Smart Contracts and Tokens

[ruferium]

Hello,
As an amateur developer, I am taking small steps towards designing an imaginary universe where wallets can exist and operate entirely on smart contracts. I am open to suggestions and comments.

Key factors I have learned:

Token Distribution
The more decentralized, the better. I have written a mining smart contract where wallets can earn 1 token per second for a certain fee. Currently, 90% of the tokens are allocated to this smart contract. Soon, this ratio will increase to 99%.
Passive Income for Token Buyers and Miners
I have created Stake and Trade Smart Contracts (still in the testing phase). A 0.1% commission is deducted from every transaction in the Trade Smart Contract and transferred to users who stake their tokens. How long should the stake duration be? I desire it to be 360 days with a base value.
Find Reasons to Burn the Tokens!
For this, I envision a science fiction-themed role-playing game. By holding ownership of all in-game materials on smart contracts, I aim to eliminate events like hacking and data loss. Once smart contracts are deployed, they should be beyond the control of the owner. I am aware that I need to give players a few reasons as to why they should own the token and exist within this universe. "Why should they have the token and be a part of this universe?" This is a question I cannot fully answer yet.

Thanks in advance for your replies and ideas.
Best regards.

[vv181]

As an amateur developer, I am taking small steps towards designing an imaginary universe where wallets can exist and operate entirely on smart contracts.

Some wallet(address/account) is a smart contract. And wallets do operate (interact) with smart contracts. It is just how it works.

By holding ownership of all in-game materials on smart contracts, I aim to eliminate events like hacking and data loss.

A smart contract may be able to govern the in-game materials, but it has no direct consequence it would eliminate hacks possibility.

The more decentralized, the better. ~Once smart contracts are deployed, they should be beyond the control of the owner.

If you build on top of the questionable decentralization degree of some cryptocurrencies, you will hardly be able to achieve it with your smart contract.

Also, how/in what way do you verifiable ensure that the owner has no direct control?

[ruferium]

Some wallet(address/account) is a smart contract. And wallets do operate (interact) with smart contracts. It is just how it works.

Smart contracts indeed offer a wide range of solutions by enabling us to define conditions, requirements, and actions based on specific triggers. They provide a structured environment where transactions are executed according to predefined rules and conditions. By leveraging the power of smart contracts, we can automate processes, ensure transparency, and establish trust in various decentralized applications. These contracts execute autonomously, allowing for secure and efficient interactions between wallets and other smart contracts within the blockchain ecosystem.

A smart contract may be able to govern the in-game materials, but it has no direct consequence it would eliminate hacks possibility.

Users should still take necessary precautions and implement their own security measures to protect their assets within the gaming environment. It's a shared responsibility to ensure the security and integrity of the ecosystem.

If you build on top of the questionable decentralization degree of some cryptocurrencies, you will hardly be able to achieve it with your smart contract.

Also, how/in what way do you verifiable ensure that the owner has no direct control?

Let's consider the example of a token contract. Suppose we have a smart contract that is deployed on the network and it only has functionalities such as burning, transferring, and approving tokens. In such a contract, does the owner have control?

Similarly, let's look at a mining contract example. In this case, the owner's wallet may only have a function to withdraw mining fees (not the tokens themselves, but the transferred ETH/BNB, etc.), and it does not have features such as stopping the contract, locking wallets, ignoring mining rights, or blacklisting. How much control does the owner have in this type of smart contract?

I am referring to the functions and capabilities of the contract. For example, you can implement mining by adding a grid map to a simple smart contract and randomly assigning tokens to specific coordinates. You can also reduce the complexity by adding various functions such as exploration, movement based on coordinates, and other details.

Having these functions in the smart contracts helps prevent potential hack attacks. Various functionalities can be built using connected contracts.

I am currently experimenting with some examples for testing purposes. However, the ideas and feedback from players and investors are crucial in shaping the project. I aim to create something more than just a traditional "build" game experience.

ty 

[libert19]

I have created Stake and Trade Smart Contracts (still in the testing phase). A 0.1% commission is deducted from every transaction in the Trade Smart Contract and transferred to users who stake their tokens. How long should the stake duration be? I desire it to be 360 days with a base value.

Imo, this shouldn't even be a thing at early stage, your first task should be to get customers for your wallet, second on to give token a value and later bother with staking/mining thing and make sure rewards are distributed properly that no free fall happens to your token.

By the way, there are plenty established wallets available, why should users choose yours? Do you plan to audit smart contracts?

[Tytanowy Janusz]

Find Reasons to Burn the Tokens!

Dude. its not how it works. A good example of how a token should be released is uniswap or 1inch. They both first built a usability that became a market leader and then monetized it by creating a token and giving it away to those who used it before it became widely used.

