The Cypherfunks[FUNK]: a coin for a global band! Talking v2. Join! 80+ songs

[soundposition]

I'm pretty sure any digital information can be put on a blockchain.

Perhaps a PoT transaction (or "tip") could be thought of as a vote of some kind?

I like that idea.. If someone clicks play, like, or favorite on the music player it sends a tip and also up votes the musician on charts (in the system). Of course the likes would need to be from different software clients to be valid.

I'm thinking also of the irony that services like Jango Radio charge you money to play your music, when legally they are required to pay you to play YOUR music. Which they do of course pay you - magnitudes less than they charge you to play your music. So you end up paying them much more just to have your music played, when really YOU should be the one getting paid.

[n00bnoxious]

Of course the likes would need to be from different software clients to be valid.

Absolutely needs to be taken into account - this could be limited to one vote per address, and a minimum tip value or something. This would de-incentivise abuse because it could become pretty expensive... I'm not sure how we would do this, but perhaps something like KARMX's experimental gold-value-tied sidechain could be somewhere we take inspiration from? It could give a semblance of IRL stability to the tips given as well as discouraging satoshi-spamming...

[soundposition]

I'm pretty sure any digital information can be put on a blockchain.

This has been tried numerous times, and it either ends up with gargantuan amounts of blockchain bloat and/or a blockchain full of links to illicit content - hence my comments about the voting mechanism... In order for a bad actor to get dodgy data into the blockchain, they'd have to 51% the network... This would be greatly reduced if we offer staking, as we don't even need miners by that point.

The Bitcoin blockchain is already too big to download. Electrum figured out how to use specialized servers that index the blockchain:

Instant on: Your client does not download the blockchain. It uses a network of specialized servers that index the blockchain.

http://electrum.qc.to/

It is open source..

[soundposition]

How to prove you've made music? Trusted Timestamp:
https://www.btproof.com/

It even says on their website:
Musicians and other digital art producers can prove when they created their work.

[n00bnoxious]

The Bitcoin blockchain is already too big to download. Electrum figured out how to use specialized servers that index the blockchain:

Instant on: Your client does not download the blockchain. It uses a network of specialized servers that index the blockchain.

http://electrum.qc.to/

It is open source..

Yeah Electrum is a thin client implementation. The issue with this is you need a strongly secured network BEFORE these get put in place. Without the pre-existing network security it hugely damages decentralisation, as these clients basically just steal the information they need to maintain balances, and give back nothing at all except extra network traffic. Even PoS staking secures the network, but without running a full node, I don't think this is possible.

How to prove you've made music? Trusted Timestamp:
https://www.btproof.com/

It even says on their website:
Musicians and other digital art producers can prove when they created their work.

Looks awesome!

[simondlr]

how can you prove you've made music?

... SNIP ...

1M artist pool. To be distributed to each musician that contributes. 1M/200 = 5000 each. This will of course be centralized (and issued by me). It will be transparent, open and verifiable.

Ok my 2 sats:

You can prove you've made any individual original piece by producing a cryptographic signature of the original file, although I'm still not sure how this could be translated into a decentralised reward mechanism without opening security/legality issues though.

Centralisation does suck, but I'm having extreme trouble wrapping my head around an actually decentralised way to do so without screwing up the blockchain. It may be a huge job, but perhaps new tx types, like Namecoin uses for name_new, name_firstupdate etc...

Just spitballing ideas, could we integrate some kind of decentralised voting mechanism for reward of artists? This could integrate with the in-wallet player concept nicely at least - people can upload files and signatures, but unless it gets majority-voted it'll get pruned perhaps? Obviously there is room for abuse, but if the network is strong enough (perhaps we open up staking when people are playing music or something) then it should be able to withstand it.

Yep.

A voting system is interesting, but it seems prone to exploitation? ie, in order to be accepted as a contribution, do you go with %50 of votes?

Centralized issuance from an artist pool is also exploitable. Contributors can just create psuedonyms and look they are several people. You don't want to encourage that.

---

@soundposition. The problem with systems like hashing files, is that it's difficult to determine what makes it "music". A hash doesn't reveal it. And then you need to start thinking. If you have a file, how can you cryptographically prove that it is music? So, yes. If you have a mp3 of the song you just made: you put it on btproof. If someone in the future uses your song, you can then prove you originally made it. But it is still human *ears* that have to do arbitration. A computer won't know. Or rather, the blockchain can't know.

