Dear Reddit community,
Following our announcement for DTube v0.9
, I have received countless questions about the new blockchain part, avalon
. First I want to make it clear, that it would have been utterly impossible to build this on STEEM, even with the centralized SCOT/Tribes that weren't available when I started working on this. This will become much clearer as you read through the whole wall of text and understand the novelties.
SteemPeak says this is a 25 minutes read, but if you are truly interested in the concept of a social blockchain, and you believe in its power, I think it will be worth the time!
I'm a long time member of STEEM, with tens of thousands of staked STEEM for 2 years+. I understand the instinctive fear from the other members of the community when they see a new crypto project coming out. We've had two recent examples recently with the VOICE
annoucements, being either hated or ignored. When you are invested morally, and financially, when you see competitors popping up, it's normal to be afraid.
But we should remember competition is healthy, and learn from what these projects are doing and how it will influence us. Instead, by reacting the way STEEM reacts, we are putting our heads in the sand and failing to adapt. I currently see STEEM like the "North Korea of blockchains", trying to do everything better than other blockchains, while being #80 on coinmarketcap and slowly but surely losing positions over the months.
When DLive left and revealed their own blockchain, it really got me thinking about why they did it. The way they did it was really scummy and flawed, but I concluded that in the end it was a good choice for them to try to develop their activity, while others waited for SMTs. Sadly, when I tried their new product, I was disappointed, they had botched it. It's purely a donation system, no proof of brain... And the ultra-majority of the existing supply is controlled by them, alongside many other 'anti-decentralization' features. It's like they had learnt nothing from their STEEM experience at all...
STEEM was still the only blockchain able to distribute crypto-currency via social interactions (and no, 'donations' are not social interactions, they are monetary transfers; bitcoin can do it too). It is the killer feature we need
. Years of negligence or greed from the witnesses/developers about the economic balance of STEEM is what broke this killer feature. Even when proposing economical changes (which are actually getting through finally in HF21), the discussions have always been centered around modifying the existing model (changing the curve, changing the split, etc), instead of developing a new one.
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.
What if I built a new model for proof of brain distribution from the ground up? I first tried playing with STEEM clones, I played with EOS contracts too. Both systems couldn't do the concepts I wanted to integrate for DTube, unless I did a major refactor of tens of thousands of lines of code I had never worked with before. Making a new blockchain felt like a lighter task, and more fun too.
Before even starting, I had a good idea of the concepts I'd love to implement. Most of these bullet points stemmed from observations of what happened here on STEEM in the past, and what I considered weaknesses for d.tube's growth.
The first concept I wanted to implement deep down the core of how a DPOS chain works, is that I didn't want the token to be staked, at all (i.e. no 'powering up'). The cons of staking for a decentralized social platform are obvious: * complexity for the users with the double token system
. * difficulty to onboard people as they need to freeze their money, akin to a pyramid scheme
The only good thing about staking is how it can fill your bandwidth and your voting power when you power-up, so you don't need to wait for it to grow to start transacting. In a fully-liquid system, your account ressources start at 0% and new users will need to wait for it to grow before they can start transacting. I don't think that's a big issue.
That meant that witness elections had to be run out of the liquid stake. Could it be done? Was it safe for the network? Can we update the cumulative votes for witnesses without rounding issues? Even when the money flows between accounts freely?
Well I now believe it is entirely possible and safe, under certain conditions. The incentive for top witnesses to keep on running the chain is still present even if the stake is liquid. With a bit of discrete mathematics, it's easy to have a perfectly deterministic algorithm to run a decentralized election based off liquid stake, it's just going to be more dynamic as the funds and the witness votes can move around much faster.
NO EARLY USER ADVANTAGE
STEEM has had multiple events that influenced the distribution in a bad way. The most obvious one is the inflation settings. One day it was hella-inflationary, then suddently hard fork 16 it wasn't anymore. Another major one, is the non-linear rewards that ran for a long time, which created a huge early-user advantage that we can still feel today.
I liked linear rewards, it's what gives minnows their best chance while staying sybil-resistant. I just needed Avalon's inflation to be smart. Not hyper-inflationary like
The key metric to consider for this issue, is the number of tokens distributed per user per day
. If this metric goes down, then the incentive for staying on the network and playing the game, goes down everyday. You feel like you're making less and less from your efforts. If this metric goes up, the number of printed tokens goes up and the token is hyper-inflationary and holding it feels really bad if you aren't actively earning from the inflation by playing the game.
Avalon ensures that the number of printed tokens is proportional to the number of users with active stake. If more users come in, avalon prints more tokens, if users cash-out and stop transacting, the inflation goes down. This ensures that earning 1 DTC will be about as hard today, tomorrow, next month or next year
, no matter how many people have registered or left d.tube, and no matter what happens on the markets.
