09:04
Jon Snow
I won’t say what happened in qtrade today since there is a price discussion channel on discord.
09:05
I'm also not going to say anything.
09:24
Looks like someone else just joined the permament bag holding club
09:44
Toby Ganger
Out of curiosity, does anyone here think we have any chance of having an actual liquid market emerge for VEO?
15:19
Ben
not without exposing Amoveo to a broader Audience and a working MVP/UI
15:20
Toby Ganger
And do you see any probability of that happening? After 3+ years does it even seem realistic? What am I missing? I’m not doing FUD. I’m a long term bag holder.
15:35
Ben
Hard to say, it feels like we are getting closer, but sometimes it feels like Zack is more interested in the "Science part" then creating an actual Product.
15:36
but a lot of smart people are here in the channel and having from time to time fruitful Discussions about math/economics/future of money. If it at some point will lead to a product it will be big.
16:17
Toby Ganger
This is my primary concern. Social technology (money) requires some social engagement. I just don’t see any path being laid out to get from great tech to viable product with community growth and engagement.
16:42
Ben
we will see how it works out, currently it feels like we could get momentum.
01:04
Toby Ganger
I retain a sliver of optimism but it seems like it’ll take a miracle more and more every day. I’d be happy to be wrong though.
01:56
Eric Arsenault
I think the cross chain stuff is exciting, and could get some PMF...
02:23
Jeans
Maybe you're just lacking a little patience... Maybe some people are building a UI for Amoveo and maybe these people are buying veo right now... Maybe until now it didn't really matter because the product was not ready... Maybe you are not ready either... Maybe one day I will build myself a UI for Amoveo, while I am a very small veo holder, so I imagine what the big holders think...
03:13
Toby Ganger
To be fair, it has been over three years with negative community development. So I would be pleasantly surprised by something that moves positively in that direction. Don’t worry, I’m not selling. I’m just gauging what the community is feeling because my optimism is waning.
03:15
O K
I was once optimistic that we would get a rap song about prediction markets, but that waned as well
03:17
Jehan Tremback
dude, get with it, my optimism waned like 2 years ago but im still here
03:44
bitcoinsfacil - pedro
Hope that the attacking other blockchains also can waned
04:03
O K
I'm still optimistic, just not about the rap song
04:11
Jeans
It's not just a matter of being optimistic, pessimistic, or freaking out that someone is going to sell... You can see that any designer will just add a drinkable look. Then if the big bag brings liquidity, everything will be fine. If I was ten years younger and not three kids that I take care of a lot I would do that. I would find a graphic designer friend to create a nice surprise bag for me, I would scramble to integrate Zack's code which I think is a programming cream, I would create a twitter account to provoke the crypto community with my Defi 5.0 and the veo will go to $ 10,000. Here everyone will be happy and will say: "I knew it"... So as apparently here we are all mostly old people in the short term, I can only hope that we will succeed in convincing young people who have time to devote to show everyone what Amoveo can do. Sorry for my crappy English.
08:07
Zack
I am patching a potential vulnerability in the buy veo smart contract: what if an attacker asked for them to send bitcoin to an invalid address?
It had a pretty easy fix, we can add a clause to the oracle text that the address needs to be valid for that blockchain.
Updating the oracle text was far easier than the old method, because this time the oracle text is generated only in that single chalang function, erlang has access to call chalang functions now, so I only needed to change the code in one place, and it just worked.
Anyway, the attack got me thinking.
If someone made the oracle question "did 0.02 bitcoin get delivered to the address BitcoinAddress before March 1 at 12:00"
But the "BitcoinAddress" was not a valid address, so it is impossible for it to have bitcoin.
Should the oracle reporters respond "false", or "bad-question" in this situation?
Responding "false" is the correct response to this literal question.
But there is obvious evidence that this oracle question is being used as a scam, and responding "false" is helping the scammer steal money.
I feel like I lean more towards "false".
08:14
The worst case scenario is really bad, we don't want people to be able to attack the main Amoveo consensus by making these ambiguous oracles.
08:27
Eric Arsenault
can't you just say "did 0.02 bitcoin get delivered to the valid address BitcoinAddress before March 1 at 12:00"
08:30
Mr Flintstone
or you could say report true if address is invalid
08:30
so the scammer loses
08:33
if there are two addresses X and Y for a btc->eth swap for example you can customize it so that if address X is invalid then its true and if address Y is invalid then false etc
08:33
Zack
Yeah, that is how i fixed it.
08:35
Yeah, if it was explicit in the oracle text, that would be a good optimization.
I am still wondering about how to deal with ambiguous oracles Though.
08:35
Mr Flintstone
what do you think is left that could be ambiguous for the dex oracle language?
08:36
one easy way that ambiguous oracles self regulate is that nobody accepts trades on them
08:36
clearly ambiguous i should say
08:36
Eric Arsenault
yeah, ideally people don't need to enter any questions, and we will only be dealing with a handful of similar Qs
08:48
Zack
It would be nice if people could make up their own oracle questions to bet on. Like the binary contract tool supports.
08:49
Eric Arsenault
Maybe, but not sure how that fits into the dex
08:56
Mr Flintstone
it would be easy once limit orders are integrated into wallet.html
08:59
Jehan Tremback
Weren't people doing some kind of like amoveo powered cryptoeconomic crowdfunding crap?
08:59
could pay for a designer or whatever people were suggesting
09:02
Eric Arsenault
cat herding crowdfunding
09:04
you can change the reward address in a new version.
09:10
Toby Ganger
welcome to the lazychain
09:46
Eric Arsenault
If we had a nice interface for it, could work
Deleted invited Deleted Account
07:32
O K
A community person sent this to me to share with the group
07:58
Toby Ganger
I’m a quick reader and couldn’t get even halfway through the text before it disappeared….so that should be addressed….good initiative though! I want to see more!
13:01
Jon Snow
So is this going to be played at one of the Times Square screens?
23:17
is the above possible using amoveo
23:31
Zack
Are vampire attacks even possible?
So the idea of a vampire attack is that you want to pay people to move their liquidity into a different market, so then traders will use your market instead, and you will earn more fees from having more traders.
But the only way you can pay people to move their liquidity is if you earn that money from somewhere, ultimately, it needs to come from trading fees.
The traders are paying 2 costs, slippage and trading fees.
If the trading fees are too low, then there is less incentive to lock up liquidity, so slippage gets worse.
If trading fees are too high, then there is more liquidity so slippage costs are lower, but the trading fee costs are higher.
There must exist some ideal size of trading fee to optimize the user's experience and how much profit the liquidity providers can earn. Anything that moves you away from the optimal fee size, including vampire attacks is destructive to your market.
If vampire attacks are succeeding, I think it has more to do with the narrative of the attack. People think it is exciting and want to be involved.
06:59
Eric Arsenault
when cross chain buy / sell trading? 😁
Deleted invited Deleted Account
15:36
🅐🅝🅣
STRONG TEAM BEHIND THIS PROJECT AND IT IS ALSO A VERY GOOD INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE WHO ARE SEEKING FOR A PROFITABLE INVESTMENT.
ヾ(๑'◡')ﾉ" ❤️amoveo
Please let your friends around you know.
02:32
Beer
zack is that you
03:03
Toby Ganger
yes…we all know Zack’s committment to promotion
04:19
Zack
Maybe we can do a contract similar to the DEX, but for lotteries.
Instead of using locked up veo as an obligation to deliver some bitcoin to a particular address, the locked up veo can work as an obligation to deliver the lottery winnings to a particular address, which is eventually determined using some random process.
Lets say the prize is 100 veo.
I could lock 110 veo in a contract, so I have 110 shares of the pot, and 110 shares of lottery tickets.
Then I could make a bunch of swap orders to sell the 110 lottery tickets for 105 veo.
Eventually the RNG determines which lottery ticket won.
So I send the 100 veo to the winner, which unlocks my 110 veo from the contract.
or if I refuse to send the 100 veo to the winner, the contract could lock up, and become impossible to ever get the veo out, destroying my 110 veo that are trapped in the contract.
04:26
Mr Flintstone
where do you get the RNG
04:27
Zack
we could do a verified delay function for big lotteries.
for smaller lotteries we could mix the RNG from different blocks to get enough cryptoeconomic randomness.
04:29
it is important to destroy veo when the person running the lottery does not deliver.
If we set up an automatic refund for lottery tickets, it would be vulnerable to free option attacks. The person running the lottery could own some of the tickets, and cancel any lottery that they don't win.
04:30
bitcoin block rewards are 6 btc currently I think.
That is like $300k
We could probably just reference 1 or 2 bitcoin blocks to get enough randomness for our lotteries.
Deleted invited Deleted Account
10:30
Ilmu Somebody
Sounds reasonable but not high priority. cat thisidea >> todolist
BlueCrypto invited BlueCrypto
20:51
x
I think that's an interesting game a lot of people like to play, as investment is very small. good idea if it works.
So this also benefit from amoveo's oracles compared to other solutions?
This reminds me of satoshidice again, but I'm not sure how satoshidice works, never looked at why it was popular.
20:51
Probably a lot of other gambling games can be developed on amoveo also?
21:20
Zack
Using the oracle, it is very flexible.
We can swap out the source of randomness, or how raffle tickets are assigned without needing to write any code.
21:20
It is turing complete, so it should be possible to build anything that can be built on any other blockchain.
23:51
sanket
This seems like a good way to get people on-boarded on VEO?
The odds of winning are really good no? and who doesn't like gambling in crypto.
01:07
Eric Arsenault
I mean, it's ok
01:07
but cross-chain dex is a problem
01:07
I think focusing on problems is better, people will just use it
01:07
there are crypto lotteries like pooltogether
01:08
I'm not particularly interested in that, but some people are
01:34
x
this kind of crosschain trading seems to reduce veo trading volume tho. it seems better to have veo trading tracked by exchanges
01:36
Zack
hopefully centralized exchanges will be obsolete soon, and people will stop using them.
01:48
x
that seems not possible. centralized exchanges are fast.
centralized exchange also allow OTC trading with fiat
01:49
Zack
Are they though?
They need to wait a long time for withdraws, to prevent double spends.
02:13
x
Most of the time people don't withdraw for small transation .
VEO based crosschain DEX is a very useful feature that will be needed long term.
e.g. otc trades for VEO/btc, veo/eth, veo/usdt, etc., without worrying about escrow. it can not replace CEXs, because not all blockchains have fast translation speed. And It can be slow but very useful especialy for large orders i think.
for trading VEO with other smaller Alts , probably it will be much more useful when VEO becomes bigger.
DEXs can only replace CEXs when CEXs all fail, which is not impossible.
02:15
Zack
if you don't withdraw, then you are locked in to only using that single exchange, and are missing out on liquidity that exists on other exchanges.
02:18
x
Actually I think there are situations where DEX features are very useful, but more use of it may not be helpful when a currency is small unless you can add that part of trading volume to coinmarketcap.
e.g. when some miners decide to mine a coin, they do look at trading volume to see whether they are able to sell their mined coins easily/
02:19
Zack
trading volume seems mostly fake
02:19
x
that's what people look at
03:17
Jehan Tremback
if you sell into "fake trading volume", your trades still get filled, right?
03:17
regardless of whether or not the trading is just be done by one entity painting the tape
05:14
Zack
Not if people are simultaneously making and matching trades at the same price. In that case no one else gets matched.
Anything else is a wasteful way to make fake volume.
Deleted invited Deleted Account
07:45
Jehan Tremback
how is it wasteful?
07:49
Zack
if you are generating fake volume, your goal it to have a big number of volume generated, and your costs are made up of trading fees, and slippage
If I buy 1 bitcoin entirely from myself at the price of $55k, then my only cost is the fees. I didn't move the price at all, so there is no loss to slippage.
But if I buy 1 bitcoin from other people by matching their open orders, the price would move. And then I immediately sell that 1 bitcoin by matching orders in the other direction, which moves the price in the other direction. So in that case I am losing a lot of money to slippage as well as trading fees.
Stéphane invited Stéphane
10:58
Decentralized Oracles
12:26
Mr Flintstone
"holders submit votes on each asset, which the protocol aggregates to compute a median weighted by each holder’s Mirror Token stake. The Mirror oracle submits prices
at a high frequency to accommodate real-time pricing of exchange-traded assets."
12:26
i will leave it as an exercise to the reader to guess what zack will say about this oracle
19:03
mr x
everyone creates their own rube goldberg machine around token vote realtime pricefeeds
19:05
Zack
yeah, it is true.
It is like, they realize that it is bad to have trust in the first part, so they make some complicated mechanism to move the trust somewhere else, and then they do a bunch of advertising about how the first part is now trustless.
