|
Hey everyone, I tried to address all of the questions you guys had on the The DashRoundtable above. If anything remained unanswered or has some ambiguity feel free to rephrase your questions and we can continue the conversation.
|
|
|
|
But it could also lead to rampant corruption, cronyism, and people just living off their reputation rather than doing the actual work. I think this is a question that must be considered carefully:
Who can be manager? And how can we incentivize managers to make right decision?
The new way is radically simple, the network hires managers, then managers hire employees. You guys will negotiate pay with the managers, then you're delegating much of the day-to-day operations to the project management team. As for stopping abuse, we're talking about having to get your primary and secondary manager to "sign off" on expenses. This means if you can't come to an agreement between the three of you, nothing gets paid. In the end it'll allow us to move really fast and keep abuse down to a minimum. So managers are responsible for reviewing and approving expenses, if the employee and two managers pay for something the network doesn't like, the network can talk to the management team and voice the concerns. These are going to be the primary point of contact for the network, so that's how we direct the ship. The employees are agreeing to do a specific amount of work with their manager, so they can't just live off of the system. You have to work to get paid for it under this model. The budget system money is a scarce resource that we need to be careful about to avoid the situations you're talking about. The nice thing is that we're going to be moving to sentinel, which is the "brain", so every part of this can be tested with trial and error. We can roll out test implementations, then revert them or tweak them. I imagine we'll be pivoting pretty quickly as we realize different goals. Thanks for the answer. Its the managers just living off the system that I would worry about rather than the employees. Managers keep the employees in check, but structuring it like that seems to encourage coin holders to delegate the task to keeping check on employees to the managers - so the question remains of who will keep a check on the managers? I think its a recipe for having less oversight from MN owners on projects, but with nothing to make sure that managers are actually doing their job properly. I don't think we need more than 2 tiers of management at this point. There's probably about 20-30 people that will be in the current system. Research shows that communication starts to break down when there's more than 8-10 people reporting to one, after that people do a really poor job. The obvious choice to keep managers in check is to allow the network to talk to them and part of their job is making sure communication isn't breaking down and that the network knows exactly what's going on and why... they need to keep you guys happy in order to continue working the network. Eventually this model won't be big enough. At that point we'll move to the next phase of the system, with some sort of elected board, which is responsible for hiring the managers and directing the project. Centralized control, but the network again will have control over the elected board. So control always comes back to the network. |
|
|
|
But it could also lead to rampant corruption, cronyism, and people just living off their reputation rather than doing the actual work. I think this is a question that must be considered carefully:
Who can be manager? And how can we incentivize managers to make right decision?
The new way is radically simple, the network hires managers, then managers hire employees. You guys will negotiate pay with the managers, then you're delegating much of the day-to-day operations to the project management team. As for stopping abuse, we're talking about having to get your primary and secondary manager to "sign off" on expenses. This means if you can't come to an agreement between the three of you, nothing gets paid. In the end it'll allow us to move really fast and keep abuse down to a minimum. So managers are responsible for reviewing and approving expenses, if the employee and two managers pay for something the network doesn't like, the network can talk to the management team and voice the concerns. These are going to be the primary point of contact for the network, so that's how we direct the ship. The employees are agreeing to do a specific amount of work with their manager, so they can't just live off of the system. You have to work to get paid for it under this model. The budget system money is a scarce resource that we need to be careful about to avoid the situations you're talking about. The nice thing is that we're going to be moving to sentinel, which is the "brain", so every part of this can be tested with trial and error. We can roll out test implementations, then revert them or tweak them. I imagine we'll be pivoting pretty quickly as we realize different goals. |
|
|
|
This all makes me wish i could fastforward a few years just to see how it all pans out. Its great to see the potential of this new system,
where the groundwork which makes it all possible is layed as we speak.