NO LIMIT TO MY VOTING POWER
Another big issue that most steemians don't really know about, but that is really detrimental to STEEM, is how the voting power mana bar works. I guess having to manage a 2M SP delegation for @dtube really convinced me of this one. When your mana bar is full at 100%, you lose
out the potential power generation, and rewards coming from it. And it only takes 5 days to go from 0% to 100%. A lot of people have very valid reasons to be offline for 5 days+, they shouldn't be punished so hard. This is why all most big stake holders make sure to always spend some of their voting power on a daily basis. And this is why minnows or smaller holders miss out on tons of curation rewards, unless they delegate to a bidbot or join some curation guild... meh. I guess a lot of people would rather just cash-out and don't mind the trouble of having to optimize their stake.
So why is it even a mana bar? Why can't it grow forever? Well, everything in a computer has to have a limit, but why is this limit proportional to my stake? While I totally understand the purpose of making the bandwidth limited and forcing big stake holders to waste it, I think it's totally unneeded and inadapted for the voting power. As long as the growth of the VP is proportional to the stake, the system stays sybil-resistant, and there could technically be no limit at all if it wasn't for the fact that this is ran in a computer where numbers have a limited number of bits.
On Avalon, I made it so that your voting power grows virtually indefinitely, or at least I don't think anyone will ever reach the current limit of Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER: 9007199254740991 or about 9 Peta VP. If you go inactive for 6 months on an account with some DTCs, when you come back you will have 6 months worth of power generation to spend, turning you into a whale, at least for a few votes.
Another awkward limit on STEEM is how a 100% vote spends only 2% of your power
. Not only STEEM forces you to be active on a daily basis, you also need to do a minimum of 10 votes / day to optimize your earnings. On Avalon, you can use 100% of your stored voting power in a single mega-vote if you wish, it's up to you.
A NEW PROOF-OF-BRAIN
No Author rewards
People should vote with the intent of getting a reward from it. If 75% of the value forcibly goes to the author, it's hard to expect a good return from curation. Steem is currently basically a complex donation platform
. No one wants to donate when they vote, no matter what they will say, and no matter how much vote-trading, self-voting or bid-botting happens.
So in order to keep a system where money is printed when votes happen, if we cannot use the username of the author to distribute rewards, the only possibility left is to use the list of previous voters aka "Curation rewards". The 25% interesting part of STEEM, that has totally be shadowed by the author rewards for too long.
STEEM has always suffered from the issue that the downvote button is unused, or when it's used, it's mostly for evil. This comes from the fact that in STEEM's model, downvotes are not eligible for any rewards
. Even if they were, your downvote would be lowering the final payout of the content, and your own curation rewards...
I wanted Avalon's downvotes to be completely symmetric to the upvotes. That means if we revert all the votes (upvotes become downvotes and vice versa), the content should still distribute the same amount of tokens to the same people, at the same time.
No payment windows
Steem has a system of payments windows. When you publish a content, it opens a payment window where people can freely upvote or downvote to influence the payout happening 7 days later. This is convenient when you want a system where downvotes lower rewards. Waiting 7 days to collect rewards is also another friction point for new users, some of them might never come back 7 days later to convince themselves that 'it works'. On avalon, when you are part of the winners of curation after a vote, you earn it instantly in your account, 100% liquid and transferable.
Unlimited monetization in time
Indeed, the 7 days monetization limit has been our biggest issue for our video platform since day 8. This incentivized our users to create more frequent, but lesser quality content, as they know that they aren't going to earn anything from the 'long-haul'. Monetization had to be unlimited on DTube, so that even a 2 years old video could be dug up and generate rewards in the far future.
Infinite monetization is possible, but as removing tokens from a balance is impossible, the downvotes cannot remove money from the payout like they do on STEEM. Instead, downvotes print money in the same way upvotes do, downvotes still lower the popularity in the hot and trending and should only rewards other people who downvoted the same content earlier.
New curation rewards algorithm
STEEM's curation algorithm isn't stupid, but I believe it lacks some elegance. The 15 minutes 'band-aid' necessary to prevent curation bots (bots who auto vote as fast as possible on contents of popular authors) that they added proves it. The way is distributes the reward also feels very flat and boring. The rewards for my votes are very predictable, especially if I'm the biggest voter / stake holder for the content. My own vote is paying for my own curation rewards, how stupid is that? If no one elses votes after my big vote despite a popularity boost, it probably means I deserve 0 rewards, no?