Burning tokens should come from the profits that the entity generates from its utility, which people want to use because they need it. And not an artificial creation as an additional fee when investing/selling, or as an element of a junk game made on a whim, which everyone will get bored of in 1 day. currently, large professional studios have a problem to attract players for longer, let alone someone who invents a game as an addition to the token.

[ruferium]

I have created Stake and Trade Smart Contracts (still in the testing phase). A 0.1% commission is deducted from every transaction in the Trade Smart Contract and transferred to users who stake their tokens. How long should the stake duration be? I desire it to be 360 days with a base value.

Imo, this shouldn't even be a thing at early stage, your first task should be to get customers for your wallet, second on to give token a value and later bother with staking/mining thing and make sure rewards are distributed properly that no free fall happens to your token.

By the way, there are plenty established wallets available, why should users choose yours? Do you plan to audit smart contracts?

The problem here is that I don't view them as customers.

"Why should they choose me?" is a valid question. But why should they choose them?

There are thousands of "shit" projects out there. Produce, hold pre-sales, create pools, and dump... No, I don't want to do all that.

Find Reasons to Burn the Tokens!

Dude. its not how it works. A good example of how a token should be released is uniswap or 1inch. They both first built a usability that became a market leader and then monetized it by creating a token and giving it away to those who used it before it became widely used.

Burning tokens should come from the profits that the entity generates from its utility, which people want to use because they need it. And not an artificial creation as an additional fee when investing/selling, or as an element of a junk game made on a whim, which everyone will get bored of in 1 day. currently, large professional studios have a problem to attract players for longer, let alone someone who invents a game as an addition to the token.

You're right. The key here is to spread it out over time and make people see it as an additional job. Smart contracts will gain value for them through the orders they place. I am trying to build a system where they can handle all their transactions and continue with their lives by dedicating a maximum of 10 minutes per day. I leave its popularity to time.

My obsession with token burning comes from the concern that wallets signing the mining smart contract could potentially cause token inflation. That's why I find it logical to implement token burning in the services, materials, or activities obtained through smart contracts. With 100,000 wallets, it would take 285 years to mine this token. Although the duration is long, a certain amount of tokens will enter the market each year.

[Tytanowy Janusz]

You're right. The key here is to spread it out over time and make people see it as an additional job. Smart contracts will gain value for them through the orders they place. I am trying to build a system where they can handle all their transactions and continue with their lives by dedicating a maximum of 10 minutes per day. I leave its popularity to time.

but you try to achieve this through various mechanisms that redistribute the money invested in the project to the investors of the project. You don't magically create capital that way, you know that? So in order for some percentage of your investors to see this as an extra payoff for 10 minutes of work a day, the other part of your investors will have to be willing to pay someone (random guy from internet) an extra paycheck for 10 minutes of work, and I assure you, there are no such people among people with money. Hence the project will not work and you can only qualify it as ponzi shame as there is no real use case that could build value in long run.

[ruferium]

You're right. The key here is to spread it out over time and make people see it as an additional job. Smart contracts will gain value for them through the orders they place. I am trying to build a system where they can handle all their transactions and continue with their lives by dedicating a maximum of 10 minutes per day. I leave its popularity to time.

but you try to achieve this through various mechanisms that redistribute the money invested in the project to the investors of the project. You don't magically create capital that way, you know that? So in order for some percentage of your investors to see this as an extra payoff for 10 minutes of work a day, the other part of your investors will have to be willing to pay someone (random guy from internet) an extra paycheck for 10 minutes of work, and I assure you, there are no such people among people with money. Hence the project will not work and you can only qualify it as ponzi shame as there is no real use case that could build value in long run.

Thank you for your criticism.

In general, we can label the market as a Ponzi scheme, as you put it. Everyone is making or losing money from each other's pockets.

By implementing certain rules, we can prevent the complete depletion of the pool and create a secure market environment for investors. Once these conditions are established, the token needs to be spent and removed from circulation. However, this doesn't mean that it will be completely eliminated.

I mentioned the idea of a science fiction-themed role-playing game as a use case for the token. It should have a utility beyond just staking and trading to achieve value. It should be actively used and its value should be influenced by community behaviors.

If there were currently $100 million inside, would you still call it a Ponzi scheme?

Yes, money is important.

[libert19]

I have created Stake and Trade Smart Contracts (still in the testing phase). A 0.1% commission is deducted from every transaction in the Trade Smart Contract and transferred to users who stake their tokens. How long should the stake duration be? I desire it to be 360 days with a base value.

Imo, this shouldn't even be a thing at early stage, your first task should be to get customers for your wallet, second on to give token a value and later bother with staking/mining thing and make sure rewards are distributed properly that no free fall happens to your token.