The when the community realizes that the trust is in the 2nd part, the cycle repeats.
19:07
I get the feeling that for a lot of crypto designers, actual security isn't a goal. Rather, they want potential investors to be unable to identify the security vulnerabilities.
19:08
Josh
it's exactly the same in politics. that's why predicting the future is the only system that works.
19:12
Zack
You would think that once actual secure mechanisms exist, everyone would just copy those.
But neither investors nor crypto designers seem to know or care what makes a mechanism secure.
It seems like the only path to a future with secure money is an evolutionary one, where insecure mechanisms keep getting destroyed, and people end up using secure mechanisms without ever knowing why they are secure.
01:02
Toby Ganger
and yet they’re doubling their users every day…and we still have like 11 users after 3 + years…..almost like a social technology needs people to actually be functional
01:21
Zack
Who is doubling users ever day?
They would have every person on the planet as a user in about 33 days.
03:45
The Ancients
Don't waste time toby. This is the same guy who said Chain link wasn't worth anything when it was valued under a dollar. Now it's in the top 15 most valued project in the space while his project hasvbeen stagnant for years.
03:58
Instinct
Tron also hit top 10 before. Doesn’t mean it’s not insecure
04:33
Toby Ganger
We have one mining pool and about 11 users. After 3+ years. Doesn’t seem very secure.
04:37
O K
It's PoW: proof of whining
04:54
Toby Ganger
This thread definitely has proof of that. I’ve done my fair share. I’m just disappointed with where we are after 3+ years. Our chances for creating an actual liquid market for VEO and an active ecosystem for Amoveo would require a miracle at this point.
08:30
Jon Snow
@zack_amoveo how is the cross chain DEX development going?
08:43
Are you still working on it?
08:47
Zack
the full node supports swap receipts.
We have tests in the full node for the smart contract.
The light node can build all the data used in those tests.
We have a UI in the light node for making offers.
I need to add the UI for:
canceling offers,
matching an offer + providing your other-chain address,
showing where you need to deliver the other-coins to,
releasing funds after the other-chain coins are delivered.
11:47
Ilmu Somebody
You guys are constantly whining about this project not meeting your expectations but seem to recognise that it is the only project with a sensible oracle design. How about you try to be a bit constructive and go argue with people elsewhere about why their projects are overvalued.. rather than complaining here that this project is undervalued (preaching to the choir!)
11:48
There is a saying that the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent. I suggest meditating a bit on that.
11:54
Toby Ganger
ah….i do agree about that tech…however….social technology is useless without the “social”…and here we are years later with nothing
12:03
Ilmu Somebody
If you feel strongly about it then write a blog post or something, pull new people in
12:12
Toby Ganger
can’t pull new people in when there’s no functional UI
12:29
UI can definitly changed a bit so that it looks more modern.. but not much work needed if it use google's style
12:29
Toby Ganger
yes…it needs to be functional and useful….there are plenty of Defi platforms now with FAR inferior tech…but they are functional and useful to regular humans so they use them thus creating a useful network….having great tech with no way for the common person to use it or even be aware of it leads to great tech that is unusable due to lack of interface and lack of network
12:34
x
I like google's style, just try different product like the search, gmail, or youtube. AMoveo's UI is certainly worst than that.. but can be easily improved.
13:59
x
actually amoveo's obstacle is not too big. the big difference between veo and other trendy coins is that some traders think it's harder for it get listed on binance/coinbase etc. it has nothing to do with the project itself. i dont think that will be a real obstacle
14:44
Toby Ganger
of course it’s an obstacle
Steve Steve invited Steve Steve
17:26
Ilmu Somebody
Only in the short term.. some of us aren't interested in get-rich-quick schemes and actually want to have solid infrastructure
17:36
x
I think it's very important that we have a functional predicton markets that works long term and will be used by a lot of people.
Actually some influencers have been promoting differnt type of prediction markets. They are just not promoting amoveo tho.
I noticed some smart contract platforms also try to add oracle, have projects built for prediction market
—
I don't mean for amoveo.
I mean prediction market in general need more adoption. it's better the widely adopted one is the best one with lowest cost.
Lucca_CoinTiger (Not PM for fees) invited Lucca_CoinTiger (Not PM for fees)
Laura Ziko invited Laura Ziko
Sarah will invited Sarah will
Mathieu Walter Ghkj invited Mathieu Walter Ghkj
22:53
Toby Ganger
Can you stop the condescensding bullshit and realize that profit is the incentive that brings users and thus creates a useful network? get out of here with that holier than thou bullshit…also 3+ years in crypto is an eternity
23:46
Instinct
You’re just angry u bought high. New ppl interested in the project don’t care about your personal investment or to hear the repetitive negativity
23:47
Toby Ganger
I’m not angry at all…I’m disappointed that such quality tech is being wasted because there is zero focus on incentivizing any network development which makes that tech useful…..
23:47
Instinct
Fair enough
23:51
Toby Ganger
and it’s not negativity to be concerned after over 3 years that fewer and fewer people are using and trading a network based asset…it’s realistic…..yes…we have the tech…but currently we have zero pathway to get this tech in a position where it can actually be useful…and that is a concern that needs to be taken seriously by anyone who wants this to succeed…whether their motivations are financial, structural, or simply wanting to improve the world.
02:27
Ilmu Somebody
Man your attitude is pure poison. The DEX and the perpetual stablecoin are both gamechanging primitives that should take priority over fluff. What made you qualified to judge whether three years is long or not? Afaict these projects are aiming at timelines measured in dozens or hundreds of years. Having a strategy for funding development and handling governance and updates is a long play.
02:29
What would a 'focus on network development' look like?
02:29
Not building the gamechanging primitives and begging to get listed on binance?
02:45
Toby Ganger
pure poison…right….it’s totally poisonous to suggest that a critical component to developing a social technology is incentivize people to become a new node on that network…thus adding functionality to it’s superior bones…..good grief…I’ve been in crypto for almost 10 years now…..i’m not begging for a Binance listing…i’m begging for some attempt to build the network on a HUMAN level…it’s not about doing it instead of working on the tech….they need to go hand in hand because they’re useless without the other
02:51
Ilmu Somebody
How much will you pay for sprucing up the UI?
02:56
Toby Ganger
I paid plenty to the network by buying large amounts of VEO.
03:02
Toby Ganger
Yeah. I’ve definitely spent several hundred thousand dollars to buy VEO. Fuck me though right?
03:03
Toby Ganger
Good talk
03:12
x
many
qtrade.io listed coins follow similar patterns. The bet now is on whether
qtrade.io will succeed or fail. Dont' expect much bigger exchanges. binance and coinbase won't list it. The coins on
qtrade.io have the same fate. Maybe you need to diversify a bit.
03:19
Toby Ganger
It’s about 1% of assets. I’m diversified.
03:20
Just disappointed because of what this could have been
03:23
x
I think it has more do to with exchange listing. But i don't expect that binance would care, or coinbase.
Timing for trading is also important. IF someone bought a lot at the top of VEO, he will be rekt, because that's exactly the time bitcoin began to moon from 3000$ bottom.
It's nothing tho, compare to what's coming in the 2021 alt season...if it arrives
04:50
Topab
I understand your frustration. On one hand, there is not yet a product. Hopefully soon. On the other, perhaps the need for Amoveo will take time to be appreciated. Suppose all this decentralized tech is a revolution and that is why people use it and are so hyped about it but it will take time when they realized that it's not actually decentralized and many projects have backdoors (like in the last kukoin theft where protocols could manage to froze stolen tokens). Perhaps only few, one of them Amoveo, is truly decentralized
11:59
x
so I noticed 3 exchanges recently asked about listing VEO .
It seems to me now that it may not be necessary, because for me I'm satisfied with
qtrade.io or the VEO dex.
But if anyone here want to get it listed in more places can contact them to see what's required.
12:30
Toby Ganger
Zack explicitly shuns any exchange that wants to list VEO unless they just list it on their own
12:40
x
I wouldn't say it's truly decentralized. I think even bitcoin won't be, but amoveo is the one of few well designed projects.
So far, for investing tho, it's not based on whether a project is well designed or not. There are so many other factors. so for anyone invested in VEO, this need to be taken into consideration, and you will know what to expect.
—
I'm sure there are people who don't only care about money, and just want to see a better prediction market widely used.
12:50
maybe he's right. Even if there's no exchange. the amoveo dex will work fine.
I believe it will definitely benefit from good planned marketing. but so far it's all organic , maybe that will still work.
12:55
about planned marketing. for example, some projects offer bounty campagns on twitter
/bitcointalk. to ask people to talk about them everywhere. That's not a bad strategy.
13:28
investing means that you have some abstract notion of value and you buy things that you believe are more valuable than their price indicates and you sell things that are priced higher than you think they should.
Right now no one is really doing investing in the blockchain space afaict, it's all trading. In trading it's actually harmful to have some philosophical notion of value, you just want to surf the fashion waves and be sensitive to how the mob moves.
13:29
Amoveo is clearly not a project that is worth trading.. It's not even listed on any of the big exchanges.
13:38
Once we have DEX + stablecoins then amoveo can become like binance, you'll be able to trade pegs to other cryptocurrencies and cash them into their respective platforms (modulo liquidity).
Right now it doesn't make sense to focus on fluff or marketing imo, we need these two things done and then things like attacking PoS chains will probably serve as very effective marketing.
Regarding fluff: I am going to be working on that a bit soon.
14:58
Ilmu Somebody
I think the motion he should take is something like “almost all 'decentralized oracles' are frauds”
16:11
Ilmu Somebody
or "layer two technologies require an oracle mechanism"
16:56
Zack
Im thinking about an exploit of social media.
We can make some anonymous accounts to talk about those big projects that pump a lot of money into advertising in social media.
Repeat the basic talking points, but also bring up some more unique stuff about the importance of these kinds of tools to the future.
Eventually the anonymous account is followed by a large amount of people in that community. We start redirecting attention towards amoveo at that point.
17:51
x
amoveo already got a lot of exposure on twitter it seems
21:55
Ilmu Somebody
yo
@zack_amoveo I'm trying to package amoveo in nixos so it will be possible to deploy it (with reproducible results) in one command, there's going to be some papercuts along the way (I guess), maybe you can help me sort them out... First one:
===> Verifying dependencies...
===> Fetching chalang (from {git,"https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/chalang",{tag,"master"}})
===> Failed to fetch and copy dep: {git,"https://github.com/zack-bitcoin/chalang",
{tag,"master"}}
make: *** [Makefile:138: build] Error 1
I have git installed so this is a bit baffling, I was expecting it to fail on the actual building since the erlang dependencies (
erlang-base make erlang-asn1 erlang-public-key erlang-ssl erlang-inets erlang-dev erlang-xmerl erlang-lager) are not specified in the same way under nixos.
Any idea why it fails there?
21:58
(btw the reason this is nice in the first place is that this repo:
https://github.com/elitak/nixos-infect has a script that allows you to deploy nixos with zero configuration on many popular cloud hosts and once I have a amoveo package then I can fork that repo and change the default config to have the firewall rules, amoveo installed and the service that runs it configured)
22:02
Josh
is there a way to make the error more verbose?
22:03
Ilmu Somebody
yeah so it clearly is trying to clone chalang but I don't understand why it fails to do that
22:03
Josh
try it with .git at the end
22:03
although both work for me with a simple git clone
22:04
Ilmu Somebody
yeah normally both work, sec I'm trying it
22:04
Josh
hmm actually the .git is the one with the redirect
22:05
Ilmu Somebody
although it shouldn't matter since everything works as-is under ubuntu
22:05
so probably it is invoking git somehow weirdly
22:05
or expecting it in some place?
22:05
Josh
or some problem with ssl certs?
22:05
there must be better error logs somewhere
22:06
Ilmu Somebody
ah it's specified under rebar
22:06
maybe my rebar is the problem
22:17
Zack
was it because of an old version of rebar? should I change anything?
I noticed that ubuntu 20.04 needed me to update rebar3 for some of the other repositories
22:18
Ilmu Somebody
it was because I didn't have some of the dependencies (they have different names)
22:20
haha it's so stupidly easy to build
22:20
loving the minimalism of no unnecessary dependencies
22:20
I used gcc, that's okay right?
22:20
(I have no idea about C)
22:21
Zack
I think jiffy needs a c++ compiler.
I tried installing amoveo without g++, and only gcc before, and I couldn't get it to work.
jiffy is for making data into JSON format.
22:21
Ilmu Somebody
okay, right now I got make prod-build to get to the end, there was a ton of warnings
22:22
Zack
yeah, there are a lot of warnings normally
22:22
Ilmu Somebody
I haven't found what g++ is called under nixos yet maybe gpp
22:22
Zack
a big part of the reason we have so few dependencies is that Amoveo doesn't have a database dependency.
