Proposal “Proof_of_Labour“ (Closed)Back

Title:Proof of Labour Improvement Proposal
Owner:juliomoros
Monthly amount: 220 DASH (205717 USD)
Completed payments: no payments occurred yet (4 month remaining)
Payment start/end: 2016-04-06 / 2016-08-20 (added on 2016-02-22)
Final voting deadline: in passed
Votes: 496 Yes / 568 No / 0 Abstain
External information: www.dashwhale.org/p/Proof.of.Labour

Proposal description

This proposal is a work plan which in this stage assesses the options on the grounds of the abundant open source solutions already existing to develop a decentralized system serving to widen the options for money creation to any agreement based any useful human labor.

We introduce the concept of “proof of labour” as an asset created by certain kinds of smart contracts.

This is the Dashtalk thread: 

https://dashtalk.org/threads/budget-proposal-proof-of-labour.8108
 
All the details for this proposal are in this document:

https://goo.gl/TSKuE6

We invested the best of our efforts to summarize all the arguments that we regarded as essential to understand the proposal.
 
We are a team of two Venezuelan professionals, an electrical engineer and a code developer.

English is not of course our native language, so we apologize to everybody for our “Yoda” speaking style.

So, if there is any part hard to understand, please feel free to ask anything to us.
 
So we hope for everybody to be able to read the document comfortably and calmly, taking the time needed to draw your own conclusion. That is why we thought the best timepoint was April the 6th.
 
WHY WE THOUGHT THAT THIS PROPOSAL WAS PERTINENT TO DASH WHALE?
 
1°.- Because it is the pertinent public for this subject. Very few other places are so appropriate to discuss a subject like this, and very few the people able to understand it.
 
2°.-Because we would have the privilege to be funded by the masternode owners with a money created in a more freely and cleaner way than the limited and conflictive way that fiat money is created.
 
3°.- It is anattractive proposal. By widening the options for money creation, this proposal gives everyone the oportunity to make a lot of money.
 
If well designed, a monetary system is very powerful to bring welfare to everybody, change the rules of the market game and transform the same social structures of mankind.
 
The cryptocurrency proof-of-work was the first step to take back the power of money creation from authoritative hands to everybody’s hands.
 
But to really widespread the use of cryptocurrencies on global scale, two kind of innovation are needed:
 
* Scaling the processing capacity to a large number of transactions per second. About this problem there are already many brilliant people working on it (Like Poon and Dryja working on the  lightening project, or the project of segregated witness as well).
 
* Broaden the options of the process of money creation, about which there are very few people working, at this moment.
 
We came to Dash Whale with the aims to offer an integral solution, over which there is much work to do.
 
We wish to dedicate to this project the best of our efforts and we think this is the best way to get funded.

From now, we appreciate your interest and support.

Show full description ...

Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?

Submit comment
 
0 points,1 year ago
What am I missing about the voting rules ? How come it still needs 334 votes despite already having a slim majority ?
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
1.The "Net Votes" (i.e., the total of "Yes" votes minus the total of "No" votes) must be greater than 10% of all active Masternodes.
2.The "Monthly Amount" requested must fit into the current total available budget. Proposals are given priority based on the "Net Votes." If there is a tie, the proposal with the most "Yes" votes gets priority.
3.A proposal must be over 24 hours old.
4.A proposal must be submitted at least three days before the budget deadline.

ref : http://dashvotetracker.com/
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Thanks a lot quizzie. Not looking too hopeful then. Need some last minute crusaders.
One other thing - whats the difference between the “Vote within” deadline and the “Final voting deadline” ?

(Sorry - didn’t read the manual as you can see. Feel free to point me in its direction ;) )
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
i think the difference is as follows :

* Vote within : to vote till first payment term starts (this means one-time payments will have equal "Vote within" & "Final voting deadline" dates)
* Final voting deadline : calculates and sums up the number of payment terms
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
The DARQ podcast hosted the authors of this proposal. Check it out for more details. http://darq.io/media/ep16
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
I don't think people realise that this is a research project - not an actual executive hardfork. As a research project it is very valuable.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
I'm voting for this.

