Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - liberman

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6
16
General Discussion / Re: Dividends 2.0 - A Simplified Implementation of Dividends and Honest Blockchains
« on: December 03, 2013, 12:25:26 am »
Inflation in Bitcoin is not perceived because the real value of the currency in relation to goods and other currencies is increasing very fast on average. From a point of view of a today user, s/he only sees that his/her coins gain in value over time, perceiving that as a fake deflation.
Infation is only a problem when you reach certain stability in real market shares, or when the decline starts. For example, what is happening to the dollar right now.

In my opinion, the ideal currency is the one which is able to expand/shrink (inflate itself by increasing/decreasing money supply) in the same ratio as market/exchange adoption does happen. So if you have 1 dollar today and are able to buy 1kg of apples, the ideal is that 20 years from now you can also buy 1kg of apples with 1 dollar.
This stability has many advantages. The first one being able to take loans and pay in a predictable way.
Do you imagine taking a loan today in bitcoins at $1000, and having to pay it when it is at $100,000? You would fail to pay, and this happens because money supply (inflation) is just not enough to support the incredible demand.
But how to implement this in a virtual currency? It is a problem if we don't want centralization, and centralization is precisely the biggest problem we want to avoid, for political reasons.

17
General Discussion / Re: WeTube - Initial economic model - programmers - the great winners
« on: December 02, 2013, 11:17:17 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on December 02, 2013, 10:01:14 pm
I think the forum needs to be updated so that admins/mods don't accidentally click modify when they mean to click quote or reply.

Yeah, it seems so. No problem. ;)

18
General Discussion / Re: WeTube - Initial economic model - programmers and thinkers - the great winners
« on: December 02, 2013, 09:22:46 pm »
UPDATE: including managers/thinkers/modelers

Please go up to read more.

19
General Discussion / Re: WeTube - Initial economic model - programmers - the great winners
« on: December 02, 2013, 09:17:00 pm »
Quote from:  Stan on November 27, 2013, 03:52:14 pm
Quote
It is also my opinion that the persons who do most of the efforts should be the initial shareholders of this company, just like it happens in the real world. Do you imagine Steve Jobs doing what he did knowing that he had only 0.0001% of the company he just created? No, he had a good share because he took the risks and has the ideas (it is irrelevant if after some years he sold them).
...
So I propose something that would not like very much to speculators, but certainly will motivate programmers and serius investors to do serius work here.
...
Because I know that there are people who want to invest but don't have any skills to contribute, we can also create a ProtoMediaShares, similar to what Protoshares is, that could be converted to WeTube DAC's shares at the launch, at some proportion. We are open to this proposition if we still give programmers something like 3/4 of the total initial shares. But some shares could be given to miners-only with a moral condition: please promote WeTube!
...
And what part of the stock do we reserve for programmers and miners? I propose 10% for programmers and 2.5% for miners. The 87.5% left is reserved for workers to be earn slowly once the system starts running. 10% is really a lot if we consider that this DAC could become the next Youtube.

Here is some innovative proto-DAC thinking that deserves to be highlighted outside its home thread.  I'd like to see more discussion about "acceptable" ways to motivate and enable more developers to develop more DACs.  After all, we as ProtoShareholders now have a vested interest in seeing lots of high-quality DACs fielded and backed by strong teams of developers willing and able to see them through to stand-alone autonomous operation.

Proto-DACs would seem to be a way to attract DAC-specific investors and developers the same way ProtoShares attracts global visionaries and industry leaders.

Stan,
What is this?  :o
You edited my message and removed parts of it?

20
General Discussion / Re: WeTube DAC - decentralized media provider - the future YouTube
« on: December 02, 2013, 08:06:41 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on December 02, 2013, 06:48:11 pm
You cannot verify bandwidth sharing in a global money supply.   You need long lived nodes with reputation and credit.   Each node must issue its own money and then trade these credits on automated markets. 

There is no block chain in this model.  You really need a ripple like model for the nodes but I suspect it will be too inefficient.   

I spent months designing tornet to find a workable economic model and you would do well to understand my design as a starting point for improvement.

I try to understand it fully, but I have some doubts.