We write bytes directly to files.
22:23
Ilmu Somebody
Hmm, okay no sqlite even?
22:23
(I guess not since it's not a dependency xD)
22:27
ok make prod-restart fails am I supposed to run something before that one?
===> release successfully created!
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/veo/amoveo'
make[1]: Entering directory '/home/veo/amoveo'
Node is not running!
make[1]: *** [Makefile:147: attach] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/veo/amoveo'
make: *** [Makefile:309: prod-restart] Error 2
22:27
Zack
the merkle tree is already a tree structure.
Leveldb in bitcoin or rocksdb in ethereum, they are tree type databases to have key-value pairs to store all the data.
layering the 2 trees is less efficient.
in ethereum/bitcoin, writing to consensus state takes
log_leveldbpagesize(# of utxos or accounts) * log_merklepagesize(# of utxos or accounts)
but for amoveo it is just log_merklepagesize(# of accounts)
22:28
did you turn the node off before you tried starting it again?
make prod-attach is for connecting to a running node
22:28
Ilmu Somebody
okay yes makes sense,
22:28
[veo@nixos-amoveo:~/amoveo]$ make prod-attach
Node is not running!
make: *** [Makefile:147: attach] Error 1
22:30
Zack
make prod-restart is doing several commands. we can try doing them one at a time to see what is going wrong.
22:30
make prod-build is probably ok
22:30
make prod-go is probably where it is breaking. that is what turns it on.
22:31
Ilmu Somebody
yeah
make prod-go was the first thing I tried I got
[veo@nixos-amoveo:~/amoveo]$ make prod-go
No cookie is set or found. This limits the scripts functionality, installing, upgrading, rpc and getting a list of versions will not work.
the first time I ran it
22:32
Zack
you can also do make prod-go without make.
./_build/prod/rel/amoveo_core/bin/amoveo_core start
22:33
maybe that will give better errors
22:34
and attaching is similar
./_build/prod/rel/amoveo_core/bin/amoveo_core attach
22:34
Ilmu Somebody
this time I got no output (but that also happened when I did the go command for the second time)
22:35
Ilmu Somebody
okay now I just need to do this again in a package
22:43
Zack
once you have a system set up, we should add it to the docs for installation
22:44
you can do a pull request if you want, so that you have credit for your work
22:48
Ilmu Somebody
yep will do
22:49
to install it locally
22:50
Ilmu Somebody
but it'll take a couple of days, going to do some homework now
Deleted invited Deleted Account
Deleted invited Deleted Account
06:01
Deleted Account
what do you guys think of the NFT craze right now lol? mooncats that got minted for free are selling for $2k+ instantly now
06:03
Deleted Account
I don’t think it’s sustainable in the long-term.. reminds me a lot of ICOs in 2017 where shitty projects were raising $20m+ out of FOMO
06:04
Zack
these guys are an ad, or they legit joined and immediately started talking about nft?
06:05
Deleted Account
yeah i guess
06:15
O K
Lol seems pretty sus
06:23
Instinct
Paid shills
11:11
Toby Ganger
Can we get back to my complaining for the sake of familiarity?
08:26
Joe
Has Zach been on any podcasts discussing this? I've stumbled across his github a few times lately
10:05
O K
A long long time ago, in a galaxy far away
11:31
Joe
Haha. Is this galaxy in our world wide web?
03:58
The Ancients
Lol bought high this project has 0 volume the $50 daily volume is from trading bots.
Muh technology!! Who cares when nobody uses it? Lol it's legit the same 3-4 faces in here year after year. I'm surprised their's even 11 miners left
03:59
x
do u still hold any lmao
04:08
The Ancients
See you next year. Bet same 3-4 Admins with 1-2 random defenders. Talking about the tech and marketing isn't important. Zack being the laughing stock of crypto. Yelling about how he built all those top 50 coins. It now makes perfect sense why they removed him. Would of been another Amoveo
04:09
x
it's interesting there are 2-3 people talking very negatively recently here. lol , what do they all want to prove?
04:11
The Ancients
Zacko Wacko is what they refer to him in Chainlink
04:15
Back then at least now he's completely irrelevant. Nobody mentions him. Even back then he was irrelevant.
04:15
x
so u r a link fan?
04:17
O K
Please stop with the personal attacks. This isn't productive.
04:20
The Ancients
It doesn't matter this place isn't productive. This place is the equivalent to a episode of Shark Tank when a entrepreneur makes a fool out of himself.
04:20
Zack
I think I was last on a podcast in 2014.
At some point it will make sense to do some more.
Ive been thinking of doing some in spanish, there isn't much good crypto content in spanish, so it could be easier to cut through the noise.
04:21
do you have questions about Amoveo technology, or suggestions on how to improve the project? there is an "off-topic" channel in discord, if you want to talk about something else.
06:26
Joe
Quite a while ago. What podcast?
06:28
Zack
https://economicsdetective.com/yeah, it was well before Amoveo.
It was before I was working at Augur.
But I think I did talk about oracles and prediction markets.
06:31
Joe
Oh cool. You were working on Truthcoin
06:32
I think Paul's implementation was in R at the time IIRC
06:32
Did you write that?
06:33
Zack
I translated his R code to python when I was with Augur
06:35
Zack
this python version of Augur was the MVP that they used to raise money to build the version in Ethereum.
06:38
Joe
Did you implement SVD in Python :)
06:38
Zack
I think we are currently using none of this.
Instead of LMSR we went with constant product markets.
Instead of a voting-subcurrency based oracle, we went with a betting-escalation version that falls back to nakamoto consensus forks for enforcing the outcome.
06:40
Zack
looks like it is using non-deterministic floating point numbers.
So this version probably would not work in a blockchain.
06:40
Joe
Haha yea I was clicking around and saw. I'd think Numpy existed at the time!
06:41
Zack
I had a lot of trouble getting python to work concurrently too. Which is why I ended up switching to erlang eventually.
06:41
Joe
I see. I don't really know the mechanics of Truthcoin (and I don't see why market scoring rules are necessary.. isn't this a betting market?)
06:41
So I'm probably not worth educating
06:41
Zack
yeah, it looks like I used numpy elsewhere. maybe I didn't know that SVD was in it
06:42
Joe
Fun to DIY anyway
06:42
Zack
Truthcoin is all about prediction markets.
market scoring rules allow us to always have a price for each prediction market, and some amount of liquidity for people who want to trade.
06:44
Joe
That makes sense. But did you say you went with constant product markets instead?
06:44
Meaning Truthcoin used MSRs?
06:45
Zack
truthcoin is called "bitcoin hivemind" today. They still use the logarithmic scoring rule.
yes, Amoveo is using constant product markets.
06:46
Joe
I always conceived of scoring rules as alternatives to true prediction markets
06:46
Like for use as an automated market maker
06:46
Zack
the LMSR is more like, some individual is paying to get information. it is like a traditional prediction market.
constant product, it allows more than one person to deposit liquidity, and earn fees for having provided liquidity that the traders use.
you can deposit liquidity and you can take the liquidity out at any time.
06:47
so what is a "true prediction market" then? an order book?
06:47
Joe
Yes I think I'm with you here
06:47
Zack
Amoveo does also have an order book.
I think bitcoin hivemind does not. although they do talk about doing something similar inside of payment channels
06:53
In this, the maximum $ that can be won is limited by the market maker
06:53
(In the Market Scoring Rule section)
06:53
Zack
robin hanson invented the idea of futarchy, which is a government based on prediction markets. He did research in LMSR specifically for prediction markets
06:54
Joe
LMSR = Logarithmic MSR?
06:54
Zack
you can keep buying more as the price shifts. yes it isn't very efficient.
ideally it would be combined with limit orders to fix this.
06:55
Joe
I see. So that's a way you can "buy" predictions
06:56
But Amoveo and Truthcoin and Augur can do prediction markets too, right?
06:57
Like on Predictit. No need for market scoring rules there
06:58
Zack
I think augur is using the LMSR.
truthcoin is "bitcoin hivemind" now. they still haven't launched on bitcoin.
Amoveo can be used for prediction markets yes.
"create binary" "create scalar" and "create futarchy" are the different tabs in the light node for this purpose
http://159.89.87.58:8080/wallet.html
06:59
Joe
Mhm. truthcoin is shorter
07:00
Zack
Predictit is always allowing people to make bets at a price in either direction, right?
so then, Predictit must be using some kind of market maker mechanism internally. It could be lmsr.
07:00
yeah. maybe "truthcoin" is a decentralized project that included amoveo, augur, parts of gnosis and bitcoin hivemind.
07:00
Joe
Oh. I assumed it had orderbooks
07:01
Joe
But I don't know
07:01
Oh yea, I've been chatting there today. I don't mind the name change
07:03
It would be nice (and probably worthwhile) to make some youtube videos on this stuff, and Amoveo
07:03
I really don't know what it is and it's a little impenetrable
07:04
Zack
ive been thinking of making some videos just walking through using the light wallet to make markets and bet in markets and stuff like that.
is that what you mean?
07:04
Joe
And there are dumber people than me
07:04
Zack
or like, the idea of prediction markets in general?
07:05
Joe
There's lots of stuff on this. The details and purposes of MSRs, orderbooks, and their feasibility on blockchains is advanced info that I doubt 99% of people would know though, so that's useful
07:06
I'd watch this after understanding that advanced info. And after learning what Amoveo is at all: why the altcoin? Why not Augur+ETHor Bitcoin Hivemind+Bitcoin?
07:08
Because it's written as notes and I think hard for noobs
07:08
Zack
amoveo's oracle is mixed in with the consensus mechanism in a way that wouldn't have been possible on ethereum or inside the side-chain plan being developed by the bitcoin hivemind team. they call it "drivechain".
Also, making our own blockchain that specifically does not allow for turing complete on-chain contracts, like etheruem has, this allows us to optimize things and make it more efficient.
ethereum is able to do so many things, that it can't do any of them very well.
07:08
Joe
But I understand how much work that all is, haha.
07:09
Joe
Oracles get paid, I assume? Who pays them?
07:10
Zack
like, amoveo has flash-minting enabled for all of our currencies. and using a constant product market in amoveo is as cheap as a normal transaction.
and we don't have that problem where if you run out of gas, you still need to pay a fee even though the tx doesn't get processed.
07:11
Amoveo's oracle does not get paid.
If you are participating in a contract that needs an oracle, you have an incentive to report the correct outcome of that oracle so that your contract can finish.
If someone reports a lying outcome, it is like giving away free money to whoever comes next to make an honest report.
07:12
Amoveo's oracle does not depend on collecting trading fees. This makes us secure against the parasite attack problem.
07:13
the parasite attack is when someone makes an oracle that just reports the same result as some other oracle. So using the parasite oracle, you get the same security, but don't need to pay fees.
So then, the legitimate oracle does not collect fees.
in bitcoin hivemind or augur, if the oracle cannot collect fees, then it stops being a secure oracle.
07:13
Joe
What is a "participant"? A party to the contract? Or a third party "miner" fellow?
07:14
Zack
like if you and I bet on the result of a football game, we are using an oracle which will report the result of that football game.
when the football game ends, either you or I will tell the oracle who won.
07:14
Joe
Oh. But wouldn't we want anonynmous third-party oracles and some consensus mechanism?
07:15
Zack
we just want the bet to be enforced correctly
07:15
Joe
Shouldn't the Oracle be telling us who won?
07:15
rather than we tell the oracle?
07:15
Zack
it does. the oracle is a mechanism that allows anyone to make reports, and it uses those reports to know who won.
07:16
if you make a lying report to the oracle, it is the same as giving away the money you used to make that report.
07:16
Joe
Dude make a podcast and I'll reverse interview you, lol
07:16
I feel bad making you type all this
07:16
To get lost in Telegram
07:21
It's not clear to me why the users would ultimately care about our football bet
07:22
Zack
it is preferable to own tokens on the version of the chain that is honest
07:22
Zack
so you can make bets and expect an honest result
07:22
Joe
Hm. Ok I think so
07:23
Ok this is why you say the oracle consensus is mixed in with the blockchain's
07:24
Why specifically wouldn't that have been doable via Drivechain?
07:24
You can control your own consensus rules on a sidechain, right?
07:24
Zack
if a sidechain forks, all the bitcoin on it would get duplicated.
So, how would the main chain handle receiving btc from the sidechain?
07:25
Joe
Miners would have to pick
07:26
Right? I think I see the challenge then
07:27
Zack
Getting Truthcoin working on bitcoin always seemed like more of a political challenge than a technical challenge.
