Author Topic: .p2p auction parameter discussion  (Read 17524 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline yidaidaxia

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
@toast, would you pls update/clarify what's Auction Specification you are going to implement when BTS DNS launch?

I actually translated the "DNS .p2p Auction Specification (https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/wiki/DNS-.p2p-Auction-Specification)" the day before yesterday then I found there is some errors in the content then I notice it's an early June article then I went through this thread just now and found what I just introduced to Chinese community is really totally out of date......

I know Agent86's proposal and I know it might use another DLS and get implemented when BitAssets available.

So you may help me on below quesions:

Quote
D will be 0 and no 1) The initial required bid is 0.
2) Your required_bid is equal to (previous_bid + (R*(previous_bid - previous_required_bid))
3) When you place a bid, (D*(your_bid - previous_bid)) goes to dividends and (previous+bid + (1 - D)*(your_bid - previous_bid)) goes to previous bidder.

The initial required_bid will not be 0 and will decided by Delegates? So it will vary by different Delegates and how?

Will R still be 1 or a bit lower than 1 or very small like 0.1 or 0.2?

D is likely to be 1 and you will not have kickbacks when you are outbid, correct? The original bid you put will be returned to you totally or just a fraction of it (like 90% )?

What's the condition for a auction to be end?  a specific time after it starts?(then how long?) A specific quantity of blocks produced after it starts(then how many?) or other condition set by Delegates or the sellor?

How renewal rate to be set?

And I think we will reserve top current famous domains for maximize system value by deliver/sell them to the related company in future, so what's the detailed plan? top 100? 1,000? 10,000?

Thanks.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2014, 01:05:21 pm by yidaidaxia »
PTS: PmUT7H6e7Hvp9WtKtxphK8AMeRndnow2S8   /   BTC: 1KsJzs8zYppVHBp7CbyvQAYrEAWXEcNvmp   /   BTSX: yidaidaxia (暂用)
新浪微博: yidaidaxia_郝晓曦 QQ:36191175试手补天

Offline jae208

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 525
    • View Profile
I say toast should go with what he thinks is best based on his ideas and see how things go and if what he is doing isn't working than just try something different.
http://bitsharestutorials.com A work in progress
Subscribe to the Youtube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/BitsharesTutorials

Offline gamey

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

I think Toast should really look into partnering with namecoin on the adoption side.  If you can make one browser plugin that does all the top-level domains outside ICANN then I think everyone's chance of success goes up proportionately.  I mean I'm sure he's thought this and it has been discussed, but... If we're going to be pushing visions of what we think will help adoption..  Perhaps delegates can fund this.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline Agent86

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
  • BTSX: agent86
    • View Profile
Quote
First thing I do when this releases (if I don't just sell my shares) is buy every halfway reasonable sounding domain I can and promise never to sell them in hopes you guys start to "get it"
irrational actors are everywhere. Consider all possibilities!
It's not completely irrational :)  I think I would make more money if I can somehow convince them to make a valuable domain DAC than I would make by worrying about my shares in an ultimately flawed DAC that's of little use or value.

A domain registry is basically a spreadsheet with a list of domains with their corresponding list of owners.  Why should the rest of the world take our spreadsheet full of domain names snatched up by our little group of insiders and early adopters as the definitive spreadsheet?  Why is this spreadsheet more valuable or legitimate than anyone else who puts together a spreadsheet and assigns/sells the domains to other people?  You have to get the world to take it serious and the way it's currently proposed will not accomplish that.  I believe my idea will accomplish this.

Offline swedespade

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
    • About me
Quote
Yes, like a trapped investor turned troll.  You guys have created a bunch of potential that, so it seems like a plausible concern
.

I agree with Adam, see Agent86:

Quote
First thing I do when this releases (if I don't just sell my shares) is buy every halfway reasonable sounding domain I can and promise never to sell them in hopes you guys start to "get it"

irrational actors are everywhere. Consider all possibilities!
That being said, release and reiterate is a good to go by. You can spend years making a perfect system!

Quote
I expect shares to be trading on exchanges before domain sales begin

Having the shares released on exchanges first should mitigate most of this irrational squatting behavior IMO.
Working on media. A little extra goes a long way:)
BTC: 1FPc7dMfwS2j9HRDyxZxft29Ti57p5jum6
Cryptsy: 76331613e1e44f0f7e7f838c6df4c4e404150f4a

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Yes, like a trapped investor turned troll.  You guys have created a bunch of potential that, so it seems like a plausible concern.
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com

Offline toast

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
Yes.