A possible idea, is to use audo fingerprinting. And that can only be sampled, if played. Something like the number stations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_station. This guy has a similar idea. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53371.0. More experiments: http://www.vanheusden.com/baa/.

If the blockchain *can* know. ie if it sees a file, it can legitimately discover that it is indeed music, it still brings into the question of what you reward. Someone can create a shitty 1 note 10-min song and that will "music". Or a 1 sec blip. It will all look like music, but because rewards are explicitly tied into the blockchain with it, it incentives "attacks" like that.

These are high level theory that's going to be difficult to solve. It's worth a try. Perhaps in the next 5 years someone does solve it, then we can just fork again?

I think for now. Just to get the economics back up to scratch we keep it simple?

btw. New tune from Bucksnot! https://soundcloud.com/bucksnot/see-how-you-are

EDIT:

Damn you guys keep posting. Can't keep up.

[soundposition]

All good points Simon, a lot of those ideas were just what popped out my head. I agree of course with keeping it stupidly simple at this point, just to make sure we are taking the right steps. I think so far no one thinks PoS is a bad idea. I like LTBcoin's approah to what they call "Proof of Work".. Real work like blog posts, and contributions, not mining.. (Thanks Brady for sharing that!)

I quote:

"LTBcoins will not be mined using algorithmic computations like most crypto-currency. Instead, LTBcoins will be distributed based on a “Proof of Work” concept, in which the “work” will be contributions of valuable content, editorial services, project leadership, tipping, and many other value-added activities that will benefit the growth and sustainability of the network. "

http://ltbcoin.com/ltbcoin-for-new-users

[n00bnoxious]

Yeah I'm on board with keeping things simple for now - these are all ideas that can be explored as part of the roadmap (something we will need to produce sooner or later), and our white paper. In order to be considered a "serious" crypto these days you seem to need a fairly in depth explanation of what you're trying to achieve and your conceptual methodologies pre-build.

[soundposition]

Yeah I'm on board with keeping things simple for now - these are all ideas that can be explored as part of the roadmap (something we will need to produce sooner or later), and our white paper. In order to be considered a "serious" crypto these days you seem to need a fairly in depth explanation of what you're trying to achieve and your conceptual methodologies pre-build.

Nothing wrong with having a white paper.. Although as we can see, people treat us pretty seriously already.

EDIT:  One thing I see we all agree on so far is that the coin in it's current technical state is not living up to it's promises. Furthermore, we need to relaunch the coin. That part seems pretty certain. We're all a little wiser now having had these experiences.

[simondlr]

All good points Simon, a lot of those ideas were just what popped out my head. I agree of course with keeping it stupidly simple at this point, just to make sure we are taking the right steps. I think so far no one things PoS is a bad idea. I like LTBcoin's approad to what they call "Proof of Work".. Real work like blog posts, and contributions, not mining..

I quote:

"LTBcoins will not be mined using algorithmic computations like most crypto-currency. Instead, LTBcoins will be distributed based on a “Proof of Work” concept, in which the “work” will be contributions of valuable content, editorial services, project leadership, tipping, and many other value-added activities that will benefit the growth and sustainability of the network. "

http://ltbcoin.com/ltbcoin-for-new-users

Thanks for your thoughts. We are breaking new ground here every day, so we need all the ideas we can get!

I like LTBcoin's approach, but as we previously stated: distribution happens through them. This isn't bad, but it forever means that LTBcoin is dependent on LTB. If we did like LTB, in the case of The Cypherfunks, it means we might have to approach it more as a "company". Do it more in the fashion of Niceplum (http://niceplum.bandcamp.com/). Any proceeds (profit from whatever) goes to owners of the tokens. Except contributions are from anyone, not just one person. I like this approach, and it's worth trying (as an alternative). But I just really dig the decentralized approach. . Much more experimental, chaotic, creative and fun imho.

@nox, soundposition:

Yep. Will get to that somewhere this week. Will post the draft here for feedback. Already started last night.

[n00bnoxious]

Yep. Will get to that somewhere this week. Will post the draft here for feedback. Already started last night.

Awesome :-) I look forward to giving it a read!

[soundposition]

The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time to plant a tree is today.

- Nicolas Cary, CEO of Blockchain.info

[soundposition]

All good points Simon, a lot of those ideas were just what popped out my head. I agree of course with keeping it stupidly simple at this point, just to make sure we are taking the right steps. I think so far no one things PoS is a bad idea. I like LTBcoin's approad to what they call "Proof of Work".. Real work like blog posts, and contributions, not mining..