This is a great proposal. IMO, one of the best that's ever been presented to the blockchain. There are lots of questions and concerns regarding implementation, but I just read the last page of their document and realised that all they’re asking for right now is support for a research phase that’s required to do a kind of detailed technical feasibility study for possibly implementation.

I think it will be great value for money and whether it goes the full mile or not, we’ll learn a huge amount about use cases. This is where crypto needs to go IMO.

I've got 2 masternodes so that will even the score :)
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
Thanks for your opinion, I appreciate it. Yes, ultimately, they're not proposing anything 100%, but a plan on how to create an economy that works at the lower levels - the non-insider levels, and I agree this needs to be figured out :D I'll throw my votes in as well. Please post on the DashTalk thread as well because I think most people are so afraid of this one, or so confused, they're simply knee jerking a NO! vote :) Thanks again!
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
too soon. next year
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
why not do private funded research first to see if it would even work and then in 4-5? months come back and ask for funding to implement it. it would support that.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
I think I might have just had an epiphany, well a personal epiphany at least. The theory is kind of like Ayn Rand's description of where money really comes from, which is from producing. Please tell me if this is the gist of the idea.:

First, these negative tokens are brought into existence from "thin air" or nowhere. Perhaps they will be given a certain value (maybe correlated to the value of the USD, lets say) They come into existence when a person spends them (creating a credit in their wallet). In a way, this is the start of a completely new monetary medium - lets call it Dash Scryp. Each Dash Scryp is valued at a USD. So, your baker uses his initial Dash Scryp to buy flour, butter, sugar and yeast at different places, he spends 100 Dash Scryp. He now has a negative balance of -100 Dash Scryp. He bakes up 100 loaves of bread and sells them for 2 Dash Scryp each. He now can pay back his 100 Dash Scryp debt and has increased his real value by 100 Dash Scryp due to the labor he put into the system. Not only that, his ability to borrow just went up, say 100%, so he can spend 300 Dash Scryp now due to his rating going up.

Another person who bought a loaf is down 2 Dash Scryp, he can pay that back, perhaps, by buying Dash Scryp at an exchange or else, perhaps he is an artist. He paints a painting, and sells it for Dash Scryp,

In a way, this is a debt based system, isn't it? Where funds are created based on debt? If the Baker doesn't ever use his credit line again, where will the new funds come from in this system? It needs new funds in order for it to grow, no? So really, new people who enter the system also bring in new money by creating debt and the first users continue to borrow, turning their borrowed coins into real coins via productivity (energy), and thus increase their stored wealth.

The increase in credit can be manipulated to keep the Dash Scryp equal to one dollar at all times. Or other systems could be at play, in case of a sudden flooding of scryp in the market place, such as the nubits system does.

You talk about community agreements. Where the community somehow gives a member the credit line. This is where I get a headache simply because it sounds idealistic and unworkable. I personally doubt any community of people can understand such a concept, and rather, I think that the entire system, one system as a whole would need to be automated to provide the initial setup. I think the Dash Scryp would need to be accessible from other forms of stored energy, such as fiat. Because in reality, not everyone will be able to enter this system so easily at first. They'll need to pay off their “debt” and may not be able to get anyone to pay them their salaries etc... in Dash Scryp. So how else would they enter the system as a consumer (person who buys the bread)? They'd have to be able to utilize the kind of "energy" they have access to (IE: fiat)

So why use this Dash Scryp? Well, what if your initial loan amount can be somehow based on an initial investment, maybe you could open an account, and buy 10 Dash Scryp. By doing that, you're given 10 Dash Scryp credit line. Now you have double the purchasing power (you could even sell all of them on an exchange to do business in fiat) but you have to pay them back. Why pay them back? Because then your credit line again increases. Now this is arbitrary, but you can see that the user instantly doubles their buying power, and from that point on, with good management and payback, he will be able to increase his credit limit. Energy that keeps the coins growing can come from any source. From selling goods and services or buying Dash Scryp from an exchange. This energy increases the number of Dash Scryp in existance.

The number of Dash Scryp available, can be calculated with the asset backed Dash using a nubit/nushares type of approach. Or perhaps another mechanism. There would have to be a way to keep the Dash Scryp at a stable rate of exchange.

Anyway, is this something like what you're trying to do? Is there a reason that it's so much more complex than this? I realize I may be missing the whole point, so please tell me where I'm going wrong, thanks so much!

As far as funds that are never paid back, those losses would be absorbed in the system, and the user would lose access to this form of finance. This whole system would require an absolute way to identify a person so that they can not create more than one account, ever. If they don't pay back their debt, then they have no funds to play with anymore, until they do. Actually this is a self healing system. If you can't pay back, and don't, your debt sits there until you can, at which point, you can re-enter the system.
Reply
-1 point,1 year ago
You have a sexy brain.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
I don't think it is quite like the debt based system. Although there is a form of "debt" involved in the form of a bond, it's full reserve. The negative amount is backed by a plus in another address.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
What other address? Who has to put out for this system to work? Does it even touch Dash as a reserve?
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
I think this proposal is very interesting. It should get a lot of thought to match the thought that has clearly been put into it. I'm not sure how negative balances squares with Dash as a gold metaphor though. (Dash is a clone of bitcoin and bitcoin was a metaphor for gold).

You cannot have negative 'gold'. Plain and simple. You can have negative "accounting" for gold but not negative gold.

Need to think.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
By the way roger, I think what you state is a general confusion about the concept of money.

Money is an agreement. Is not an object. Gold may serve as a kind of metaphor, but gold is not money. The value given to the gold by a community, is what is money.

When it comes to the form of using it, what difference it makes between "negative accounting" for gold and "negative gold"?
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Ok, you have a point. But I see an issue when the monetary medium is accounting for itself. The accounting should ideally be abstracted away from the monetary level.

For example, if we are accounting for gold on a piece of paper and you sell me your gold then I have an accounting record that says I own the gold. We traded gold at a secondary level (the accounting level) but not at the base level (the physical level).

I own +1kg of paper gold.
You own +1Kg of physical gold and -1 Kg of paper gold.

The negative is at a different abstraction layer from the +ve. That's what gives the physical layer it's integrity because any default is confined to the layer that's abstracted away from the base monetary medium (in this case the accounting layer).

You are proposing to merge these two layers which is kind of unprecedented I think.

Need to think.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
I see.

I agree that It may have different layers in the physical world (the accounting balance and the tokens), but at digital or conceptual level, they are dual.

I may be wrong though. But I don't see a difference between a digital negative coin transfered to an address, and a negative accounting entry.

What may concern people is that debt in a crypto-currency which is defelationary, may become in a headache. And that is why I say it should be tested and used in a side chain, and do not disturb the actual dash operations.

These tools to be developed should be seen as alternatives. And again, as I told you, we are open to think.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
The sidechain idea sounds interesting. that could be a way to trial it. The thing is your proposal is very extensive and thought out. You've put a lot of technical detail into it on actual implementation so I think something should be done with it if it's found to have a sound economic basis.

Out of interest may we know your professional backgrounds ? Do you have previous experience in this type of business and financial modelling work ?

I’ve only read half the proposal. I need to read all the way through and then go back and it again to get familiar with the terminology.

By the way, whether it gets approved or not, I think it’s great that you’ve submitted this and the community should be pleased that it’s receiving proposals of such technical depth and ambition.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
I think that your concern reflects the opinion of the most of who has being skeptical to the proposal.

The concern related to any disruption bringing "negative dashes" to the platform.

As I stated in some comments at dashtalk : If there is something difficult, risky and delicate is to disrrupt any system which already works.

Dash is not the exeption. This is not a proposal to disturb the mechanics that already dash has, because it would affect awfully the dash price in the market, and that would obviosly hurt us all.

The proposal here is a way to expose a set of solutions to real needs. And here "solution" should be read as an "alternative". Which alternatives do not exist right now?

* An elaborated smart contract to emulate the regular banking administrative trust. Think of the power of a solution like this. Total freedom from any stock exchange chamber. The ability to ofer to anyone real paying-dividends-shares of your business. The ability to create really fair crowdfundings. The ability to offering a really secure clud minery, safe from any kind of the scams.

* A smart contract to help a bunch of people to organize themeselves to create a business, and to operate them in the way to be able to create money (flow scrip system).

And related to these ideas, there is a concept of -UTXO, to be tested, but also a concept of -coinbase, that could work as well.

* And over all: The option to use whatever alternative will work better and discard whatever which don't.

The same way, negative coin concept, is an alternative to be tested in side chains or colored, in any way that it don't affect the today mechanics of dash, otherwise it would be too dangerous to dash.

But Let's remember that in order to be decentralized, all the code created needs to be open source. Open to anyone to imporve it or test it.

I want this idea, not oly to be usefull to dash, but also watching carefully the suggestions of the dash community, as we advance in our work.

I know it is a very ambitious project.

In every project there is a first stage to be developed, and it is the conceptual design. We wrote our proposal as a first explanation for the conceptual. I'm well aware that there is already a budget for code development in dash community, but as I understand it is related for detailed project stages the most.

Before to start a coding project, is usefull to seek for previous development. May be all the solutions we need for our proposal, already exist, and we just need put all them together. May be some needs a further code work.

The work we like to do is some like of the next step after a conceptual design: Specific technical papers explaining how every idea can be accoplished, and what are the open source projects already done or in development right now.

And yes, we are open to think or adapt our proposal to any suggestions from dash community.

Regards.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
What advantages does Dash in particular have as a platform for this type of flow bond ? How is it more appropriate than a specialist smart contracts platform like, say Ethereum or Counterparty or Bitbay ? (Or even Bitshares with its granularised banking model)
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Because (imho) Dash has been the first paradigm in introducing a decentralized clearing house system: The masternodes. Proof of Service is a step towards the proof of labour.

As I understand them, Counterparty, Bitbay, Bitshares can not guarantee the payment of dividends over its shares. To do it in a trustlessly way you need smart contracts.

But you are riwght, Ethereum is a great platform, the best I think. But dash is by the moment the best cryptocurrency.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Ah, so you mean the system that Dash has in place to guarantee payouts of funds straight from the blockchain once approved by the stakeholders ? Ok.

I like the idea and I can see why you came up with it - it's basically an extension of the proof of service concept out into the actual human economy. I also think that it would be a way for Dash to further diversify itself and actually hook in a vertical sector.

It’s just that those damn negative balances do jarr a little bit, plus the fact that reading your paper it looks like hardforks might be required all over the place and we may be customising an entire cryptocurrency just for this application.

If there was a way to benignly trial it it would be good.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
I don't think the idea of a negative future value of a wallet works. In the fiat world, yeah you can tie a negative future value to a business or person - so loans are possible. But with Dash, you can just create a new wallet and dump any wallets with negative value - no way to really collect on a loan.

There is a need to allow credit to produce a good in the future, but it needs to be tied to collateral(or debt on person/business). Maybe you can tie a loan to a future payment stream of masternode payments.

I will admit, I am still trying to fully understand your proposal and look forward to a video or something easier to understand.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
I understand the concern of dash community about this subject.

