up or down vote by a pool of trusted Keyhotee IDs to verify it as true or false. (As an administrator who verifies the work of others you would get paid to check whether or not others have completed their task and the greater your accuracy the better your credit rating or reputation for doing that particular task. You are like a referee for the system. This job may also involve preventing spammers, cheaters, other Keyhotee IDs will anonymously review your work and get paid on their accuracy as well)
------------------------------------
Output: Signature campaigns, website development, documentation, FAQs, tweets, YouTube videos, Facebook pages, memes, or anything else.

Output can be measured for success. If an output is considered a failure such as if it is spam, if someone did not follow the rules, or if it has a completely negative impact then that output can be reviewed during the verification process and credit score shall adjust based upon the result of that review. In most cases there should be nothing to review because reviewers would have to be compensated and the anonymous reviewers of those reviewers would have to get their cut as well so this action should be avoided unless a significant amount of people in the community vote for and pay for a review/audit.
------------------------------------
Social contract: Any DAC which wants to use the services of this DAC must set aside shares in their DAC to pay for its services. This DAC is to be set up for the benefit of the humans and autonomous agents who work for it and for the community as a whole to benefit from it.

We can create this DAC without permission from Invictus and fund our own marketing campaign as the first implementation of the DAC. The reason it should not be a DAC is because a centralized website can easily be shut down, you want it to be a blockchain or something difficult to turn off.

The other reason is you want this sort of DAC to be profitable for both the shareholders and the individuals fulfilling the tasks on the task lists or taking the bounties.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2014, 02:12:30 am by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads