Agreed. I can’t come up with a decentralized, on-chain solution for incenting developers either:https://twitter.com/naval/status/985020476744400896?s=21 …
-
-
Replying to @naval @hugohanoi
What I don’t buy is the argument that good developers don’t need to be paid (not saying you’re making it, others are). It’s an AND not an OR. Anyone designing an incentive system should acknowledge Free Rider and Tragedy of the Commons.
1 reply 1 retweet 14 likes -
Replying to @naval @hugohanoi
What we have right now is suboptimal incentive allocation - all the rewards are going to founders, early investors and miners. None to late developers. Which leads to more independent blockchains that would exist otherwise.
1 reply 5 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @naval @hugohanoi
But there seems to be no decentralized, on-chain solution to the problem. But the market will test BTC and ETH by creating “innovation incentives.” BTC has a weak implicit one (own some BTC). ETH has a slightly stronger one (ERC 20).
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @naval @hugohanoi
But in this Cambrian Coin Explosion, we will see coins that use inflation funding and centralized grants to fund engineering for a while, and then switch to decentralized models.
1 reply 2 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @naval @hugohanoi
For the non-private pure-SoV use case, there’s a good argument that Bitcoin is done, should stay simple and decentralized. For the “Global Computing Platform” use case, further innovation is likely needed. So ongoing incentives for development matter.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @naval
I mostly agree. Lack of top dev talents is def a big problem & like you said, Tragedy of the Commons. Maybe the next best solution is for the biggest companies in the space to step up & raise a common, neutral fund to attract protocol developers. Give them a stake in the coin.
3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @hugohanoi
Historically that hasn’t happened much. My guess is: • More Treasury models like DASH • Inflation funding with centralized grants during the early period. • Inflation funding for technology / team acquisitions (speculative and further out and yes, centralized).
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @naval
My concern with the inflation funding model is that we'd recreate the problem of central banking: how much inflation is enough?
And it might set a precedent where if it can be inflated once, it can be inflated again & again.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @hugohanoi
Yes. Not a good route for a SoV coin. The best way to keep a train on the track is to remove the steering altogether.
1 reply 1 retweet 17 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

