Pre-Proposal Discussion: Dash to fund Tezos

[demo]

Tezos is a self-amendment Nomic Bank that can instantiate any cryptocoin.
So they can instantiate dash.
Would you like dash to fund Tezos, in order they instantiate dash in their platform?

 

[demo]

<vote history>
Would you like dash to fund Tezos in order they instantiate dash in their platform?
* yes 1 vote(s) 100.0%, no 0 vote(s) 0.0%, other 0 vote(s) 0.0%
</vote history>

 

[GrandMasterDash]

I thought Tezos uses it's own ledger? - but most definitely, if they had a node incentive programme, I'd be all over it.

It's great watching these alts maturing. Imo, the top REQUIREMENTS for next-level-crypto, that will resign bitcoin to the history books are:

• code lock down and governance (like Tezos)
• formal verification (like Synereo / Tezos)
• anonymity (like Monero / ZClassic etc)
• node incentive programme (like Dash / NEM etc)
• token tax i.e. user created tokens that automatically pay a transfer tax e.g. for local government funding

 

[halso]

I just looked at their website and the first thing I read was a lie. Tezos is the first and only blockchain with decentralised governance.

 

[GrandMasterDash]

I just looked at their website and the first thing I read was a lie. Tezos is the first and only blockchain with decentralised governance.

I wouldn't call that a lie, maybe just a bad choice of words. What they are doing is something I've been saying for years; namely self-awareness. They're applying the pillar of blockchain tech to the code itself. I truly believe in time this will become the norm.. only private and government blockchains will retain their own governance.

 

[demo]

I thought Tezos uses it's own ledger? - but most definitely, if they had a node incentive programme, I'd be all over it.

Here is where Arthur Breitman describes how Tezos can become any ledger and any coin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mgaDpuMSc0&feature=youtu.be&t=1930

As long as they can become any coin, I think they should be able to describe in their protocol a node incentive programme too.

Tezos is promising, I think the masternodes should fund the Tezos team to port dash into Tezos. Of course I dont know how much Tezos team wants to be paid, and how much the masternodes are willing to offer for that job. So if the result of this poll is positive and the proposal passes also from the budget, and as long as the masternodes are not allowed to vote with numbers and define the price, then someone should contact tezos team and do the price negotiations.

 

[halso]

I wouldn't call that a lie, maybe just a bad choice of words. What they are doing is something I've been saying for years; namely self-awareness. They're applying the pillar of blockchain tech to the code itself. I truly believe in time this will become the norm.. only private and government blockchains will retain their own governance.

"They're applying the pillar of blockchain tech to the codeitself" - what does that mean?

 

[demo]

"They're applying the pillar of blockchain tech to the codeitself" - what does that mean?

it means that they vote for the software updates, using blockchain.

 

[goto1415]

Honestly, I looked at the website and I don't really get what Tezos actually is, someone ELI5. If I don't understand it and it can't be explained clearly in laymen terms then a.) it's too complicated for the average Joe and b.) I can't make an informed decision on if it's needed - which is why I voted other.

If it's governance for Dash then Dash already has that - and so far, I like Dash's governance model.

How exactly would this benefit Dash?

 

[demo]

Honestly, I looked at the website and I don't really get what Tezos actually is, someone ELI5. If I don't understand it and it can't be explained clearly in laymen terms then a.) it's too complicated for the average Joe and b.) I can't make an informed decision on if it's needed - which is why I voted other.

If it's governance for Dash then Dash already has that - and so far, I like Dash's governance model.

How exactly would this benefit Dash?

<vote history>Would you like dash to fund Tezos in order they instantiate dash in their platform? yes 1 vote(s) 33.3% , no 1 vote(s) 33.3%, other 1 vote(s) 33.3% </vote history>

 

[demo]

a.) it's too complicated for the average Joe.

If you care so much about average joe, then why you deal with cryptocurrencies? Average joe cannot understand cryptocurrencies at all. Average joe cannot use internet. Average joe cannot even read or calculate. Those things are too complicated for him.

If it's governance for Dash then Dash already has that - and so far, I like Dash's governance model.
How exactly would this benefit Dash?

You pay a lot of money from the budget in things that are bullshits. You pay for advertising, for videos, for online stores and communities, for feasts. Just pay a small amount of money also for research. It wont hurt you, trust me.

Tezos' timocracy is more sophisticated that dash's timocracy , and dashers have a lot of things to learn from tezos. Although I hate timocracies (like Tezos or Dash), Tezos contains a lot of innovative features that can be used in Direct Democracy . Thats why I support Tezos efforts.

 

[halso]

it means that they vote for the software updates, using blockchain.

Dash voted for 2mb blocks

 

[qwizzie]

Dash voted for 2mb blocks

and reached consensus within 24 hours.

I also do not see the clear advantage for Dash here. It looks like Tezos (just like Dash) developed a blockchain supported consensus model, where stakeholders in their coin will have voting power.
Only they chose a pure Proof of Stake model and are supporting Turing complete smart contracts, security-wise that immediately raises red flags for me.

Just tell us in simple words why Dash would benefit from instantiation on their platform ?

 

[GrandMasterDash]

"They're applying the pillar of blockchain tech to the codeitself" - what does that mean?