The bitcoin wizards IRC recommended I get it working well on an altcoin before talking about adding it to Bitcoin.
07:27
hopefully drivechain will exist someday, and we can try making an Amoveo sidechain to bitcoin
07:29
Oh, also, why not just airdrop it to Bitcoiners when it's done?
07:29
Bootstrap all the users
07:30
Assuming you have some BTC
07:30
Zack
I was working on Amoveo alone a long time.
Since letting people mine VEO, it has been a lot easier. People keep joining the chat and giving suggestions.
07:32
Joe
Mining is another way to do that. But isn't an airdrop more natural (not to mention more efficient)?
07:32
Zack
im not sure that bitcoin miners would pick the honest fork of Amoveo.
Experiments of this sort are probably worth doing though.
07:33
economically speaking, it seems like airdrops don't work. lots of people just dump their free money.
Historically as well, I don't know any examples of them being successful.
07:34
A large portion of the airdrop would go to exchanges, right?
07:35
Joe
Same for altcoins in general though
07:35
They won't support it for a while
07:36
I think Grin vs. MimblewimbleCoin. Both failed IMO, but the airdrop has higher market cap
07:36
Zack
even if they don't support it, they still get all the airdropped tokens from bitcoin held in their wallets.
07:37
Yeah, true. But they'd need somewhere to dump
07:37
And if it gets listed, that's a massive win
07:37
Zack
plenty of altcoins have gotten big. Even $billion market caps.
07:37
Joe
Even if the price crashes, that's a lot of legitimacy
07:37
Hah yes. But with ICOs, marketing budgets, and a lot of luck
07:38
I don't see the price dumping as a bad thing though. It'll dump for a bit, maybe, but it'll get a lot of attention and have lots of liquidity
07:38
And everyone who didn't dump is now bought in
07:38
Zack
why would getting listed be a "massive win".
plenty of dead projects have been on exchanges.
07:39
Joe
Even more dead projects are not on exchanges
07:39
Would you rather be on exchanges or not?
07:39
Zack
every time we get attention, another wave of people would realize they have tokens and dump.
07:40
it is better to be listed than not, but only at a certain cost.
I think the negative aspects of airdropping to all the bitcoin holders would overwhelm the benefits.
07:40
Joe
And then have to pay taxes, worry about FOMO, etc
07:41
Zack
As it is now, the people holding Amoveo are people who understand what it is, and are interested in it.
07:44
Joe
I'm not trying to be obnoxious, btw
07:44
Zack
If a large portion of holders don't understand the tech, they are more likely to dump for reasons besides the tech. It would become harder to understand and predict price movements. The price would become more vulnerable to propaganda and fashion.
07:44
Joe
What's its marketcap?
07:44
So it probably can't hurt much
07:45
Zack
A lower market cap means more potential gains for investors who take the time to understand the technology
07:46
Joe
Yeah. But same can be said about every project. I jsut think if you want to attract support and interest (this is open source after all), "buying" everyone in might be a reasonable idea
07:46
You need a high-risk strategy I'd think
07:47
And if you're worried about the price dumping, then that's fine. Smart peopel will buy it up
07:47
Zack
but wouldn't that be a betrayal to the loyal community who has been giving support and interest for years?
07:47
Joe
But at least there will be liquidity
07:47
Yes it might! And that's a serious concern
07:48
What about a fork with a bitcoin airdrop, haha? We can run the experiment
07:48
If you think it's possibly worthwhile, you may want to ask them
07:48
Zack
I dont think this would cause an increase in liquidity. Why would it?
07:48
Joe
If people dump it, there will need to be liquidity
07:49
They probably won't, is what I think
07:49
Zack
we could make a futarchy market to ask whether an airdrop would help or hurt the veo price.
07:49
That is how we do controversial decisions for Amoveo.
07:50
previously when we changed the block reward, we used the futarchy mechanism to make that decision.
07:51
Joe
I don't own any coin so I can't do it myself I assume
ironstar invited ironstar
ALNOOR OFFICE invited ALNOOR OFFICE
07:51
Zack
if you are confident that an airdrop would be profitable, then you can buy veo and invest in creating this prediction market and profit from your knowledge.
07:53
Joe
That might be fun
07:55
Is it traded anywhere?
07:55
What is the block reward and block rate? Is it finite?
07:55
Zack
qtrade.iowe also have a crosschain DEX built into Amoveo
07:55
the block reward is about 0.1 veo
the block reward can be changed by the futarchy mechanism. we don't know if it will be finite or not.
07:56
blocks are about once every 11 minutes.
07:57
Joe
What's the purpose of the block reward in your view? It seems unnecessary
07:57
Like oracles are not paid, right?
07:57
Zack
the block reward is for increasing the supply of veo, and to incentivize the PoW mining that secures the network.
07:58
Joe
Oh I thought oracles maintained consensus
07:59
I don't see why the supply needs to be increased. Isn't the "work" in your "mining", just googling for true facts to settle disputes?
07:59
These are two separate points
07:59
Zack
we use single-SHA256 as the mining algorithm for finding blocks.
08:00
We need more VEO so people can make more financial derivative contracts.
PoW mining transforms electricity value into cryptocurrency form, so it can secure contracts.
08:01
Joe
Hmm.. ok I'll take it for granted
08:02
But why do you need more VEO? Is it not divisible?
08:02
Zack
why does bitcoin have a block reward?
08:02
Joe
Block subsidy or reward?
08:02
Zack
6.25 btc + the tx fees.
08:03
Joe
The tx fees are what you do to compete to get in a block. This is what makes Bitcoin censorship resistant.. a miner who censors all transactions and just takes the 6.25 BTC loses a little profit
08:04
Zack
right. Amoveo works like that.
08:04
Joe
The 6.25 is just bc Satoshi wanted a gimmick to distribute coins, IMO
08:04
The 6.25 is not necessary, IMO
08:04
It hurts censorship resistance and just wastes $
08:05
But forking it out would be chaotic
08:05
Zack
do you know of any PoW blockchain that has a 0 block reward?
08:05
Zack
right. a blockchain with only tx fees. does it exist?
08:06
Joe
No, I don't think so. But bitcoin was "secure" with block rewards of much less than the tx fee component today
08:06
and as I said, it hurts censorship resistance
08:07
Zack
the amount a person could steal by double-spending is bigger today too.
08:07
Joe
But miners have no less incentive to double spend
08:07
they get the subsidy anyway
08:07
Zack
Maybe the bitcoin block reward is too big, but I don't think zero is ideal at the current time.
08:07
Joe
That's fair. we'll ask the futarchy
08:08
Zack
theoretically, if there was a lot of fees at some point in the future, maybe a negative block reward would be ideal
08:09
Joe
What I am still confused about is why you have PoW mining at all. I thought the "work" was just deciding on which forks the oracles thought had the truth
08:09
Zack
I think that as long as the economy is growing, the demand for collateral for financial derivative contracts will also be growing, and so we want the available collateral to increase with that demand. So a positive block reward would be best.
Maybe if there was a big plague, and the population fell by 70%, the economy would shrink, and we would want a negative reward.
08:10
the oracle is not for block production. it is for settling bets. like if we bet on a football game. the blockchain needs to know which of us won.
08:10
Joe
I thought I read somewhere that the oracle consensus = the blockchain consensus
08:10
But I guess I am wrong
08:11
But the "demand" is denominated in $ terms, right? So new coins wouldn't change that. It's just a change of units
08:11
Zack
amoveo's oracle is connected to nakamoto consensus, because if someone tries to make the oracle mechanism lie, eventually it causes a nakamoto level fork. the blockchain splits into 2 versions.
08:12
Zack
if $1000 of electricity get transformed into cryptocurrency, then we have $1000 more collateral to enforce contracts.
08:13
Joe
But each unit is now worth previous_mcap/($1000 + previous mcap) as much
08:13
Zack
I don't think that is the case.
08:13
Joe
ceteris paribus
08:13
however that's spelled
08:14
I think it's the only approximation that can be made
08:14
If you doubled everyone's VEO, would the price double? Or would it just be a unit change?
08:14
Zack
another approximation is that if you burn $1000 of electricity to create more cryptocurrency, that the supply of cryptocurrency increased by $1000.
08:14
if you double, with or without burning that value of electricity?
08:15
Joe
With, and then without. (I don't think it matters)
08:16
Zack
I think if you double the supply without burning electricity, that the market cap would stay the same. or it could drop from people losing confidence.
I think if you burn the electricity, the market cap doubles.
08:16
mining gold costs about as much as how much that gold is worth.
08:17
Joe
I think people would just say "oh, I had 101010 coins (in base-2) and now I have 1010100 total "new" coins. But that's just 101010.0 "old" coins."
08:17
Zack
oh, I am distributing the coins to people who already had them?
I thought I was doubling the supply for myself, and either burning electricity or not.
08:18
if you just move a decimal, then nothing changed, obviously
08:18
Joe
Yah sorry. I meant literally everyone's
08:18
Well, it's not literally moving a decimal
08:18
But people will reinterpret
08:18
Zack
newly mined coins go to the miner, they aren't evenly distributed to all holders. so it isn't a good comparison.
08:18
Joe
It is good however to get at the principle
08:19
I think it can also be argued in terms of the microecon
08:19
The miner "buys" coins with his electricity
08:20
or the miner "buys" coins with his dollars, and chews through the orderbook, mechanistically.
08:20
A
Zack, to what extent can veo be used with gold and real estate backing as a derivative for currency risk hedging within the real economy?
08:20
Joe
(That's not microecon. I bailed)
08:20
If he eats up orderbook, price goes up
08:21
So in reverse, the price didn't go up
08:21
Zack
amoveo contracts are all denominated in VEO. You can bet on the price of gold, but you are betting in units of veo.
08:22
the price can grow that way, but I think it is less efficient because it over-rewards early investors at the expense of later investors.
We want the market cap to grow quickly to benefit from network effects.
08:23
Joe
Over-rewarding them seems exactly how you'd benefit quickly from network effects
08:24
whatever, you get the idea
08:24
Zack
the market cap can grow either from having more units of veo, or from increasing the value of veo.
And there is some ideal mix of the two, which we use futarchy to find
08:24
Joe
Very itneresting but I totally disagree, haha
08:24
Zack
if you think the block reward is too high, you can profit from making the futarchy market to show us this.
08:24
Joe
(No, I think it's too high)
08:24
But I like futarchy
08:25
Zack
historically the block reward has only decreased so far
08:25
Joe
Ah so I'm the futarch
08:25
Zack
it hasn't changed in over a year if I remember right
08:27
Well thanks for all the chitchat
08:28
If you end up doing those youtube videos, I'd be happy to give good feedback since I'm a noob
08:28
You sound like a good guy from that podcast
08:28
Zack
im thinking ill do the MSR one in text, but I might do a voice one of the white paper
08:47
A
I understand. What would be the cost and risk for a startup non-bank to use the amoveo blockchain exclusively for pondering risk hedging of real assets?
08:54
Zack
you can bet any amount of VEO, so the cost is low.
Currently no on is selling stablecoins, so you would need to hold a lot of VEO risk for now.
But we have plans to improve the stablecoin system, so hopefully this will be less of an issue in the future.
09:40
Joe
Ooh constant product market is like how uniswap does it
09:40
Didn't bother parsing the words in it
10:58
Steve Steve
Yes, any virtual currency is very risky
13:33
Ben
is the DEX complete by now?
13:35
the DEX interface does not make sense
13:38
i made a few suggestions in another channel
13:40
Ben
i bet no average joe can even undestand what this is about
13:41
and i think we need an smart and crisp explanation what the flow is.
13:42
since it differ from the current de-facto standard
13:42
(connect your Wallet of choice to the browser and just swap)
13:46
x
need to add more coins for people to select from but at the same time im thinking maybe zack should mostly work on core technology of a blochchain.
i think tho it wont take much time for amoveo dex to add hundreds of coins in a list, so that people can trade them more easily
14:11
Ilmu Somebody
Yeah, ideally Zack does the internals and gets perpetual stablecoins and DEX working
14:12
The frontend as it is now is perfect as a proof of concept making it simple to extend with fluff (you already have an illustration of how to use the API...)
14:12
We should have a monthly DAC for people who work on the frontend to claim some veo
15:06
Ben
if there would be a write up for WEB-DEV how to build it correctly i would throw money at it to have it build
15:07
but last time i asked a web-dev to have a look at it, they had no clue what zack has build there.
15:07
so the question is how can we get the DEX Documentation in a state that a seasoned web-DEV can work on it.
15:08
and we need also an honest answer to the question: Is it yet ready?
15:29
x
i've said this before, i compared it with google products' interface (search, gmail, youtube) , imo it may not have to add good frontend.