I had to try different attempts to find an algorithm yielding interesting results, with infinite monetization, and without obvious ways to exploit it. The final distribution algorithm is more complex than STEEM's curation but it's still pretty simple. When a vote is cast, we calculate the 'popularity' at the time of the vote. The first vote is given a popularity of 0, the next votes are defined by (total_vp_upvotes - total_vp_downvotes) / time_since_1st_vote. Then we look into the list of previous votes, and we remove all votes in the opposite direction (up/down). The we remove all the votes with a higher popularity if its an upvote, or the ones with a lower popularity if its a downvote. The remaining votes in the list are the 'winners'. Finally, akin to STEEM, the amount of tokens generated by the vote will be split between winners proportionally to the voting power spent by each (linear rewards - no advantages for whales) and distributed instantly. Instead of purely using the order of the votes, Avalon distribution is based on when the votes are cast, and each second that passes reduces the popularity of a content, potentially increasing the long-term ROI of the next vote cast on it. Graph It's possible to chart the popularity that influences the DTC monetary distribution directly in the d.tube UI
This algorithm ensures there are always losers. The last upvoter never earns anything, also the person who upvoted at the highest popularity, and the one who downvoted at the lowest popularity would never receive any rewards for their vote. Just like the last upvoter and last downvoter wouldn't either. All the other ones in the middle may or may not receive anything, depending on how the voting and popularity evolved in time. The one with an obvious advantage, is the first voter who is always counted as 0 popularity. As long as the content stays at a positive popularity, every upvote will earn him rewards. Similarly, being the first downvoter on an overly-popular content could easily earn you 100% rewards on the next downvote that could be from a whale, earning you a fat bonus.
While Avalon doesn't technically have author rewards, the first-voter advantage is strong, and the author has the advantage of always being the first voter, so the author can still earn from his potentially original creations, he just needs to commit some voting power on his own contents to be able to publish.
ONE CHAIN <==> ONE APP
More scalable than shared blockchains
Another issue with generalistic blockchains like ETH/STEEM/EOS/TRX, which are currently hosting dozens of semi-popular web/mobile apps, is the reduced scalability of such shared models. Again, everything in a computer has a limit. For DPOS blockchains, 99%+ of the CPU load of a producing node will be to verify the signatures of the many transactions coming in every 3 seconds. And sadly this fact will not change with time. Even if we had a huge breakthrough on CPU speeds today, we would need to update the cryptographic standards for blockchains to keep them secure. This means it would NOT become easier to scale up the number of verifiable transactions per seconds.
Oh, but we are not there yet you're thinking? Or maybe you think that we'll all be rich if we reach the scalability limits so it doesn't really matter? WRONG
The limit is the number of signature verifications the most expensive CPU on the planet can do. Most blockchains use the secp256k1 curve, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Steem and now Avalon. It was originally chosen for Bitcoin by Satoshi Nakamoto probably because it's decently quick at verifying signatures, and seems to be backdoor-proof (or else someone is playing a very patient game). Maybe some other curves exist with faster signature verification speed, but it won't be improved many-fold, and will likely require much research, auditing, and time to get adopted considering the security implications.
In 2015 Graphene was created, and Bitshares was completely rewritten. This was able to achieve 100,000 transaction per second on a single machine, and decentralized global stress testing achieved 18,000 transactions per second on a distributed network.
So BitShares/STEEM and other DPOS graphene chains in production can validate at most 18000 txs/sec, so about 1.5 billion transactions per day
. EOS, Tendermint, Avalon, LIBRA or any other DPOS blockchain can achieve similar speeds, because there's no planet-killing proof-of-works, and thanks to the leader-based/democratic system that reduces the number of nodes taking part in the consensus.
As a comparison, there are about 4 billion likes per day on instagram
, so you can probably double that with the actual uploads, stories and comments, password changes, etc. The load is also likely unstable through the day, probably some hours will go twice as fast as the average. You wouldn't be able to fit Instagram in a blockchain, ever
, even with the most scalable blockchain tech on the world's best hardware. You'd need like a dozen of those chains. And instagram is still a growing platform, not as big as Facebook, or YouTube.
So, splitting this limit between many popular apps? Madness! Maybe it's still working right now, but when many different apps reach millions of daily active users plus bots, it won't fit anymore
Serious projects with a big user base will need to rethink the shared blockchain models like Ethereum, EOS, TRX, etc because the fees in gas or necessary stake required to transact will skyrocket, and the victims will be the hordes of minnows at the bottom of the distribution spectrum.
If we can't run a full instagram on a DPOS blockchain, there is absolutely no point trying to run medium+reddit+insta+fb+yt+wechat+vk+tinder on one. Being able to run half an instagram is already pretty good and probably enough to actually onboard a fair share of the planet. But if we multiply the load by the number of different app concepts available, then it's never gonna scale. DTube chain is meant for the DTube UI only
. Please do not build something unrelated to video connecting to our chain, we would actively do what we can to prevent you from growing. We want this chain to be for video contents only, and the JSON format of the contents should always follow the one used by d.tube.
If you are interested in avalon tech for your project isn't about video, it's strongly suggested to fork the blockchain code
and run your own avalon chain with a different origin id, instead of trying to connect your project to dtube's mainnet. If you still want to do it, chain leaders would be forced to actively combat your project as we would consider it as useless noise inside our dedicated blockchain.