Supposing that connections are never made directly from peer to peer, but they always pass through a chain of nodes like in Tor, each node can verify the amount of bandwidth that it delegates.
Propagation can happen in chunks (for example, 100K each), and every chunk comes signed from both the originator and the reciever, and all the nodes it traverses. For every block traversed, there is an amount of coins generated.
Now, I know what you are thinking: any malicious attacker can create a short circuit and become itself the originator, the nodes, and the receiver, creating money from nothing. I suppose this attack can be called "self-fake-serving". That is why I've been thinking about a solution that I have not yet written because there are some issues, but bassically it can be described this way:

Not a single node can choose the nodes it connects to, the receivers or the originators. Receivers and originators cannot, too.
A list of nodes and their IPs will be in a signed pool in the cloud, and downloaded by every single server every 10min. This pool must be signed by every server that wants to enter into the system, so for every IP listed there, there is a signature corresponding to the public key of the node using that IP. We can make this pool to be efficent to download updates, just by sending diff requests every time a new node is connected.
Now, when a reciever wants something, it is given a random node it must connect to. How to make it really random? We use a mathematical formula (I haven't thought about it yet) that relates his public address to the obtained hash of the full pool. Users trying to connect to a node which is not assigned are banned from the pool.
Nodes that doesn't transmit anything or transmit something which is not requested are banned from the pool and they can't earn nothing.
Recievers and nodes check that the node before it in the chain is acting correctly. If not, it marks that node "banned" in the pool, and then other nodes comes and verify that is true by checking what was solicited and what was served by the conflicting node. If it is true that the node is trying to scam, then the node is marked banned permanently (or for some period of time). If it is false that the node is not trying to scam, then the denouncing node is marked as banned.

Well, and how this relates to a block chain? I have yet to think it, but I'm thinking that every update to the pool could represent a new block. We can make the blockchain space-efficent by only storing changes from previus blocks. We could also protect IPs in some way so to make this fully anonymous, and I have to think about this too.

I'm wondering how your Tornet and  Proof-of-Stake ideas could be related to this.


21
General Discussion / Re: WeTube DAC - decentralized media provider - the future YouTube
« on: December 02, 2013, 06:41:56 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on December 02, 2013, 05:01:42 pm
Why mine if we can use Proof of Stake?

Can we apply this to a non-mining blockchain like wecoins, where money supply comes from bandwidth sharing and other services?

22
General Discussion / Re: WeTube - Initial economic model - programmers - the great winners
« on: December 02, 2013, 05:59:46 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on December 02, 2013, 05:03:49 pm
Most users would prefer to use a known coin to pay for services.  How would the WeTube service compete against a clone that switched to Bitcoin from WeCoin?

We need our own coin because money supply should be generated by bandwidth sharing and moderation services.
The interface will contain a wallet and a simple exchange interface, where sellers/buyers freely interchange bitcoins and wecoins with automatic escrow. An interface to bitshares is on your charge, as I think wetube should be a Bitasset.
Even more, we can work together to make a bitshares interface for the browser, and with the same codebase you can build bitshares for the web, while we just have to include a simplistic version in our user interface.
I'm thinking to open a new thread also for Keyhotee. The more I think this, the more I realize that Keyhotee should be implemented as a browser extension, with strong security in mind (to avoid scams). I have many ideas on this regard that we can share.

Read what I'm writing the next days, I'm having many explosive ideas.  ;)

23
General Discussion / Re: WeTube - Initial economic model - programmers - the great winners
« on: December 02, 2013, 01:58:41 pm »
Ok, you are right.
So I'm thinking another way, which is just separating MediaCoin from Wetube itself.
MediaCoin will be another virtual currency like Bitcoin, and WeTube is just a platform that uses it. There could be many other platforms.
MadiaCoin could represent the price of bandwidth propagation, which is the equivalent to the services of internet routers. Nobody accuses ISPs for what their users do, specially if they use encryption and cannot know what the user is doing. When the prosecutors want to find illegal activities, they go to those serving illegal content, not for the routers/ISPs. If they do so, then they should shut down Cisco and many other router services/companies. For example, they don't go against Tor nodes and your ISP, but against end hidden servers and users.

If you know about law, please read this and help us to design WeTube better:

http://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=1046.msg12451#msg12451

24
General Discussion / Re: WeTube DAC - decentralized media provider - the future YouTube
« on: December 02, 2013, 01:16:30 pm »
Wonderful!

We not only need programmers, also managers, legal advisers, thinkers, writers, etc.