Cryptocurrency systems shouldn't change if already work as they are. We propose a solution for sybil attack based on two alternative elements, and the dash community may discard the one they don't like. And even so, the system may be compatible with dash; This solution looks for:

#1.- One reputed wallet for each person.
#2.- One flow scrip contract to each business wallet.

How to prove you are one single person? Is a tricky subject.

I think it may be solved by some form of a "pay it forward" system that creates your reputation (look at the page 6 of the paper). An internship, some work for help to your community, and so on. If this were the only criteria, you may be able to create many reputed wallets, but they only will have reputation by paying the due services to the community, for each wallet.

You may receive each credit line in exchange for your "favors". This way you have reputation, to use it as form of credit transaction as you please.

But by the other hand, let's pay some little attention to systems of service like Uber.

Nobody feels comfortable stepping into the car of someone you don't know

In order to ease any trading based community, people sholud walk out from the anonimity shadows.
You may remain anonymous (is your right), but under such condition you woudln't offer too much services or products. Some personal info may be available about you. Just the needed. I know that structures like Uber are centralized, but as rule of thumb, if it works in centralized fashion, there is at least one solution to work as decentralized way. One option are these sponsor and bakers pools giving reputation to wallets, and the line of credit working as collaterals. These pools may retain detailed info about the user who offer services as well.

I think this proposal may offer a lot of solutions without disruptin the dash structure.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Yes, I understand your concern.

But what you describe is precisely what is called "sybil attact".

In the proposed system, you may have negative coins only with reputed wallets. And that is the crucial concept here.

We are proposing a reputed wallet is possible/feasible by the means of a hierarchical deterministic wallets, which allows you to generate a set of public keys without knowing the corresponding private keys. Using as a first public data of the wallet some personal ID data, or bio-data. This bio data would be useless to manipulate your accounts, only to indicate where to deposit funds.

What we propose is that a person just can have one reputed wallet. And each flow scrip contract, just one business wallet.

We are working on a short video. But whatever happens with this project we appreciate the interest of the community on our proposal.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
We want to thank everyone of you for your interest in our proposal. We have been adivised to make a more simple version-explanation, may be through a very short video. We are working on it.
We appreciate a lot if you take your time to digest with all your comfort this proposal, and contact us if is there any question. We will be very glad to answer to you.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
I like it. Dash needs some cool applications on the second tier, especially smart contrats.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
Thanks!!!
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
Would appreciate a TLDR version for us non techies too! Thank you!
Reply
2 points,1 year ago
You're right dude, let us try to do a little video to make it more illustrative. But it will take us some days.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Sounds like something Dash could really put to use... I think you guys should write up some sort of example use case that is very common and put that right here as the top comment to give people a better idea of why this could be game changing for Dash.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
It's a deal. In dashtalks we've just put an example, let me copy here:

Ok, The system we propose works, more or less this way:

1°.- let's suppose you're a baker. The product of your labor/business is bread.
2°.- You know that in your community your bread would be well received. So you announce an offer to deliver, say 10 Kg of your delicius bread weekly, for one year.
3°.- And you launch a campaign. So, in 30 days there are enough people (a community) fans for your bread. The potential clients, giving reputation to your business.
4°.- You create a smart contract wich is validated by the most of, or all of your fans. This community is now the owner of the contract for the products offered (breads).
You have a compromise to make availabe to the community 10 Kg of bread weekly, for one year.
5°.- To warrant your fulfillment, the smart contract create a negative balance in the main address of your business wallet (Te price of all the 10 Kg of bread): CHarge Account.
To make valid your contract you give the manage of this account to another decentralized pool (A master-pool <--- the guys who randomly "verify" the transaction sales, similar like masternodes).
6°.- But as reward, you will receive the same amount of coins but with positive value, deposited in your credit account.
7°.- During the week you can use the positive coins to buy whatever you like within your community to other business with other flow scrip contracts.
8°.- Everyone who buys to you a bread, pays the price to your charge account, so positive and negative coins for that price amount dissapears.
9°.- At the end of the week, all the positive coins you haven't spent or negative coins of breads you didn't sold, are destroyed by the smart contract.
10°.- Inmediately a new amount in coins for the price of the 10 Kg of bread are created in your charge account (negative coins) and in your credit account (positive).