Another issue of sharing a blockchain, is the issues coming up with the governance of it. Tons of features enabled by avalon would be controversial to develop on STEEM, because they'd only benefit DTube, and maybe even hurt/break some other projects. At best they'd be put at the bottom of a todo list somewhere. Having a blockchain dedicated to a single project enables it to quickly push updates that are focused on a single product, not dozens of totally different projects.
Many blockchain projects are trying to make decentralized governance true, but this is absolutely not what I am interested in for DTube. Instead, in avalon the 'init' account, or 'master' account, has very strong permissions. In the DTC case, @dtube: * will earn 10% fees from all the inflation
* will not have to burn DTCs to create accounts * will be able to do certain types of transactions when others can't * * account creation (during steem exclusivity period) * * transfers (during IEO period) * * transfering voting power and bandwidth ressources (used for easier onboarding)
For example, for our IEO we will setup a mainnet where only @dtube is allowed to transfer funds or vote until the IEO completes and the airdrop happens. This is also what enabled us to create a 'steem-only' registration period on the public testnet for the first month. Only @dtube can create accounts, this way we can enforce a 1 month period where users can port their username for free, without imposters having a chance to steal usernames. Through the hard-forking mechanism, we can enable/disable these limitations and easily evolve the rules and permissions of the blockchain, for example opening monetary transfers at the end of our IEO, or opening account creation once the steem exclusivity ends.
Luckily, avalon is decentralized, and all these parameters (like the @dtube fees, and @dtube permissions) are easily hardforkable by the leaders. @dtube will however be a very strong leader in the chain, as we plan to use our vote to at least keep the #1 producing node for as long as we can.
We reserve the right to 'not follow' an hardfork. For example, it's obvious we wouldn't follow something like reducing our fees to 0% as it would financially endanger the project, and we would rather just continue our official fork on our own and plug d.tube domain and mobile app to it.
On the other end of the spectrum, if other leaders think @dtube is being tyranical one way or another, leaders will always have the option of declining the new hardforks and putting the system on hold, then @dtube will have an issue and will need to compromise or betray the trust of 1/3 of the stake holders, which could reveal costly.
The goal is to have a harmounious, enterprise-level decision making within the top leaders
. We expect these leaders to be financially and emotionally connected with the project and act for good. @dtube is to be expected to be the main good actor for the chain, and any permission given to it should be granted with the goal of increasing the DTC marketcap, and nothing else. Leaders and @dtube should be able to keep cooperation high enough to keep the hard-forks focused on the actual issues, and flowing faster than other blockchain projects striving for a totally decentralized governance, a goal they are unlikely to ever achieve.
A lot of hard-forking
Avalon is easily hard-forkable, and will get hard-forked often, on purpose. No replays will be needed for leaders/exchanges during these hard-forks, just pull the new hardfork code, and restart the node before the hard-fork planned time to stay on the main fork. Why is this so crucial? It's something about game theory.
I have no former proof for this, but I assume a social and financial game akin to the one played on steem since 2016 to be impossible to perfectly balance, even with a thourough dichotomical process. It's probably because of some psychological reason, or maybe just the fact that humans are naturally greedy. Or maybe it's just because of the sheer number of players. They can gang up together, try to counter each others, and find all sorts of creative ideas to earn more and exploit each other. In the end, the slightest change in the rules, can cause drastic gameplay changes. It's a real problem, luckily it's been faced by other people in the past.
Similarly to what popular and succesful massively multiplayer games have achieved, I plan to patch or suggest hard-forks for avalon's mainnet on a bi-monthly basis. The goal of this perfect imbalance concept, is to force players to re-discover their best strategy often. By introducing regular, small, and semi-controlled changes into this chaos, we can fake balance. This will require players to be more adaptative and aware of the changes. This prevents the game from becoming stale and boring for players, while staying fair.
Death to bots
Automators on the other side, will need to re-think their bots, go through the developement and testing phase again, on every new hard-fork. It will be an unfair cat-and-mouse game. Doing small and semi-random changes in frequent hard-forks will be a easy task for the dtube leaders, compared to the work load generated to maintain the bots. In the end, I hope their return on investment to be much lower compared to the bid-bots, up to a point where there will be no automation.
Imagine how different things would have been if SteemIt Inc acted strongly against bid-bots or other forms of automation when they started appearing? Imagine if hard-forks were frequent and they promised to fight bid-bots and their ilk? Who would be crazy enough to make a bid-bot apart from @berniesanders then?
I don't want you to earn DTCs unless you are human. The way you are going to prove you are human, is not by sending a selfie of you with your passport to a 3rd party private company located on the other side of the world. You will just need to adapt to the new rules published every two weeks, and your human brain will do it subconsciously by just playing the voting game and seeing the rewards coming.
All these concepts are aimed at directly improving d.tube, making it more resilient, and scale both technologically and economically. Having control over the full tech stack required to power our dapp will prevent issues like the one we had with the search engine, where we relied too heavily on a 3rd party tool, and that created a 6-months long bug that basically broke 1/3 of the UI.
