BitShares Forum
Other => Graveyard => Muse/SoundDAC => Topic started by: cob on June 04, 2014, 05:52:34 pm
-
Hey everyone.
Need some of your creative brain juice!
Fill in the blanks.
Blockchain name: Bitshares Music
Blockchain units: __________________ This is the currency our platform is going to use. EVERYTHING will be price in these units.
Artist Issued Assets: __________________ This is coin or token the artist sells to his fans to fund his career. Those assets need a family name. For example, RihannaCoin, EminemCoin, XzibitCoin, OneRepublicCoin, those would all be ____________. Just like a tree, another tree, and another tree and all a Forest.
So two things I need your input on. The unit of the Music DAC and the family name of the Artist Issued Assets.
Thanks!
-
...
Blockchain units: __________________ This is the currency our platform is going to use. EVERYTHING will be price in these units.
...
"Notes" would be the obvious choice for this, as it relates to musical notes.
Notes is also a slang term for that old money they had before crypto - referring to bank notes!
It'd be kind of ironic don't you think?
-
Blockchain units: shares
Artist issued assets: notes
-
Perhaps Decentralized Autonomous Clubs with Slices.
I think calling things shares, corporations, etc may draw unwanted attention and confusion. As much as I love the analogy.
-
Ugh.
Well, coins are already synonymous with blockchains, so...
Coins and Notes?
-
1. BIP, just like bitshares x
2. LyraAsset. Just like a star, another star, and another star and all a Lyra.
-
Which would you use for which?
Notes for the Blockchain Units? Or Notes for the artist issued assets.
Do you buy MetaliccaNotes with Something coin?
Or do you buy MetallicaCoins with Notes?
-
I think we may be better off leaving bips exclusive for bank and exchange chains.
I think notes are best fit for artist issued assets.
-
Yes, I think 'shares' might be troublesome. Even 'notes' has a legal connotation, though it's more of a civil law term, so probably less of interest to the government than to private parties (such as promissory notes, which are often called notes). For better or for worse, I think we should stick to 'play money' terms until regulations become clearer. The ideal terms would be some happy mixture of descriptive (e.g. coins) and fun (e.g. chips).
I do like 'slices'. Some other cool synonyms: chunks, doses, drags, bites, plums, whacks, rations, fragments, scraps, shreds, portions, atoms, flakes, slivers, drops, splinters, snippets, morsels, snatches. I'd like to buy some snatches, please.
For more playful terms (for 'shares' or artist-issued assets), how about jangles, jams, bling, skins, assets, dinero, hoohas, wampum, gravy, bread, scratch, chips, chords, riches...
Then there are the traditional 'coin' alternatives: bucks, bullion, reserves, mints, etc.
The concept of 'building blocks' might offer another metaphor: units, blocks, frames, bricks, parts, etc.
-
Will there be various types of artist issued assets, i.e. for artist, song and album?
-
Lets just call them 'votes'... how many 'votes' do you have, would you like to buy some of my 'votes'?
-
Yes, I think 'shares' might be troublesome. Even 'notes' has a legal connotation, though it's more of a civil law term, so probably less of interest to the government than to private parties (such as promissory notes, which are often called notes). For better or for worse, I think we should stick to 'play money' terms until regulations become clearer. The ideal terms would be some happy mixture of descriptive (e.g. coins) and fun (e.g. chips).
I do like 'slices'. Some other cool synonyms: chunks, doses, drags, bites, plums, whacks, rations, fragments, scraps, shreds, portions, atoms, flakes, slivers, drops, splinters, snippets, morsels, snatches. I'd like to buy some snatches, please.
For more playful terms (for 'shares' or artist-issued assets), how about jangles, jams, bling, skins, assets, dinero, hoohas, wampum, gravy, bread, scratch, chips, chords, riches...
Then there are the traditional 'coin' alternatives: bucks, bullion, reserves, mints, etc.
The concept of 'building blocks' might offer another metaphor: units, blocks, frames, bricks, parts, etc.
