BitShares Forum

Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: luckybit on May 19, 2014, 09:53:13 am

Title: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 19, 2014, 09:53:13 am
The purpose of this DAC is to make a portable app which can run on a cellphone allowing anyone running it to ask verified doctors around the world about health related questions.

Doctors would be incentivized with a healthare payment in exchange for answering questions.

Patients will buy healthshares and then save them for a time when they need a doctors expert advice.

These healthshares should be presold to the market. Airdrop to selected healhcare professionals to get the ball rolling. 50% reserved for for PTS/AGS holders and 30% for presale, 20% for airdrop.


This method can work for the legal industry as well.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: santaclause102 on May 19, 2014, 12:12:55 pm
Is a great idea! But it is not a DAC and could be done with any crypto currency that is not associated with the platform....
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: crazybit on May 19, 2014, 03:56:03 pm
the centerlized "askdoctor" similar website/app has been working very well,it is easy and convenient to use it,and it has been widely accepted by people,i do not see a big incentive to build it as a DAC,we can not decenterlize business only for decenterlization.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 19, 2014, 04:29:26 pm
the centerlized "askdoctor" similar website/app has been working very well,it is easy and convenient to use it,and it has been widely accepted by people,i do not see a big incentive to build it as a DAC,we can not decenterlize business only for decenterlization.
We can decentralized the centralized businesses if it's profitable to do so. If it's profitable and would be better off decentralized you've not made a good case for why we should avoid making money by doing it.

I don't think you get it. If it can be profitable and decentralized why would you need a centralized version?

We could make the money that the centralized business currently makes. Doctors could make money in decentralized crypto-currency. Does the current similar websites take Bitcoin? Do we need more centralized websites where users are forced to store their sensitive health information so it can be hacked?

Not only could you make it more private for users, you could make it more flexible for doctors, and remove all the overhead of having to run it in a centralized way. It's a waste of money to run it in a centralized way when you could save that money doing it in a decentralized way.

Over time you could do more than just ask doctors questions, you could be diagnosed, you could get legal services, all sorts of stuff. I say if it's profitable and can be done better decentralized then it's worth doing just because of that.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 19, 2014, 04:49:29 pm
Is a great idea! But it is not a DAC and could be done with any crypto currency that is not associated with the platform....

Of course it's not a DAC yet, because it hasn't been made yet. Saying it's not a DAC is like saying the only thing which can be a DAC is currency. Just because it's not a DAC yet doesn't mean it wouldn't be better for us if we had such a DAC.

Think of AskADoctor as a decentralized information service which utilizes the free market to produce the highest quality information. The current centralized versions of these ideas, how exactly are doctors paid? Where is your information stored and how easily is it stolen? Who owns the business? How autonomous is it?

My guess is that either doctors aren't being paid at all or they are paid behind the scenes by the users. They probably aren't paid in Bitcoin or any cryptocurrency which means you wont be able to use cryptocurrency to pay them (which reduces your flexibility greatly). The market probably doesn't determine how much doctors get paid so what exactly determines that true value of the information being offered?

And those centralized sites might or might not scale but lets assume they do scale up, then why would we want to not turn it into a DAC so it can scale up in a decentralized fashion?

In a DAC you can for example use market incentives to encourage Doctors to give honest answers to popular questions. You can use a blockchain technology to store reputation and transaction history.

Assume it's 3 years from now and we have decentralized peer to peer healthcare and insurance. Let's also assume we have sensors connected to us now which can monitor our health, we have plenty of information being collected, but we want to ask a question to the blockchain itself and attach a reward for whomever answers it? I think we should be able to do this and I don't think the centralized way has any advantages.

Doctors and patients can set it up on their end to accept questions at a certain price or perhaps even create a market around that. The fact is we need to decentralize it and bring the free market into it. In the long term picture if AI becomes a big thing then perhaps the blockchain itself might be able to diagnose you.

Overall healthcare itself is extremely inefficient and I think stuff like this can make it much more efficient. I also don't see a reason to have a centralized website when we would have DomainShares, MaidSafe, Ethereum and all that.

http://www.qmed.com/news/ibms-watson-could-diagnose-cancer-better-doctors
http://www-03.ibm.com/innovation/ca/en/watson/watson_in_healthcare.shtml
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 19, 2014, 05:02:01 pm
I admit the AI component may or may not be easy to accomplish. Assume for sake of argument that we can have something like a decentralized Watson attached to a blockchain allowing us to ask both the doctor and the blockchain?

The blockchain could diagnose you if it receives the right information. The doctor can answer your questions if they receive the right information. How much would you be willing to pay for this?

The blockchain never sleeps and is always on. It cannot be shut down. Diagnoses and advice would trend toward the truth. It could be designed so that the more you pay it the more computing resources it will use to diagnose you. Doctors could be paid as well and their opinions can be rated. Prediction market functions could be built into it as well. It could be so private that it wouldn't require you to have anything but a BitID or KeyhoteeID.

Tell me why it couldn't or shouldn't be a DAC.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: donkeypong on May 19, 2014, 05:02:57 pm
Theoretically, you could do this for any professional service: medicine, veterinary medicine, psychology, law, accounting. One trick would be licensing and regulation. In the U.S., these professions largely are regulated at the state level, so someone operating nationally would need a lot of licenses. Better yet, with enough scale, the organization could be big enough to have experts in every populous state and foreign jurisdiction. And why stop with those professions? Astrologers, odds makers, meditation gurus, personal trainers...
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 19, 2014, 05:07:32 pm
Theoretically, you could do this for any professional service: medicine, veterinary medicine, psychology, law, accounting. One trick would be licensing and regulation. In the U.S., these professions largely are regulated at the state level, so someone operating nationally would need a lot of licenses. Better yet, with enough scale, the organization could be big enough to have experts in every populous state and foreign jurisdiction. And why stop with those professions? Astrologers, odds makers, meditation gurus, personal trainers...