While d.tube's UI can now totally run independently from any other entity, we kept everything we could working with STEEM, and the user is now able to transparently publish/vote/comment videos on 2 different chains with one click. This way we can keep on leveraging the generalistic good features of STEEM that our new chain doesn't focuses on doing, such as the dollar-pegged token, the author rewards/donation mechanism, the tribes/communities tokens, and simply the extra exposure d.tube users can get from other website (steemit.com, busy.org, partiko, steempeak, etc), which is larger than the number of people using d.tube directly.
The public testnet has been running pretty well for 3 weeks now, with 6000+ accounts registered, and already a dozen of independant nodes
popping up and running for leaders. The majority of the videos are cross-posted on both chains and the daily video volume has slightly increased since the update, despite the added friction of the new 'double login' system and several UI bugs.
If you've read this article, I'm hoping to get some reactions from you in the comments section!
Some even more focused articles about avalon are going to pop on my blog in the following weeks, such as how to get a node running and running for leadewitness, so feel free to follow me to get more news and help me reach 10K followers ;)
On Nov 27th and 28th, the first ever VeChain Foundation Steering Committee meeting was held in Singapore. Over the course of this meeting, we have accomplished a lot. We are pleased to say that we have finalized members for our VeChain Foundation Steering Committee; we have revolutionized our blockchain foundation governance system; we have discussed the evolution of the our blockchain design and functionalities and an exponentially upgraded economic model for all of our stakeholders.
In celebration of the VeChain Foundation evolution, we have initiated a rebranding effort, or rather an escalation of our brand, which we will have finalized within a month and a half. More will be presented below.
VeChain believes that a well governed foundation is the key to longevity, growth and stability. Making an actionable governance system, that matches the identity we envision for our product, is the base in which we built on for our apotheosis. As such, the governance model of VeChain Foundation was at the paramount of discussions.
VeChain is going through an evolutionary period across all aspects of the foundation as directed by our Board of Steering Committee. At its core, the VeChain Foundation does not believe in a fully anarchically decentralization, nor does it believe in totalitarian governance. It is for that reason the board members envisioned something in between. Our governance structure is a new breed of a decentralized system through centralized channels, at its core it is a principal never seen before within the blockchain industry. PICTURE ONE
Being the centralized agency to govern the decentralized workflows, VeChain is as strong as our Board of Steering Committee enables us to become. The Board of Steering Committee oversees the various functional committees within a decentralized foundation. The board members, though a governing agency, ultimately guide units towards cohesive goals and enables collaboration, efficiency, and output across channels that traditional org charts cannot.
The Board of Steering Committee is the governing body of VeChain Foundation. It oversees the various functional committees within the foundation and represents the balanced interests of the VeChain blokchains stakeholders as a whole. Stakeholders include Blockchain Smart Contract Owners, VeChain Authority Nodes, and token holders. In addition, the Board of Steering Committee ensures the development, innovation, coordination and advancement of the VeChain blockchain ecosystem. Though not necessarily involved in day to day operational activities, the main functions include but not limited to the following:
- Propose and organize blockchain-wide general voting;
- Review and approve the Foundation’s fundamental strategies on technical, financial and business;
- Review and approve the governance principle;
- Review and approve the Foundation’s annual budget;
- Review, approve and monitor the procedure of nomination and election of the Steering Committee members, functional committee chairs and the General Secretary of the Foundation.
The Board of Steering Committee must be comprised of brilliant and respected individuals across a multitude of industries and it is for that reason we are very lucky to introduce our complete Board:
C Y Cheung - PwC Cybersecurity and Fintech Partner
|Name ||Experience ||Responsibility |
|CY Cheung ||PwC Cybersecurity and Fintech Partner ||Head of Regulation Committee |
|George Kang ||CEO of Greater China Region, DNV GL Business Assurance ||Head of Public Relation Committee |
|Jay Zhang ||CFO, VeChain Co-founder ||Head of Operational Committee |
|Margret Rui Zhu ||Assistant Professor of City University of Hong Kong ||Head of Compensation & Nomination Committee |
|Peter Zhou ||Chief Scientist, VeChain Partner ||Head of Technical Committee |
|Renato Grottola ||Global Digital Transformation Director, DNV GL Business Assurance ||In charge of VeChain business development related affairs |
|Sunny Lu ||CEO, VeChain Co-founder ||General Secretary of the Foundation |
Chun Yin Cheung is a partner in PwC China's Risk Assurance Practice, based in the Shanghai office, having worked at PwC for over 14 years.
Mr. Cheung is an information security subject matter expert, with extensive experience in security assessment and regulatory compliance related advisory for financial service institutions in China and Hong Kong.