How about "vibes" for artist-issued assets? That seems to go well with Arabic numbers (Artist X's ranking increased today by +100,000 vibes... list of top movers for the day and the week, etc.). The term 'vibe' also has at least some connection with the whole music theme of the DAC.
On a side topic--if using the word "share" is problematic from a regulatory perspective, maybe "stake" or "claim" would be better. Users would probably be more excited if the language makes it clear that they're participating financially as stakeholders and can "buy in" and "cash out" sometime in the future. On the website they can be given options to "buy a stake", "sell a stake", etc. Also, instead of using the byline "Own your share", perhaps "Stake your claim" or "Claim your stake" would cause fewer regulatory problems?
The interview with Eddie and cob was really good stuff, quite heartening and informative. Can't wait to see the website...
-
Blockchain units: Notes
Artist Asset : Riffs or Vibes (eminemRiff RhiannaVibe)
so many notes on that Riff
-or-
Blockchain units: Riffs
Artist Asset: Vibes
so many Riffs on that Vibe
-
Blockchain name: Bitshares Music
Blockchain units: Votes
Artist Issued Assets: Clubs
This should be relatable for music fans.. clubs as an asset class because it relates to a "fan club" and votes as a unit so all fans can "vote" on the direction of the "club". It basically decentralizes fan clubs and incentivizes fans to be active in the project. It's also an interesting direction because fans in the club could cash in their votes for tangible products like performance tickets, merch, downloads, etc.
Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like this could potentially help alleviate issues with bands not being properly paid by venues too... "Vote for our band to play ___ music hall!" Similar to kickstarter, if enough votes are collected then the band could pay the venue for the stage and pocket the rest!
As a musician, I'm really looking forward to this project! Fundraising for studio time, production, promotion, distribution, etc would be sooo helpful. Bands currently use kickstarter which is fine but it doesn't empower or incentivize fans for their time and money.. and it's inflexible in its "prizes".
-
Blockchain units:
Personally I think this might partly depend on the name of the Domain you end up getting.
Artist issued asset:
I would stick with stocks or coins. The only other alternative I can think of is 'Team'
Everyone wants to be on a team, support their favourite team etc. 'Team-JayZ'
EVERYTHING will be price in these units.
I would consider pricing the songs and artist stocks in $ for the first year, with the price in our currency in brackets behind it. (These $ prices will be more familiar to the average user as well as the fact that listing songs and stocks in our currency would make them very volatile.)
Example: As alt-coins tend to be priced in Bitcoin on the exchanges, their $ price tends to rise and fall depending on Bitcoin's price. I suspect Bitshares Music price would be very volatile in the first year but we want the price we charge for songs to be stable and the stock prices of our artists to move independently on their own news. Just pricing songs, stocks and graphs in $ with our conversion in brackets behind should largely address this.
-
I like "notes" for general asset and "vibes" for per-artist asset.
Example: As alt-coins tend to be priced in Bitcoin on the exchanges, their $ price tends to rise and fall depending on Bitcoin's price. I suspect Bitshares Music price would be very volatile in the first year but we want the price we charge for songs to be stable and the stock prices of our artists to move independently on their own news. Just pricing songs, stocks and graphs in $ with our conversion in brackets behind should largely address this.
Unless BitUSD is confirmed to work and added to bitshares music, the blockchain has no control over USD-denominated trades. Centralized altcoin exchanges price things in BTC for a reason - they aren't trading USD!
-
I like "notes" for general asset and "vibes" for per-artist asset.
Example: As alt-coins tend to be priced in Bitcoin on the exchanges, their $ price tends to rise and fall depending on Bitcoin's price. I suspect Bitshares Music price would be very volatile in the first year but we want the price we charge for songs to be stable and the stock prices of our artists to move independently on their own news. Just pricing songs, stocks and graphs in $ with our conversion in brackets behind should largely address this.
Unless BitUSD is confirmed to work and added to bitshares music, the blockchain has no control over USD-denominated trades. Centralized altcoin exchanges price things in BTC for a reason - they aren't trading USD!
