The results of the ZCAP poll are in, with 80% of respondents indicating that they would, in principle, support the introduction of a new funding mechanism to replace the current Dev Fund when it expires in November 2024.
6 Likes
I thought this was a cool idea. So much so that I spent some thousands of hours building Free2Z. What are the differences between f2z and what you have in mind?
The main strength of f2z is really solid iterative software fundamentals - Iām really good at changing software. Itās weird that I get little feedback about the direction of f2z but sometimes I see folks imagine new platforms.
8 Likes
itās very hard for me to tell what free2Z is. is it social media? How is this related to Zcash /
money?
what i have in mind for a community funding is a list of projects where a person who wants funding can set forth all of the elements of their project, set a funding request, and then the community can send money to fund it. ZEC, USDT or whatever they want. this is not ZCG funding. these are for edge and non blockchain related proejcts. what i call the edge
there are many examples to copy out there. UIUX is critical. kick starter is one of the more popular sites. and monero didnāt look too bad.
To me, free2z would fall into the type of project that should be funded from the community.
the community funding would be part of zechub or zcash or something. (we have way to many websites by the way. itās very confusing. but thatās another topic).
2 Likes
dis is literally wat free2Z allows u to do also. yes the funding UI bars are not implemented. but otherwise its possible to send ZEC so far to - fundraising pages
or im misunderstandin?
This particular thread on the Dev Fund is already insanely epic so maybe these comments could be split here:
Briefly though, weāre still looking for frontend help. Weāre fullstack guys. UI/UX is certainly important. But, people should consider and value the solid backend functionality and security. Frontend and layout stuff are malleable. Iāve seen 2 monero sites and they look interesting ā¦ but scratch the surface ā¦ lots of details to attend to ā¦
1 Like
The question was not clear and I suspect many ZCAP members voted not the way they intended to. ZF should recognize that to get a clear response from ZCAP; and by extension a mandate to execute on ZCAPs behalf, the questions must be clear.
I wish the ZF Board would be more engaged to ensure that the questions put to ZCAP are unambiguous, clear, and easy to understand.
1 Like
A more meaningful poll would have been something clear/ void of abstractions.
Do you support:
- Renewing the Dev Fund as it is currently
- Renewing the Dev Fund in a modified form
- Eliminating the Dev Fund
- I have no strong opinion about the Dev Fund Decision
3 Likes
Is there any significant faction here who believes that the entire devfund should go to one non-profit with a single, clear mission statement?
The idea to ādecentralizeā by going from 1 entity to 2 entities was a clear mistake, in hindsight. Dividing into more entities would be folly. Wouldnāt it be more efficient to have the overhead of 1 single structure instead of multiples? One unified vision? Of course, we could modify the course and reprioritize continuously and ādecentralizeā or democratize decision making. But, it would be more efficient to iterate on these mechanisms with 1 organization. We could decide how funds would be split up, we could use data and iterative feedback. But, I donāt think that 2 Chiefs is more decentralized than 1. Perhaps the bipolarity even tends towards not decentralizing.
One Devfund that goes through One Structure that continuously improves on the efficiency of what is delivered to the community.
Letās flip the language around a bit. The word ādecentralizedā gives me a warm fuzzy too and the word ācentralizedā usually makes me want to grab my pitchfork. But, letās think about these words a bit too:
Unified, cohesive, coherent, integrated, organized, focused, aligned, concentratedā¦
and also
Disjointed, discombobulated, disorganized, unintegrated, scattered, siloed, fragmented, chaotic, incoherent, uncoordinated, splintered ā¦
Iād go further and say that we should build one big, beautiful repository with everything integrated together and all devfund recipients working in that same wonderful, mythical multi-package code heaven where everything always has to work together in the trunk. But, I donāt want to scare anyone off so I wonāt mention that a single monolithic codebase is a great way to deliver cohesive products that work together over time.
2 Likes
Is there any significant faction here who believes that the entire devfund should go to one non-profit with a single, clear mission statement?
Yes. Monorepo ftw. Keep it simple, stupid!
1 Like
well, lots of people hate monorepo and I donāt want to start a VIM/Emacs thing about it again ā¦ but ā¦ at least one organization ā¦ like ZF could host their own gitlab ā¦ developing those democratic rules around the trunk branch(s) though ā¦ thatās where the real decentralization is ;9 If not a true monorepo then at least being able to define what the entire code base is.
