Retroactive Public Goods Funding giving Exit to public goods (OSS)
public.icon
Related
I talked to Mr. Kato about DAO
Capitalistic Vector provides sustainability to OSS
The current capitalism is an investment system
Main Text
Japanese version: Experiment of Optimism giving exit to public goods - by TheCoffeeTimes ☕ - Bspeak! - Cryptocurrency/Blockchain
Original article: Retroactive Public Goods Funding. Note: The Optimism team has long been… | by Ethereum Optimism | Ethereum Optimism Blog | Jul, 2021 | Medium
"The Optimism team has long been in search of a solution on how to sustainably fund public goods, and we now have the structure of our first experiment thanks to a brilliant design by Vitalik Buterin."
Optimism has come up with a method called "Retroactive Public Goods Funding" as one of the ways for OSS projects to operate in a sustainable and economically viable manner.
It seems to be devised by Vitalik.
Content
Running a company is very difficult.
Most startups, even with ample funding from VCs, often fail.
However, even if they fail, startups (which are for-profit compared to OSS projects) have the option of an exit.
This option does not exist for projects carried out by nonprofit organizations or FOSS.
Differences in goals between projects done by non-profit organizations and projects done by companies
In that case, wouldn't it be understandable and structurally inevitable to establish a for-profit company rather than an OSS project, even if you have a noble vision and don't want to be tainted by capitalism, thinking that "if you're going to spend time anyway, it's better to have some upside"?
What if the concept of "exit" existed for OSS projects?
If the profits and bonuses of a project were determined not by quarterly profits like a corporation, but by the value (public goods) created by that project, wouldn't investments in technology to maximize community benefits and innovation become more active?
Instead of competing for survival, wouldn't there be an increase in nonprofit organizations that aim to maximize stakeholder benefits?
I feel that this aligns with the ideology of a "Profitable NPO-like Entity" tkgshn.icon.
Result Oracle method (named "Result Oracle" in the DAO) to solve
1. Generate profits through the protocol.
2. Evaluate the value retroactively.
"Retroactive public goods funding"
It is easier to agree on what has been useful than on what is useful
"It is a concept of fund distribution that gives funds to projects that have already contributed based on past achievements
Experimenting with Optimism, which gives an exit to public goods - by TheCoffeeTimes ☕ - Bspeak! - Cryptocurrency/Blockchain
https://gyazo.com/c7f25ec6d72fc6794d43ef5ba6b6b2e4
1. Fundraising
People called "Sequencers" contribute the profits from those who deposited ETH.
① Create a DAO and allocate all Optimism's revenue to this DAO.
The revenue comes from the profits in the work called "Sequencing" on Optimism.
2. Determine which OSS projects have added value through voting, etc.
It is easier to agree on what has been useful than on what is useful
3. How to provide rewards to those OSS projects
1. Send funds (ETH) to Single individuals or organizations that have mainly contributed to the project.
(Note: It should be noted that it refers to a single individual or organization)
2. Send funds (ETH) to the contract.
Split among Multiple individuals or organizations who initially agreed on the resources (time and money).
(Contract: 'Resources initially agreed'
"Fixed Allocation Table Splitting Funds Between Multiple Individuals and/or Organizations" So, it seems like declaring "I will commit only XX hours or yen!" at the beginning? tkgshn.icon
3. Project token that allows trading based on the prediction of this Result Oracle.
Essentially creating a prediction market for what the results oracle will fund.
Result Oracle predicts "what to fund" and opens up a trading market for that.
It is easier to agree on what has been useful than on what is useful was in the context of "Evaluation is easier than expected."
But on the contrary, it discusses "How do you think the Result Oracle will judge?" and opens up a market for trading.
It has a VoteTech feel to it. tkgshn.icon
Allowing Time Axis Issues in a Non-Centralized Manner by DAO System
If you want to provide funding to a project with token 3, you create a buy order for the project token using the distributed revenue.
https://gyazo.com/d450ba376eb0f18467419184288fd82e
By creating a lower limit for the price (blue line in the figure), token holders of the project can sell and monetize their holdings and support the value.
The design of this oracle is a very complicated problem (see also: known long-time problems with naive approaches like coin voting), and is best approached iteratively. A simple early version might be ~20–50 hand-picked technically skilled long-time contributors from the ecosystem that is implementing this scheme. The scheme can be improved from there over time as our understanding of decentralized governance improves.
"I think it is essential to continuously improve such a complex mechanism, as there are existing problems."
"In the beginning, we selected about 20-50 experts from the ecosystem, so I think the initial discussions will go well to some extent. Well, I want to improve over time."
The problem of insufficient funding until now (to become a valuable OSS)
The above initiatives are only possible when it is quite mature.
The means of raising funds until now are as follows:
1. Grant program by projects or foundations.
2. Projects that sell Project Token on Uniswap.
Does this become an investment in the project itself? tkgshn.icon
3. Secondary funding.
Separating the Maintenance of Public Goods and Speculative Capital Investment?
This problem is Challenges in funding public goods.
Funding Public Goods Using SAFT may be a hypothesis.
The main text ends here, summarizing the concepts discussed in the Japanese article.
As an example of retroactive funding other than the above, the article mentions NFT of EIP1559.
["Let's further discuss the mechanism of providing funding for already apparent contributions and throw in DeFi. Let's further evolve DeGov (decentralized governance) such as retroactive funding."]
https://youtu.be/oLsb7clrXMQ
Picked on 2021/7/26.