Cryptoeconomics Research

layout: fr
title: Crypto-Economics Research
author: helloworld9998
date: 01/03/2020
amount: 320 XMR
milestones:
  - name: Initiate research
    funds: 320 XMR
    done:
    status: unfinished
payouts:
  - date:
    amount:
  - date:
    amount:

Greetings Monero Community,

This proposal has been brought forth out my own personal interest in the cryptoeconomic systems put forth by Bitcoin, Monero, Grin etc. I intend to closely analyze the block reward mechanisms put into place by the founders of different cryptocurrency systems in order to determine how they compare to each other. There are many fundamentally different designs put forth by cryptocurrencies and each can effectively determine the future of the security of the network. I feel that these questions have not been fully addressed or explored. I hope to find valuable information for the Monero community with regards to its own economic system and also different systems such as merge-mined coins or proof-of-stake currencies. This research could prove to be extremely valuable in confirming the validity of the current model established by Monero founders or to possibly realize a potential shortcoming which may need to be addressed. This research is also valuable for future currencies such as Tari in deciding their respective economic system.

I am lifelong Mathematician who, in the spirit of Monero, would prefer to remain anonymous, unbiased, and independent in my study.

My rate for this research is 1 XMR/hr with the goal of completing the research in 8 weeks time. At a full-time working rate, this amounts to a total 320 XMR. At current XMR/USD rates, this proposal amounts to approximately 16000 USD or 8000 USD per month which is akin to other research proposals granted previously.

Please contact me personally at helloworld9998@protonmail.com for any questions or conccerns regarding this research proposal.

Sincerely,

helloworld9998

I say nay for the following reasons:

1. The milestone structure would need to be completely redone. As it currently stands you would get paid all money up front and can easily exit scam. This alone stops the entire rest of the proposal in its tracks.

2. You have no reputation and have no history of volunteer work (as far as I know). How do we know you are capable of completing this proposal in a quality way? If you were willing to not be anonymous, you could share your credentials and we can judge based off of that. That you choose to be anonymous is fine, but it just means you will probably have to do some volunteer work (for free) to prove your qualifications and work ethic without revealing yourself. So yes, it's possible to be anonymous and do this work, but not without volunteering first.

3. I would like some concrete questions that would be answered by your research, not just compare and contrasting. The scientific method always starts with a question, followed by statement of hypothesis. I'd like to see more of this outlined in the proposal.

Maybe I'm just being short-sighted, but I don't see what value this research has to the Monero community, assuming it was completed competently. And assuming you laid out concrete questions to answer, not sure why any particular community should fund your exploration of your own personal interest. That's not the norm for open source communities - usually, if it's interesting enough to you, you just do it.

I'm interested to learn more after the points that @rehrar raised are addressed. Perhaps the work could be a little more Monero-centric, but still include a survey of the field to annotate recent research when relevant to Monero's ecosystem.

Monero has a unique dynamic system with complex couplings between the fee market and block size. We have made recent modifications that are not yet reflected in documentation and have not yet been externally audited, and cryptoeconomics research is progressing rapidly in the broader space. (We must take care to never be complacent or arrogant enough to think that we have perfectly solved all the problems and arrived at an optimal solution so early.)

The last comprehensive writeup by Jollymort was in 2017, and a lot has changed since then. Documentation is severely lacking, and I think only a handful of people actually understand 1) what the code is supposed to do, and 2) what the code actually does.

I would find it valuable (i.e. worth funding) to have a clear comprehensive guide that documents our current cryptoeconomic system with math, models, and cross-references to code. Would you be interested in producing something with the level of detail as JollyMort's tear-down?

Closing due to lack of engagement by the creator on the issues raised.

closed