Here we go with the regulation killing innovation. What if this technology could save your life, do you care more about regulation?

You're right we would have a problem with peer to peer health insurance, as well as these decentralized information services. The only question we should be asking is if it's technically possible, because we don't control the government.

Of course you want to make sure every doctor is licensed because bad doctors will give bad advice but I think we will need this service. Does it make sense to go to a doctors office or make a phone call to a doctor or to send our private information to a centralized easily hacked website when we can do it in a better way? Can we use market incentives to optimize for good advice from the general population?

Obama's healthcare.gov was absolutely terrible by design but the government spent a fortune to launch that centralized website which isn't even future proof. The government does not tend to design in a future proof manner. We need to design a better way of doing healthcare which is future proof and figure out how to regulate it technologically so that we don't need to use as much of the old fashioned regulation strategies.

Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: santaclause102 on May 19, 2014, 05:09:21 pm
Quote
Tell me why it couldn't or shouldn't be a DAC.
DAC doesnt just mean internal currency. To me it is required to call it a DAC that the service itself (no only the currency used in the system) depends on a public ledger. You could distribute the data about the docs maidsafestyle across many computers. But I guess that would be limiting to the service and it for sure is complicated. The question is what do you win there? A centralized system is always cheaper and can hand this low costs on to the users...
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 19, 2014, 05:18:42 pm
Quote
Tell me why it couldn't or shouldn't be a DAC.
DAC doesnt just mean internal currency. To me it is required to call it a DAC that the service itself (no only the currency used in the system) depends on a public ledger. You could distribute the data about the docs maidsafestyle across many computers. But I guess that would be limiting to the service and it for sure is complicated. The question is what do you win there? A centralized system is always cheaper and can hand this low costs on to the users...

I don't think a centralized system is cheaper at all. And I'm not just talking about having some internal currency with a website. The web app would only be the front end.

At the core you need a public ledger because there should be actual markets and market functions. For example if you take counterparty and how that works you can offer to buy or sell something. What if you want to sell an answer to a question? What if you want to buy an answer to a question? What if you want professionals to bet on whether or not the answer is correct?

When the question is answered then you need a public ledger to track who answered it and how correct they are so that reputations can be built. You also need to keep track of the price of certain information using a sort of bid and ask.

A centralized website definitely wouldn't be cheaper because you cannot scale it in the same way. Assume MaidSafe works and we can have cheap storage and computing resources which can scale? If that is the case why would you run a centralized website which you have to pay or charge customers some sort of subscription fee when you can let it pay for itself?

Some unknowns are whether or not they can really do distributed computation and put something like Watson on top of MaidSafe or on top of some decentralized network. Let's say that becomes possible?

The decentralized version of this business is future proof and if it does become possible then you now have an abundance of computing power to diagnose people with (along with the advice/opinions of doctors). If you're doing it centralized are you saying it makes sense to build the super computer yourself and compute with that? What happens when it's time to upgrade or maintenance costs? Oh and don't forget you have to store patients most private information on some central server which makes absolutely no sense if something like MaidSafe works at all.

Patient information could be secured by the fact that patients are anonymous. Only they would have the private key, only they would control who can access their medical records.

Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: santaclause102 on May 19, 2014, 05:39:07 pm
Quote
Tell me why it couldn't or shouldn't be a DAC.
DAC doesnt just mean internal currency. To me it is required to call it a DAC that the service itself (no only the currency used in the system) depends on a public ledger. You could distribute the data about the docs maidsafestyle across many computers. But I guess that would be limiting to the service and it for sure is complicated. The question is what do you win there? A centralized system is always cheaper and can hand this low costs on to the users...

I don't think a centralized system is cheaper at all. And I'm not just talking about having some internal currency with a website. The web app would only be the front end.

At the core you need a public ledger because there should be actual markets and market functions. For example if you take counterparty and how that works you can offer to buy or sell something. What if you want to sell an answer to a question? What if you want to buy an answer to a question? What if you want professionals to bet on whether or not the answer is correct?

When the question is answered then you need a public ledger to track who answered it and how correct they are so that reputations can be built. You also need to keep track of the price of certain information using a sort of bid and ask.

A centralized website definitely wouldn't be cheaper because you cannot scale it in the same way. Assume MaidSafe works and we can have cheap storage and computing resources which can scale? If that is the case why would you run a centralized website which you have to pay or charge customers some sort of subscription fee when you can let it pay for itself?

Some unknowns are whether or not they can really do distributed computation and put something like Watson on top of MaidSafe or on top of some decentralized network. Let's say that becomes possible?

The decentralized version of this business is future proof and if it does become possible then you now have an abundance of computing power to diagnose people with (along with the advice/opinions of doctors). If you're doing it centralized are you saying it makes sense to build the super computer yourself and compute with that? What happens when it's time to upgrade or maintenance costs? Oh and don't forget you have to store patients most private information on some central server which makes absolutely no sense if something like MaidSafe works at all.

Patient information could be secured by the fact that patients are anonymous. Only they would have the private key, only they would control who can access their medical records.

You have many great ideas! But you can have most (maybe all) of that on a central server: Bid/Ask (like ebay), replier tacking, database (like wikipedia). You can automate everything on one server too. And user side is decentralized anyway already. With a DAC the accounting side of things would be decentralized in addition. Everytime you want to make a tx it costs. Decentralized payments are always more expensive than a similar centralized version. What you get from decentralization is a big degree of trustlessnes but it costs. All bitcoin transactions together (about 400 in 10 Minutes) cost 25 BTC ever 10 minutes (28USD on average for 1 tx). With POS it is significantly lower but more (I dont know how much) than if you change one ledger on one server. I tried to find out about the costs of a DPOS system here... I dont know how low it can get...
 
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: donkeypong on May 19, 2014, 06:03:33 pm


Here we go with the regulation killing innovation. What if this technology could save your life, do you care more about regulation?