By the way, there are plenty established wallets available, why should users choose yours? Do you plan to audit smart contracts?

The problem here is that I don't view them as customers.

"Why should they choose me?" is a valid question. But why should they choose them?

There are thousands of "shit" projects out there. Produce, hold pre-sales, create pools, and dump... No, I don't want to do all that.

There may be shit projects but popular wallets are free ones, people use them because it full-fills their needs.

[DaCryptoRaccoon]

Here are some good resources to get you started

The web3 development platform Alchemy

Essential APIs, SDKs and tools to build and scale your app with ease

https://www.alchemy.com/


This is a good place to start they have lots of good documentation and guides to help you get started.

OpenZeppelin Wizard

https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/4.x/wizard

Great way to learn how to deploy contracts in a safe manner lots of good documentation also.

[Tytanowy Janusz]

Thank you for your criticism.

In general, we can label the market as a Ponzi scheme, as you put it. Everyone is making or losing money from each other's pockets.

When I buy shares of an example MMM company, behind the shares is a company that has 60,000 different products that it sells all over the world. People buy these products because they need them, not in the hope that they will sell when price of self-adhesive wall hooks pump. Of the profits the company generates, it pays me a 6% dividend. this is investing and you won't tell me it's ponzi schame.

If there were currently $100 million inside, would you still call it a Ponzi scheme?

Yes, money is important.

Of cours i would. LUNA had $30B marketcap and UST had another $19B before it collapsed. Bernie Madoff went to jail in 2008 for 150 year because of a $20B ponzi.

I mentioned the idea of a science fiction-themed role-playing game as a use case for the token.

If there were currently $100 million inside, would you still call it a Ponzi scheme?

do you think you can make a "science fiction-themed role-playing game" with enough popularity to justify a capitalization of $100 million? So, for example, 500,000 copies sold at $20 in 1 year, which gives a P/E of 10, not including production costs (1 mln copies including marketing, distribution costs etc.)? Because thats the only use case you plan to have.

[ruferium]

When I buy shares of an example MMM company, behind the shares is a company that has 60,000 different products that it sells all over the world. People buy these products because they need them, not in the hope that they will sell when price of self-adhesive wall hooks pump. Of the profits the company generates, it pays me a 6% dividend. this is investing and you won't tell me it's ponzi schame.

Web3 indeed represents a different world. I completely agree with you that there are thousands of Ponzi projects out there, simply creating and releasing tokens without any real substance.

What I am aiming to do with my ideas is to create smart contracts centered around production, providing dividend income to wallet holders. I understand your concerns regarding the nature of production. Essentially, we are sharing our thoughts with a couple thousand lines of code, and isn't that a product in itself?

In order for you to earn money from the shares of a company you invest in, the company needs to sell its products. Isn't it about creating a need?

Of cours i would. LUNA had $30B marketcap and UST had another $19B before it collapsed. Bernie Madoff went to jail in 2008 for 150 year because of a $20B ponzi.

so BTC should we expect the same thing? How much BTC does Satoshi have in his wallet?

What does a project need for you to not be a ponzi?

Transparency, innovation, usage areas, sustainability?

do you think you can make a "science fiction-themed role-playing game" with enough popularity to justify a capitalization of $100 million? So, for example, 500,000 copies sold at $20 in 1 year, which gives a P/E of 10, not including production costs (1 mln copies including marketing, distribution costs etc.)? Because thats the only use case you plan to have.

It seems there may be a misunderstanding about the nature of the project. The game is not solely focused on making profits or generating a high market capitalization. It revolves around the interaction of assets functioning on smart contracts. By engaging with a smart contract, you become part of the game. The rest is the storyline and gameplay.

For example, when you sign the mining smart contract for the token, you earn 1 RUFE per second. In addition to that, there are various smart contracts within the game that offer tasks, production, exploration, and both player versus environment (PvE) and player versus player (PvP) interactions. All of these actions and transactions take place on the blockchain, adhering to predefined conditions and rules. However, who would want to be a token miner and build a grand station, right? :/

I am also working on expanding the types of smart contracts in the future. However, considering the general perspective and expectations of investors, I am currently prioritizing the development of stake and trade smart contracts that provide clear and measurable returns on investment.

It's important to note that the project is not solely about making money but also about creating an engaging and immersive experience within the Web3 ecosystem.

--
The only thing the project needs is to communicate itself to people and build its financial structure in a way that encompasses different types of investors. That's why I value everyone's ideas within this ecosystem. You need to see the notes I've taken on what should and shouldn't be done.

I believe that if I ensure decentralization and transparency for the owner, the project can complete its first phase and move on to the second phase. Of course, this will take years ahead.

