olsf admin, Author at 0L

7 minute read

October 2022 Governance Recap

08/11/2022

The 0L Community recently concluded its first round of collaborative, decentralized strategic planning. Starting first with rounds of guided discussion on the RadicalxChange Voice platform, the process culminated with a set of eight proposals for community vote. In this blog post, we’re going to take a brief look at the contents of those proposals and reflect on the outcomes of the vote.

The Voting Process

Seven of the eight proposals gave voters a yes-or-no binary option for voting. The eighth proposal was comprised of four parts that needed to be voted on independently. The voting platform was RadicalxChange Voice, which gives all voters an equal amount of “credits”, which can be used to vote more than once for any proposal they feel strongly about, allowing them to express how committed they are to that result (note this factor is expressed below as “voting power” which expresses the total commitment of both positive and negative votes).…

26 minute read

TTechnical

Proof-of-Fee, Part 2

20/10/2022

In Part 1 of this paper we laid the foundations for Proof of Fee. Some of the ideas expressed there may be different from what you have seen elsewhere, and we do urge you to read that before you begin here. In Part 2 of this paper, below, we get into the mechanics and implementation details of Proof-of-Fee (PoF).

From empirical evidence over the last five years, we have seen few malicious attacks by validators; clearly something is working. We don’t want to break something that is working. What we want to evaluate is whether we can make it sustainably work at a lower cost.…

14 minute read

TTechnical

Proof of Fee, Part 1

15/10/2022

The Cost of Consensus

TL;DR

As an alternative to the (near-universally deployed) Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS), we propose Proof of Fee (PoF), a sybil resistance technique designed natively and with consideration of the benefits and tradeoffs of PBFT consensus from empirical experience.

Profits to blockchains are slim to non-existent. Low consensus costs are foundational for any chain that wishes to provide consumer surplus and profit to coin-holders; where excess winnings of the chain can be distributed to all account holders without preference to an investor class of “stakers”.
In PoF the cost of consensus is lowered maximally to the operator opportunity cost; with such an approach, the social cost of dilution through issuance is minimized.

…

PProposals

Proposal 2210-1 : Final Supply

11/10/2022

Proposal Type: Signalling

Champion: ricoflan

Date: 11 October 2022

State: Draft / Work In Progress

Context

This proposal relates to the biggest opportunity 0L has. With this proposal, the community is in a unique position to create a balanced, equitable approach to sustainability in which all participants are of a single class: All participants are workers.

The current 0L token issuance schema is dramatically diluting workers while enriching the validators via issuance of new tokens each epoch (i.e., inflation). Anyone who has earned bounties, or engineering funds, have had their value reduced significantly by inflation across the last 6 months. This needs to change.…

PProposals

Proposal 2210-2 : Proof of Fee

11/10/2022

Proposal Type: Signalling

Champion: 0o-de-lally

Date: 13 October 2022

State: Draft / Work in Progress

Context

As an alternative to the (near-universally deployed) Delegated Proof of Stake we propose a sybil resistance technique designed natively for the benefits and tradeoffs of PBFT consensus, we call that system Proof-of-Fee (PoF). This proposal seeks to replace the Delay Towers mechanism currently in place with Proof-of-Fee.

Profits to blockchains are slim to non-existent. Low consensus costs are foundational for any chain that wishes to provide consumer surplus and profit to coin-holders; where excess winnings of the chain can be distributed to all account holders, that is, without preference to an investor class of “stakers”.…