Centralized altcoin exchanges price things in BTC for a reason - they aren't trading USD!
Regards the pricing of songs...
If a song is priced @ $0.5 it simply means when you buy a song you will be charged $0.5 worth of Bitshares, thereby giving you a stable and advertisable price. (As opposed to saying a song costs 1 Bitshare or whatever, the $ value of which will fluctuate wildly.) This is far preferable and doesn't require BitUSD.
- If 1 Bitshare currently trades @ $0.5 then 1 Bitshare per song would be deducted from your account & the artist would receive 1 Bitshare per download that day.
- If 1 Bitshare currently trades @ $0.25 you would have 2 Bitshares deducted from your account to purchase a song & the artist would get 2 Bitshares per download.
Regards the pricing of stocks...
Traders often keep the alt-coins around their current BTC specific level, because exchanges currently force them to place their buy and sell orders at BTC levels, thereby making them mirror Bitcoin price fluctuations more than they need too.
Eg. Bitshares is listed and graphed currently @ 0.0063 BTC (Which is also convertible to $4.16 each.)
Buyers are putting in orders below 0.0063, sellers are putting orders in above.
If Bitcoin's price doubles, Bitshares buyers will end up paying $8+ for a Bitshare even though it may still only be 0.0062 BTC. Thereby making Bitshares track Bitcoin as opposed to moving more independently.
If on the other hand the exchange showed the $4.16 price with (0.0063 BTC) in brackets and the graph also showed the dollar conversion. Then traders would have the option to put in buy and sell orders around that dollar price instead.
So when you place a buy order for Bitshares at $4. The exchange will simply buy Bitshares with Bitcoin when the conversion rate for Bitshares priced in Bitcoin equals $4. This does not require BitUSD. But making that adjustment would allow alt-coins or other assets to move more independently and fluctuate closer to a $ price rather than mirroring Bitcoin's price.
The concept may be easier to see if we had 'Silvercoin' which was redeemable for one real ounce of silver.
Traders wouldn't want to put in buy orders at volatile BTC levels but rather $ levels.
The exchange would simply calculate the current dollar value of Silvercoins, (Even though it is traded in Bitcoin) & when that current $ value hit your buy and sell level the purchase or sale would be made in Bitcoin.
-
I understand your point, and I'm saying without BitAssets you can't do it, you can only price things in terms of the asset and then show $ conversion on the site (which would fluctuate). The frontend website is not going to be a centralized exchange company.
If a song is priced @ $0.5 it simply means when you buy a song you will be charged $0.5 worth of Bitshares, thereby giving you a stable and advertisable price. (As opposed to saying a song costs 1 Bitshare or whatever, the $ value of which will fluctuate wildly.) This is far preferable and doesn't require BitUSD.
For this to be possible, there would have to be a price feed from the centralized exchange into the blockchain. This would mean some central exchange site and the DAC would be intertwined and interdependent - unless the centralized site also had a USD exchange outside of the DAC.
The concept may be easier to see if we had 'Silvercoin' which was redeemable for one real ounce of silver.
So why haven't we seen a "silvercoin" yet? This is the entire purpose of BTS X - allowing you to trade in terms of an arbitrary asset value on a blockchain, without a price feed.
-
Of course if Eddie and Cob plan to run an proper exchange as well then this is possible - just not through the actual wallet client, they would be facilitating trades on behalf of their users.
-
notes and vibes are definitely outstanding the rest
so many notes on that vibe +5%
-
Of course if Eddie and Cob plan to run an proper exchange as well then this is possible - just not through the actual wallet client, they would be facilitating trades on behalf of their users.
Yes I think that is what I'm thinking of. I thought they said in the interview they were running a centralised front end that would be letting people use different payment methods etc. so I thought something like this would be possible. Though it is pretty late here...
Edit: I'll come back to it the morning. In my head it still seems this is possible without BitAssets. like just using conversion rates.
-
What we really need is Eddie or Cob to explain to give one explanation so that we're all on the same page :P
(I still don't know the exact incentive model behind how the shares (vibes?) work)
-
What we really need is Eddie or Cob to explain to give one explanation so that we're all on the same page :P
(I still don't know the exact incentive model behind how the shares (vibes?) work)
Thanks for the replies anyway.