[Tytanowy Janusz]

What I am aiming to do with my ideas is to create smart contracts centered around production, providing dividend income to wallet holders. I understand your concerns regarding the nature of production. Essentially, we are sharing our thoughts with a couple thousand lines of code, and isn't that a product in itself?

In order to provide dividend income to wallet holders you have to generate profit. Produce stuff that someone wants to use. Not buy just to sell later on in hope of profit. But buy for use.

Giving dividends for solving unnecessary tasks from newly generated tokens from the air and then, to avoid inflation, tax movements on the token to burn them is just a redistribution of funds from one investor to another not a dividend.

Moving tokens from place to place does not magically produce wealth.

It seems there may be a misunderstanding about the nature of the project. The game is not solely focused on making profits or generating a high market capitalization. It revolves around the interaction of assets functioning on smart contracts. By engaging with a smart contract, you become part of the game. The rest is the storyline and gameplay.

For example, when you sign the mining smart contract for the token, you earn 1 RUFE per second. In addition to that, there are various smart contracts within the game that offer tasks, production, exploration, and both player versus environment (PvE) and player versus player (PvP) interactions. All of these actions and transactions take place on the blockchain, adhering to predefined conditions and rules. However, who would want to be a token miner and build a grand station, right? :/

So what's the use case that will build a project value in a long run?

[ruferium]

In order to provide dividend income to wallet holders you have to generate profit. Produce stuff that someone wants to use. Not buy just to sell later on in hope of profit. But buy for use.

Giving dividends for solving unnecessary tasks from newly generated tokens from the air and then, to avoid inflation, tax movements on the token to burn them is just a redistribution of funds from one investor to another not a dividend.

Moving tokens from place to place does not magically produce wealth.

Let's elaborate on the project a bit. We have our own token that can be obtained by all wallets under equal conditions, and it is used in all smart contracts within the project. Additionally, this token can be staked and traded, establishing its market price over a certain period of time.

To provide dividend income to HODLers, you can design smart contracts within the game universe. The rules and conditions of these contracts, which are created to maintain the market price and balance token inflation, can be adjusted. Instead of considering the token as a stock, in this project, you can earn 1 token every second by paying 0.1 BNB.

Rather than focusing on just holding the tokens, users should lock or burn them by engaging with smart contracts that generate dividend income (commission). For example, let's consider a production smart contract within the game universe that works in two ways. First, users can send the required tokens (materials) to the smart contract and receive an asset in return. They can also pay BNB to shorten the production time, although it is not mandatory but optional. Additionally, the smart contract can accept a certain number of investors for commission sharing. 15% of all BNB and token payments made over a period of 360 days are distributed to the investors. This is achieved not by holding the tokens, but by interacting with the smart contract. The question of whether the deposited tokens should be burned or refunded needs to be answered because the tokens can be obtained every second. I believe it makes more sense to burn them instead of locking and releasing them back into the market.

By utilizing smart contracts in this way, wallets can earn dividends (you can change the name) while actively interacting with the contracts and even involving others in the project.

In addition, rather than creating a complex system by producing thousands of raw materials, I seek to gradually build a fictional universe and explore ways to adapt it to the real world when necessary. Yes, it may seem like a product of imagination.

It would be foolish to create billions of tokens and expect them to gain value by releasing them into the market. Ah, if only I had a $15 million advertising budget, we might be in a different position right now. A bit ironic.

So what's the use case that will build a project value in a long run?

The use case that will build value for the Ruferium project in the long run is the development of a robust and thriving ecosystem of smart contracts. These smart contracts will enable various activities such as stake, production, rare mining, and other interactions within the project's universe. By providing utility, engagement, and innovative gameplay experiences, the project aims to attract and retain a dedicated community of users, resulting in increased adoption and demand for the Ruferium token. The project's value will be derived from the active participation and engagement of users within the ecosystem, supported by sustainable revenue streams generated through the execution of smart contracts.

--

I'm here to understand how investors evaluate projects and to learn how to bring my ideas to life based on their expectations. As I mentioned, I'm an amateur developer. I don't have a huge advertising budget, so I'm conducting a token distribution at a reasonable cost. However, the general approach of "invest $20 and get $200 back tomorrow" is not applicable to our project, and I apologize for that.

Furthermore, in the long run, each miner's monthly production is equivalent to a salary. Imagine a project with a daily user count of 5,000, where more tokens are burned and destroyed every day than what the miners produce. Miners indirectly earn a certain amount of income each month. Isn't that a positive approach in the long run?

I initially considered conducting a pre-sale on a pre-sale platform, but I changed my mind. After making the necessary adjustments, I plan to make the stake and trade smart contracts operational by the end of this year. Then, with the involvement of Noveria Corp, a fictional entity within our project's universe, I intend to initiate our role-playing game by assigning various tasks to token holders.