Quote from: devilfish on December 02, 2013, 03:25:28 am
I' still very concerned about how your going to raise capital but anyways, not really a major concern for myself, setup and prove me wrong.

I'm thinking several ways. The original idea is to give capital (MediaCoins) to programmers. But still there will be other people who will not program/design but help the project itself. How to pay them? One way is by ProtoMediaShares, you can get in charge of that part if you want.
Another way, instead of mining, is to reserve a position between programmers, to those whose work cannot be measured by the amount of code/art they do, but more kind of management, studying, thinking, promoting. If we agree with this, I can create a new github repository only for papers, and the people contributing in that repository would receive their shares too. Legal advisers can publish their legal comments there. Managers/marketers  will publish their ideas there, too. There could be even spokesmans, paid in function of their videos/conferences. I will be moderating the repository to avoid abuses.
We can measure shares in proportion of the number of lines written, and we can also vote to give more shares to one specific area if we think it is more important.

Once the project is launched, new capital (money supply) is earned by sharing bandwidth and moderation, and all of this would be archived. This will be the equivalent of mining, but with real intrinsic value. The system can promote itself, because the first week everybody will enter the system to start sharing content in order to win cheap coins. I think this is just great! We can design the system such as the first week/month the difficulty of earning coins is low, and after that it returns to normal. Finally we can "mine" doing something useful.

If we are not able to agree with that, we can still return to your original idea of ProtoMediaShares. Proportion would be 10% to programmers and 2.5% to protoshares. We can negotiate that proportion.

So, the question now is for those with no programming skills: do you prefer to mine, or do you prefer direct payment for the papers you write?

25
General Discussion / Re: WeTube DAC - decentralized media provider - the future YouTube
« on: December 01, 2013, 10:35:01 pm »
I'm in contact with some GNUnet programmers, and there is a posibility that this project could be followed by the GNU organization itself.

We need to move forward. Next days will be critical. Please contact us at #wetube on freenode.

26
General Discussion / Re: WeTube DAC - decentralized media provider - the future YouTube
« on: December 01, 2013, 10:31:52 pm »
Forks will happen. It happened to Bitcoin, it will happen to Bitshares, it will happen to WeTube.

No way that serius programmers will get involved in anything just by offering mining. Bytemaster knows this very well.

Anyway, WeTube will have the equivalent of mining, but money will come from sharing bandwidth. Difficulty will be very low the first week, so for sharing many medias just the first day the alpha comes out, you the investor can earn a lot of coins. This will motivate people to enter very fast in the network and spread the word.
I predict the first week WeTube will be released, we will be in the news and in thousands of blogs very quickly. It will be really explosive.

I can open a private github account only for the protocol, and release the working source just the day before. Only protocol implementors will have access to this source code.

27
General Discussion / Re: WeTube DAC - decentralized media provider - the future YouTube
« on: November 30, 2013, 09:49:30 am »
Quote from: luckybit on November 28, 2013, 08:36:15 pm
Quote from: liberman on November 27, 2013, 04:59:01 pm
Quote from: luckybit on November 27, 2013, 04:51:26 pm
Quote from: liberman on November 25, 2013, 07:45:50 pm
Interesting, bytemaster.
But I think the problem with your original idea is about the people donating to the network.
This is different, as we are a truly substitute for Youtube. Free for users, but paid by advertisers.

I suggest you use micropayments. Then you don't need advertisers.

Please, elaborate.

Micropayments can be set so that every time we visit the site it extracts 0.0001 Bitcoin per minute. So you can do stuff like charge by the amount of time viewing a video. You can also do pay per view and charge per viewing a fee. I think not everyone wants ads and people need a reason to spend their various coins.

Why have cryptocurrencies if we aren't going to use them for stuff like this? It's divisible so why not exploit the fact that you can do stuff that YouTube cannot do? If you just play into YouTube's strengths you will lose. You will never match the advertisers of YouTube but with micropayments you don't need to. It's like the difference between Cable TV and regular TV.

Thank you for your ideas.
We are thinking ways to make the system free for general use while allowing servers, artists and moderators to win money. More info will come the next days.

28
General Discussion / Re: WeTube DAC - decentralized media provider - the future YouTube
« on: November 28, 2013, 09:16:36 am »
The rise of privacy

Privacy is a big problem today. Corporations and goverments keep track of everything yo do, and use the information they collect from you to make a profile of your personality that they then use to impose certain things and make decisions.