Google's products have billions of users, but their default setting does not have any UI. With gmail. you can choose a style you like in the setting of course.
Maybe the font size ,layout can be optimized, dark mode option is useful. that's not much work.
"We should have a monthly DAC for people who work on the frontend to claim some veo"
That will help. I think not a must currently.
15:29
Ilmu Somebody
Yeah the problem with trying to get a third party is understanding what the hell this thing is.
15:30
Ilmu Somebody
You can pitch in 5$ it's not a huge deal. It's just to signal interest / price discovery
15:31
Ben
i could not disagree more. this is a dex and not a search engine or mail program. i mean if we look what all the swap sites have in common (Uniswal,pancake and 1inch)
15:38
x
. it indeed doesnt cost much tho for basic UI design. I think.
15:42
I think it helps if the light wallet has a ton of cool options, that would make it look like an advanced and powerful tool..
15:47
x
👍 this is very useful.
soeng Putheara invited soeng Putheara
Deleted invited Deleted Account
05:55
Zack
Looking at uniswap v3.
It seems like gas is linearly related to the number of range markets used.
Maybe they are thinking the lower slippage will make up for higher gas fees?
But then, it mostly benefits people making very big trades.
05:58
Or maybe traders dont need to reference all available markets. So that markets arent hooked up all to one price, they can move independently.
06:10
I guess if we wanted to add this to amoveo, we would make a version of the AMM tool with this formula from uniswap v3
`````(x+L/sqrt(P2))*(y+L*sqrt(P1)) = L2```And we would teach the swap tab AI to take advantage of the different kinds of available markets.
18:23
Zack
the uniswap v3 white paper says that fees need to be collected as a different currency, and can't be kept inside the liquidity pool.
but I don't see why not?
Maybe their design doesn't have the client choosing which markets to use, and instead that is calculated on-chain, and it is a limitation in updating their on-chain database efficiently?
18:41
Zack
so this new kind of market, it provides a constant amount of liquidity between a range of prices.
But if you wanted to make, say, a bell-curve of liquidity, you would end up needing a bunch of these range-markets all overlapping, and making trades near the middle of the bell curve would be most expensive, since more markets get referenced.
Another way to build a bell curve is if, instead of overlapping horizontal boxes, we have infinitely narrow non-overlapping boxes.
This is like the dirac delta function if we set the price limits of the range market to be nearer to each other in the limit, while keeping the liquidity provided constant.
What would be nice about doing it that way, is that the number of markets you reference is related to how far the price slips.
So making trades near the center of the bell curve would be cheap.
The programming would be simpler too. it would work like orders to make a trade, and if someone matches the order, the money you earn is immediately used to make an order to do the reverse trade.
It is like an on-chain order book.
18:57
Zack
Another option would be to allow some approximation of bell curves, with some parameter for how narrow it is.
we could hard-code a z-table into the full node software, so calculating the area under a range of the bell curve would be a simple subtraction.
but then a trader would potentially need to reference all available bell curves in their trade, in order to get the best price.
19:19
Zack
there are a few goals we want to optimize for.
1) cheap to add/remove liquidity
2) control over liquidity curve
3) traders need to reference few markets when making trades.
Uniswap seems very focused on pairs of USD stablecoins, but I think we are more interested in assets that can move a lot relative to each other.
normal constant product seems to optimize for 1, and 3.
range-markets optimize for 2.
diract delta markets for 2 and 3.
bell curve markets for 1 and 2.
19:20
I feel like there will be a lot more trading in comparison to the number of txs that deposit/withdraw liquidity.
So maybe it makes more sense to do the dirac delta markets instead of range-markets.
19:26
another question is which of these markets can be moved off-chain, and how many features would we need to sacrifice to enable that?
19:32
I think we can do the dirac delta version already, using off-chain tools.
Like, lets say I have 100 veo.
I could make an offer to spend 10000 veo to buy 10100 veo worth of stable btc, and an offer to spend 10000 stable btc to buy 10100 of veo, and allow partial matching of each of these offers.
People can only buy veo from me if I have it. they can only buy btc if I have it.
So my 100 veo of value could keep getting swapped back and forth from veo to stable btc every time the market price crosses my trading price. I would earn 1% every time it switches type.
I could have multiple dirac delta markets like this, but I would need to make a different account with a different pubkey for every market.
19:35
instead of adding a specific dirac delta tool, it might make more sense to teach the light node about master public keys, and it can automatically generate lots of pubkeys from your one private key, and manage multiple dirac delta markets by moving money between your accounts.
19:59
Zack
oh, off-chain dirac deltas like this have a pretty big limitation.
every person who wants to deposit in it, they need to make their own dirac delta offer. if there are multiple offers at the same price, customers are free to pick whichever, so you might not get paid if you aren't picked.
and if they match more than one at the same price, they need to pay a bigger tx fee and make a bigger tx.
So even if we go with the dirac delta version, maybe it is better to do it on-chain, and have liquidity shares as the currency for owning value in a dirac delta market.
20:21
Zack
the advantage of off-chain offers is that if they are not matched, it cost nothing to make.
making an offer and then canceling it is only 1 tx.
making an offer and having it matched is also only 1 tx.
but an on-chain offer is at least 3 txs.
making it. matching it. and withdrawing your winnings.
the advantage of the on-chain offers is that multiple people can deposit liquidity into the same market, and a customer trading in that market only publishes one tx.
20:22
so maybe it makes sense for the offers that are more likely to be matched to be on-chain markets. and the offers that are less likely to be matched should be off-chain.
20:24
so the center of the bell curve is on-chain markets, and the tails are off chain.
another reason to have off-chain tails is that if your tail-trade gets matched, you probably don't want to undo that trade at the same price.
You got a great deal, and you want to keep your position.
or at least, you want the sell for a good profit. the spread should be wider in the tails.
20:25
Ilmu Somebody
What is the problem statement for this solution you are considering?
20:26
Zack
uniswap v3 is an optimization on constant product markets. instead of providing liquidity for the entire range of possible prices [0, infinity], they choose some smaller range to provide liquidity in. which can make your liquidity more efficient, so you earn more fees, and it can limit impermanent loss.
20:27
im trying to see how this kind of feature can be added to Amoveo, and be compatible with our memoryless full node design.
20:31
Ilmu Somebody
Cool, makes a lot of sense to plan for this feature and see what kinds of constraints it imposes. I didn't read the paper yet, but it seems to me that this has a pretty significant implication on these systems? You'd need to redo all former proofs since you no longer have smoothness assumptions..
20:32
The simplicity of analysis* of constant product markets was largely due to the smoothness afaict
20:32
Zack
a constant product market is only 2 integers of consensus space, they are very simple
20:33
Ilmu Somebody
Yep. But now you have an extra dimension in the sense of where liquidity comes online or goes offline in the space..
20:34
Zack
we also want Amoveo txs to all be processed in constant time. That way they are compatible with flash minting, and you don't have to worry about paying a fee and not having your tx included because of gas price changes.
23:59
A summary of Uniswap V3 smart contracts
00:00
Zack
cool, thanks for sharing
03:47
Maybe we can take amoveo from being haskell and turn it into rust... 😋
04:43
Zack
Amoveo is in erlang
05:14
Ilmu Somebody
You think I don't know 😆
05:52
bjorn
It keep saying no internet connection in veo app, any help?
09:10
Zack
thinking about integrating the swapping AI tool with these markets that provide liquidity to a smaller space.
we had already found a way to mix the off-chain swap offer tool with the AMM AI.
We just had to teach the AMM AI to be able to run backwards, starting with an amount to buy, and calculating the amount that you would need to spend.
That way the AMM AI can run have a backwards version of the off-chian swap offer in it, so we can subtract that part of the trade from the AI.
I think we can use this same strategy for the dirac delta distribution version, because this markets are the same thing as off chain swap offers that allow you to partially match the offer.
Using the range markets seems more challenging. A solution doesn't immediately jump out at me, but I am not sure it is impossible either.
budy ghaib invited budy ghaib
10:53
A |
Hello admin, where can I send an AMA proposal invitation?
17:49
Can't tell if applies here, a bit beyond me
20:00
Ilmu Somebody
the part of the thread where he says the lazy LPs lose feels like a hint that the convexity property is lost with this new mechanic. That would mean (by the paper a couple of messages up) that this won't work... but we'll see whether that is true in practice by just observing the deployed v3 and how it behaves.
20:04
convexity means that any strategy will bring the market to it's optimal price point, i.e. equilibrium is easy to find...
If that is gone then uniswap prices will not track prices on exchanges and lots of arbitrage attacks will be possible.. I haven't looked at this thoroughly enough to verify these claims (and I won't, this will become apparent soon enough) but if bucketing preserves convexity then that is great and then this is a super awesome refinement of both CFMMs and order books!
20:07
But I don't see how this can still be convex.. Each interval is now isolated from the others so the global consistency is not guaranteed in any reasonable way.
20:23
Zack
what do you mean by "convex"?
21:00
Ilmu Somebody
mathematical definition
21:01
Zack
So, a polygon where every angle is less than 180 degrees.
21:01
Ilmu Somebody
this whole paper is about why convexity is the reason these things work
21:02
which means that a local optima is the global optima
21:03
Zack
Oh, you mean that if i buy currency type 1, that currency type 1 should not end up at a lower price after my purchase.
21:03
It would be a pretty weird market if it wasnt convex.
Uniswap v3 is convex.
21:04
Ilmu Somebody
could be, I don't care enough to go into it... just going to see how it works in practice
21:05
Zack
How could something end up cheaper after i buy a bunch and there is less available to buy?
Like, why is convexity even worth talking about? Seems pretty obvious that any market would have this property.
21:07
Ilmu Somebody
ah can't post media content
21:09
So basically if uniswap v3 works then it is possible to prove that it is equivalent to some convex payoff
21:09
Zack
Oh, non-negative too.
Imagine a market with negative prices.
So they are paying you to take away one of the assets.
21:10
It is obvious that uniswap v3 is convex.
I think this paper is using a bunch of complicated math words without saying anything useful.
21:11
Ilmu Somebody
I don't think it's obvious, if there is a camel-hump in the liquidity then the convexity is gone afaict
21:12
Zack
Think of it like this.
You are walking on a road, then the road is muddy and so you start walking slower. Then the mud ends, so you walk faster again.
The mud isnt forcing you to walk backwards, you are still going in the direction you want to go. It just takes longer to get there.
21:13
A concave function would mean that if you buy shares, those shares end up cheaper than they were before you bought them.
Having more liquidity in the middle, like uniswap v3, it just makes the price move slower in those parts with more liquidity. It never causes the price to go backwards.
21:15
Ilmu Somebody
Yeah, as I've said I'm willing to concede this argument, I haven't even looked at the uniswap v3 paper. Your characterization feels natural and is probably correct.
21:20
Zack
The paper also says it needs to be "homogeneous-1".
Which means if we provide twice as much liquidity for a price region, that you can buy twice as many shares while moving the price the same distance.
If a market function wasnt homogeneous-1, that would mean the number of units of currency is increasing or decreasing when people use the market. And the rate of counterfeiting changes based on how much liquidity is in the market.
I question the motives of whoever wrote this paper.
I feel like they were more interested in getting credit for having written a paper, in comparison to actually solving any useful problem.
21:23
Ilmu Somebody
Could very well be. I think they are working on something they want to launch in the cryptocurrency space and obfuscation+credentials (famous uni / phd / whatever) is a useful way to attract suckers.
21:23
Still I enjoyed reading that paper..
21:23
All of the obfuscation words are indeed obvious in the context of markets though.
21:33
Zack
I think uniswap v3 has a issue with depositing/withdrawing liquidity.
If it is quantized like this tweet says, then that means depositing liquidity is more expensive if you are doing it for a wider range of prices. Because the numbers in more of the quantized markets need to be updated.
It would be very costly in the memoryless full node design, because we need merkle proofs of each of those sub-markets.
21:36
maybe they intend to partially solve this by tokenizing batches of liquidity in the markets.
but someone needs to deposit/withdraw at some point.
22:15
Charles Maurice
thanks both for assistance to my understanding
22:44
Mr Flintstone
dont you just need starting and ending points for the range
22:50
Zack
It looks like the way it works is that they divide up the entire possible range into lots of little chunks.
So if you want to provide liquidity for a factor of 25% change in price, maybe that is like 50 chunks.
So you are updating on the order of 50 numbers in consensus space.
Updating long term memory is expensive. In ethereum they are touching the hard drive. In amoveo you need merkle proofs for all those numbers.
Maybe we can batch the merkle proofs though, so like, one merkle proof could reference 100 consecutive chunks.