https://github.com/evan82/sentinel/blob/master/docs/usage.md - New system usage This is how I see it working, it's a bid/ask system for employment, built on a cryptographic currency. Pretty cool. This system also fleshes out the competitive part of employment into it's real world representation, employees ask and employers bid. It'll be neat to have a record of that and be able to "ask" for a raise. It's kind of like threatening to leave... if you go long enough, you won't be paid  |
|
|
|
First sentinel command. My brain is exploding from what this thing is capable of  . 12:08:38 {master} ~/Desktop/projects/sentinel$ ./sentinel-cli --create="user" --name="blockchain-contract-evan-2016" --revision=1 --subclass="employee" --dash_monthly=233.32 --first_name="evan" --last_name="duffield" --address1="123 w. main ave" --address2="#123" --city="Phoenix" --state="Arizona" --country="US" 12:25:04 {master} ~/Desktop/projects/sentinel$ ./sentinel-cli --events_process=1
Processing queued events
('17', '7', '1461350402', None, None)
loaded event successfully
loaded govobj successfully
prepared
--cmd :
mngovernance prepare 1 1461352124 blockchain-contract-evan-2016 5b227b226c6173745f6e616d65223a20226475666669656c64222c202263697479223a202250686 f656e6978222c202266697273745f6e616d65223a20226576616e222c202276657273696f6e223a 20312c2022646173685f6d6f6e74686c79223a20223233332e3332222c2022636f756e747279223 a20225553222c20226164647265737331223a202231323320772e206d61696e20617665222c2022 6164647265737332223a202223313233222c20227374617465223a20224172697a6f6e61227d225 d;
LoL care to explain what this is to us mere mortals  Let me try to get a stab at why this is cool. #1 This is a contract ... this is where most coins would start jumping up and down spewing Ether and Gas and sending out press releases....Evan says not good enough #2 This is a contract tied to an identity(user) #3 Since an identity is verified by name/address/city/state it opens the door for a loan against that identity.Now we are closer to what Toknormal is pushing for, flowscripts, like what is described in the "proof of labor" proposal. Basically, this allows a future contract tied to an identity. Or a way to start production with funds now payable in labor in the future. (I barely grasp this myself, but it is the start of something very big.) See how it is cool now? anyone out there from kickstarter? anyone out there want to start a DASH powered kickstarter? What I actually figured out how to do is create a decentralized relational database application using crypto, that's what sentinel is. So then we can create new types and setup relationships between them. But we'll be able to do that on the python side and on the fly. Just to show you how insanely powerful this system is, I'll document how to setup 12.1 under the new system. First we'll create a governance object type of User(firstname, lastname, address1, address2, city, state, country), then we'll create subclasses of Employee and Manager. So then to get network employment under this model we'll require Employees be managed by a primary and secondary manager. Employees will pick their primary and secondary managers, then negotiate a salary. Once each of them agree, they will be employed by the network. Next there are no generic funding proposals or contracts anymore, there's only expense reports. These are reimbursed if the managers agree. So if I fly to a conference I would submit separate expense reports for each of the items (plane ticket, car rental, etc). What's really nice about this is it also solves the tax issues with working for the network. We'll be able to query the network and print out an exact report of what happened to file. In most countries we shouldn't be paying taxes when we're being reimbursed for a company expense. This system can also assign reputation to users, companies, groups. We can start building the framework for evolution. The plan is I would have a record like "user-eduffield" that's also an employee and in the record there's a url to my personal server. We'll have Amazon AMIs and other images of a full-node based private server, these will allow you login and see your balance in Dash and USD. Then we can use robots to move money between USD (cryptocapital) and Dash (polo). After the transactions happen, the money is removed from the exchanges and stored locally. Then we'll add user accounts to this system, so I could add my wife for example and then restrict her spending or something  . This is like "Phase I" of our development (~6-10 months from having this thing below) , something like a generic decentralized bank-like entity. We want everyone to be able to take part of masternode shares programs and earn interest. I calculate the network should be able to pay in excess of 5% interest rate. It's far better than investing in the stock market at this point.  Phase II is where we'll have multiple user GUIs, masternode GUIs, business GUIs, etc. We want everything to be highly accessible and easy to use. The whole reason all of this will work well is because we'll be able to just query the database locally and get whatever data we want. How many active users are there? How many businesses? How much is being spent on holiday X? |
|
|
|
First sentinel command. My brain is exploding from what this thing is capable of . 12:08:38 {master} ~/Desktop/projects/sentinel$ ./sentinel-cli --create="user" --name="blockchain-contract-evan-2016" --revision=1 --subclass="employee" --dash_monthly=233.32 --first_name="evan" --last_name="duffield" --address1="123 w. main ave" --address2="#123" --city="Phoenix" --state="Arizona" --country="US" 12:25:04 {master} ~/Desktop/projects/sentinel$ ./sentinel-cli --events_process=1
Processing queued events
('17', '7', '1461350402', None, None)
loaded event successfully
loaded govobj successfully
prepared
--cmd :
mngovernance prepare 1 1461352124 blockchain-contract-evan-2016 5b227b226c6173745f6e616d65223a20226475666669656c64222c202263697479223a202250686 f656e6978222c202266697273745f6e616d65223a20226576616e222c202276657273696f6e223a 20312c2022646173685f6d6f6e74686c79223a20223233332e3332222c2022636f756e747279223 a20225553222c20226164647265737331223a202231323320772e206d61696e20617665222c2022 6164647265737332223a202223313233222c20227374617465223a20224172697a6f6e61227d225 d;
|
|
|
|
Heh, look what google gave me for my birthday!  |
|
|
|
Dash-CORE roadmap - version 1https://github.com/evan82/dash-roadmap/blob/master/README.mdThis is my first draft of the finalized timeline for evolution. I believe I can commit to this and it should be pretty easy to accomplish based off of my recent discoveries. If you're a programmer, you should be able to understand it. I'll explain this (timeline and discoveries) in much greater detail on The DashRoundtable on Sunday, April 24th.