Actually, I suggested a way around it in my earlier response. I agree with you that the health care system is a mess and people deserve better. Maybe this can be part of the solution.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: mf-tzo on May 19, 2014, 08:45:04 pm
I like the idea and actually to be applied in all kind of professions not only healthcare somehow...

Quote
What if you want to sell an answer to a question? What if you want to buy an answer to a question? What if you want professionals to bet on whether or not the answer is correct?
[/b]

 +5% to the above but...

I don't think it is very easy though since everyone can search on the net for healthcare advice from doctors and anything basically for free. But even if you can find anything you want for free people still visit their doctor who they know and trust.

Therefore for healthshares or any other proffesionshare to succeed people behind those shares should be well known names and not anyone. And if you find those few strong names and you form the DAC team it is again centralised and no different than just pay them for advice.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: gamey on May 19, 2014, 10:05:40 pm
I like the idea and actually to be applied in all kind of professions not only healthcare somehow...

Quote
What if you want to sell an answer to a question? What if you want to buy an answer to a question? What if you want professionals to bet on whether or not the answer is correct?
[/b]

 +5% to the above but...

I don't think it is very easy though since everyone can search on the net for healthcare advice from doctors and anything basically for free. But even if you can find anything you want for free people still visit their doctor who they know and trust.

Therefore for healthshares or any other proffesionshare to succeed people behind those shares should be well known names and not anyone. And if you find those few strong names and you form the DAC team it is again centralised and no different than just pay them for advice.

Yep. Bingo!  If Google does the same job just as well, where is the value ?  Google will answer just about any question with multiple well thought out answers.  The only difference that I can see here is that you'd be assured the answer comes from a doctor.  Doctor's aren't perfect by any stretch.  I suppose you get to interact with a doctor, but most doctors want to give physical examinations.  Otherwise a person would be just as well to sit in front of an expert system and be diagnosed.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 20, 2014, 04:22:36 am
Quote
Tell me why it couldn't or shouldn't be a DAC.
DAC doesnt just mean internal currency. To me it is required to call it a DAC that the service itself (no only the currency used in the system) depends on a public ledger. You could distribute the data about the docs maidsafestyle across many computers. But I guess that would be limiting to the service and it for sure is complicated. The question is what do you win there? A centralized system is always cheaper and can hand this low costs on to the users...

I don't think a centralized system is cheaper at all. And I'm not just talking about having some internal currency with a website. The web app would only be the front end.

At the core you need a public ledger because there should be actual markets and market functions. For example if you take counterparty and how that works you can offer to buy or sell something. What if you want to sell an answer to a question? What if you want to buy an answer to a question? What if you want professionals to bet on whether or not the answer is correct?

When the question is answered then you need a public ledger to track who answered it and how correct they are so that reputations can be built. You also need to keep track of the price of certain information using a sort of bid and ask.

A centralized website definitely wouldn't be cheaper because you cannot scale it in the same way. Assume MaidSafe works and we can have cheap storage and computing resources which can scale? If that is the case why would you run a centralized website which you have to pay or charge customers some sort of subscription fee when you can let it pay for itself?

Some unknowns are whether or not they can really do distributed computation and put something like Watson on top of MaidSafe or on top of some decentralized network. Let's say that becomes possible?

The decentralized version of this business is future proof and if it does become possible then you now have an abundance of computing power to diagnose people with (along with the advice/opinions of doctors). If you're doing it centralized are you saying it makes sense to build the super computer yourself and compute with that? What happens when it's time to upgrade or maintenance costs? Oh and don't forget you have to store patients most private information on some central server which makes absolutely no sense if something like MaidSafe works at all.

Patient information could be secured by the fact that patients are anonymous. Only they would have the private key, only they would control who can access their medical records.

You have many great ideas! But you can have most (maybe all) of that on a central server: Bid/Ask (like ebay), replier tacking, database (like wikipedia). You can automate everything on one server too. And user side is decentralized anyway already. With a DAC the accounting side of things would be decentralized in addition. Everytime you want to make a tx it costs. Decentralized payments are always more expensive than a similar centralized version. What you get from decentralization is a big degree of trustlessnes but it costs. All bitcoin transactions together (about 400 in 10 Minutes) cost 25 BTC ever 10 minutes (28USD on average for 1 tx). With POS it is significantly lower but more (I dont know how much) than if you change one ledger on one server. I tried to find out about the costs of a DPOS system here... I dont know how low it can get...

You can have the whole web on a central server but why would you think thats better than having it decentralized? I see no advantage to having it on a central server.

You could say Bitcoin wouldn't exist if it were centralized so it had to be decentralized but a lot of centralized companies aren't future proof and can't scale because they are centralized.

For example MaidSafe or Ethereum could be used and that would be decentralized and cheaper while also being future proof. If there is an advance in AI then the combined processing power of thousands of computers can probably take advantage of it at some point.

Storage would also be better off decentralized. Unless you're saying you would want to store the website on a central server but store the user information decentralized but then the website can be taken offline by DDOS. Why not put the decentralized domain name system to use as well?

Quote
Decentralized payments are always more expensive than a similar centralized version.

Where did you pull this from? Paypal, Western Union, Mastercard, Visa, are they all less expensive than Bitcoin? I don't know where you got this idea or if you just made it up.

The argument you're making is that Bitcoin doesn't scale but when did I suggest Bitcoin or Proof of Work? Transaction fees do cost but even if somehow it were to cost more for me to do it decentralized I would rather do it decentralized. Hackers will target health information and other similar documents. We need to store those extremely sensitive documents in the most secure manner possible which means encrypted and decentralized.

Let's assume for sake of argument that DPOS is more expensive for the user? It still depends on how you define expensive. If you value your privacy then it's significantly less expensive.

Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 20, 2014, 04:31:59 am
I like the idea and actually to be applied in all kind of professions not only healthcare somehow...