As long as the amount of consensus space per merkle proof isnt much bigger than a merkle proof, it seems like that would increase efficiency.
22:51
Also, writing to a contiguous region of the hard drive is a lot cheaper than a bunch of small random regions.
22:54
Another option is to have 2 sets of chunk sizes.
One set of chunks that are each for 0.2% changes in price, and another for like 5% changes in price.
A trade would potentially need to reference both sets of chunks. So it makes trading slightly more expensive.
But depositing and withdrawing liquidity could be far cheaper.
If you are doing a larger than 5% region, you can switch to the bigger chunks.
22:55
I wonder how many trades we should expect per tx depositing or withdrawing liquidity.
So we can optimize for the ratio.
00:10
Ilmu Somebody
One thing to consider is to use a different authenticated datastructure than a merkle tree. There are ones that allow you to deal with sparse things in a compact manner.
00:11
Zack
like if we put related data into the same branches of the merkle tree, so that proofs are more likely to overlap, and we can compress the repeated data
00:13
the original design of the oracle worked like that.
the order book of trades in the oracle was a merkle tree who's root was recorded in the oracle.
00:17
I ended up turning that feature off when we were setting up Amoveo to process blocks out of order, to simplify things. but that strategy can work.
00:21
Zack
currently our merkle trees all have 16 children, because that was the best we knew about when I built them.
Today we know that binary trees would be more efficient.
sha256 hash is 256 bits, 32 bytes.
So if a node has 16 children, each of 32 bytes, that is 512 bytes per node.
if a market has 1028 chunks, then each proof is on average 2.5 nodes long. about 1250 bytes.
if you reference lots of chunks, you are only wasting 512 bytes of merkle proof per chunk referenced, after compressing overlap.
00:29
should we consider the RSA accumulator they mention in this?
00:30
but if there are 1000+ chunks in total, investing liquidity in all of them would be 0.5 megabytes of merkle proofs
00:33
proving disjointness and subset is pretty useful
00:37
Zack
does this depend on a secret prime number that can be used to make fake data? because that isn't really an option for blockchains.
00:37
we don't want to do a zcash style trusted setup
00:40
Ilmu Somebody
you can remove the trusted setup, there are different flavours
00:47
this one seems not to require any trusted setup but idk if there is an implementation yet.
00:55
but I don't think this is very pressing tbh, nobody is trading in amoveo yet
00:55
it'd be good to have perpetual stablecoins so that people could trade pegs to other systems using this uniswap thing and the DEX for importing and exporting
00:56
basically it'd be a much much much better uniswap for obvious reasons
01:26
Zack
how about a prediction market for the suez canal?
02:57
Zack
Instead if having small continuous ranges to trade at, what if it was a bunch of discrete prices? Like an order book?
If the prices are discrete, it is always possible to insert a new trade in between a couple existing ones, and make it smoother where necessary.
07:39
Zack
This looks like a cool idea for scalability with memoryless full nodes. but maybe it is not compatible with the other idea we had, to make individual txs in each block concurrent?
This technique involves compressing lots of proof of existence into something much smaller than the merkle proofs would have been, but we don't want to need to do that for every tx. I am not sure if this is compressible.
Streaming a large volume of consecutive data is very cheap, as long as we don't need to do random lookups of data from it.
If this strategy makes the data shorter, but it doesn't let us parallelize tx processing, then it might not be faster.
I still don't totally understand the paper, I think I need to look into this more to see if it could be useful for blockchains.
07:52
Ilmu Somebody
I don't have a great grasp of the landscape of authenticated datastructures but I really want to study it better. Problem is that merkle trees can do basically everything, and most of it they do sufficiently well, so that's all you ever hear about.. However, there are some things that they model quite poorly (but I don't have enough practical experience to list examples, something to do with large spaces where you want to represent every slot but most are empty?) anyway, these other datastructures should fill those niches but I'm not sure about the tradeoffs, a lot of the papers are pretty inscrutable.
For me the interest is beyond blockchain, I also care a lot about reproducible builds and software distribution / package repositories. Nixos and guix both use deep traces for making the exact dependencies explicit and some other build systems such as bazel use shallow traces so they don't need to rebuild everything when they add a comment to a deep dependency. Maybe you can combine the two approaches to get a perfect best-in-class build system across cloud and local by leveraging different authenticated datastructures.
Also backups, social media or the web in general uses hashes a lot and could maybe be improved with zero knowledge proofs in strategic places, like a zip where you can prove you zipped something that has a certain hash and in that way make IPFS more bandwidth efficient or lets you be sure that you are getting your backup back.
Also verifiable delay/random functions can be used for lots of stuff, really there is so much opportunity in using these new cryptographic constructions for networked datastructures that it's overwhelming... I've kind of decided to focus on other parts of my problems for the time being and come back to it once there is a bit more accessible material on the subject.
08:03
NM$L
zack,do u give up veo？
08:54
Zack
I am still committed to building veo.
I am in the process of moving where I live.
10:26
Jon Snow
To a different country?
23:32
Zack
im trying to turn some bitcoin into a more sustainable living arrangement, to deleverage my risk, and minimize the chances that I would ever need to lose focus on Amoveo and earn money to support myself.
01:18
Ilmu Somebody
You can combine the two approaches I think ... constant function market makers (rather than product) also have all the required properties, balancer for example is a trivial extension to uniswap and if you do a dirac delta [like uniswap v3] then you can get back the logarithmic thing where you "gridify" the n-dimensional space of outcomes and allow people to bet on subspaces.
01:19
(I haven't finished reading, maybe you already said that)
01:20
also maybe you could ask the off-chain scaling people about authenticated datastructures for making it cheaper to represent this information in the consensus
01:21
There's bound to be someone there that is well read up on that and can list off the relevant tradeoffs and the available constructions.
01:35
Zack
authenticated data structures can potentially make it cheaper to prove the existence of things.
But updating N values is still going to involve touching consensus state N times, right?
01:36
Ilmu Somebody
Not if you can reference the union as a singular thing
01:36
Zack
but that isn't an authenticated data structure optimization. that just means organizing the data into pages differently.
01:36
which is the same for merkle trees as any other data structure
01:37
Ilmu Somebody
Which one of the suggestions are you responding to?
01:37
A different datastructure is organized differently, yes.
01:39
Zack
every market maker is "constant function market maker". I think that paper isn't giving us anything.
01:40
Ilmu Somebody
I wasn't talking about that paper in particular, it's just that your example in the wiki page was a product (both the word and the equation). Balancer uses AM-GM inequalities which is also quite simple.
01:45
Zack
looks to me like balancer is constant product, but with more than 2 currencies.
02:36
Ilmu Somebody
yes, exactly, so you can do the slots like the logarithmic markets
05:21
Crypt Dweller
Smart to cash out some Bitcoin now Zack
06:09
Zack
If any one of the share types goes falls to near zero value, a market like that is useless for trading the other share types.
A drawback that lmsr doesnt face.
17:51
Zack
great. you can ask questions about Amoveo tech here.
Kyle Jaxon | Never PM You First invited Kyle Jaxon | Never PM You First
09:26
Kyle Jaxon | Never PM You First
can I inbox you
Deleted invited Deleted Account
02:07
I don't get this insurance for defi projects
02:07
Is there a similar concept and a way to build it in Amoveo?
02:08
Zack
You could short the asset from the other blockchain.
Kim Taehyung 💜 invited Kim Taehyung 💜
00:37
Zack
Thinking about uniswap v3 and custom liquidity distributions.
The big drawback of these strategies is that withdrawing and depositing liquidity can get so expensive.
But, our long term strategy is to have single price batch markets off-chain in the channel network.
In this context, the liquidity distribution can be stored in the channel state.
So at most, you only need to prove on-chain at most which portion of your liquidity got matched in a single batch.
And the market manager has an incentive to end your channel honestly with you, so nothing is computed on chain.
03:37
Instinct
Yes Amoveo is one, don’t you agree?
03:57
This ploy is so transparent
04:01
Eric Arsenault
Price go up?
04:13
but seriously, what happened to actually being creative, and scamming with passion?
05:11
Instinct
They take payment, they shill with agreed system 🤝
10:03
OEV is a nice way to describe this concept i think
16:15
Zack
What concept though? Looks like he is just bothering chainlink soldiers
21:10
Mr Flintstone
the concept of how much money can an oracle extract from a system
21:20
Jon Snow
@zack_amoveo are there any progress on the DEX development in the past couple weeks? Once V3 is launched, it would be hard to get attention
22:52
Zack
Like, if it lies? Or what?
How many fees it takes?
22:52
Why would v3 matter?
22:53
It is progressing slowly.
23:48
x
I wonder, do you have to work on that dex now?
Should you work on something else first for example sharding, or other blockchain designs first before getting more users? With more users using it, will it be harder to make changes to the blockchain design?
23:56
Ben
zack looked already in sharding and discarded it.
23:56
x
I think the blockchain is the product, and all hoders are users. so it's already good enough to get attention.
amove has a long history
It doesnt need anything more to be a big cap coin.
many projects had high cap with no mainnet.
It's a not a bad idea to stop worrying about new features.
23:58
Zack
we have a plan for processing txs in parallel inside of each block. For miners to be able to generate these txs quickly, it seems like we will be using a kind of database sharding.
It is still just a single PoW though.
00:00
Ilmu Somebody
For me the killer feature that is sorely missing is the perpetual stablecoins
00:05
x
Polkadot has two blockchains, one experimental(kusama) , one stable(polkadot), maybe if amoveo need very big changes in the future, a good idea is to fork another version? Maybe amoveo can do that now too?
it seems to be a good idea to have two. versions of the blockchain
00:09
Josh
is buying veo on the dex live yet?
00:10
Josh
that's my candidate for highest priority
00:10
Zack
yes, it is top of the list
01:12
Mr Flintstone
yeah if it lies, what is the maximum amount of money it can extract. sometimes the answer is “all of it” and sometimes it is “some of it”. its probably hard to predict the social reaction to an oracle theft in progress though so maybe this concept isnt so useful
01:14
Zack
if they know that they will be able to get it to lie ahead of time, then they can make a lot of bets in the market in preparation.
Having such a bad price in the market could draw in more traders, trying to correct that bad price.
They could end up making the market much larger than it would have been if there was no exploit.
01:15
So the oracle extractable value could be much larger than the amount of money in a normal market.
01:15
Mr Flintstone
yeah makes sense. So it seems like any useful concept would need to be a lower bound
01:17
Zack
I guess markets that have a price far from 50-50 are most exploitable. Because there is a bigger ratio between the cost of buying a losing share, and how much you can win by cheating the oracle.
01:19
A large portion of markets go through a stage where the result is already known, but the oracle hasn't recorded the result yet. so one of the two kinds of shares is worth practically zero.
At that point the attackers could probably buy up almost all of the losing shares, and steal almost all the money in the market.
01:48
Mr Flintstone
if the market price were not to reflect that possibility of course
02:22
doesnt seem to display related info?
02:25
its for Coinbase to halt LINK trading for US customers before April 2021
02:30
Zack
looks like it needed to update a dependency
02:30
it should be working now
02:59
so it should report as true not false
03:00
Zack
oh, I guess someone made a bad oracle report
03:01
mr x
yea i got tripped up again
03:01
"Coinbase to halt LINK trading for US customers before April 2021" little counter intuitive that true is false and false is true xD
03:02
first time i made it right
03:02
but then "corrected" it
03:07
if stake is 0.27780000 how much should be bet to switch direction?
03:29
Mr Flintstone
just more than that amount
03:30
Zack
yeah, if it is exactly in the middle, it will resolve to "bad question"
03:30
it needs to be a little more to one side. as much as the initial liquidity
03:45
A |
Hello admin, where can I send an AMA proposal invitation?
Pluc Ebt invited Pluc Ebt
SergioAgwero invited SergioAgwero
20:42
Ben
when do you expect to have the DEX MVP ready Zack?
20:49
Zack
you can use the dex to make offers to sell veo. that is an mvp.
it is hard to know how soon the feature for buying veo will be ready.
20:52
Lopyox
Hi :) Do you know who are main competitors of Amoveo ? I would like to do research on them
20:54
Zack
augur, bitcoin hivemind
20:54
Lopyox
ok ty I'll take a look !
21:43
Steve Steve
What is the Bitcoin Hive?
22:36
Ilmu Somebody
hive*mind*
22:36
it's a prediction market thing made
22:36
(hope I got his name right)
Lilly nomat invited Lilly nomat
SALAN heann invited SALAN heann
Plaster mona invited Plaster mona
Madison choob invited Madison choob
Hanna mashin invited Hanna mashin
Meabh moraba invited Meabh moraba
palang soorati invited palang soorati
Eimear lexi invited Eimear lexi
Sara toolani invited Sara toolani
Miran maghae invited Miran maghae
Deleted invited Deleted Account
Mr robot❌ Sampaio gomes invited Mr robot❌ Sampaio gomes
22:54
Steve Steve
Is the blockchain like a honeycomb world?