As for the code, it's a real rough specification of all of the various pieces of technology required to build out dash. It's goal is to decouple the core code, in the form of a generic governance object, then secure our network using a completely dynamic python implementation (sentinel) via masternode network voting. The concept is pretty simple actually, it should allow us near infinite flexibility.
|
|
|
|
I would relax  Hi toknormal, ok I'll listen you  ... For example the two monetary researchers that wanted to use Dash as a basis for their Flow Money proposal flat out said it was the most advanced (monetarily) of all on offer. Max Keiser cited it as one of the 3 candidates for "the one" to 20 million viewers.
Who are this researchers? Do you have links? (Max Keiser too) Thanks in advanced I had to dig for it through the "General" sub-forum on dashtalk.org, but found it here: https://dashtalk.org/threads/budget-proposal-proof-of-labour.8108/ Unfortunately, it didn't pass, so it's not viewable at Dashwhale, but luckily you can find the link to the Dashwhale proposal page through the above link It's very unfortunate that this didn't pass. Dash evolution will support their idea... it's just going to be done differently. Evan style. Wow, That would be awesome. Maybe they should simply keep an eye out until it's out then work with the team to implement something once the structure is there. Heck, I'd love to know all the things you guys are doing because frankly, I suspect it's going to blow our minds. You're being so quiet, and I know you're brilliant and far from lazy, so something incredible is going on over there, and I'm just about to pee my pants with excitement - it's killing me! Luckily my kid is keeping me so busy as it'll help pass the time (I hope)  You won't be disappointed |
|
|
|
I would relax Hi toknormal, ok I'll listen you ... For example the two monetary researchers that wanted to use Dash as a basis for their Flow Money proposal flat out said it was the most advanced (monetarily) of all on offer. Max Keiser cited it as one of the 3 candidates for "the one" to 20 million viewers.
Who are this researchers? Do you have links? (Max Keiser too) Thanks in advanced I had to dig for it through the "General" sub-forum on dashtalk.org, but found it here: https://dashtalk.org/threads/budget-proposal-proof-of-labour.8108/ Unfortunately, it didn't pass, so it's not viewable at Dashwhale, but luckily you can find the link to the Dashwhale proposal page through the above link It's very unfortunate that this didn't pass. Dash evolution will support their idea... it's just going to be done differently. Evan style. |
|
|
|
I did, originally, think the Block Halving on Bitcoin was going to be very good for Dash, because people would be transfer their Cash purchases of Bitcoin onto another crypto with similar net coin production size e.g. 20 million, rather than pump the Bitcoin price up sky high and get their finger burnt again relative to the next block halving on Bitcoin. However, I would point out: It is a little bit crazy for there to be ASIC X11 miners for Dash coin, its' total net value is $40 million. The 1st batch of 50 X11 ASIC miners shipped last month at cost of $2100 each, or (total shipment value was $105,000). Crypto Mining Blog ordered 1 and was show casing on the website. http://cryptomining-blog.com/7548-ibelink-dm384m-x11-asic-availability-and-profitability/Not, sure Dash would really reap the full benefits of the Bitcoin block halving, when it also dealing with a cost implications of a change from GPU mining to ASICs, which naturally leads to an increase in net outflows of liquidity from a major crypto. Oddly enough, your comment inspired me to make a discovery. I know how to reverse engineer a model of our economy now. Thanks Give me a few weeks and we'll see. I should be able to prove you wrong ( or right, who knows... I'll wait for the results of science before having an opinion ). |
|
|
|
Isn't this the basis of the current political system? Maybe one day Dash will be big enough to have Dash political parties and Masternode Senators! Walter Democracy is terrible. Delegative democracy is probably less terrible. Delegative democracy without egalitarianism(you have to have 1000 dash to vote) might actually work. You are absolutely correct. As Churchill once said: "Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…" But until somebody invents a better system, we keep coming back to it =) Dash isn't a democrracy. Votes are based on the amount invested. More like shareholders. There will only be 6000 or less masternodes. It isn't unreasonable for each of those to research and vote on each proposal when each masternode is worth $100k. And then each node will probably be shared by a few owners. Each node owner