With a known $ to BitsharesMusic share exchange rate, which may require a feed from an exchange.
I think both my things are possible. Because it doesn't require being able to hold the value of a $ like a bit-asset can, but just reference that exchange rate to determine how many Bitshares Music units to charge for a song or when a buy/sell order for non $ denominated stock should be activated.
Sorry for the thread derail guys.
-
Blockchain units: Grooves (A-Sides)
Artist Asset: Groovecoins (B-Sides)
Or am i just not getting it..
-
Blockchain units:
Personally I think this might partly depend on the name of the Domain you end up getting.
+5%
I would consider pricing the songs and artist stocks in $ for the first year, with the price in our currency in brackets behind it. (These $ prices will be more familiar to the average user as well as the fact that listing songs and stocks in our currency would make them very volatile.)
or bitUSD ? ;)
-
My concern with 'grooves', 'vibes', or 'notes' is that they'll be more difficult to market and understand for the end user. It seems like it would be easier to explain what 'votes' or 'slices' are in relation to the asset than 'vibes'. How much does it cost to play a song on the jukebox? 50 vibes? Or 20 votes?
We should consider the context in which they'll be used.
-
My concern with 'grooves', 'vibes', or 'notes' is that they'll be more difficult to market and understand for the end user. It seems like it would be easier to explain what 'votes' or 'slices' are in relation to the asset than 'vibes'. How much does it cost to play a song on the jukebox? 50 vibes? Or 20 votes?
We should consider the context in which they'll be used.
I hear what you are saying. But wouldn't you agree the majority audience for the Music DAC (initially) are for the younger generation? To start with anyway. They are more familiar with the 'vibe or 'groove' term. 'Votes', (my daughter anyway) would assume 'oh that must be boring' ie associate with politics or something. I just feel the whole branding, which has to be nailed from day one - needs to be young and 'jazzy'. Forgive the cheese.
-
My concern with 'grooves', 'vibes', or 'notes' is that they'll be more difficult to market and understand for the end user. It seems like it would be easier to explain what 'votes' or 'slices' are in relation to the asset than 'vibes'. How much does it cost to play a song on the jukebox? 50 vibes? Or 20 votes?
We should consider the context in which they'll be used.
I hear what you are saying. But wouldn't you agree the majority audience for the Music DAC (initially) are for the younger generation? To start with anyway. They are more familiar with the 'vibe or 'groove' term. 'Votes', (my daughter anyway) would assume 'oh that must be boring' ie associate with politics or something. I just feel the whole branding, which has to be nailed from day one - needs to be young and 'jazzy'. Forgive the cheese.
Personally I think we might be trying to create new words for concepts that already exist - Stocks and Shares.
Hollywood Stock Exchange for example trades movie stocks and shares. They could have created jazzy new names for movie specific stocks, 'slices of pie' 'bits of a box' 'notes on a blockbuster' but we'd probably still end up just calling them shares in movie stocks, it's just a format that hadn't previously been offered before.
I'm not against making something creative and interesting I just think as it's a new concept - trading shares in Artists/Songs it could be best to make the terminology, currencies and layout as simple, clear and familiar as possible to the average person.
(unless there are legal considerations etc.)
(Though as I said before, if the domain name is catchy there might be something that comes naturally off that, which people start using to refer to trading in artists and music in general.)
-
Personally I think we might be trying to create new words for concepts that already exist - Stocks and Shares.
Hollywood Stock Exchange for example trades movie stocks and shares. They could have created jazzy new names for movie specific stocks, 'slices of pie' 'bits of a box' 'notes on a blockbuster' but we'd probably still end up just calling them shares in movie stocks, it's just a format that hadn't previously been offered before.
I'm not against making something creative and interesting I just think as it's a new concept - trading shares in Artists/Songs it could be best to make the terminology, currencies and layout as simple, clear and familiar as possible to the average person.
+5%