Still, I do think that all of the books, websites, nodes, wallets, docs, ZIPs ā¦ everything being in sync on a single trunk is totally feasible and makes it so that people could find and improve things a lot more easily than having to constantly be like ādude, which repo is this?ā ā¦ darn! Iām starting to get verbose in favor of monorepo. Sorry, guys, itās like a character flaw or sth ā¦
OTOH, zebra is already a monorepo, so lean into that where it makes sense ā¦
2 Likes
VIM > Emacs. Unless youāre an octopus, I guess.
1 Like
Yes. Yes. Yes. As we sit here today, we need one mission, one vision, one treasury, and to execute as one team. Its a farce for one single source of funding (Zec holders) to be funding so many orgs and then call it decentralization. Its effectively not real decentralization its disintermediation. As you rightly point out, its inefficient, and wasteful. Maybe at a $10+ billion market cap, it might make sense to have more verticals. But we dont. And, verticals usually are defined by their independently earned revenue as a line of business or product line, not politics or splitting up the same vertical (EG we have one vertical, ZEC, split into 3 pieces). Its very wasteful because one of the 3 pieces might need more money than the others at any given time. A static allocation of money as opposed to a dynamic knowledge based allocation is not effective. And on top of that, we have a āSustainability Fundā trying to capture future transaction fees before we even have a fee structure in place. Eliminate them all and simplify under one umbrella/org. They need to work as a team and not use the orgs as fiefdoms to do what they want without oversight. @joshs plan is an outline for how to split up responsibilities: L1 (core blockchain, POS, Sync Times, etc), L2 (ZSA, Stablecoins, RWA, NFT), L3 (Wallets, Crosschain, DEX, CEX) as one way to look at it (im sure there is more). Currently I cant tell which org is responsible for what.
2 Likes
I agree. Regardless of how funding is implemented, we need to tightly coordinate the use of the resources we have. There is no room left for uncoordinated efforts.
7 Likes
, In my opinion this is likely the most important priority for the Zcash ecosystem at the moment.
6 Likes
Count me in. Now that weāre 4 full years into the tri-party system, the results speak for themselves. To answer the question - No there isnāt a significant faction.
Cross Post:
The Primary, most Logical Reasons to End the Block Rewards Model is to make it imperative that the ZF & ECC reorient their currently exploitative behavior against ZEC holder/ activists.
How?
Stop giving those organizations free ZEC that they turn around and liquidate without regards to the Zcash project.
If the ZF & ECC intend to continue to work for Zcash, and operate as non-profits in America, then itās time for them to stop acting like opaque crypto Hedge Funds/ trading into and out of arbitrary altcoins.
Are we āAll in Zcashā or not?
2 Likes
This is not true where fiat doesnāt have those properties. Thatās precisely where ZEC is doing relatively well, and thatās exactly the use case we should be supporting.
1 Like
I am in strong agreement with @decentralistdan and @earthrise. To some degree I believe we see the adaptive response they advocated coming from ZeBoot. I think that weāre going to start experiencing observable and very positive results as a consequence.
1 Like
It is absolutely true. Countries like Venezuala and those in Africa want stability too. You are not going to be able to replace Venezuala fiat with something equally as volaltile and prone to price declines. People in Africa use Mpesa, and NuBank is dominating is S. America. You are biting off more than you can chew. And you are the one speculating with development money.
ZEC price volatility is not price speculation, its historical statistical fact. Volatility is backwards looking whereas price speculation is forward looking. You are not going to be able to take the Vol out of ZEC under any scenario unless you plan on completely changing it by removing the 21m cap and collateralizing it, which happens to start looking like a stablecoin. If you think you will make ZEC stable and trustworthy such that a person will offer they labor in exchange for ZEC, I wish you would explain in detail. Then you can hopefully convince the Foundation to stop selling ZEC, which they need to do to hedge its price volatility. If ZEC was trustworthy as a SOV and stable, as a currency for day to day spending needs to be we would not be needing to hedge.