may hire advisors to help read and decipher proposals. Each node may have an internal voting strategy between owners. And it is also possible to have each proposal be a group of projects that internally decide how they move forward. So those 2000 proposals may be 20 with 100 projects under them. The core voting mechanism needs to be done by those actually risking capital. Every project is kept honest by the threat of losing funds, every voter has a vested interest and votes in the best interest of Dash. Masternode operators are going to always lack specific domain knowledge that is required to make competent decisions about where to spend the money. Governments solve this issue by having boards of advisors, such as the administrative cabinet, the counsel on foreign relations, the economic advisory committees, etc. Can't we just alter this strategy slightly for our purposes? For us, we're going to need to setup some kind of simple advisory boards for business, economics, technology, etc. What if at a few billion dollars we have four or five of these types of committees, where the masternodes are electing whoever they want into the roles. After that these people would do the research and publish reports. These advisors could be expensive later on as well, I think they'll need significant experience in the domain in question. For economics, it might mean you have a PhD and have published. Those types of people are going to be too expensive to hire alone, I think it makes more sense for the network to band together. If we use a setup like that, the masternodes could start by reading the research done by these committees about various decisions they need to make, then they could make up their own mind. |
|
|
|
The current and new system is post-emptive. I think we just need something to track people and companies as they use our system. I think you're thinking I'm trying to solve the human element. The human element in a system like this is critical to it's success.
As I say, I can understand the basis, I just don't see why a project submission template has to be coded into the blockchain. Whats wrong with this process ? Proposer: "I've got this proposal" Arbitrators: "It's a bit vague, could you submit a more structured proposal with some milestones" Proposer: "Ok" Who said anything about a "project submission template" that is "coded into the blockchain"? I'll try to be much more explicit. People will be able to create entities on the blockchain (groups, users, companies), these are really simple objects and only have a publickey and a name basically. They allow someone to own an alias which represents something in the real world, like my identity on here. By the way this is exactly the way the evolution documents describe the process of implementing these systems, these are the "network primitives". Next, using these identities you'll be able to create a proposal or contract, which is then controllable in the future. You can add things to it, like reports. Reports have a date and a url. It's just a really simple abstraction of exactly what we're going to need over the next 5-10 years and nothing more. They'll live elsewhere, perhaps all over the internet. Groups of people working together are managed with decentralized autonomous organizations. We could have DAOs for DashCORE, DashResearch (vending machines, etc?), DashFoundationLLC, etc. So when the foundation wants to get funding for something, we can group all of the requests together and see how much funding they've gotten total and other metrics. Graphing these metrics out over long periods of time is going to allow people to study our currency and figure out how it's growing, what is working and what is not. Here's a comment from my code of the layout of the network:
/*
CATEGORY MAPPING
* means the category has an associated class
DASH NETWORK (ROOT)
-> NETWORK VARIABLE
-> switch, setting
-> CATEGORIES
-> LEVEL
-> I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI
-> VALUEOVERRIDE
-> NETWORK, OWNER
-> ACTOR
-> GROUP*
-> CORE, NONCORE
-> USER*
-> CORE, NONCORE
-> COMPANY* / ORGANIZATION
-> DAO
-> COMMITTEE
-> BUSINESS, RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AMBASSADOR
-> FORPROFIT
-> LLC, INC
-> NOTFORPROFIT
-> 501c3, 501c6
-> PROJECT*
-> TYPES
-> SOFTWARE
-> CORE, NONCORE
-> HARDWARE
-> PR
-> PROJECT REPORT*
-> UPDATE
-> PROJECT MILESTONE*
-> START, ONGOING, COMPLETE, FAILURE
-> PROPOSAL*
-> FUNDING, GOVERNANCE, AMEND, GENERIC
-> CONTRACT*
-> TYPE
-> INTERNAL, EXTERNAL
-> STATUS
-> OK
-> GROUPS
-> GROUP1
-> USER1 (only users are allowed here in this scope)
-> USER2
-> GROUP2 (EVO)
-> VALUEOVERRIDE (STORE=DASHDRIVE)
-> USER1
-> COMPANIES
-> COMPANY1
-> DAO1
*/
|
|
|
|
... I'd probably have to sell all my Dash just for the pleasure of not having to read them.
