Pre-Proposal Discussion: Dash to fund Tezos
- Thread starter demo
- Start date
- Status
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:
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
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.
Here is where Arthur Breitman describes how Tezos can become any ledger and any coin.
HTML:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mgaDpuMSc0&feature=youtu.be&t=1930Tezos 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.
Last edited:
"They're applying the pillar of blockchain tech to the codeitself" - what does that mean?
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?
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?
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.
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.
Last edited:
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 ?
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.
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.
Last edited:
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.
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.
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...
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...
Last edited:
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.
I look forward to hearing more about it. But I'm still not convinced about smart contracts. We still haven't cracked simple payments or currency exchange. Never mind turning on your toaster using your alarm clock.
You will not hear more about it, unless you change your vote to yes and you convince also others to vote yes, in order to be legitimate for someone to contact the tezos team and ask them to port dash into their platfom.
It is that simple. Voting no , and then looking forward to hearing more, this does not make sense.
<vote history>
Would you like dash to fund Tezos in order they instantiate dash in their platform?
yes 1 vote(s) (demo) 33.3%
no 1 vote(s) (halso) 33.3%,
other 1 vote(s) (goto1415) 33.3%
</vote history>
Last edited:
Below a link where Arthur Breitman describes a similar to the above tree.
HTML:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mgaDpuMSc0&feature=youtu.be&t=2054
Last edited:
No, because dash core will continue to "upgrade" with or without the consent of MNs.. AFAIK Tezos is putting control into the hands of it's users... if you want to modify against the will of the users then you'll have to fork... which makes a bloody change because right now crypto devs are the new bankers, constantly moving the goal posts and telling everyone else to fork off.
Below Arthur Breitman explains the tezos contract model.
HTML:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNerM72f0Pk&feature=youtu.be&t=1681On the other hand the language Tezos choosed is OCaml which is not a reflective language. so I am a little bit confused on whether Tezos is planning to support reflective programming or not.
Last edited:
It seems dashers do not care about a Nomic Bank.
The idea of a Nomic Bank is not a new one, this idea is at least 10 years old. But until now nobody was ever able to implement such a thing. People do not seem to be interested in defining the rules of the bank system, they prefer others to define the rules on their behalf.
Although this obvious disinterest, I am confident that a Nomic Bank will be the last step in the evolution of the Bank system.
<vote history>
Would you like dash to fund Tezos in order they instantiate dash in their platform?
yes 1 vote(s) 25.0%
no 2 vote(s) 50.0%
other 1 vote(s) 25.0%
</vote history>
The idea of a Nomic Bank is not a new one, this idea is at least 10 years old. But until now nobody was ever able to implement such a thing. People do not seem to be interested in defining the rules of the bank system, they prefer others to define the rules on their behalf.
Although this obvious disinterest, I am confident that a Nomic Bank will be the last step in the evolution of the Bank system.
<vote history>
Would you like dash to fund Tezos in order they instantiate dash in their platform?
yes 1 vote(s) 25.0%
no 2 vote(s) 50.0%
other 1 vote(s) 25.0%
</vote history>
Last edited:
Tezos? Another thing I have not heard of before. Do they have a good reputation? How long have they been around? Looking at their website... Interesting logo, I like that. It also says on their website: "Tezos is currently testing and bug fixes to move out of its prototype phase. We are scheduling to release Tezos in Q1 2017." - perhaps we should wait and see if it is successful for others before funding anything.
Dash was a pioneer cryptocoin in the governance and in the anonymity fields 2 years before. But it is not enough to have good ideas. You have to be able to implement your ideas also, and implement your ideas not good enough but with the best way. A good enough implemention is not enough if you are competing into the internet. Into the internet you have to be the best. Only the best survives, and all the rest (although good enough) they die. Nowdays Dash is not alone into the governance and anonymity fields, there are many rivals and this is dangerous for Dash.
It is urgent for Dash to invest in research in both the governance and the anonymity fields.
Especially in the governance field, it is not enough to copy and paste the ideas and the code of your rivals to become competitive. Even if you manage to copy and paste their ideas and their code, it is impossible to copy and paste the community created because of the good governance.
So to be the best in the governance field, this is the most crucial for survival.
If it is succesful for others, maybe it will be too late for Dash.
It is urgent for Dash to invest in research in both the governance and the anonymity fields.
Especially in the governance field, it is not enough to copy and paste the ideas and the code of your rivals to become competitive. Even if you manage to copy and paste their ideas and their code, it is impossible to copy and paste the community created because of the good governance.
So to be the best in the governance field, this is the most crucial for survival.
Last edited:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/tezos-disc...-blockchain-slated-springtime-release-1591018
<vote history>
Would you like dash to fund Tezos in order they instantiate dash in their platform?
yes 1 vote(s) 20.0% demo
no 3 vote(s) 60.0% fible1 , babygiraffe, halso
other 1 vote(s) 20.0% goto1415
</vote history>
<vote history>
Would you like dash to fund Tezos in order they instantiate dash in their platform?
yes 1 vote(s) 20.0% demo
no 3 vote(s) 60.0% fible1 , babygiraffe, halso
other 1 vote(s) 20.0% goto1415
</vote history>
Last edited:
- Status