People tend to think that the information they collect from them is just for advertising purposes, but that is only a tiny part. And I will put some examples:

The main target are libertarians, anarcho-socialist, anti-capitalists, anarcho-captitalists, comunists, people aware of their rights as citicens, artists, media distributors (incorrectly named “hackers”), protestors, open source activicts, many minorities, people protesting against goverments regulations, people protesting against monopolies, scientifics out of the status-quo, and more. In a sense: people who embrace freedom, wether they are from the left or the right.

Wars are used as an excuse to impose vigilance and coercion against the people. Actual corporations want to earn money, yes, but the point is that, meanwhile, they are a tool to impose censorship and control. Any good company who is worried about their clients privacy is ussually forced to give all the information they gather to goverment agencies. And this is happening in most countries, some more than others.

But we belive in freedom and self-responsability. And privacy is vital at this point, because we must protect ourselves against censorship. It doesn't matter what you have to say, what are your ideas, if you can't spare them.

Important is also your economic privacy. Remember that most media providers requires you to give your credit card number in order to start downloading media, even if it is free media. iTunes and Google Play are examples. When you give your credit card to them, not only are you de-facto telling them who you are exactly, but you are telling banks and therefore goverment agencies what are you doing with your money. This is a very strong form of coercion to artits too, because that implies that only artits aproved by them can reach a sufficent audence to make a life.

So we embrace Bitcoin and derivatives for the economic parts of WeTube, because it allows anonymous and non-coercible transactions.

More importantly, we base our identity parts in Keyhotee, that has an impresive list of privacy and security features, including the posibility to register any nick in a completely distributed network, not owned by anybody, and therefore out of the information collectors. This is the only way today to obtain real private anonymous IDs.

Of course, we also protect your IP. Even if you need an internet connection to connect to WeTube, in the very moment you enter into it, your privacy is guarantied because all data travels encripted and completely distributed. So the only thing that a man in the middle can see is that you are connected to WeTube, but cannot know what are you truly doing.

But what about criminals? Couldn't they have inpunity in this system?

They can't have inpunity because this is a moderated system. Criminal activites sould be inmediatly rejected by most moderators. Illegalities could also be cut-off.

Yes, they could still broadcast media to the unmoderated area, but that area will be mostly ignored by normal people.

We believe that if you try to censor terrorists or psicopaths, the only thing you will obtain is a stronger response from those groups, and motivate them to use actual physical forces. Most moderators and users do understand that the best they can do is ignore criminals, or even better: create content that severely expose their badness and identities by investigations.

Also, we should consider that most people are actually good people and don't like violence. Most of the biggest threads to humanity did precisally came from wars and false-flag actions, of course motivated by the dark sides of goverments and bankers.

29
General Discussion / Re: WeTube - Initial economic model - programmers - the great winners
« on: November 28, 2013, 12:26:37 am »
Quote from: devilfish on November 27, 2013, 11:52:31 pm
I don't like the idea of centralising anything at any point especially programmers because the group could ultimately be held liable for the actions of the DAC.

As you say a coder may only be holding 0.0001% of a stock and there is no motivation for them to program, however if they really think it's a good idea then they can invest in the protoshares and gain a bigger stake. If they truly believe in the idea they will feel that the cost of buying a stake will result in a profit for them. If the price of the shares has risen out of their range this would probably suggest that there has been major progress within the DAC community and coders are already at work on final products.

The DAC coding should be looked at as a community process just like any open source project, hundreds of people contributing to the one source code to come to a final end. The more coders working the less each coder will need to do (in theory...practice is another thing which would assume all code is commented correctly and in a way that can be understood by all).

Ultimately I feel the issues you are raising are ones that a final DAC will have to handle but I don't think centralising the ownership to the developers of the software is a good idea if we want to eliminate liability and regulation.

Partition can be in private, and anyway, they can transfer their shares to many other accounts just after they receive them.

30
General Discussion / Re: WeTube - Initial economic model - programmers - the great winners
« on: November 27, 2013, 09:10:12 pm »
Quote from: bytemaster on November 27, 2013, 07:33:10 pm
We agree with your assessment and this is why we started DAC angels.  We are still working out the details but will publish something soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Too much to do and so little time we have...
That is why we should incentive the open source spirit and make these projects attractive for programmers.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 20 queries.