Isn't this the source of our problem? We can't read everything. If there's 10 companies using the system and an average of 5 pages of reports per month, you'd need to sit down for a few hours to get through it all. Masternode operators are simply unable to perform such a task, therefore we must find another solution. I'm considering some sort of endorsement committee, which is elected by the network to review what's happening and produce short overviews. We could start with just a simple business committee, to review the legitimacy of the projects. There could even be multiple of these committees eventually and a masternode operator could mirror their voting habits if they liked the research. |
|
|
|
I never said any of that, nor would I want a system that required that level of reporting. We need to find the minimum level to stop abuse and keep the network informed. I think if we have zero reporting requirements (such as where money is being spent) we'll run off a cliff. OK. I'll have to have a think about that. I also have been wondering how to hold blockchain funding applicants to account, but I would do it post-emptively, not pre-emptively because that puts the blockchain in a position of weakness. I think there are better ways to do it that push the problem back out to the holders. The current and new system is post-emptive. I think we just need something to track people and companies as they use our system. I think you're thinking I'm trying to solve the human element. The human element in a system like this is critical to it's success. |
|
|
|
Ok, I just read Macrochip's post on Dashtalk and now understand the problem better. So we need to have a discussion on how to remove the component of dependency on goodwill and trust within our governance model I'm sorry. This cannot be done. Dependency and goodwill are the essence on which ALL great creations, business projects and enterprises rely. That's exactly what's great about the current incarnation of Dash's governance system. It provides a basis for the holders and contractors to interact informally. Over time, some bad apples will be paid good money but also some gems will be discovered. It's an organic interaction that takes time to evolve - how do you think any great company develops ? Through getting to know their partners and trusting them. That trust is nothing to do with the blockchain - it's a people to people thing. It's voters pitted against contractors and thats just something that takes a lot of time, discussion, argument and growth. No way around it, but the fact that Dash has that dimension of commercial evolution to it is a huge strength IMO, not a weakness. Yes - money will get wasted on crap contractors. They just won't get another look-in and the ones that have integrity and productivity will. You could never match that level of project consciousness with an automated process. Actually I don't really want to automate very much. I just want the system to track reporting and who's doing what. Everything else is human driven. |
|
|
|
On the other hand, if they were all full of project management structured B.S. and 7 levels of hierarchy, each one of which were professionally prepared I'd probably have to sell all my Dash just for the pleasure of not having to read them.
