Author Topic: CPOS (cooperative proof of stake) discussion thread  (Read 19108 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bytemaster

Is it not obvious that inflation is a brilliant way to force everyone to continually donate a tiny amount? Does it not effectively solve the tragedy of the commons problem? Are we sure our idealist attitudes are not interfering with our judgement? What does it matter that voting etc. on how to spend this influx of money is flawed, when we know that it can solve at least one problem that individuals as individuals can not, namely the situation where each donating a tiny amount would be rational if they all did it, but they do not do it since they can not be sure everyone or even anyone else does. Pending a perfect solution, do we not already know that we require both types of spending for the whole system to be supra-rational?

I think of it more like shareholders agreeing to a dilution in exchange for a capital infusion.    I think it is indeed a good idea in the short run and works well for DPOS.   Early on in a networks life transaction fees are unlikely to be sufficient to motivate growth.  They will merely cover costs.   

So I have thought about it some and recognized that no company pays a dividend while in its growth phase.   Only after it has matured does it start paying dividends.   

So paying 100% of transaction fees to the delegates is a middle ground.   Have the percent paid to delegates decrees down to 10% over 10 years as the network matures.   

On the other hand, paying dividends is marketing in its own right and is effectively paying every shareholder to grow the network.   

I think that transaction fees will more than cover infrastructure growth as the network grows. 
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 CLains

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clains
Is it not obvious that inflation is a brilliant way to force everyone to continually donate a tiny amount? Does it not effectively solve the tragedy of the commons problem? Are we sure our idealist attitudes are not interfering with our judgement? What does it matter that voting etc. on how to spend this influx of money is flawed, when we know that it can solve at least one problem that individuals as individuals can not, namely the situation where each donating a tiny amount would be "rational" if they all did it, but they do not do it since they can not be sure everyone or even anyone else does. Pending a perfect solution, do we not already know that we require both types of spending for the whole system to be supra-rational?

I have never read a book on economy in my life so feel free to point of where I go wrong here.

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
From the Bitcointalk thread:
Quote
I introduced a new thought that is not in the whitepaper and that is that the block creation reward, in addition to funding infrastructure and developers, could also subsidize transactions to the extent of negative transaction fees, should the abuse problem be addressed. Imaging paying Amazon or any other global Internet retailer a week's worth of block creation rewards, i.e. $13 million to get them to accept bitcoins as payment. I call this notion paying for order flow.
Would negative tx fees allow anyone to send coins back and forth and make money this way? Would the increased demand for coins through this way of making money overcompensate Bitcoin holders (on the one site the price might increases and on the other side negative tx fees have to be paid through dilution by holders)? 

Offline StephenReed

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Thanks for inviting me. It was enjoyable and will help me polish the presentation of my ideas. I plan to listen when I can to the progress of the bitshares project and learn what I can.

I linked to here from my bitcointalk forum project thread.

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
Thanks Stephen for presenting and discussing your approach on mumble.

You can find his white paper here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C4m-MFnxw0JjDorzrKs_IRQRqD9ila79o0IDt6KsbcE/edit?pli=1
Here is a relevant thread on BTT: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=584719.0;topicseen

This thread is for discussing CPOS by itself and in comparison with DPOS.

To me Stephen brought up a few new concepts.
1) Diluting shareholders as Bitcoin does now and spending this money / those coins on marketing ("paying Amazon to accept Bitcoin") instead of paying it to miners or shareholders - would this be an advantage to DPOS/bitshares? Also see Agent86's suggestion here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=4660.0
2) Autonomous agents (instances in the standard software everyone runs) select, testify and fire nodes and super nodes - where are the limits and the advantages of this approach?
3) Increasing scalability by establishing two layers of nodes (super nodes and full nodes) - would this be applicable and helpful for DPOS?

What other new concepts did you spot?

What is not yet clear to you?

Happy discussing!
« Last Edit: May 25, 2014, 01:52:17 am by delulo »