00:37
Ilmu Somebody
Yes if a honeycomb world is like the blockchain but otherwise; no, probably not.
05:28
Mr Flintstone
i think a brief way to describe how perpetual stablecoins would work on amoveo is that you can imagine simultaneously buying & selling september & december veousd futures respectively and putting both contracts into one token. so this token stays stable in usd. then once its almost october you swap out the september long for a march long. once its almost january you swap out the december short for a june short. and so forth. it is like you are rotating between long or short 1x levered calendar spreads
there are other times when you might need to swap out futures contract like if the margin backing the contract drops too much but that is the overall idea i think
05:30
Ilmu Somebody
This is also how I understand them.
05:30
Nice description :)
05:52
Mr Flintstone
the calendar spread would be too volatile to use contracts with maturities that far in the future so i think it should be daily or weekly to start
05:54
Ilmu Somebody
it would be denoted in blockchain heigh. no?
05:55
actually i think the concept of block height is gone
05:56
so you can just use normal time
05:57
you can have a contract pay out contingent on two oracles, one (A) of which asks if the event in the other oracle (B) has happened yet
05:58
something like that
05:59
then B has to be in a block that came after A
qim jhon invited qim jhon
Lafa | DEUS (µ , µ) invited Lafa | DEUS (µ , µ)
01:42
Eric Arsenault
@zack_amoveo how’s the move? Any news of DEx?
01:52
Zack
the move is a mess, and no interesting news
02:08
Eric Arsenault
Hang in there, moving sucks
05:14
Kagamii
Umm... ChainLink is the largest right now as it should be and the market cap is in the tens of billions if I'm not mistaken. At least very close if not.
06:17
Zack
How high of a fee would you need to justify a $10 billon market of an oracle coin?
Something like $1 million per oracle
Deleted invited Deleted Account
Deleted invited Deleted Account
10:35
Zack
This is a group to talk about amoveo
09:51
Zack
what do you think of a blockchain harberger tax, where we burned all the tokens used to pay property taxes?
10:07
Mr Flintstone
what is the tax levied on? Veo?
10:22
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
What would the benefit be of such a tax be?
10:31
I suppose it would mean that you must expect higher than the tax% returns on your asset compared to what you are able to achieve via other assets
10:31
assuming the tax% is of the asset's current price + a bit more
10:31
to prevent it being bought by arbs and sold on the market for its current price
10:32
you would just need to update the price you are paying the tax on to always be a bit above the current market price + expected volatility margin
10:33
so if the tax was say 5%, I would need to expect the price of veo to appreciate at 5% more than an alternative investment
10:33
in order to be willing to hold it
10:34
(or expect to be able to earn at least 5% higher (interest rates + price appreciation) on my veo than any other asset
10:35
so in effect a harberger tax means that people will have a lower propensity to want to invest in whatever assets are subject to such a tax
10:35
as it is effectively reducing the returns they earn on such assets by whatever the annual harbeger tax is
10:38
So I suppose it would make amoveo more expensive to use than a fork of it that didn't enforce such a tax... since you, as a pm speculator, would need to compensate veo collateral providers more in order to incentivise them
10:38
although ofc I suppose it would depend on where the "revenue" from the tax goes
10:38
if it just gets burnt then the tax has no actual impact
10:39
since it will increase the price of the asset (correct me if I am wrong) via reducing supply...
10:39
so cancels out the increased cost of holding it
10:42
There would be no reason why someone would set the taxable value of their tokens to be significantly greater than the market price of them (although ofc they would always be somewhat/slightly higher than the market price of them)
10:43
because there is no reason why someone would "acquire" their tokens if they were priced even a bit above the current market price
10:43
because they can always buy them off the market for lower prices
10:44
maybe people would do it purely for griefing attack purposes
10:44
but it probably wouldn't be very effective unless the victim was using their tokens for something at the time
10:45
since they can just buy them back on the market at a cheaper price then they were paid for them by the griefer
11:00
I think where it would be harder to analyse if it were to be applied to non fungible tokens
11:01
because in such cases you do not have a market price that you can make sure you are always paying tax on a price slightly above
11:01
Zack
self assessed tax on land
11:10
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
if it were to be applied to assets that do not have a liquid market available in order to determine their price, then ofc you can still get an idea for what the market price of it is via using heuristics such as what similar assets sold for, as well as valuations. So in that way it isn't too different from fungible and liquid assets, it just has higher "volatility" relative to your estimated price. The main difference is probably that if it is acquired from you, you have to acquire it from the acquirer in order to retrieve it, rather than being able to buy it from the market.
11:13
so I suppose you would need to consider the extra costs associated with paying tax on a higher price for it, relative to the costs of acquiring it back off someone if they acquire it off you
11:16
Mr Flintstone
what is the blockchain relationship? Enforcement?
11:17
Zack
records who has which land. allows you to update your self assessed tax. allows people to buy your land at your self assessed price.
11:18
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Ah so you weren't considering such a tax in the context of veo and pm shares?
@zack_amoveo
11:36
Zack
no. just a land tax that gets burned.
18:41
Zack
if the taxes get burned, then that means holding the currency that taxes are paid in is a bet that the value of the land will increase.
So we could connect futarchy to the value of this token, and we could be aware of how decisions we could make would impact the value of the land in a community.
18:43
if a person owns x% of the currency, and x% of the land, then they will always have enough extra currency to pay the tax. So it is free.
And if other plots of land get improved, whiles yours does not, then the value of your currency would grow faster than how much you lose from paying the tax.
18:46
If there is an expectation that people will need to pay a tax, then this would give value to the currency as well.
I think we can find some function connecting the market cap of the currency with the total value of the land and the interest rate of land. What is that function?
18:47
maybe it involves the difference of the interest rate on currency vs the interest rate on land?
18:54
A major source of collateral for modern finance comes from mortgages.
I think a harberger tax system + burning the taxes would have a similar effect. it would cause the currency to balloon in value, and we would have more collateral available for making contracts.
19:05
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
How would you enforce that land owners pay such a tax on such a cryptocurrency?
19:05
Zack
from a futarchy perspective, it would be nice if each community had a different currency to pay their tax, so we could do futarchy decisions for that community.
but if there are lots of small currencies, there is going to be more volatility, and those small currencies are less useful as collateral for smart contracts.
So maybe it would be better to use one giant currency for all the land?
Is there some other way to do futarchy on a community level? maybe we could look at the median tax paid over a period of time for a certain region?
19:06
it is a self-assessed tax. the tax also encodes the price they are willing to sell the land for.
19:06
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
What if you don't pay it and aren't willing to sell your land? Wouldn't it always require an enforcement mechanism in meatspace?
19:07
Zack
land is worth more if you have the ability to sell it.
A person could drop out of the harberger system, but they would be destroying their own wealth.
19:08
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Interesting ok so you are proposing people would be incentivised to partake in such a system with their land without changes to govt legislation?
19:08
Zack
I think if we started it up, people would sign up to join the system yes. new land on the borders would continually be added.
19:12
the existence of a government could prevent this system from working.
If a government has it's own tax that is based on the value of land, then no one would want to join the harberger system, because that would reveal to the government the true value of the land, and taxes would increase.
19:17
maybe the owner is anonymous, so the government doesn't know who to tax
19:19
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Could you explain why without such a harberger futarchy system land owners would be less able to sell their land than under such a system?
19:20
Zack
If land has squatters on it, and there is no mechanism to get rid of them, then it is worth less. This is true for any system of property transfer.
19:21
the same as if land has mosquitoes or some other pest
19:21
If you want your land to be valuable, you need to keep squatters off, you need some mechanism so that a potential buyer can be confident that if they bought the land, they would have control of it.
19:23
the mechanism of control is a different system from the mechanism we use to record and transfer ownership.
19:23
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
I think I have missed something, please forgive me :) Isn't it already the case that most land is subject to systems that allow for the removal for unauthorized squatters etc?
19:25
Zack
In many countries, it is one of many parts of the economy that the state has monopolized.
19:26
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Yes it is
19:26
So just so I understand, is the goal of what you described above to create a currency which has a value which is correlated to the value of the land, and so can be used as tbe basis of a futarchy system to make decisions about the land?
19:28
Zack
Im trying to explore the consequences of a harberger land tax system where the taxes are burned.
If this is a source of more collateral for derivatives contracts, it could be an important part of a system like amoveo.
19:36
Probably a more efficient mechanism of ownership enforcement would involve insurance contracts.
So if you buy land, and you don't have control of that land, you would be compensated.
19:36
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
What would the incentive be for someone to pay the tax on their property in the currency as opposed to just buy the currency and not pay tax while benefitting from the deflation that the currency experiences due to other people paying the tax?
19:37
Zack
you could own the currency without owning any land, sure.
If we were using VEO for this, I expect most owners of VEO would not also be owning harberger land.
19:39
people would want to add their land to the harberger system because it increases the value of their land. they can sell it for more after joining.
19:43
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Is the reason why it increases the value of your land because it incentivises others in your community to act in such a way as to increase the value of your land since they own veo and the price of veo is positively impacted by you valuing your land more highly as that would involve you burning more veo?
19:47
Zack
it increases the value of the land because potential buyers can be more confident that you are selling at the right price.
It is like how there is a market for lemons for used cars, and this market for lemons can be fixed if a company does detailed inspections and creates gives their seal of approval to certain used cars.
If you sell a car in the market for lemons, it is necessarily undervalued to make up for the risk that it is a lemon.
If you pay for the inspection, then you can sell it at the correct price.
the harberger tax system gives confidence that land is being sold at the correct price, it solves a market for lemons.
19:48
Zack
So I could buy up land that is a lemon, then put it on the blockchain and start paying harberger taxes, and the land would be purchased from me at a much higher price.
19:48
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Sorry I think I must be tired hence not picking that up initially
19:50
This is very interesting, I have never seen harberger taxes discussed in such a way
19:50
I have only ever seen them promoted by ethereans, always with the implication that they need government enforcement
19:50
And that they are redistribitonist taxes
19:54
Zack
There is a lot of bias for universal basic income, and bias against burning coins. So maybe they are missing a good opportunity.
19:55
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
hmm interesting maybe
19:56
I haven't seen them before discussed in the context of being used as a tool by owners of property in order to provide an expensive signal to other market participants of what they think their property is worth.
I kind of dismissed the idea as I only saw it being promoted by radical markets promoters who seemed to be rather socialist ;)
19:57
Zack
There is a substantial cost of property transfer too. Negotiations and bargaining.
The harberger system avoids these costs. So a person who buys land in the harberger system can afford to pay more, because they aren't wasting value in negotiations.
19:59
And there are people who are just bad at negotiating. These people might currently choose to not invest in land at all, because they know they will lose so much during negotiations.
With the harberger system, there will be a bigger pool of potential buyers, because it takes less skill to be a buyer.
19:59
with a bigger pool of buyers, the land can be sold at higher prices
20:01
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
"if a person owns x% of the currency, and x% of the land, then they will always have enough extra currency to pay the tax. So it is free." Isn't it technically not free since the opportunity cost is always that you could have just bought x% of the currency and not paid the tax?
So it does cost something (but could also ofc be a net benefit if it increases the value of your property by creating a reliable price signal for others to have more certainty when buying it off you).
20:03
sorry to nit pick :) I am only doing it to make sure I am not misinterpreting what you wrote
20:04
Zack
one way to do it is start with a bunch of land in the same place that has approximately uniform value, and simultaneously create a new currency with that land, so each person starts out with the same amount of currency and land.
Maybe there is a way to efficiently inflate the money supply when new land is added to the system. Maybe with some kind of auction.
20:05
I think we need to figure out this function to know if it is possible to efficiently inflate the money supply this way.
20:11
Part of what would make this difficult is there isn't a good way to determine what is part of the land and what isn't.
Like if I had animals on some land, are those animals included when the land gets transferred? What about my pet? What about wild animals?
buildings are probably included, but what about movable buildings? what about a mobile home with a broken motor that is used like a building?
20:12
good answers to these questions in one part of the world would be bad answers in another.
20:12
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Couldn't it be defined by the owner and made part of the terms of the harberger tax that they are paying, so all potential buyers are aware?
20:13
Zack
so we would need some system for the owner of a property to move assets in and out of the harberger part of their land
20:14
maybe this is related to the problem of squatters.
So if you are going to buy land, you would buy insurance to make sure that you actually end up in control of that land, and your insurance contract would specify what exactly you want control of.