I never said any of that, nor would I want a system that required that level of reporting. We need to find the minimum level to stop abuse and keep the network informed. I think if we have zero reporting requirements (such as where money is being spent) we'll run off a cliff. |
|
|
|
If they get paid to do this work from the blockchain, then we should be tracking their milestones and releasing money for the work that's being done. Evan - you're thinking like a bank manager not like a monetary token developer. "God" created gold. He left it lying there to be discovered and people endowed it with value. "He" did not endow them with value. It got acquired in all different ways - some people lost their lives mining it, others just tripped over it during a hillwalk. There was no rhyme or reason for its ascension to acceptance as a monetary medium other than its core monetary properties which were consistent throughout all of its incarnations - whether monetary, decorative or industrial. Thats the difference between Ethereum and Bitcoin. Ethereum needs development funds (because it isn't money) and Bitcoin doesn't (because it is). Bitcoin is currently a metric by which all other trades are measured in the cryptocurrency economy and thats enough. Dash had a chance at that with the Proof of Labour proposal and blew it out. (Hopefully it will get it back again  ). Turning the blockchain funding mechanism into the equivalent of my local bank manager who wants to see "returns" and asks people to fill in a 7-level form is about as appealing as eating the trimmings off a coffin. Nobody will ever apply (at least nobody that has a semblance of creativity about them). If you put the same effort into developing Dash's monetary properties as you are proposing to put into its "business properties" you'd have arrived. • Darksend working fast. • Decentralised API for 3rd party creativity and accessibility Just to get the decentralised API would be awsome. It would unleash a massive potential in 3rd party production that could never be matched by the core protocol. For example those guys could get their "negative balances" without even touching the core protocol. It's all there in the Evolution document. I suggest you go back and read your own script  I'm 0% sure about how your argument applies to what I'm doing with the budget system. I'm creating a system, that will better track what the network is doing. There are no "returns" or "business properties". This system could fund everything you say we should be funding and actually track it. Imagine that? |
|
|
|
[2] - that the governance system is SINGLE TIER, not a bank manager. For example, if something is complex then it just gets done in multiple proposals, each one evaluated on its own merit
Let's get crazy and say Dash blows up to a 500 million dollars. Now the budget is 9M per year. If average employees cost $55k a year, we could actual employ 163 people. Let's say the average working group is 7. That means we have 23 fully operational "companies" developing different things in our economy. We know if we're successful we're going to be in this situation, therefore it's really important to figure out how we manage this now. How do you search something like this? I want to know: - How many users there are, how many proposals each owns. - What the average project is costing the network - Which projects are behind - How to reach project owners - How to allow users to amend proposals / contracts and other objects securely I also want to be able to do all of this in a decentralized way, without having to rely on outside centralized software. The question is how you keep track of all of this without directly writing it into the software. Is there another way? I think the budget system usage is growing exponentially and we have a very short time to figure this out. I also want: - Standard reporting guidelines - Official forms and procedures for using our systems - Centralized sites for storing reports and project status type information (think federated) We should be able to ask any question, go to one place and have it answered in less than five minutes. It sounds like a technology issue to me and I think it's solvable by this idea. Maybe "incubator" is the wrong term? Maybe we should just call it the governance system. |
|
|
|
oh?
Well read this: the governance system (what was previously the budget system) will explicitly have a system for tracking what's happening in our economy Dash is money, not a venture capital investor. Venture capital companies have governance systems for "tracking what's happening in our economy" but money sure as hell does not since the whole point of "sound money" is that once you have it you are at liberty to do whatever you want with it. These two objectives just have wildly conflicting priorities. Dash's priorities IMO should be aligned with those of a monetary medium. i.e. [1] - continue to consolidate the technology behind improving fungibility and security [2] - implement a commercial API Those two priorities are consistent with those of monetary media. Dash is on solid ground. The governance system is there to support development of the monetary token - not the other way around IM(H)O. I've been meaning to bring this up, so thanks! I think we're on the same page and we need to focus on fixing problem areas in the economy. As a cryptographic currency, we have various needs to ensure success: - Fiat on-ramps in every country, capable of integrating directly with all major banks - Core software maintenance / upgrades - Wallet software on the 1st tier (Existing Android and Apple Wallets) - Wallet software on the 3rd tier (Evo) - Legal work / Legal research - Funding for foundations, which will interact with governments / users / companies - Advertising / Public Awareness - Building educational websites / wikis / documentation - Building new hardware - Maintaining core infrastructure - Hiring core engineers for ongoing maintenance of the network The question is who's going to do this work? Are they going to get paid? If they get paid to do this work from the blockchain, then we should be tracking their milestones and releasing money for the work that's being done. Bitcoin was the first, so others just popped up to help them build all of this. It just happened. However, it's not happening automatically in our economy, so some of us are working on fixing these one by one. After all of these are fixed and only at that point can you call Dash money. Currently it's an investment in a product that we're trying to turn into money. I think we can do this, but how? We have to fund these things. We will create the snowball, then get the machine working piece by piece. But that's going to take some different ways of thinking about these issues. I think the solution is a decentralized incubator and we will agree as a network what our current prime objectives are. One by one we will fix the issues. As soon as you know it, we'll be money. So what should we fund and what shouldn't we? I think we should fund things directly benefiting our value as a medium of exchange and nothing else. So if you're going to build a product for our network that solves a pressing problem we're having, then you'll likely get funded. If you're a company, looking to make the next fitness gadget... you can look elsewhere |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