Mr. Cheung was educated at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology and achieved a Bachelor of Business Administration (B.B.A.) in Information Technology George Kang - CEO Greater China Region, DNV GL Assurance
George Kang has worked for one of the biggest state-owned automotive design and manufacturing company - SAIC Motor before joined GNV GL in 1999.
George has accumulated extensive experience in supply chain management, product assurance with a particular strategic focus on the food & beverage, healthcare and automotive & aerospace sectors.
George was graduated from Shanghai Jiaotong University with a bachelor degree in Engineering and EMBA from Xiamen University. ** Jie (Jay) Zhang - CFO / CoFounder VeChain**
Jay has worked at 2 of the ‘Big 4’ accountancy firms - PwC and Deloitte’s and joined VeChain as leader of their Blockchain governance framework design and digital asset management framework.
Jay has 14 years’ experience in IT assurance and advisory services. Jie’s major areas of expertise and experience include IT General controls, IT security, IT Governance and risk management, System Application Controls, etc.
Jay was educated at Shanghai Jiaotong University and studied Electrical and Electronics Engineering Margret Rui Zhu - Assistant Professor City University of Hong Kong
Professor Zhu received her BA from Fudan University, China, MA in Economics from Indiana University USA and PhD in Finance from University of Texas at Austin USA. Professor Zhu is currently interested in corporate finance, corporate risk management and the interaction of capital market and product market. Peter Zhou - Chief Scientist / VeChain Partner
Dr. Zhou obtained a Ph.D in Computer Sciences from the University of Southampton and serves as VeChain’s R&D Director. He has been involved in projects funded by the European Commission and Academy of Finland whilst working as a postdoctoral researcher for the University of Kent in the UK. He has been published in numerous international scientific research journals. Renato Grottola - Global Digital Transformation Director, DNV GL Assurance
Renato is an experienced global Director with a demonstrated history of working in the advisory industry, skilled in Strategic Planning, Mergers and Acquisitions, Business Development and Management of complex international operations. Renato has been working on a blockchain backed project to introduce ship certifications to a private blockchain. Sunny Lu - CEO, VeChain Co-founder
Sunny Lu, the Project Lead for VeChain, has a wealth of experience in IT and Information Security across luxury retail brands, with his most recent role prior to co-founding BitSE being as CIO, IS&T Director for Louis Vuitton China.
Part of the LVMH Group, other famous brands across the portfolio include luxury fashion brands Givenchy and Christian Dior, alongside Champagne Brands Moet et Chandon, Veuve Cliquout and Dom Perignon.
Sunny was educated at Shanghai Jiao Tong University and studied Electronics and Communication Engineering A board of this magnitude will need outside forces keeping them in check and aiding in the design, implementation, and vision of VeChain. This is why VeChain has seeked out a promising Advisory Board to be a backbone that the foundation can lean on to provide immense wisdom and experience in the blockchain industry. VeChains Advisory Board is currently comprised as follows:
Bo Shen - General partner of FENBUSHI Capital
|Name ||Experience |
|Bo Shen ||Partner, founder of FenBuShi Capital |
|Daniel Kelman ||General Counsel of Bitcoin.com |
|James Gong ||CEO of ChainB.com |
|Roland Sun ||Partner of Broad&Bright Law Firm |
|Ning Nan ||CEO of BitOcean |
Bo cofounded Bitshares, Qtum, Zcash, etc. He is also a veteran of traditional financial industry, accumulating 12 years of senior management in brokerages, hedge funds and investment banks.
Daniel Kelman - General Counsel of GSR and Bitcoin.com
Daniel represented the interests of creditors who lost funds in the MtGox hacking scandal. Besides, he is also a co-founder of BitOcean Japan, a cryptocurrency exchange which will be licensed by Japanese regulator FSA.
James Gong - CEO of ChainB.com
ChainB is the most influential professional blockchain and cryptocurrency media in China.
Roland Sun - Partner of a full-service Chinese law firm named Broad&Bright
Roland has rich experience in providing law consultancy services in the following practice areas, such as cryprocurrency, blockchain, banking and trust.
Nan Ning - CEO of BitOcean
BitOcean is a cryptocurrency exchange which will be licensed by Japanese regulator FSA.
With the combined expertise of the Board of Steering Committee and the wisdom of the Advisory Board, VeChain has the foundation to be a revolutionary force within the blockchain industry and a global initiative for decentralization of businesses, truly embracing a digital way of life.
Voting： As mentioned above, VeChain stakeholders include Blockchain Smart Contract Owners, Authority Nodes and token holders (including VeChain Economic Masternodes/Nodes). Each of the stakeholder holds at least 10,000 VeChain tokens with a single public key will be considered to have ONE vote, and each stakeholder can have not more than ONE vote.
The following fundamental subjects will be voted by the stakeholders:
The general voting activities shall be carried in the VeChain Blockchain voting platform, designed to ensure anonymity, accuracy and not subject to manipulation.