I quote:

"LTBcoins will not be mined using algorithmic computations like most crypto-currency. Instead, LTBcoins will be distributed based on a “Proof of Work” concept, in which the “work” will be contributions of valuable content, editorial services, project leadership, tipping, and many other value-added activities that will benefit the growth and sustainability of the network. "

http://ltbcoin.com/ltbcoin-for-new-users

Thanks for your thoughts. We are breaking new ground here every day, so we need all the ideas we can get!

I like LTBcoin's approach, but as we previously stated: distribution happens through them. This isn't bad, but it forever means that LTBcoin is dependent on LTB. If we did like LTB, in the case of The Cypherfunks, it means we might have to approach it more as a "company". Do it more in the fashion of Niceplum (http://niceplum.bandcamp.com/). Any proceeds (profit from whatever) goes to owners of the tokens. Except contributions are from anyone, not just one person. I like this approach, and it's worth trying (as an alternative). But I just really dig the decentralized approach. . Much more experimental, chaotic, creative and fun imho.

@nox, soundposition:

Yep. Will get to that somewhere this week. Will post the draft here for feedback. Already started last night.

No no no.. No company.. Let's keep it decentralized for sure.. I mean that IS the appeal of this approach at least for me.

[groggin]

  

Just spitballing ideas, could we integrate some kind of decentralised voting mechanism for reward of artists? This could integrate with the in-wallet player concept

   +1  

 heavycoin's wallet has built-in dectralized voting for the block reward

                                  

[simondlr]

No no no.. No company.. Let's keep it decentralized for sure.. I mean that IS the appeal of this approach at least for me.

We share sentiments.

[soundposition]

  

Just spitballing ideas, could we integrate some kind of decentralised voting mechanism for reward of artists? This could integrate with the in-wallet player concept

   +1  

Right but how do we make it a trustless decentralized integrated voting system? Whew, that sounded technical.

I know BitVote has the answer!?

http://bitvote.net/

Project Highlight: BitVote
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iderhH6ttA

Something sort of like that?

I'm tempted to reach out to them to let them know about us at least.

[soundposition]

heavycoin's wallet has built-in dectralized voting for the block reward                      

Interesting, thanks for sharing that. I see they developed their voting system to democratically decide the mining schedule. It seems to work, although it's a bit complicated (to me at least). Although not sure how complicated in comparison to Bitvote it is which seems similar to how it works.

[n00bnoxious]

I know BitVote has the answer!?

http://bitvote.net/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iderhH6ttA

i just edited my post above ... heavycoin?

I was actually just thinking of HVC... They do decentralised voting, but the incentive is to increase block rewards, so directly tied to their own earnings. Not sure if this financially translates into a voting mech for artists.

Unfortunately Youtube has been broken all day for me so I can't watch the video, but "Who will be able to use bitvote? Any individual that has a computer and a basic set of bioauthentication devices  (iris scan, webcam, fingerprint scanner)" truly terrifies me... All it'd take is for an algo to turn out broken and the consequences could be astronomically bad.

I'm sure there's a way around this...

[soundposition]

I know BitVote has the answer!?

http://bitvote.net/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iderhH6ttA

i just edited my post above ... heavycoin?

I was actually just thinking of HVC... They do decentralised voting, but the incentive is to increase block rewards, so directly tied to their own earnings. Not sure if this financially translates into a voting mech for artists.

Unfortunately Youtube has been broken all day for me so I can't watch the video, but "Who will be able to use bitvote? Any individual that has a computer and a basic set of bioauthentication devices  (iris scan, webcam, fingerprint scanner)" truly terrifies me... All it'd take is for an algo to turn out broken and the consequences could be astronomically bad.

I'm sure there's a way around this...

I like your attitude n00bnoxious.. If there is a will, there is a way. I share your optimism, there IS a way around this.

One nice thing about all of this is it shows us that if anyone did attack and screw up the whole thing, we can always scrap it and start over.. It's nice to know that it's like a sand castle.

[n00bnoxious]

One nice thing about all of this is it shows us that if anyone did attack and screw up the whole thing, we can always scrap it and start over.. It's nice to know that it's like a sand castle.

It's great while we have such a small, insular user base. I wouldn't like to attempt a relaunch if we had loads of users, exchanges and pools. Hard forks and relaunches are a nightmare...