PIP-28: DAN - Distributing the Altruist Network (Community Chains Introduction)

[shane]

@poktblade

This is the concern I have with community chains

@poktblade

The ideal scenario IMO is that this isn’t funded by the DAO given the nature of the product but rather funded by PNI.

I think you misunderstand this proposal as a “funding proposal”, when it’s a service proposal… where we (DA and node runners) get paid for the work we do and value we create for the network. We scoped out this concept in August and began developing in early October. This proposal is not to funding that development… if it were, then it would be a heck of a lot more

This is providing a real-time service where the lion share of the funds go to other node runners, and DA’s fee is minimal, especially considering the service we’ve been providing PNI to contribute to the altruist work. We actually put off launching our public MVP in January because PNI needed a high quality solution for the altruist, and focused on their needs first. We are hoping to launch a public facing version for all node runners soon, now that we’ve addressed the QoS needs of the altruist

@poktblade

This service has the opportunity to drive revenue in so many different directions.

This applies to any service or project in the POKT ecosystem… let along the entire web3 world Your company already provides chain access service to other companies… so should the DAO not work with Nodies since your company monetizes your own infrastructure in ways the DAO can not audit?

While your company monetizes your own infrastructure in the ways you see fit, Decentralized Authority doesn’t own our own node infrastructure and we have multiple parties keeping us accountable. We are strictly a software company. CC Towers are owned by POKT node runners and they are able to verify every relay going through their system. They have full access to ALL logs… because it’s on their system, not owned by us.

Your logic would make it impossible for the DAO to interface with any company (including your own) and that concept should not be applied selectively to CC which right now includes DA, POKTScan, Node River, Breezy, and qspider. We fortunately built our system completely auditable by our node runners, but so many companies in the POKT are not open or distributed… hence why this concept is impossible to implement.

@poktblade

Scenario 2: If DRPC (a load-balancing service amongst node runners) also comes to the forums and proposes something very similar, would we hold the same sentiment?

@poktblade

My team is building middleware software for this - to encourage node sharing. Some of the things that need to be built is bascially a smaller version of infura

@poktblade

V1 solves a lot of the “blockchain” problems we face today, but nothing about the effiency of our how our node runners operate.

I do not see how CC is any different than what you said you were wanting to build. We took a different architectural approach where we weren’t going to be an Infrua like service, but be a distributed service, where we don’t run any infrastructure and node runners themselves own the CC Towers and can audit every relay.

We also built this service to open it up to all node runners, not just select node runners (like other chain access services that exist in the background of the POKT ecosystem). Every product and service we release is freely available to all node runners, and CC is a way we can give any POKT node access to the same opportunities as large providers like Nodies have with their own infrastructure. Even with CC, we are working with every provider that reached out to use to join… we see our “market niche” as node software for any node runner, and that is all we’ve ever released. As @AmishBatman said

@AmishBatman

Our primary business has always been about empowering individual node runners and providing tools for them to do that. That is why we created Node Pilot.