Quote
What if you want to sell an answer to a question? What if you want to buy an answer to a question? What if you want professionals to bet on whether or not the answer is correct?
[/b]

 +5% to the above but...

I don't think it is very easy though since everyone can search on the net for healthcare advice from doctors and anything basically for free. But even if you can find anything you want for free people still visit their doctor who they know and trust.

Therefore for healthshares or any other proffesionshare to succeed people behind those shares should be well known names and not anyone. And if you find those few strong names and you form the DAC team it is again centralised and no different than just pay them for advice.

Yep. Bingo!  If Google does the same job just as well, where is the value ?  Google will answer just about any question with multiple well thought out answers.  The only difference that I can see here is that you'd be assured the answer comes from a doctor.  Doctor's aren't perfect by any stretch.  I suppose you get to interact with a doctor, but most doctors want to give physical examinations.  Otherwise a person would be just as well to sit in front of an expert system and be diagnosed.

I don't think you're going to get the same quality advice if t's free. What if your question requires some actual thought and research by a doctor and is not something basic?

Remember we are talking about being future proof. The kinds of technology and amount of information which will exist in the next few years will be far more advanced than what we see today on Google. Google might or might not do it but they have been talking about Google health for a long time and so far they haven't done it.

Popular names isn't what I trust. That is what you might trust and in that case you can ask Doctor Oz or Doctor Phil. I trust track record and if a Doctor has no track record then I wouldn't have anything to go by so we need to have Doctors who have a very good track record and reputation. You can do some or all of it decentralized if you choose to.

The only reason I'm seeing for why we shouldn't do it is because Google or some other centralized company is doing it. That's not really a good reason not to do it. If it wouldn't be profitable or if you wouldn't use it then those are reasons not to do it.

I do think Google has the resources to do it but I don't think theirs would scale up because you're relying on Doctors providing free advice. Free advice isn't going to be as high quality or high priority as paid advice. If you want a Doctor for example to review your medical history and your genetic information to give you paid advice that currently costs quite a bit of money in a centralized way but it could be made significantly cheaper if decentralized because there would be no middleman.

Information is going to increase dramatically. As Doctors have to analyze more information and it becomes more personalized then you will need very personalized advice. Going to Google or the current sites will get you very generic advice which is great for very common symptoms or problems but it's not going to be what people will be paying for.

Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: santaclause102 on May 20, 2014, 08:01:43 am
How do you define future proof?

Technically a decentralized tx is always more expensive, you need to update the database with all nodes instead of just on one server. Also these nodes have to be (monetarily) incentivized to stay online and have to have a (monetary) motive to stay honest.
E-commerce payments (Visa, paypal etc) are different than the tx internal to this platform. Visa etc. are only expensive because they are vulnerable to be defrauded and because of all kinds of state requirements (know your customer, licensing etc.). Therefore a Proof of stake system could be less expensive for payment applications. But in our case there would be no charge backs and no kyc or licensing requirements...

No offensive btw luckybit :) It's a fruitful discussion.
 
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: gamey on May 20, 2014, 08:58:59 am
I like the idea and actually to be applied in all kind of professions not only healthcare somehow...

Quote
What if you want to sell an answer to a question? What if you want to buy an answer to a question? What if you want professionals to bet on whether or not the answer is correct?
[/b]

 +5% to the above but...

I don't think it is very easy though since everyone can search on the net for healthcare advice from doctors and anything basically for free. But even if you can find anything you want for free people still visit their doctor who they know and trust.

Therefore for healthshares or any other proffesionshare to succeed people behind those shares should be well known names and not anyone. And if you find those few strong names and you form the DAC team it is again centralised and no different than just pay them for advice.

Yep. Bingo!  If Google does the same job just as well, where is the value ?  Google will answer just about any question with multiple well thought out answers.  The only difference that I can see here is that you'd be assured the answer comes from a doctor.  Doctor's aren't perfect by any stretch.  I suppose you get to interact with a doctor, but most doctors want to give physical examinations.  Otherwise a person would be just as well to sit in front of an expert system and be diagnosed.

I don't think you're going to get the same quality advice if t's free. What if your question requires some actual thought and research by a doctor and is not something basic?

Remember we are talking about being future proof. The kinds of technology and amount of information which will exist in the next few years will be far more advanced than what we see today on Google. Google might or might not do it but they have been talking about Google health for a long time and so far they haven't done it.

Popular names isn't what I trust. That is what you might trust and in that case you can ask Doctor Oz or Doctor Phil. I trust track record and if a Doctor has no track record then I wouldn't have anything to go by so we need to have Doctors who have a very good track record and reputation. You can do some or all of it decentralized if you choose to.

The only reason I'm seeing for why we shouldn't do it is because Google or some other centralized company is doing it. That's not really a good reason not to do it. If it wouldn't be profitable or if you wouldn't use it then those are reasons not to do it.

I do think Google has the resources to do it but I don't think theirs would scale up because you're relying on Doctors providing free advice. Free advice isn't going to be as high quality or high priority as paid advice. If you want a Doctor for example to review your medical history and your genetic information to give you paid advice that currently costs quite a bit of money in a centralized way but it could be made significantly cheaper if decentralized because there would be no middleman.

Information is going to increase dramatically. As Doctors have to analyze more information and it becomes more personalized then you will need very personalized advice. Going to Google or the current sites will get you very generic advice which is great for very common symptoms or problems but it's not going to be what people will be paying for.

Google allows you to determine consensus on your own by examining all the answers.

For a DAC to determine reputations you are going to have some reputation system that has been in place for some time or be relying on external data. 

Free does not mean bad.  Wikipedia is a great source and it is all free.  Also people are paid to write things that are made free.  Being passionate about something is a greater motivator than a relatively modest amount of money.

Paid does not equate to quality.  Also, if a doctor is writing something that will be read by dozens if not thousands of people, they might put in a little extra work.  I've had poor diagnoses from recommended doctors before. It happens and I'm sure I'm not alone.