If I spent $10,000 supporting invictus very early and that results in 10,000,000 domainshares for me, is it really so painful to spend 1000 each on 1000 promising domains ASAP?   Really the only one who can stop me is someone else who also bought in at cheap cheap prices because my actions do not make economic sense to someone coming in at this later point when the multiplier is so much worse.

I *love* this system, i'm just saying be real

(edit: maybe the disconnect is that I expect shares to be trading on exchanges before domain sales begin, and you expect it to be hard to buy shares while some people are able to buy domains?)

To make sure I understand: You are saying that, given a choice between $100 worth of dollars and a domain you think is worth $101, you'd pick the domain, because you obtained those $100 worth of shares for less than $100, whereas someone who does not yet own shares, given the choice between $100 worth of dollars and a domain they think is worth $101, would not pick the domain, because they have to get their $101 worth of domain for $100.

So you are telling me to anticipate a particular kind of irrational actor, and that the effect is made worse when there are many shares.

I'm totally open to any number of initial shares. What's good, 5 million? Are there other kinds of irrational behaviors I should expect if I make it too small?
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 AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Yes.

If I spent $10,000 supporting invictus very early and that results in 10,000,000 domainshares for me, is it really so painful to spend 1000 each on 1000 promising domains ASAP?   Really the only one who can stop me is someone else who also bought in at cheap cheap prices because my actions do not make economic sense to someone coming in at this later point when the multiplier is so much worse.

I *love* this system, i'm just saying be real
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com

Offline toast

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
Ok so let's use that analogy on the other extreme:

I pay $100 per year to list my personal webpage with a few download links to some crypto tools I built. A few days before my lease expires someone bids $200, I'm on vacation and they get it. Replace my download links with versions that steal everyone's keys.

So now what, we have to add some logic where when someone makes a bid above you there's some minimum time you get to re-bid before you actually lose the name? I guess that's not so bad, I just have to somehow notify all my users that my site is about to get compromised.

The more concerning scenario, actually almost identical to the one you said but formulated in a way that doesn't sound irrational: Big Corp sees that my site with its new brand is quickly gaining popularity, says to pay them $10k per month or else they'll buy my name for that much because it's worth it for them to not have competition grow even if it is not possible to monetize the users for that much. This also coincidentally happens near the end of my lease, because hey it takes about a year to build up a good brand.



@adam I imagine everyone will always be using $ value to judge and so I don't think initial supply or price per share matters at all. Let's just pretend we're using USD for these, all the points made by everyone else are still valid.

Toast, isn't the current strategy going to result in a lot of people having tens of millions of Domainshares each?   You can reckon it in whatever currency you want but if you are talking about relative prices, it seems safe to say an attacker can greatly amplify their attack by supporting invictus early and securing an overlarge share relative to your anticipated value of them for purposes like dns auction.

Still not following... if you have 1% you have 1%. I could make there be only 10 shares total, so what?

If you're saying that someone who buys in early will have lots of shares... again, so what? At any given point they have the choice of spending $X worth on a domain or $X worth on dollars. If they choose the domain over dollars and then that's equivalent to someone who has $X worth of dollars buying in and spending it on the domain. Are you saying it's psychological and that someone who has millions of shares will think of themselves as domainshares-rich and buy names they wouldn't have bought with equivalent value of dollars?
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 AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Ok so let's use that analogy on the other extreme:

I pay $100 per year to list my personal webpage with a few download links to some crypto tools I built. A few days before my lease expires someone bids $200, I'm on vacation and they get it. Replace my download links with versions that steal everyone's keys.

So now what, we have to add some logic where when someone makes a bid above you there's some minimum time you get to re-bid before you actually lose the name? I guess that's not so bad, I just have to somehow notify all my users that my site is about to get compromised.

The more concerning scenario, actually almost identical to the one you said but formulated in a way that doesn't sound irrational: Big Corp sees that my site with its new brand is quickly gaining popularity, says to pay them $10k per month or else they'll buy my name for that much because it's worth it for them to not have competition grow even if it is not possible to monetize the users for that much. This also coincidentally happens near the end of my lease, because hey it takes about a year to build up a good brand.



@adam I imagine everyone will always be using $ value to judge and so I don't think initial supply or price per share matters at all. Let's just pretend we're using USD for these, all the points made by everyone else are still valid.

