Proof of Sharism

Pretty interested in this concept being developed to switch from PoW. Any timings or updates here?

I also interested

administrators

We are going to kick off the process of revising white paper from v2.0 to v3.0. Join us if you guys are interested. Proof-of-Sharism is definitely a key central topic in this round.

references:

last edited by im

@im I'm pleased to see that Musicoin is hoping to move away from the 'Proof of Work' protocol. I can't fully commit myself to any POW based crypto currency knowing the destructive environmental implications caused by mining as we speak and getting worse. However I can't seem to find anything about 'Proof of Sharism' anywhere online. Is this less power intensive to mine? Can you please elaborate, or point me in the right direction for info in laymans terms?

I think switching from PoW to any other algorythm is a natural step even for Bitcoin. Mining and electricity costs associated to it PoW are not a sustainable business into the near future.

On the other hand I am not sure wether PoS (Stake) is either a positive direction as it enriches and doesn't incentive the use of tokens into an economic ecosystem, such as, Musicoin.

I wonder wether Proof Of Sharism is gonna represent something different from these two options. Are listeners going to validate blocks?

I hope it will give more value to the coin as well, it's important for the early investors and miners.

Cant wait to hear more about this concept. I feel like its a great way to encourage more circulation of musicoin. It also helps the community grow stronger by encouraging discovering new artists and also tipping the ones you really like. This combined with the new physical speaker they are making is undeniably something incredible. I really feel this site will succeed. Keep up the great work everybody!!

@im said in Proof of Sharism:

We are going to kick off the process of revising white paper from v2.0 to v3.0. Join us if you guys are interested. Proof-of-Sharism is definitely a key central topic in this round.

references:

This is great news!

Assuming we have all read the current version of roadmap AND whitepaper 2.0
What are the next steps?
We are ALL interested, trust me.

What can we as community members do to help?

Is there a timeline for the whitepaper 3.0?

Are there specific sections that will need modification, and what are they?

Is there a workflow schedule?

Is there an expected release date of the whitepaper 3.0? (if not, than i suggest creating one as a goal)

Will the ROADMAP be updated to reflect the next few goals for musicoin?

Should the UPDATED ROADMAP come out BEFORE the whitepaper 3.0? (yes)
(and have the whitepaper release date (aproximate timeframe) on it?

What are Musicoins UPDATED goals for Q1 2018?
What are Musicoins UPDATED goals for Q2 2018?
What are Musicoins UPDATED goals for Q3 2018?
What are Musicoins UPDATED goals for Q4 2018?

WHAT is the current status of "proof of sharism" and when will it be incorporated?

We are all excited to see the next evolution of this platform.

The more information you share with us, the MUSICOIN COMMUNITY, the more we may be able to help facilitate and participate.

Complete transparency of:
TIMELINES (even estimated)
current PROGRESS of ongoing coding project (with estimated timeline goals)

will do MORE GOOD for this project than a silent team that works hard in the shadows.

Feb 2018 could be a pivotal moment in MUSICOIN's crypto currency space health.

Any info on the next whitepaper (V3) or even the roadmap? thx

Personally I cannot wrap my head around why you would move away from PoW at this point. The current framework works fine, in respect that the miners pay the artists and the consumers can enjoy the content for free. While I think the current system is lacking some real reasons to ever bother buying musicoins, at least as long as the value is high enough miners will secure the chain.

Then your going to turn around and cut miners out of the picture and pursue some utopian idea of sharing? Proof of Stake would be bad enough but moving to some activity based PoS model? Why in the world would you move from a system where miners (who support your chain) are actually willing to pay your artists, artists get to enjoy all the listener->Artist goodness and $$ for free without the normal life lottery of getting discovered, and the listeners get to use the platform for free.

Personally I feel that if that is implemented your going to destroy the potential the musicoin platform has. The money to pay artist has to come from somewhere. The blockchain has to be secured by someone. The idea that everyone will create and share, do work for the chain at their own expense ? That strikes me as some idea floated in a drum circle at a bluegrass festival.

I don't understand why most effort is not going into making the platform itself more modern and increasing the tools and methods artists use to get in front of as many listeners as possible. The whole concept of MC strikes me as a brilliant way for artists to be discovered and paid for their work. But instead it seems the roadmap says MC will spend 2018 trying to destroy it's own ecosystem by removing miners whom use their electricity and hardware to do work that creates value in a coin that in turn pays the artists.

As a miner, MC's eventual move away from PoW and move to ... well failure in my eyes... won't affect me because I can and will move my hardware to other coins for no loss. But your artists will lose out on a what could be a phenomenal discovery and payment method.

I don't know if it's possible to completely remove the miners out of the equation, from a technical perspective, because that's how the blockchain technology works (someone has to confirm the transactions, etc.). It is though possible to improve the algorithm so that it uses less energy, but that is highly unlikely, given it uses eth algorithm. It is interesting to see what this PoS is all about. I'm also waiting for and and hoping for it to be successful.

I think the lowest ping that can provide the content should get like 30% of the reward, then going on with the 2nd lowest ping getting 29% and so on. This would ensure that the closest locations to a specific enduser would provide the content and then be supported by other peers.

I could imagine a soft limit to individual hashrate via reducing the block reward.to further decentralise the network.
e.g.: when you or your pool got 10% of the network you get 90% of the block reward, with 11% you get 89%, and so on... the rest of the block reward is going into a moonbowpool, eeh moonpool...
I think this would ensure mining pools not getting to big.

Earning mc while listening with the Musicoinwalllet (eg 1MC per hour)

None PoW schemes promote centralization inherently. Take PoStake for example, the idea that simply having more money generates more money is the exact same as how current fiat money systems work when you boil it down. Most of the money eventually settles in very few hands. PoStake really is nothing more then re-creating the same fiat money system in place today. People seem to completely miss this fact though because it's crypto they miss the obvious hypocrisy of a decentralized currency trying to use a centralizing methodology.

Now I'm not sure of the details of the Proof of Sharing. I assume it has to do with some form of validation wrapped around the delivery of content. Perhaps it would be better labeled Proof of Bandwidth ? Or it could just be one of the PoStake models that uses frequency of transactions from the holder to determine block rewards. Regardless all PoS schemes will result in centralization.

@MJMoonbow-aka-Tinman The lowest ping getting an advantage promotes people with high speed server farms being about to centralize block rewards. Anyone on a standard home internet is going to give up mining something where the data center with fiber can out ping them any day of the week.

I'm also don't see a way to limit pooling honestly. That means the algorithm itself would need to monitor the source of the block and it's relation to the network. Earning MC while you listen , if thats the system would fail simply from the basis that there would be no one to pay the artists. There has to be a reason to buy MC.

Imho , what MC needs is more reason to buy the coin itself and a lot of work done on the actual platform to make it look far less like a college project and more like a professional streaming platform. MC strength is giving artists a medium to be directly compensated for their creations and discovered by the listening community. Those are what need to be focused on , not creating some validation algo that "saves the planet" while destroying the ability for artists to get paid. It is going to be a real shame to see such a valid and potential laden project chop off it's own legs.

Artists provide content, which is uploaded to content holders (providing disk space and bandwidth)
Miner provide hashpower for transactions and smart contracts
To get it work i think all three parties need to be paid equally. The artists and content holder can be paid with PPP. Only the miner would have additional transactions.
I think it might be necessary to divide those two kind of work a miner would do. One (or a series) of transaction that is triggered by the play of a song and another for booking coins.
I think it might be necessary to have two different gas prices for those different kinds of work.

Looks like your connection to $MUSIC Forum ("Let's Rock") was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.