DACs have a list of "things to work with" as Dan posted once.  IMO a DAC needs to seriously utilize some of those aspects to be considered.

There are a ton of existing web-sites out there that you could slap DAC name on.. but unless they benefit from what a DAC brings us, it will be a hard sell to any developer or anyone who at least sorta understands DACs and where they provide value.

Otherwise you make a ton of assertions which I don't see as being true.  Medical industry doesn't advance that much every few years.  I am not saying compete with Google, I'm saying using a search engine to google up answers. (google as in a verb, not a noun)  I know nothing about google health, but I'm trying to understand why someone would download a DAC to ask a doctor a question when they could just as well go to "askaodoctor.net".  You haven't even begun to propose the vetting process of this DAC for doctors etc.

"Future proof" means that the government or some central authority will try to shut it down and the service needs to be resistant.  I don't see the government trying to silence doctors on the internet.. At least there is nothing I've ever read like this.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: gamey on May 20, 2014, 09:04:42 am
How do you define future proof?

Technically a decentralized tx is always more expensive, you need to update the database with all nodes instead of just on one server. Also these nodes have to be (monetarily) incentivized to stay online and have to have a (monetary) motive to stay honest.
E-commerce payments (Visa, paypal etc) are different than the tx internal to this platform. Visa etc. are only expensive because they are vulnerable to be defrauded and because of all kinds of state requirements (know your customer, licensing etc.). Therefore a Proof of stake system could be less expensive for payment applications. But in our case there would be no charge backs and no kyc or licensing requirements...

No offensive btw luckybit :) It's a fruitful discussion.

Hosting websites is absolutely dirt cheap.  Some guys will say you need an Amazon cloud account and pay $200 a month min, others will say a good $20 a month provider will work fine.  A lot depends on your traffic and whether you'll be DDOSed or if the service will remain around.

DACs have a form of cost not being calculated, and that is the time involved in the learning curve and installation of the DAC.

You also bring up a good point.  I'd be very surprised if chargebacks are a serious issue in the 'pay for medical advice' world.  Thats another area DACs shine at, but not sure it is a problem we are solving.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: santaclause102 on May 20, 2014, 09:08:12 am
gamey, what do you mean by
Quote
DACs have a form of cost not being calculated, and that is the time involved in the learning curve and installation of the DAC.
?
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 20, 2014, 10:40:50 am
How do you define future proof?
When you cannot predict the political or technological atmosphere 5 or 10 years away you want to design your technology to be future proof. That is the main reason why we are all here discussing Bitshares instead of Bitcoin.

You don't want to have to redesign your solution after the fact because by then it could be too big and too important. The impact of artificial intelligence, as well as the Internet of Things will require a careful design which scales to utilize these technological trends.

Technically a decentralized tx is always more expensive, you need to update the database with all nodes instead of just on one server.
Expensive? But more free, secure, private, resilient? I suppose you could have said the Internet at one point was more expensive than just using the phonebook but that has switched around and now using the whitepages is more expensive than the Internet when you can consider the difference in capabilities. You could still use the whitepages or go library but it's actually more expensive because it costs much more time. You also don't have the convenience of being able to do it from home.

In the future we will be diagnosed from home. We'll want to be able to consult with doctors. Doctors will want to get paid, we'll want freedom, security, privacy and convenience once biohacking becomes popular.


Also these nodes have to be (monetarily) incentivized to stay online and have to have a (monetary) motive to stay honest.
So? That's not how people judge value. You're thinking as an accountant and maybe as an accountant you would be right but people don't care about that. What they want to know is whether they can get the same features or better with greater privacy, security and freedom. If the answer is yes then tell me why people wouldn't want it? If people want it then it can make money regardless of if some centralized less functional version is cheaper.

E-commerce payments (Visa, paypal etc) are different than the tx internal to this platform. Visa etc. are only expensive because they are vulnerable to be defrauded and because of all kinds of state requirements (know your customer, licensing etc.). Therefore a Proof of stake system could be less expensive for payment applications. But in our case there would be no charge backs and no kyc or licensing requirements...
There could be all of that and it would still be cheaper in my opinion. There is no reason why you couldn't do KYC or chargebacks. Licensing requirements I don't even know what that means.
No offensive btw luckybit :) It's a fruitful discussion.

No offense taken. It's understandable that people will think this idea is a bit out there. The purpose behind this is that if we are going to have P2P insurance why would we stop there?

We would still have to rely on legacy systems which use outdated centralized technology. The problem with centralized technology is that it's not as free, it's not as secure, and it's not as private. These are facts inherent in the design of the technology itself.

For example if you have to use a centralized Internet to get advice from a doctor then if your government takes a hostile position they could simply block the DNS and now you cannot access the site? Hackers who don't want this could simply hack the site and then give everyone's most sensitive biological information to really bad people?

How are we going to deal with a world where computers know more about us than we could ever know about ourselves? All of our genes sequenced, all sorts of extremely private information has to be stored. We need the ability to let certain people access it and give us advice but we currently don't have any safe place to store it.

How do you want to solve this problem? I say we should go decentralized and turn it into a DAC. Over time technology itself which would be directed by economic incentives would solve the problem. I don't see how you can do it with a centralized company because which company do you trust to have all the worlds biological information? Do you want Google to know you like that? How about Facebook?

Anyhow I put my idea out there. Study it and if the time comes where it begins to make sense then this thread will be pulled up.

Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: santaclause102 on May 20, 2014, 11:02:58 am
Quote
Anyhow I put my idea out there. Study it and if the time comes where it begins to make sense then this thread will be pulled up.
Agree to that :)
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: mf-tzo on May 20, 2014, 01:10:23 pm
Quote
Anyhow I put my idea out there. Study it and if the time comes where it begins to make sense then this thread will be pulled up.
Agree to that :)

Yes... Dejavu... : someone from this community has a good idea, we don't pay much attention and get the ball rolling, someone else from another community picks that up, make a DAC and get all the benefits...
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: gamey on May 20, 2014, 06:39:35 pm
gamey, what do you mean by
Quote
DACs have a form of cost not being calculated, and that is the time involved in the learning curve and installation of the DAC.
?