- The election of new Board of Steering Committee;
- The modification of fundamental consensus mechanism;
- Other subjects that Board of Steering Committee deemed necessary for general voting.
VeChain Rebrand Our brand is not our name or logo, it is who we are. It is as much our governance model as it is our economic model. With VeChain undergoing its apotheosis it is imperative for our brand to grow with it. This evolution brings VeChain from a status of a blockchain solution to an one of a kind blockchain pioneer that can last indefinitely, offering a powerful and adaptable product for any business process that could benefit from trustless, immutable, and readily available data. This evolutional output requires us to reinvent the structure of our mainnet to coexist with an economic model design for indefinite stability and reward. As a result VeChain has become bigger, faster, stronger, disruptive, ambitious, incentivized and above all else, impactful. The board has made every effort to bring power to the stakeholders/people of VeChain. There are many attributes that make the Norse God “Thor“ and VeChain similar, and therefore:
VeChain is opting to upgrade the VeChain blockchain itself to VeChain Thor. The process of this transformation we call Apotheosis.
Our efforts towards apotheosis will last over the course of a month and a half from today, the full range of details will be released periodically from now until the mid of January.
Here is a glimpse at some of the changes being incorporated into VeChain Thor:
- VeChain Blockchain will be upgraded to VeChain Thor Blockchain
- Upon this release, we will be converting the existing VEN tokens for VeChain Thor tokens (VET). We are taking the appropriate measures to make this conversion seamless, we will begin this process by aiding current exchanges with the conversion first, all future exchanges will list our token as VET instead of VEN, including the ones we have been actively speaking to prior to this announcement of the name change.
- Transactions on VeChain Thor Blockchain will not use VET token as expense. This is our way of giving back to the stakeholders. In turn the blockchain transactions will be incentivized through other reward structures. This allows VeChain to offer a stable and predictable budget for enterprise users. This new system also enables resource optimisation and adjustments by economical approaches for the indefinite future.
- In order to take full advantage of decentralization and strong governance, the Foundation has decided to adopt Proof of Authority as the consensus mechanism of the VeChain Blockchain so that future developments are aligned with vision and direction the Foundation has designed;
- As for Nodes and Masternodes, (Yes, we have them!) We categorize two major types of nodes on the VeChain Thor Blockchain, a total of four distinctive nodes all together:
- One Authority Masternode
- Three Economic Masternodes/Nodes
VeChain Authority Masternode Thrudheim means ‘World of Strength’ and is the home of Thor. We announce Thrudheim Masternode as the senior and most privileged masternodes that VET token holders can own.
There will be a total 101 Thrudheim Masternodes on the VeChain Thor Network. Thrudheim Masternodes:
To successfully become a Thrudheim Masternode Owner operating a Thrudheim Masternode, the token holder needs to fulfill certain criteria:
- Receive the highest rewards of any node operators on VeChain Thor;
- Hold the most power when it comes to voting rights
- Are the most senior of masternodes that VET token holders can attain;
- Stabilise the VeChain Thor blockchain network;
- Are selected and rated based on the criteria the VeChain Foundation announce in the near future;
A) Owns a Qualified Thrudheim Masternode Candidate, the said candidate is a trackable address holding a minimum of 250,000 VET/VEN starting from Trust Tracking Day until the Date of Decision. Date of Decision will be announced soon, this date should coincide approximately with our main net launch date.
B) The person who owns a Qualified Thrudheim Masternode Candidate is a Qualified Thrudheim Masternode Operator Applicant and will automatically enter into the application process, given he/she meets the below criteria:
VeChain Foundation will release a detailed Thrudheim Nodes selection standards, procedure and rewards together in a later announcement.
- Due to the importance of these Masternodes, and the limited number available, VeChain Foundation will need a period of time to observe and review each applicant to determine their trustworthiness and value proposition within the network, and the decision of acceptance will take into consideration of the holder’s contributions to the Foundation as whole, therefore, the Trust Tracking Day of the Thrudheim Masternodes will start on December 21th. More detailed information soon to be released on The Decision Making Criteria of Becoming a Thrudheim Masternode Holder.
- The moment the token holding of Qualified Thrudheim Masternode Candidate is less than 250,000 VET, the address will lose the privilege of applying to become a Thrudheim Masternode when the blockchain launches.
- Hardware conditions: CPU, hard disk capacity, memory, overall performance will be reviewed individually.
- A full KYC and application procedure.
VeChain Economic Masternodes and Nodes: A VeChain Economic Masternode/Node offers stability to the ecosystem and acts as a distribution of power and privilege within the blockchain’s economy. VeChain Economic Masternodes/Nodes also have representation within the ecosystems voting periods. For an address with at least 10,000 VET/VEN held, a node represents one vote within the majority consensus. Unlike Authority Masternodes, Economic Masternodes/nodes do not produce blocks and ledger records.
Mjolnir Masternodes （Second highest-incentive Nodes) Token possession: 150,000 VET and above
Incentive received: receive the highest reward among VeChain Economic Nodes.