When people talk about the wonders of blockchain, they will often tell you it's great for voting and also to verify supply chains... yet so far all blockchain projects do not apply these principles to their own projects... hence you get projects like ethereum that are happy to unconditionally fork to infinity. A blockchain that behaves like gold today might magically behave like silver tomorrow... in which case it's a bit disingenuous to call them blockchain "assets". The way I understand, Tezos hopes to apply some lock down to the code such that a few elite geeks are no longer masters of the universe... thus granting stability to the little people.

 

[demo]

and reached consensus within 24 hours.

I also do not see the clear advantage for Dash here. It looks like Tezos (just like Dash) developed a blockchain supported consensus model, where stakeholders in their coin will have voting power.
Only they chose a pure Proof of Stake model and are supporting Turing complete smart contracts, security-wise that immediately raises red flags for me.

Just tell us in simple words why Dash would benefit from instantiation on their platform ?

The consensus model of Tezos reflects also to the code itself. It is not just a budget consensus. The vote has immediate result to the runtime code.

Have also a look at this comment of mine. As far as I understand Tezos, they will try to implement something like this also.

 

[halso]

Imo smart contracts are a sideshow. The real prize on offer is the payments industry and providing a more efficient mechanism for transfering value around the workd.

 

[halso]

When people talk about the wonders of blockchain, they will often tell you it's great for voting and also to verify supply chains... yet so far all blockchain projects do not apply these principles to their own projects... hence you get projects like ethereum that are happy to unconditionally fork to infinity. A blockchain that behaves like gold today might magically behave like silver tomorrow... in which case it's a bit disingenuous to call them blockchain "assets". The way I understand, Tezos hopes to apply some lock down to the code such that a few elite geeks are no longer masters of the universe... thus granting stability to the little people.

My understanding is that sentinel will allow MNs to vote on 'objects' which will include variables embedded in the code.

I could be wrong but my interpretation of Evans comments are that MN will be able to vote on sprok variables etc.

Which in essence what u are talking about.

 

[demo]

My understanding is that sentinel will allow MNs to vote on 'objects' which will include variables embedded in the code.

I could be wrong but my interpretation of Evans comments are that MN will be able to vote on sprok variables etc.

Which in essence what u are talking about.

Because something is generated by a protocol, this does not mean that it is not a tax. It is a protocol generated tax.

What I mainly argue is that 10% is a hardcoded number, thus a wrong number. This is not correct, it should be a number that fits to the will of the active members of the community. If you have a theory explaining why 10% is the correct number for the community of today, then it is ok. But you have not. So in the case a number has no theory, then this number should vary in order to fit best into the community's current needs (and vary again in order to fit to the future needs of course).

And who is about to decide the change of that number? It is either Evan, or the core team, or the MN owners, or the miners, or the wallet owners. I am in favor of the third or fourth option. I dont think the fifth option (wallet owners) is appropriate, because wallet owners get benefits from the budget (for example they hope the basic income to be written in the budget).

So lets inspect the decision tree to be voted, and how polls are dependant eachother. More dependent polls could occur of course, this is just the simpliest decision tree example about this subject.

Poll:Should 10% budget be a constant number for the present and the future?(yes/no/other)
---Voted yes/other---> end
---Voted no-------------> Poll:Should Evan decide the change of this number? (yes/no/other)

Poll:Should core team decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)
Poll:Should MN owners decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)
------ Voted no/other--->end
-------Voted yes -----------> Poll: Should MN owners decide that change by voting with numbers? (yes/no/other)
Poll:Should miners decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)
Poll:Should wallet owners decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)

​

And who is allowed to vote into this decision tree? Evan and the core team currently.

But I claim that at least MN owners should also be allowed to vote on it. Not by voting a simple yes or no for a proposed budget percentage, but by voting with a number, a number between 0% and 100%. And then the poll result should be the average of all the number votes.

Poll:Should 10% budget be a constant number for the present and the future?(yes/no/other)
---Voted yes/other---> end
---Voted no-------------> Poll:Should Evan decide the change of this number? (yes/no/other)

Poll:Should core team decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)
Poll:Should MN owners decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)
------ Voted no/other--->end
-------Voted yes -----------> Poll: Should MN owners decide that change by voting with numbers? (yes/no/other)
-------Voted yes -----------> Poll:Should MN owners decide that change by voting yes/no on a proposal of the core team? (yes/no/other)
Poll:Should miners decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)
Poll:Should wallet owners decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)



So in the decision tree, sentinel stands in the position marked as bold? Interesting...​

 

[halso]

Poll:Should 10% budget be a constant number for the present and the future?(yes/no/other)
---Voted yes/other---> end
---Voted no-------------> Poll:Should Evan decide the change of this number? (yes/no/other)

Poll:Should core team decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)
Poll:Should MN owners decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)
------ Voted no/other--->end
-------Voted yes -----------> Poll: Should MN owners decide that change by voting with numbers? (yes/no/other)
-------Voted yes -----------> Poll:Should MN ownes decide the change by voting yes/no on a proposal of the core team? (yes/no/other)
Poll:Should miners decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)
Poll:Should wallet owners decide the change of this number?(yes/no/other)



So in the decision tree, sentinel stands in the position marked as bold. Interesting...​

as with all systems of governance. Some things are fixed, some are variable. I think most people can live with that.

 

[demo]

as with all systems of governance. Some things are fixed, some are variable. I think most people can live with that.

Well in that case, and if the 10% fixed number of the budget system cannot change with sentinel, then this is exactly what tezos port may offer (among many other things) to dash.