A DAC will require you download the client AFAIK.  THen you have to execute it.  This is not the same as a web-browser where you point it to a URL.  Lots of people have it ingrained in their head to not download and run anything.  A website skips over this problem.   Now you could put a website interface on a DAC and run a node remotely, but thats sorta getting away from why we have DACs.  My understanding is you download the DAC, then it will likely have a web browser embedded and the interface will be based on modern web-design.  So it still requires downloading and running an app.  It is a minor point, but when dealing with old people or anyone, it is going to go against one of the rules they were taught. "Do not download and install anything !"  (Which is good advice for the largest majority of people..)

Modify - One other thought.  Is I read a lot about privacy.  I'm not entirely sure how privacy is to be expected. If you are talking about privacy because the data is stored on the net encrypted, then that definitely is an improvement.  However, you better make sure that you keep that network up and cranking.  If you call a coin a DAC, then we've already seen abandoned DAC networks.  Also realize that your data will have to be made available to the Doctor when you talk to them.  I'm not sure if all this makes the data any more secure or not.  I think a properly designed website could at least provide equal privacy.

Dan had a small inconsequential seeming post where he listed all of the things we have to work with.  I think a DAC needs to utilize features from that list before you consider making a DAC. This is why I like the thought of making DACs for user generated content as a nice starting point experiment.  It utilizes the ability of DACs to track user voting, uses the centralized storage, and can take care of handling the equity to be paid out via the voting system.  None of these ideas are very sexy though.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 21, 2014, 11:00:14 am
gamey, what do you mean by
Quote
DACs have a form of cost not being calculated, and that is the time involved in the learning curve and installation of the DAC.
?

A DAC will require you download the client AFAIK.  THen you have to execute it.  This is not the same as a web-browser where you point it to a URL.  Lots of people have it ingrained in their head to not download and run anything.  A website skips over this problem.   Now you could put a website interface on a DAC and run a node remotely, but thats sorta getting away from why we have DACs.  My understanding is you download the DAC, then it will likely have a web browser embedded and the interface will be based on modern web-design.  So it still requires downloading and running an app.  It is a minor point, but when dealing with old people or anyone, it is going to go against one of the rules they were taught. "Do not download and install anything !"  (Which is good advice for the largest majority of people..)

Modify - One other thought.  Is I read a lot about privacy.  I'm not entirely sure how privacy is to be expected. If you are talking about privacy because the data is stored on the net encrypted, then that definitely is an improvement.  However, you better make sure that you keep that network up and cranking.  If you call a coin a DAC, then we've already seen abandoned DAC networks.  Also realize that your data will have to be made available to the Doctor when you talk to them.  I'm not sure if all this makes the data any more secure or not.  I think a properly designed website could at least provide equal privacy.

Dan had a small inconsequential seeming post where he listed all of the things we have to work with.  I think a DAC needs to utilize features from that list before you consider making a DAC. This is why I like the thought of making DACs for user generated content as a nice starting point experiment.  It utilizes the ability of DACs to track user voting, uses the centralized storage, and can take care of handling the equity to be paid out via the voting system.  None of these ideas are very sexy though.

Can you show me the list from Dan because I don't see how any of what I said violates anything. Some parts might be more difficult than others but I don't see any part of the idea which can't be done.

I also don't agree with you that people don't download apps. People download apps on their phone all the time. If you have the app on your phone that would be good enough. You would simply speak into your phone to ask the app your question and it would turn it into a request to the DAC to pay for the answer.


Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: pgbit on May 21, 2014, 11:28:15 am
http://www.vetlive.com/
provides a model for pets that illustrates the process. There are quite a few of these around now.

Expert advice from doctors is quite variable infact. One possible benefit in a DAC therefore, is that with a decentralized medical consensus system, groups of doctors could provide advice independently, and contribute to a second opinion panel / group response. Although this would dilute the incentives for medical professionals, it could likely provide better quality responses that most accurately represent the current perceived wisdom on specialist subjects.


Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: gamey on May 21, 2014, 11:44:22 am
gamey, what do you mean by
Quote
DACs have a form of cost not being calculated, and that is the time involved in the learning curve and installation of the DAC.
?

A DAC will require you download the client AFAIK.  THen you have to execute it.  This is not the same as a web-browser where you point it to a URL.  Lots of people have it ingrained in their head to not download and run anything.  A website skips over this problem.   Now you could put a website interface on a DAC and run a node remotely, but thats sorta getting away from why we have DACs.  My understanding is you download the DAC, then it will likely have a web browser embedded and the interface will be based on modern web-design.  So it still requires downloading and running an app.  It is a minor point, but when dealing with old people or anyone, it is going to go against one of the rules they were taught. "Do not download and install anything !"  (Which is good advice for the largest majority of people..)

Modify - One other thought.  Is I read a lot about privacy.  I'm not entirely sure how privacy is to be expected. If you are talking about privacy because the data is stored on the net encrypted, then that definitely is an improvement.  However, you better make sure that you keep that network up and cranking.  If you call a coin a DAC, then we've already seen abandoned DAC networks.  Also realize that your data will have to be made available to the Doctor when you talk to them.  I'm not sure if all this makes the data any more secure or not.  I think a properly designed website could at least provide equal privacy.

Dan had a small inconsequential seeming post where he listed all of the things we have to work with.  I think a DAC needs to utilize features from that list before you consider making a DAC. This is why I like the thought of making DACs for user generated content as a nice starting point experiment.  It utilizes the ability of DACs to track user voting, uses the centralized storage, and can take care of handling the equity to be paid out via the voting system.  None of these ideas are very sexy though.

