An impending funding crisis threatens Zcash
1–10 of 27 posts
Re: An impending funding crisis threatens Zcash
#2Thank god for reader mode. It really seems to be essential, but this site doesn’t even support reader-mode.
Re: An impending funding crisis threatens Zcash
#3I’ve been through a lot of discussions around what a fair price is to pay for the devs of a community resource and I don’t think I’ve ever seen it resolve well. A few examples I remember are plastic and kur5hin shutting down, digg and reddit and slashdot for selling off with digg and slashdot going into barebones ad models and Reddit doing whatever they’re doing.
One of the big disagreements I witnessed a lot of discussion around was how much founders thought they should get just to run community resources and how much the community wanted to pay. The most concrete I remember was the plastic, or maybe it was netslaves, founder wanting $300/month to run the servers. Not much at all, I think it was between 2000 and 2005. A few members offered to run it for free and he wouldn’t do it because he also needed the servers for his other projects. That spiraled into a boring discussion about why a community would pay for some private servers.
Re: An impending funding crisis threatens Zcash
#4Re: An impending funding crisis threatens Zcash
#5Meta: I’m not fond of the trend with these huge banners. The view portal is basically non-existent.[0] Thank god for reader mode. It really seems to be essential, but this site doesn’t even support reader-mode. [0]: https://i.imgur.com/jWA4pX6.png
As for zcash, well, it was always terrible because of the way it started with a double digits effective pre-mine in all but name and security based entirely on the word of what a handful of guys did in secret.
That same centralization strikes again here.
Re: An impending funding crisis threatens Zcash
#6Re: An impending funding crisis threatens Zcash
#7It’s unclear to me how much should go to founders of things like currency. Shouldn’t the amount of funds to a dev team depend on some sort of measure of value rather than a cut of all future tokens? That seems unsustainable and part of the reason why a cutoff would be designed into the system. I’ve been through a lot of discussions around what a fair price is to pay for the devs of a community resource and I don’t th…
I’ve never given money to these types of stuff and now I’m donating monthly to Kurzgesagt. That says something.
Re: An impending funding crisis threatens Zcash
#8Drop all the currency terms and what you have is a product, a consumer good sold to the public that some employees are given. The employees are free to sell in parallel to the organization selling it.
When that runs out the organization still has 100% share ownership
So THEN it gets put on the same lower level of flexibility as startups and all private tech companies.
So the answer is not that hard: it issues stock options to founders and employees when the product sells dry up. This is not funding just incentivizing, which the article and crypto industry conflates.
The organization and founders have been funding themselves by exchanging the product for cash. LOTS of cash, for years.
The organization has an unknown amount of cash REVENUE from simply selling Zcash from their treasury+mining, this is done on the open market
Re: An impending funding crisis threatens Zcash
#9It’s unclear to me how much should go to founders of things like currency. Shouldn’t the amount of funds to a dev team depend on some sort of measure of value rather than a cut of all future tokens? That seems unsustainable and part of the reason why a cutoff would be designed into the system. I’ve been through a lot of discussions around what a fair price is to pay for the devs of a community resource and I don’t th…
Re: An impending funding crisis threatens Zcash
#10This relies on - and takes advantage of - a lack of understanding on how these organizations are able to operate Drop all the currency terms and what you have is a product, a consumer good sold to the public that some employees are given. The employees are free to sell in parallel to the organization selling it. When that runs out the organization still has 100% share ownership So THEN it gets put on the same lower l…