20:28
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Hmm I was thinking, the difference between a the price that the owner of a property is willing to pay a harberger tax on it at and things such as insurance on used cars is that in the latter, what makes someone willing to buy the car is not that the seller of the car is willing to pay for insurance on it per se, but that the fact that they have paid insurance on it means that the buyer knows that they are buying a car which could be good or bad but also insurance, which makes the car bearable if it is bad.
20:28
as in the insurance actually changes what they are buying
20:29
so it is not a perfect analogy to the affect that a harberger tax has on the increased trust that buyers have in the quality of the property
20:31
Zack
what do you mean by insurance here?
Im imagining like, I go to assess the property, then I buy it, and when I visit the property that I now own, I find that all the trees have been clear-cut, or a building is gone.
I want insurance against the possibility that part of the property disappears.
20:32
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
well I was referring to car insurance of the type where if something is wrong with the car, repairs or compensation are covered by the insurance company
20:32
Zack
oh right. the used car dealership is solving the market for lemons by agreeing to pay to fix the car if it breaks
20:32
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
yeah exactly
20:33
you are not buying the car that they are selling, you are buying a car that is at least as good as a car that doesn't have anything wrong that is covered by the insurance
20:34
as in if it has an issue that is covered by the insurance, you can get rid of the issue for free
20:34
by calling up the insurance company
20:34
and getting a repair payed for by them
20:34
so it is somewhat different to the affect that a harberger tax has
20:34
since insurance actually improves what you are buying
20:35
Zack
but I think the basic analogy holds.
Any solution to the market for lemons allows for the seller to sell at a higher price, because we eliminate the risk to the buyer that they are buying a lemon.
20:35
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
I am not saying btw though that a harberger tax doesn't help or increase the certainty that buyers have in the quality of the property
20:35
I was just pointing out some subtleties :)
20:36
I think a harberger tax is more equivalent to the car dealer having a good reputation
20:37
in that if you buy a car from them and it is still bad
20:37
you don't really benefit from them having a good reputation
20:37
but you will be generally less likely to buy a bad car from a dealer with a good reputation
20:39
Zack
solving for this function is really important for us to know if this could work, and how it could work.
To know if there is some kind of auction so that when new land is added to the system, the current owner can be compensated with newly created coins for the fact that they will need to start paying taxes.
and to know if a financial derivative platform would need a harberger tax system to give us more collateral for betting
20:40
if it is optimal to have a different currency for every neighborhood, that is going to look really different from a single world-wide harberger currency
20:42
Previously I had been thinking that if you burn currency, this is reducing the market cap.
But it seems like if there is an expectation that people will be paying harberger taxes in the future, and those taxes will get burned, that this should cause the currency to be worth more.
20:44
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
deflationRateOfCoin = (totalPropertyvalue*harbergerTaxRate)
/coinMarketcapreturnOnHoldingCoin = 1/(1-deflationRateOfCoin)
20:45
I don't know how to get much further than the above ...
20:45
is there an error in it so far?
20:46
Zack
so this is based on the assumption that when taxes are burned, it wont change the market cap?
20:48
Zack
if we start with that assumption, it seems like the harberger system wouldn't be giving us any extra collateral that we could use for smart contracts
20:49
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
hmm true
20:49
Zack
so lets say we created a new currency for this harberger project.
Would this new currency really be worth zero? even though people need to own it to continue owning their land?
20:50
an important number is the tax rate.
Like, if I self-assess my land at $100,000
how much tax should I be paying per month?
20:50
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
say 1% for the sake of argument
20:50
Zack
How can we find the optimal tax rate? would the optimal rate be different in different places?
20:51
Just going back to first principles:
20:51
Zack
what are the costs and benefits of having a tax rate that is too low or too high?
20:56
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
I suppose the reason why the harberger tax should result in buyers being willing to pay more for land is that it acts as a signal that the land owner:
1)Doesn't value their land at more than the amount that they are paying tax on it (otherwise they wouldn't be willing to sell it for that amount)
Assuming they actually value their land at x dollars but pay tax on n:
2)They are willing to spend (n-x)*taxRate per year in order to be able to sell it any perceived premium they derive from the harberger tax being paid
3)Are potentially willing to forego lower offers on their property than the amount they are paying tax on? (maybe)
20:57
am I understanding this right?
20:57
Zack
(value of land) = (rental income)/(interest rate on land)
if the harberger tax was more than the rental income, then the value of the land would just keep dropping until the harberger tax was less than the rental income, right?
20:59
(2) seems like the important part
21:01
if the harberger tax is higher than the interest rate, then signing up new land for the harberger system would decrease the value of that land.
21:02
if the harberger tax is too low, then it doesn't work as a signal for potential buyers to be sure that the land is being sold at the correct price. the market for lemons isn't being fixed.
21:03
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
If I don't think that adding my property to the harberger system will improve the price discovery of my property and will improve the amount I am able to sell it for, then there is no reason I would add it.
21:03
so the amount you are willing to pay depends on the present value of the premium you expect it to add to your property
21:05
Well not the present value, but the present value divided by how long until it takes to get to the point at which it has added a premium
21:05
ahhh I need to go to sleep :)
00:00
Zack
Some interest rate exists. Because investors are all looking for the best investment they can get.
So i think we can ask futarchy how high the tax should be in order to maximize the value of the currency used to pay the tax.
00:24
Zack
An important point to understand harberger taxes.
Lets say that you can earn 10% returns on your land every year, but someone else can earn 15%.
If they are willing to pay you 11% so that they can use your land, this is a net gain for both of you.
So a person who has land in the harberger system, they want to keep their land very sell-able. Because if someone buys their land, that means they are earning even more profit than if they kept the land for themselves.
00:34
I am thinking about adding new land into the harberger system.
Maybe the way to think of this is that ownership of land is split into 2 parts.
There is one person who has permission to use the land currently.
But in a sense, the land is also owned by the greater harberger system.
So if a pirvate owner of land wants to add their land to the harberger system, they are selling the land to the harberger system.
I think the way to do this is that they would make a futarchy proposal like "This land gets added to the system, and I receive 1000 newly created veo". And if futarchy shows that this would have a positive influence on the price of VEO, then we do the hard update.
00:35
The thing we really need to calculate is how the land and the taxes influences the market cap of veo. would this give us significantly more collateral to make contracts with, the way mortgage backed securities add collateral to the centralized derivatives system.
02:58
Instinct
In light of FEI botched launch ^^
03:11
Jehan Tremback
"resistant to review"
03:30
SergioAgwero
CAn’t you buy a domain
06:18
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
At 3:04 he says that 4 assets need to be created in order to measure the impact that the agenda item will have on the outcome
06:18
But wouldn't you really need like hundreds of assets
06:19
In order to control for external factors that may be influencing both whether the agenda will pass and that also affect the outcome
06:26
Zack
Why would it matter if they are influenced?
06:29
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Like if for example the goal was to increase the amount of tourists to a city, and you realised that the amount of cars parked in the city is often correlated with the amount of tourists, you could create a pm to see what the conditional probability is of more tourists being in the city if there are more cars parked in the streets
06:29
And it would be probably higher than with fewer cars
06:29
But that wouldn't mean that going and buying cars and parking them in the streets increases tourism
06:30
That is an example of whether the causative link was in the opposite direction to what was assumed
06:30
But there are also cases where factor c has a causative affect on both factors a and b
06:32
Zack
Just because they correlated doesnt mean it would influence a futarchy market.
If the market is asking whether parking more cars will bring tourists, no one is going to be confused and bet that cars will cause tourism.
06:33
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
But that market is just asking for the share price of "more cars and more tourists"
06:34
People may buy it because they think if more cars park then it will actually he because of more tourism
06:34
Zack
A futarchy market is asking about the impact of a decision we make.
06:34
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
But ofc they may also be less willing to buy it if they know that the parked cars metric can be manipulated by the council
06:34
Zack
If one person makes a bad bet, that is free money for a smart trader to fix the price after.
06:36
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
I totally get that, dw this isn't the typical confusion about "the crowd doesn't know or can be confused" etc
06:36
I get that pms are resistant to manipulation
06:36
But what I am saying is that the true probably/price of "more cars and more tourists"
06:37
Zack
Futarchy markets arent about correlations. They are about the impact of a decision we are making.
06:38
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Is actually influenced by the fact that naturally there is a correlation
06:38
As well as the considerations about causation
06:39
Zack
Maybe you are imagining a poorly designed futarchy mechanism.
06:42
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Ah I see, because the condition will not "more cars and more tourists"
06:43
But if will be "the council puts more cars on the street and there are more tourists"
06:43
Ok yeah you are right
06:43
That was a bad example
06:43
But I have a better example 👍
06:43
I am still not convinced that you would not need 100s of shares...
06:45
Zack
First we make a binary market with 2 shares.
A) we park a bunch of cars on the street.
B) we dont park a bunch of cars.
Then we use those 2 share types as collateral for 2 scalar markets, which each ask about how much tourism there is.
So these scalar markets, they measure tourism conditional on which decision we make.
06:46
ᴅɪꜱᴛʙɪᴛ ⛓️💵
Yes that makes sense
06:49
I still think it will require hundreds of shares... But I will brb 30 mins to explain why 👍
09:10
Zack
thinking about the harberger system again.
If you own 1% of all the housing, and 1% of the coins that taxes are paid in, that gives you a kind of neutral position, where your taxes are covered and you own some land.
If you own more coins than land, that is like a position where you benefit from the value of land increasing.
So if you own housing without coins, it is like the crypto lending that they do on eth.
You are letting someone else borrow the coins from you, in comparison to a neutral position.
So how much value is being added to the crypto from these loans?
We know that the tax paid is less than the interest rate of investments.
If the tax paid is 1/2 the interest rate, then that means holding all these coins is like earning 1/2 the interest rate applied to all the land.
Assuming that the market cap of these coins will migrate to a price where the expected profit of holding the coins is the same as the interest rate, then the value added to the coins is 1/2 of the market cap of all that land.
if the tax is n% of the interest rate, then the value added to the coins is n% of the value of all the land.
09:16
If we can get the value of 1/2 of a bunch of land into the blockchain, so it is available to collateralize smart contracts, that would be a good thing.
10:29
Zack
the total value of all land is like 70x bigger than the total value of all gold.
10:29
if 1/2 of the value of the land was tokenized this way, we would have lots of collateral available to make all the contracts we want.
10:39
If we can get the blockchains value from land or buildings, would that make mining less important? Since we have another route to add value to the system?
18:25
Zack
Imagine if a blockchain owned a literal gold mine.
18:41
Josh
I think it would be too easy for a government to seize
18:42
Zack
all property comes with the risk that the local government will nationalize it, or a cartel will force you off the land
18:44
If a harberger land system was an important part of the economy in a country, it could be politically impossible for the government to do this.
If the politicians were invested in the system and profiting, then they wouldn't want to nationalize it.
18:45
There are a lot of parts of the world where land is almost free, and the local government is unable to collect almost any taxes.
A harberger system would make it clear how much the land is worth, and increase investment. Creating local jobs, and allowing the productive use of otherwise wasted land.
18:48
What do you guys think of me buying a bunch of land, and selling it to Amoveo in exchange for some newly created VEO?
18:51
maybe we could combine this with some kind of ICO so I have more capital to work with. ICO participants could receive some of the new veo, and be the initial tenants of the land.
18:54
Josh
How would amoveo gain control of the land?
18:54
Would it be able to hold legal title?
18:55
I think you can do some kind of ICO like that. A company is formed to buy the land, that company's ownership is determined by the ICO.
18:56
Zack
If all your neighbors are invested in the harberger system, that makes it easier.
Yeah, some kind of company could act as an interface to the old legal system.
18:57
It seems like participants in the harberger system have an incentive to maintain the land in a sellable state. So if someone else buys the land from them, they can easily take control.
The solution for how this is done probably will be different in different places.
The harberger solves the incentives, and the rest comes down to human creativity.
18:57
Josh
Could be interesting because the oracle system is really what can make this kind of thing work
18:58
Zack
how are you imagining the oracle system helping?
18:59
Josh
futarchy can decide how to develop the land, what other land to buy
18:59
whether amoveo has effective control
18:59
Zack
In harberger, each plot of land has a tenant who is control of using that land.
Futarchy is a good way to add new land, because we need to know how many veo to create to pay the person providing the new land.
19:00
the tenant would decide how to develop the land. whether to build a building, or clear-cut the trees, or anything
19:08
Maybe we can frame this as a environmentally friendly way of creating new cryptocurrency. an alternative to mining.
19:08
Tokenizing the land.
19:22
Can I have a car rental service based on the harberger system?