Your commercial activity gives you credit to your personal reputed wallet (wich is unique, and identifies you on the network)
Your reputation in your community also enhance your credit line.
So if you need money, you can create it by a "credit transaction", leaving in your wallet the negative coins.

In the system you can receive negative coins to your account, only if you authorize it.
While you have a negative balance in your personal wallet, you can not participate in investments.
But here are no interests, and no hurry to pay your debt.

As you invest in new business projects in the community you become shareholder of new business, receiving money to more credit accounts, increasing your purchase power, and your personal credit line.

This projects will only work because a digital and cheap version of banking trust accounts can be replicated bay a smart trus (a still non existent smart contract).

But once in existence these tools make you ern a lot of money. Well, not olny to you, but for everybody.

=) regards,

P.S. please excuse my misspellings
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
It seems like a cool gadget, but I don't see how it's useful. Commerce is sloppy because it is organized around the individual, not socialist collectives pretending they're not socialist... I can see this having a limited effect in co-op type environments, but it's hard enough to get them to use the money that already exists... Your plan expects way too much of people. Way more than I did. I see it as a really neat thing you can do, but to what end? The same reason mass transit only works in massive socialist enclaves (cities). People like their independence. Yes, it's inefficient to do what I want, when I want. But, my freedom to go buy bread from the store whenever I want, instead of on a contract/schedule, is worth it to me, and the business that sells it to me. I also like being able to go buy it somewhere else because sometimes I go other places, shock! Maybe I want to try different bread? It's a cool gadget, but it's predicated upon a bunch of false assumptions, the root of which is that everyone is a cloned generic carbon unit and we're all the same and we all do the same and live the same and... It's just not useful in reality. Even the most boring couch potatoes leave town now and then. Community is not everything. Communism is essentially the idea that community is everything and it's wrong. You're trying to make communism look like capitalism, and this means freedom to do what you want, not be on a bread contract for a year... Commodities. You don't contract them. You put them on a shelf and people buy them from you if they feel like. It's a hugely complex thing used to justify an end concept that we already know doesn't work...
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
It's not this idea that is bad.... It's that the concepts that it suggests to support have already been proven defective by history over and over again, for reasons that have not changed, even if crypto has changed or could change much... It should facilitate freedom, not bind us to a box of people against our will... But. And I hate to say this... If you've lived in an echo chamber your whole life, I guess you'd be loath to admit that we're not all the same and not all like you.

How about we just buy and sell stuff with DASH? Wanna buy my cool gun? Scan my QR code, send, when IX shows me it's done, I hand it to you... Why does the whole town need to be involved? Individuals. this is what you're forgetting. There is no collective. There is no community. There are only individuals. The smallest granular unit.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
(By "compromise" he means "promise") http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=compromiso
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
I agree with you we should prepare smoething more. Let us plan smomething better for this week. Thank you really for your interest!!
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
He has been in contact with me on Twitter. I told him to register and start a thread on DashTalk.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Thanks for your support and help dude!
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Hello juliomoros,

Can you register at dashtalk.org and create a new thread in the "general" section with the title "Budget Proposal - Proof of Labour"? You can reach a larger portion of the community there and start a discussion of this proposal.
Reply
1 point,1 year ago
Ready!

This is the new thread:

https://dashtalk.org/threads/budget-proposal-proof-of-labour.8108/
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Ok wls, I´m registering!
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Thank you Julio for posting this interesting and comprehensive proposal. I'll get back to you here, after digesting the full paper.
Reply
0 points,1 year ago
Thank u rango. Take your time. Do not hesitate to ask.
Reply