So you are speculating that the price will be become stable and more trustworthy because by all accounts ZEC is not a SOV or useable as a fiat for day to day spending today. Your own inherent ZEC price speculation is causing development funding speculationā¦
So as it relates to development, you are the one speculating and gambling with development money provided by ZEC holders. Rather than trying to stop price speculation, we need to stop development funding speculation. Zcash has a good thing going; but your vision has caused a massive misallocation of resources. Now we have projects like Aleo that started ini 2019! looking to take over and displace Zcash. Recenty, they raised $200m (almost the entire ZEC market cap in one funding round!) and got a $1.45 billion value. There is a lot of competition and Zcash keeps getting smaller and smaller while the rest of the market is growing rapidly. Just because prices are down doesnt mean real user growth isnt happening. If ZEC is experiencing major user growth, transaction growth, wallet growth, etc etcā¦, please share.
Aleo is a remarkable crypto wallet with several features that set it apart:
- Fully-Private Applications: Aleo is the first blockchain that enables fully-private applications. It achieves this through zero-knowledge (ZK) cryptography, which allows users to prove something is true without revealing how it is true. This privacy feature ensures that sensitive data remains confidential, making it an excellent choice for privacy-conscious users1.
- Proof of Succinct Work (PoSW): Aleo employs the PoSW consensus mechanism, which generates succinct proofs for transactions. This approach enhances scalability and efficiency while maintaining security1.
- Leo Programming Language: Aleo uses the Leo programming language, inspired by Rust. Leo is designed for writing private applications on the Aleo network. It allows developers to express logic easily and efficiently, contributing to the platformās privacy-focused architecture12.
- Secure and Private Viewing: Aleoās Leo Wallet provides complete privacy by allowing users to generate zero-knowledge proofs directly in their browsers. This innovative feature ensures secure and private viewing, sending, and receiving of tokens on the Aleo network3.
In summary, Aleoās commitment to privacy, scalability, and cutting-edge technology makes it a strong contender for those seeking a crypto wallet that prioritizes confidentiality and security.
Sounds a lot like what Zcash was supposed to be in many waysā¦
Now with crypto as a fiat, we can create collateral pools to create fiat alternative that will be much better than ZEC, Bitcoin, Monero and anything else without collateral and use the Zcash privacy network. That is why I have been a proponent of. However, Bitcoin seems to be positioning as āthe collteralā or sit alongside the dollar and gold as a reserve currency (not a fiat for spending as a primary use case even though it can be spent). If they can build the trust between central bankers, they have a chance and the price clearly is a reflection of that potential. BTC price is still a fraction of the dollar value of gold, and that appears to be the primay use case. Fiat for spending requires stability and ZeBoot is just ZeSame if the plan is to try and get people to buy ZEC for spending on day to day transactions as a fiat. Its a risky gamble that keeps coming up snake eyes. We should ZeBoot with ZEC as a store of value as the primary use case, use the Zcash network for privacy transactions for a suite of assets such as stablecoins, and yes ZEC can be used to buy things but given its volatile nature its not a primary use case. ZEC is Gold 2.0. and you can create collteral pools backing a more privacy based stable fiat to provide to your favorite country. But, I think you will come up snake eyes over and over if you think ZEC is going to replace a fiat. From the little I know about @decentralistdan and @earthrise, it seems like they may live in an alternate universe where people donāt have any choices and where ZEC is the only option. So in their world ZEC isnāt volatile because its the only option. Thatās not reality. Believe me, I wish your vision was realistic and possible. But, I simply think its a dream and as a ZEC holder, I need to speak up and hopefully see ZEC funded development focused on areas where I think ZEC will succeed. Just as important, what I have been proposing doesnāt hurt ZEC or take away from what you would like to see, it just changes how development funds are used to focus on what I believe is a less risky strategy. POS, programmability, ZSA/Stablecoins, Ease of Use, Txn speeds, decentralized development ecosystem (which I think requires gas/fees)ā¦
Edit - I think its important to have a privacy based DeFi ecosystem with 1) ultra low volitility; highly collateralized assets ideally backed 100% with subject Co government bonds for day to day spending 2) a fixed supply utility token such as ZEC that earns yield (from ecoystem gas/fees) to secure the network and works as a medium to long-term SOV (its too volitile for short term day to day transactions. 3) an ecosystem where third parties can connect and settle using either a fixed supply/yield or variable supply/burn tokenomics for DeFi use cases.
2 Likes
how about you post the poll on twitter or threads or something that isnāt the community forum, no one checks this
1 Like
they should post this on a public space like twitter where its not 130 people voting where 95% are devs with a vested interest in the outcome of poll.
1 Like