Can you show me the list from Dan because I don't see how any of what I said violates anything. Some parts might be more difficult than others but I don't see any part of the idea which can't be done.

I also don't agree with you that people don't download apps. People download apps on their phone all the time. If you have the app on your phone that would be good enough. You would simply speak into your phone to ask the app your question and it would turn it into a request to the DAC to pay for the answer.

Good luck porting bitshares toolkit to support a DAC on iphones and Android. QT has crossplatform phone support but not exactly how it works.

Dan posted a list that had about 7 things that was something along the lines of "Things we have to work with .."  I am not not going to look it up, but I don't see your idea having a meaningful need for a DAC. 

Being able to make something into a DAC is not the same as having a compelling reason to be a DAC.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 21, 2014, 06:52:19 pm
http://www.vetlive.com/
provides a model for pets that illustrates the process. There are quite a few of these around now.

Expert advice from doctors is quite variable infact. One possible benefit in a DAC therefore, is that with a decentralized medical consensus system, groups of doctors could provide advice independently, and contribute to a second opinion panel / group response. Although this would dilute the incentives for medical professionals, it could likely provide better quality responses that most accurately represent the current perceived wisdom on specialist subjects.

Take a look at this https://pay.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2650sx/digitalhealing_crypto_startup_based_on_the_idea/

Should one of us contact them and tell them about Bitshares? This is the sort of people we would want in our community.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 21, 2014, 06:58:04 pm
gamey, what do you mean by
Quote
DACs have a form of cost not being calculated, and that is the time involved in the learning curve and installation of the DAC.
?

A DAC will require you download the client AFAIK.  THen you have to execute it.  This is not the same as a web-browser where you point it to a URL.  Lots of people have it ingrained in their head to not download and run anything.  A website skips over this problem.   Now you could put a website interface on a DAC and run a node remotely, but thats sorta getting away from why we have DACs.  My understanding is you download the DAC, then it will likely have a web browser embedded and the interface will be based on modern web-design.  So it still requires downloading and running an app.  It is a minor point, but when dealing with old people or anyone, it is going to go against one of the rules they were taught. "Do not download and install anything !"  (Which is good advice for the largest majority of people..)

Modify - One other thought.  Is I read a lot about privacy.  I'm not entirely sure how privacy is to be expected. If you are talking about privacy because the data is stored on the net encrypted, then that definitely is an improvement.  However, you better make sure that you keep that network up and cranking.  If you call a coin a DAC, then we've already seen abandoned DAC networks.  Also realize that your data will have to be made available to the Doctor when you talk to them.  I'm not sure if all this makes the data any more secure or not.  I think a properly designed website could at least provide equal privacy.

Dan had a small inconsequential seeming post where he listed all of the things we have to work with.  I think a DAC needs to utilize features from that list before you consider making a DAC. This is why I like the thought of making DACs for user generated content as a nice starting point experiment.  It utilizes the ability of DACs to track user voting, uses the centralized storage, and can take care of handling the equity to be paid out via the voting system.  None of these ideas are very sexy though.

Can you show me the list from Dan because I don't see how any of what I said violates anything. Some parts might be more difficult than others but I don't see any part of the idea which can't be done.

I also don't agree with you that people don't download apps. People download apps on their phone all the time. If you have the app on your phone that would be good enough. You would simply speak into your phone to ask the app your question and it would turn it into a request to the DAC to pay for the answer.

Good luck porting bitshares toolkit to support a DAC on iphones and Android. QT has crossplatform phone support but not exactly how it works.

Dan posted a list that had about 7 things that was something along the lines of "Things we have to work with .."  I am not not going to look it up, but I don't see your idea having a meaningful need for a DAC. 

Being able to make something into a DAC is not the same as having a compelling reason to be a DAC.

You're speaking about an idea that you dislike on pure gut reaction. If you had something to cite you would cite it.

You're appealing to authority to make an argument that an idea for a DAC wouldn't work. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

You say that porting Bitshares toolkit onto smartphones would be difficult but then you say QT has cross platform support? Why would it be difficult? In any case it has to be ported if it's ever to be useful for the masses because most people aren't going to be using their laptops in the future. This is what I mean by future proofing and while we might not have an app right now it's very likely we will.

My idea actually was to turn it into a web app which means you could run the QT client on the backend and just use a web interface but in any case it's eventually going to be ported to Android because I see nothing inherent about the code which would make it difficult. The only reason I could think of as to why it wouldn't could be if the blockchain were to become huge and there is no way to to a lite client.

Think about third world countries where people only have smart phones. Consider that Android is the most used operating system in the world today.

Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 21, 2014, 07:08:19 pm
http://www.digitalhealing.org/

My guess is that this could be a scam. It's at least possible that someone looked at our discussion on the thread and set that up to sucker people so I wouldn't throw any money at that.

On the other hand if they can offer some verifiable evidence that they are who they say they are, that they are licensed doctors, then maybe we can tell them about Bitshares and Bitshares ME.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: gamey on May 21, 2014, 07:23:05 pm
Quote


You're speaking about an idea that you dislike on pure gut reaction. If you had something to cite you would cite it.

You're appealing to authority to make an argument that an idea for a DAC wouldn't work. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

You say that porting Bitshares toolkit onto smartphones would be difficult but then you say QT has cross platform support? Why would it be difficult? In any case it has to be ported if it's ever to be useful for the masses because most people aren't going to be using their laptops in the future. This is what I mean by future proofing and while we might not have an app right now it's very likely we will.

My idea actually was to turn it into a web app which means you could run the QT client on the backend and just use a web interface but in any case it's eventually going to be ported to Android because I see nothing inherent about the code which would make it difficult. The only reason I could think of as to why it wouldn't could be if the blockchain were to become huge and there is no way to to a lite client.

Think about third world countries where people only have smart phones. Consider that Android is the most used operating system in the world today.