Toast, isn't the current strategy going to result in a lot of people having tens of millions of Domainshares each?   You can reckon it in whatever currency you want but if you are talking about relative prices, it seems safe to say an attacker can greatly amplify their attack by supporting invictus early and securing an overlarge share relative to your anticipated value of them for purposes like dns auction.
Email me at adam@letstalkbitcoin.com

merockstar

  • Guest
@Agent86 I still do not see how you can't imagine someone with more money than you wanting to buy your name and doing something malicious with it. I would *never* rent a domain if I expect it to be possible for some rich guy I piss off to snipe it out from under me.
Ok, I'm trying to think of best way to explain how I see it.

Imagine you have a barber shop and you are leasing a space for your business (common practice).  You have been there 5 years and have prepaid your lease out by 5 years @ $12k/yr.  Now, your customers know your location, you have adds in yellowpages etc.  Some rich guy who wants to spite you (maybe the large hairdresser at other end of stripmall?)   He wants to raise your rent to $20k/yr.

God, I would LOVE to do this to my former employer (with in real life buildings).

They would totally up, shit themselves, and move over like 10K even though they make millions per store-- and they can't just put a store anywhere.

Thanks for carving a daydream Agent86, but yea I did read the whole post and saw where you went with it...

Offline gamey

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

Large corporations are not going to be buying p2p domains.  They don't want multiple domains. I am assuming this is supposed to be a free speech product with having domains that are protected against seizure.  You value free markets, but even with Toast's proposal the corporation can likely buy their domain off chain.  (Assuming they'd want it). 

You see 2p2 as becoming a definitive source.  I think ICANN and the centralized domain system works quite well for that.

It could always be forked with the 2 distinct target audiences and the corresponding fee structures.  In fact having 1 plugin do all of them wouldn't be a bad thing.  .bit, .p2p and .bizdir (or whatever)  It could help adoption imo.

Anyway.. I'll officially go mute before Toast offs me.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline Agent86

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
  • BTSX: agent86
    • View Profile
Agent86 -

p2p is going to appeal people specifically looking for anti-censorship.  Established businesses are not going to want to be on the domain with all the weird riff-raff.  Your idea might help the DAC in the longrun if it wouldn't  kill adoption. 

And it is censorship.  It isn't like a First Amendment level of censorship, but having someone be able to buy up your private domain for $XXX blows.  So now you have to pay extra.  With these concerns in the back of people's minds, who is going to be the early adopters?  I would think just squatters.  There is so many problems with adoption that adding FUD to this by the concerns expressed surely won't help.

With all due respect gamey, I don't think you are fully understanding my proposal.  There is no incentive for squatters.  People are not just "buying up your private domain"  they are buying it from you for your profit.  You also know full well going into things that if you get BestBuy.p2p for your electronics store down on the corner the day will likely come that you can't afford it and will want to sell.   Customers who we want to install plugins and use our DAC for ".p2p" domains will have WAY more respect for the system and will be much more likely to use it and install the plugin if they find that the registered domains have real appropriate content and BestBuy.p2p is owned by BestBuy not by your lame used electronics store.  I, for one, would absolutely be an early adopter.  I most likely wouldn't spend time on your other proposals for the similar reasons I don't have an interest in .bit domains from namecoin.  It is not censorship; anyone can lease a domain whether they are anonymous or not without any censorship.  They are leasing the domain and they know the rules going in.  It is a fools errand for people to be running around trying to buy your worthless domain to censor you, and it won't happen.  It probably just puts more options and/or money in your pocket so you can get your message out louder.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2014, 06:28:58 pm by Agent86 »

Offline Agent86

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
  • BTSX: agent86
    • View Profile
to clarify toast; in my proposal you are never "near the end of your lease"  because you just auto-extend your lease to the max allowed on a monthly basis or however often you like, so you always have a multi-year buffer time there.

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Agent86 -

p2p is going to appeal people specifically looking for anti-censorship.  Established businesses are not going to want to be on the domain with all the weird riff-raff.  Your idea might help the DAC in the longrun if it wouldn't  kill adoption. 

And it is censorship.  It isn't like a First Amendment level of censorship, but having someone be able to buy up your private domain for $XXX blows.  So now you have to pay extra.  With these concerns in the back of people's minds, who is going to be the early adopters?  I would think just squatters.  There is so many problems with adoption that adding FUD to this by the concerns expressed surely won't help.
I speak for myself and only myself.