Cannot be upgraded More information on Mjolnir Masternodes soon
Thunder Nodes (Higher-incentive Nodes) Token possession: 50,000 - 149,999 VET/VEN;
Incentive received: receive the higher Thor incentive;
Can be upgraded; More information on Thunder Nodes to come.
Strength Nodes (Medium-incentive Nodes) Token possession: 10,000-49,999 VET/VEN;
Incentive received: receive the medium Thor incentive, however, still more than none-node holders;
Can be upgraded;
More information on Strength Nodes to come.
Holders with less than 10,000 VET tokens receive default incentive.
Important Timetable and planned events:
- Hold corresponding quantity of VET/VEN tokens in a trackable wallet (such as MEW) starting from 00:00:00 UTC+8 on 21st December; if your wallet has more than or equal to 250,000 VET/VEN, then you will be considered as an applicant to become a Thrudheim Masternode Operator, this is one of important must-have criteria when the Foundation selects Thrudheim Masternode Operators.
- Any wallet holding a corresponding quantity of VEN/VET tokens for any other nodes begins to accumulate seniority and that will be used as a means of distributing incentives in the future.
- An official strategic partnership announcement event is planned late January at London between DNV GL and VeChain.
- A VeChain Rebranding event, in Singapore, is planned for mid-January.
- A detailed economic model upon completion
- Listing on a major exchange in December
- A complete upgrade and rewrite of our current “VeChain Development Plan (Not a Whitepaper Document)
I know that in the talks with dan and team they often show charts of comparison with steem to bitcoin and eth. Along with bitshares, and they use this to give a generalized base for EOS. I was wondering if anyone could provide me links to sites that give live comparison? submitted by
I would like these to share what i believe to be valued information.
Thank you in advance.
Bitshares / Bitcoin crypto price quote with latest real-time prices, charts, financials, latest news, technical analysis and opinions. The Latest Crypto Market Rally Pushes Bitcoin (BTC) Above $13,000 & Ethereum (ETH) Above $400: Positive Volatility Leads to 16-Month Bitcoin Price Record: 22. Oct 2020 Akolkar B: 21. Oct 2020 Akolkar B: PayPal Secures NYDFS License to Bitcoin and Crypto Trading Services: Bitcoin Price Crosses $12,000 For the First Time In Last Two Months : 20. Oct 2020 Akolkar B: 19. Oct 2020 Akolkar B ... “Bitcoin S2F chart update… Red dot released,” Plan B tweeted. Chart by Plan B via Twitter. The chart’s trajectory shows that BTC could touch an all-time high (ATH) of $50,000 to $100,000 in the near future. BTC has already touched an ATH of $19,600 per coin on December 17, 2017. Even though S2F charts are extremely bullish and Plan B’s chart shows extreme gains, lots of people ... Bitcoin Cash. BNB Binance Coin. EOS EOS. XRP XRP. XLM Lumens. LINK Chainlink. DOT Polkadot. YFI Yearn.finance. Suggested Currencies. USD US Dollar. IDR Indonesian Rupiah. TWD New Taiwan Dollar. EUR Euro. KRW South Korean Won . JPY Japanese Yen. RUB Russian Ruble. CNY Chinese Yuan. Fiat Currencies. AED United Arab Emirates Dirham. ARS Argentine Peso. AUD Australian Dollar. BDT Bangladeshi Taka ... Price chart, trade volume, market cap, and more. Discover new cryptocurrencies to add to your portfolio. Skip to content. Prices. Products. Company. Earn crypto. Get $171+ Sign in. Get started. Price charts BitShares price. BitShares price (BTS) BitShares is not supported by Coinbase. Add to Watchlist $ 0.0192-1.10%. 1h. 24h. 1w. 1m. 1y. all. $0.0000 January 1 12:00 AM. 10:11 AM 2:20 PM 6:30 ...
join the link to claim your free bitshare coins a campaing running by the company click the link below to get yours http://coins.billionherocampaign.com/ref/... There are some important signals on a chart of bitcoin that very few people are watching right now. What does it mean for BTC? We explain in this video. For more on Bitcoin visit: https://www ... BITCOIN PRICE TO $22000 ?? - PLEASE SEE THE BITCOIN TRADING TECHNICAL CHART ANALYSIS TO FIND OUT. *****. Would you like to learn and do Bitshare technical analysis like this, using the Elliott ... Ich habe nun damit angefangen, mich mit Bitcoin auseinander zu setzen und möchte meine Erfahrungen mit Dir teilen! Im heutigen Video sprechen wir über die Gründe, warum der Bitcoin Preis sinkt ... Funontheride BITCOIN Last Minute! The chart they don't want you to know! We analyze the Cryptocurrency Market and much more Skip [Skip Intro: 0:34] #Cryptonews #FunOntheRide #Criptomonedasatope ...