First off, just because I don't care to go look for the post doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just simply means I don't see value in spending my times to find a simple post of Dan's which enumerated "what we have to work with" when creating DACs.  It does nothing to prove anything about your DAC. It is just that I don't see why you think your idea is better as a DAC.  Decentralization is a wonderful thing, but I don't see it needed when you interact with a doctor. 

You are the same guy who denigrates creating technical documentation as "spell checking" when you want to put the idea down.

Put up a wager and I'll find Dan's post.   You think way too much of yourself if you think I'm going out of my way to do it for you.  It isn't particularly material, it was just a succinct list of the features we have at our disposal when creating of DACs.  It doesn't follow that you have to have things out of that list to make a DAC.  It is just i would question why would you want to make such a DAC when a website serves the same purpose just as well with significantly simpler coding.

For starters Android = a modified java and Iphone = objective C where you have to get OK from apple for any app.   If you make it into a webapp, then it will only work as long as that website is not attacked.  You also can't create incoming network connections over a cell network.  None of these are idea killers, but you have a long steep hill ahead of you to catch up with where a website could be within a couple months.

BTW I am not appealing to Dan's post, I just put it out there as a starting point for guys like you who just throw out random ideas of services and say "lets plop .dac on the end and we're golden".

There might very well be a market for some variant on what you proposed but I suspect it would be far far down the line and involve far more than what you've suggested.

...... but yes.. a DAC would be futureproof and work with biohacking.. so you can take your 3d printed out arms and have the doctor tell you where to implant them via the DAC you just used.  No ?
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: gamey on May 21, 2014, 07:33:50 pm
http://www.digitalhealing.org/

My guess is that this could be a scam. It's at least possible that someone looked at our discussion on the thread and set that up to sucker people so I wouldn't throw any money at that.

On the other hand if they can offer some verifiable evidence that they are who they say they are, that they are licensed doctors, then maybe we can tell them about Bitshares and Bitshares ME.

THat is a wall of text to be spit out in the course of a day.  I was going to say you are deluded thinking the copied the idea from here, but they registered the domain on 5-20-2014.  ROFL.  So maybe they did copy your idea... Lol, my hats off to you here.  Maybe your idea is the greatest since sliced bread !  Not even being sarcastic.
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: xeroc on May 21, 2014, 07:43:09 pm
http://www.digitalhealing.org/

My guess is that this could be a scam. It's at least possible that someone looked at our discussion on the thread and set that up to sucker people so I wouldn't throw any money at that.

On the other hand if they can offer some verifiable evidence that they are who they say they are, that they are licensed doctors, then maybe we can tell them about Bitshares and Bitshares ME.

THat is a wall of text to be spit out in the course of a day.  I was going to say you are deluded thinking the copied the idea from here, but they registered the domain on 5-20-2014.  ROFL.  So maybe they did copy your idea... Lol, my hats off to you here.  Maybe your idea is the greatest since sliced bread !  Not even being sarcastic.
not again ... same thing happened with the multipool pos payout idea :-(
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: mf-tzo on May 21, 2014, 08:33:44 pm
As I said...

Quote
Yes... Dejavu... : someone from this community has a good idea, we don't pay much attention and get the ball rolling, someone else from another community picks that up, make a DAC and get all the benefits...

I think from now own you guys should STOP throwing any more ideas!!! Whoever has an idea just go for it, make a DAC, wait for Bitshares ME, just honor AGS/PTS and that's it...

This forum has by far the best ideas I have seen so far and the members of this forum are the only ones who do not benefit from these ideas...

If I soon see an altcoin pop up out of nowhere and use DPOS before we do I will be very upset!!
Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 22, 2014, 06:09:50 am
http://www.digitalhealing.org/

My guess is that this could be a scam. It's at least possible that someone looked at our discussion on the thread and set that up to sucker people so I wouldn't throw any money at that.

On the other hand if they can offer some verifiable evidence that they are who they say they are, that they are licensed doctors, then maybe we can tell them about Bitshares and Bitshares ME.

THat is a wall of text to be spit out in the course of a day.  I was going to say you are deluded thinking the copied the idea from here, but they registered the domain on 5-20-2014.  ROFL.  So maybe they did copy your idea... Lol, my hats off to you here.  Maybe your idea is the greatest since sliced bread !  Not even being sarcastic.
not again ... same thing happened with the multipool pos payout idea :-(

I can't take credit for the PoS payout idea. That idea was from the Blackcoin community.
If you want the truth, no one owns an idea. I'm just concerned about it being a scam.

If they did steal the idea and actually build a DAC I would just interact with the DAC. If the idea is proven then there will be a fork of their DAC which gives to PTS/AGS.

But from the way they describe things it looks like it's a scam right now so I wouldn't be concerned about them.

Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: luckybit on May 23, 2014, 10:46:25 pm
As a use case suppose you want to anonymously talk to a psychiatrist?

Suppose you want to do this anonymously, privately, yet have the psychiatrist be compensated?

To a certain extent you could do something like this in a DAC format, at least a certain portion of it such as payment.

This would not be a replacement for all kinds of therapy but it could help and apparently people pay money to talk about their problems to complete strangers even when most of the time it's not confidential.

If you set it up so anyone can ask for any kind of advice from any professional then it might work. It would give people a place to talk about confidential matters without the fear of it somehow not being confidential.

Of course this might not be well thought out as a use case. Anonymity could be abused if it's set up wrong so it probably would have to be pseudo-anonymous but I'm mentioning it for consideration of merit.


Title: Re: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares)
Post by: jwiz168 on August 20, 2014, 03:07:48 am
Health DAC is a good idea . I just stumbled upon Curecoin and recently Foldingcoin both being a proof-of-participation in Folding@Home - a project of Standford University - studying protein folding in search for cure diseases like cancer, Alzheimer etc.  Interestingly FoldingCoin uses counterparty for distribution of its crypto currency. My question is can it be done in Bitshares toolkit/blockchain ?