Did we ever get a final answer on if PtP (pay the producer) was going to be implemented? This may affect the viability of some people’s apps.
Edit:
Also, I have an app idea that I would like to implement, but I’m no developer, I’m a back end systems guy. If a UI/UX designer would be interested in hearing out my idea and teaming up, please message me. It is an idea that works to maintain and archive an important part of human history. It does have a few foundations that work to preserve this history on the current Internet, but it would have a natural place on the Safe Network, and a well designed supporting app could make it much more usable than the current versions in existence. I know the post said they were creating a place to discuss this sort of stuff, but I haven’t seen one, yet, so I decided to post here for the time being.
BTW its Pay the Provider since the network has no knowledge of who was a producer of a piece of content and to try would be near impossible to do when there is no authority to appeal to. Just try to find who owns what music track.
No. It was considered to be something tested later on. Mind you that later on is much closer now.
It is a game changer (in the world) for the network, any network, to be paying (even a tiny amount) to people who provide content people want to view/play/utilise. Things from movies, art, music, wiki, tutorials, and so on.
This is no longer the case. The Hydra Blockchain pays 50% of the fees in its network to the creators of dapps that people use.
Reimbursement to Smart Contract Creators
Chains that support smart contract functionality such as Ethereum do not incentivize developers for their contribution to the network. The only incentive for them is to build a profitable business around the chain, which is a strong limiting factor to the overall development of the ecosystem. There are many useful applications that do not necessarily allow for a profit to be applied.
The Hydra chain solves this important gap at protocol-level by enabling a reimbursement of transaction fees to token creators. The mechanism effectively rewards project owners based on the transactional economy they create, by getting a share of each transaction their token was involved with.
Adjustments to the reimbursement rate can be made by voting on it within a range of 0% and 50%. Combined with the staking mechanism, this creates a truly shared environment, where network participants are rewarded on all levels for the value they add to the ecosystem.
Of course, I’m giving information that someone is testing the concept for us for free at their own expense with millions of dollars. It will be interesting to follow their success or failure.
Hmmmmm about this, I should have said it from the start, guess I was too exited about the news and forgot. But right from the start, the Tezos foundation was staking funds to support their ecosystem.
FYI: I mentioned the BambooGarden fund as a way to fund gitoxide (a set of git libraries in Rust) to its maintainer in a conversation about funding by Radicle which looks unlikely to happen.
Gitoxide is an impressive project and has working code but many gaps in its git functionality, currently two developers including the maintainer. My impression of him is very good indeed, technically and in general and he’s keen to support and develop open source decentralisation in Rust.
So it isn’t surprising that he’s interested in finding a way forward in collaboration with Safe Network, such as a bid for funding of Git Portal or a similar Safe app using gitoxide. He’s too busy to give time to this right now but hopes to do so in future.
Has anyone got some good historical research / current status on these types of funds? What works and what doesn’t? What to avoid vs what went better than expected?
I started looking into this a little in the researching network updates and governance topic, which looks at how Dash and Tezos manage their grants / funds. Ethereum foundation also does a lot of grants but I don’t know much about their process or level of success or community reception. Zcash is another project that does a lot of grant work too.
The idea of grant giving isn’t new, but I’m wondering if there’s any stuff particularly in this decentralized network space we need to be aware of? Also should we be aiming to avoid overlap? Or aiming at some cooperation with other groups? Seems like an area that’s very active these days but I’m not seeing much discussion around the current environment which seems like it would be very important to understand if we want to get the most out of these funds.
Good point. The primary objective here is to launch and the fund should fund Engineers/consultants/Universities and possible security audits as the initial focus.
Then we have app/project applications to get user engagement as the 2nd wave. Some may happen in parallel, but this push to launch does need to be key IMO.
The only one I have any knowledge of is the earlier MaidSafe scheme which funded the initial Safe Browser. That worked very well, and helped recruit Josh!
@dirvine having some apps at or as close to launch as possible is also important for launch.
The distinction is no apps work on an incomplete Network, so let’s make sure that the Network is prioritised first. We’re in control of when it gets launched, and what suite of features and apps are required when the big green button gets pushed, and can time it appropriately. But we are naturally applying caution before lighting the fund’s candle at both ends.
But then again, that’s why we have a committee with a big community presence to guide it!
I think David gives the impression that apps are low priority until after launch.
You don’t need launch to develop apps. You need APIs and a functioning test network. Those are core responsibilities and shouldn’t be dependent on the fund.
So I would say once that point is reached, the move to launch and development of apps are both able to happen, and having some impressive apps will be very important part of a successful launch.
You don’t need to launch before you start developing apps, and as he says they can be developed in parallel.
1st wave of funding for network dev doesn’t mean that the 2nd wave is post launch, just that the first priority is at the network level, with that underway and accelerated by the fund, then we can start opening things up.
We are cognisant of the fact that even though the committee is large, it doesn’t have unlimited time either, so accepting and properly assessing applications from all angles might reduce efficiency somewhat too.
And also remembering that folk can put a lot of time and effort into applying to the fund too. It sucks to do all that, and then have an application sat in a big pile waiting for it to be assessed, or in some opaque holding pattern.
You’re clarifying, but I’m still not sure we are all saying quite the same thing! Anyway, I’ve said my piece and will let you get back to the important stuff. Thanks Jim.
Possibly, incorrectly though. I see apps as essential to launch, but launch is so important. i.e. I am saying it would be good to get some consulting / projects right now on
Thanks David, this explains the potential need to prioritise which is where the uncertainty about when apps might be funded arises. A lot hinges on the committee, how many good proposals there are, and then how much time is needed to manage each one.
I suspect it will take a while to get up to speed, and then still require quite a bit of time to process and manage. So it seems likely you will have to prioritise as the post to which I replied suggests.
Imo the only 3 apps needed for a popular launch are safebrowser, safedrive and safemail reference implementations. After that come a messenger, voice and video phone capabilities like irc, whattsapp, jitsi or zoom. With that you have an basic internet replacement.
If done right, regular Git should just work on safedrive. Otherwise the safedrive api needs more polishing and posix.
p.s. This list includes a baked in a wallet mechanism as part of cli that is accessible through the browser. THE CLI IS FUNDAMENTAL. I don’t really view the cli as an app. Otherwise a wallet app gets same priority as safedrive / core, giving you a basic set of 4 for launch.
p.s.s. All we REALLY need as a user interface for launch is the cli, with built in payment functions, and a working posix compliant safe network filesystem api / snfs.
