A redacted post I recently made was trying to encourage proposal voting by sharing token inflation for voters. While I fail to see how this is different than an airdrop advocated for by blocktrades in relation to gaining support for DHF it is none-the-less a slippery slope toward vote buying.
Therefore a token reward to DHF voters is no longer on the table. I'm open to discussion, especially on chain, related to getting more engagement. Either in terms of votes... or in terms of discussion as to how to make proposals better.
So far none of my 3 other proposals have been funded which makes this a sore subject to me. Seeing as I've delivered on generic community token ecosysystems as well as Atomic Swap protocols for a true DEX. Utilizing Hive in these manners opens a score of very cheap possibilities for distributed computing and trust and I'm more than happy to contribute to an ecosystem I feel will change the world.
I'm also no stranger to raising concerns to the current codebase which is what I feel keeps funding out of my hands more than anything else.
Proposal 171
Proposal 171 is an effort to gain some funds to finalize and test autonomous multi-signature control of community funds. It's usually easiest to explain in terms of what people are familiar with:
Hive Engine has limited smart contract options, one of them controls dublup, a prediction market. While one can use my current generic token system to build a version of this, they would need to do all the market in the layer 2 token. What's not possible is to have the network control HIVE funds. Because these funds would be in one account, and that account would have to be controlled by one person, which isn't much security for theft or other attack vectors... or would need to be controlled via multi-sig, which while a native feature for hive, doesn't yet have the code written to have automatic control. Roughly meaning, several of the signatories would have to manually sign anything the community/prediction market concluded on.
This also works toward the DEX. Controlling atomic swaps via the HIVE escrow network is relatively easy. But to have partial fills of exchange somebody would have to temporarily be in control of the remaining funds either incoming or outgoing. With autonomous control, that account can be controlled by the community at large and still have the needed buffer for theft of funds.
And once you have the ability to sign transactions as a group, then any transaction is an easy next step. For example, Account Creation Tokens are non-transferable, but with autonomous control a large account can have them, and reliable sell them with out having to worry about them being signed off market and creating a shortage.
Also, HBD to HIVE transactions on the internal market can be autonomously controlled. Right now HBD Stabilizer is receiving up to 26K a day, of HBD valued at $1.5, with an exposure of up to 3.5 days(converts). Which means up to $75,000 is (so far correctly, over $2M) being handled by the program written by @smooth. But with autonomous multi-sig control, several Hive accounts could run the same program and it would take more than 1 account to attack the paradigm. It brings safety to the processes that we should take for granted.
It's for these reasons I continue to develop, raise awareness not only of my programs but the possibilities for Hive and to raise the overall value of this network by making many more things possible here.
I encourage you to read proposal 171 and vote if any of this sounds like something you hope to see in the very near future.
FREEDOM FROM TYRANNY
Your post has been voted as a part of Encouragement program. Keep up the good work!
Use Ecency daily to boost your growth on platform!
Support Ecency
Vote for Proposal
Delegate HP and earn more