[DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated - page 202.

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Hunterbunter on February 01, 2014, 06:12:13 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on February 01, 2014, 03:35:58 AM

Quote from: Wekkel on February 01, 2014, 03:29:15 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 31, 2014, 08:17:16 PM

I know what's happening....

Its because the old clients do not accept these small payments and you need a new client to relay the transaction.... so simply just click anywhere on your android wallet, like goto block explorer, let it start talking to your window client again, and it will relay the transaction to the network. The block explorer should have this transaction but you cannot connect to the block explorer because its not a new version of the client.

I noticed as soon as android connected again to the new window client it relayed the transaction instantly, since new blocks formed since then.
[...]

Do you run a (permanent) node to the newest windows client that I can connect to?

I think hunterbunter is running an official seed he just put up with the new client. Hunterbunter can you confirm? If so can you use latest source? I made some fee changes.

Thx

Heya, yeah I'm running version 80501 on dvcnode.blisteringdevelopers.com:52333, not sure if that's the one you mean, though... I tried actually just doing a git-pull but it failed compiling at the start:

Code:

make -f makefile.unix
/bin/sh ../share/genbuild.sh obj/build.h
g++ -c -O2 -pthread -Wall -Wextra -Wformat -Wformat-security -Wno-unused-parameter -g -D_MT -DBOOST_THREAD_USE_LIB -DBOOST_SPIRIT_THREADSAFE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -I/home/amit/devcoin/src -I/home/amit/devcoin/src/obj -DUSE_UPNP=1 -DUSE_IPV6=1 -I/home/amit/devcoin/src/leveldb/include -I/home/amit/devcoin/src/leveldb/helpers -DHAVE_BUILD_INFO -fno-stack-protector -fstack-protector-all -Wstack-protector -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -MMD -MF obj/init.d -o obj/init.o init.cpp
In file included from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/mutex.hpp:14:0,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/mutex.hpp:16,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/thread_data.hpp:12,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/thread.hpp:17,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread.hpp:13,
   from util.h:26,
   from bignum.h:12,
   from main.h:8,
   from txdb.h:8,
   from init.cpp:6:
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:23:5: error: expected identifier before numeric constant
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:23:5: error: expected â}â before numeric constant
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:23:5: error: expected unqualified-id before numeric constant
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:46:14: error: expected type-specifier before âsystem_timeâ
In file included from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/mutex.hpp:14:0,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/mutex.hpp:16,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/thread_data.hpp:12,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/thread.hpp:17,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread.hpp:13,
   from util.h:26,
   from bignum.h:12,
   from main.h:8,
   from txdb.h:8,
   from init.cpp:6:
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp: In function âint xtime_get(xtime*, int)â:
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:73:40: error: âget_system_timeâ was not declared in this scope
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:73:40: note: suggested alternative:
In file included from /usr/include/boost/thread/locks.hpp:12:0,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/mutex.hpp:12,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/mutex.hpp:16,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/thread_data.hpp:12,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/thread.hpp:17,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread.hpp:13,
   from util.h:26,
   from bignum.h:12,
   from main.h:8,
   from txdb.h:8,
   from init.cpp:6:
/usr/include/boost/thread/thread_time.hpp:19:24: note: âboost::get_system_timeâ
In file included from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/mutex.hpp:14:0,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/mutex.hpp:16,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/thread_data.hpp:12,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/thread.hpp:17,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread.hpp:13,
   from util.h:26,
   from bignum.h:12,
   from main.h:8,
   from txdb.h:8,
   from init.cpp:6:
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp: At global scope:
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:88:1: error: expected declaration before â}â token
make: *** [obj/init.o] Error 1

EDIT: Just doing an apt-get update/upgrade to see if it's outdated libs.
EDIT2: Hmm nope, that didn't help. Are there new lib dependencies?

I think win obj files were pushed for leveldb.. The makefile needs to clean libcurl libleveldb properly like the mingw makefile does. Also the src/obj files need to be deleted on clean.. Did you change the makefile to do this?

I left it so the unix builder will do it and give me a fixed version so I can push it.. Check mingw for reference on the bottom clean and build stuff...

Make sure you always clean before you build. I will clean up the repo next push..

weisoq

hero member

Activity: 720

Merit: 500

Quote from: novacadian on January 31, 2014, 09:02:54 PM

Could writers expect a half decent residual on ad revenues over time?

Some cons that come to mind are that it would likely shape successful writers; successful in the sense of reward in DVCs; to write in a fashion that is search engine friendly and could possibly put a bias on the writing if the motivation was reward related.

If their share in ad revenues was perpetual then is it possible to see the same reward, or better, over time that may, now, be had in one time share splits?

Should witers expect a half decent residual on ad revenues over time? Or on generation shares?

There's already a bias - word count - so we're not starting from a position of neutrality. It's chicken and egg again. In the case of open source work I think effort should come before reward. That means it's down to programmers and writers (and musicians and artists?) to determine worth. Perhaps one way would be for each creative form earning base to be determined by all participants except those under assessment. At minimum it would give an interesting idea of foundational value, and would be an interesting study in (as you've put it) race to the bottom or race to the top. Testing game theory and underlying motivations.

An example of arse about tit are suggestions for charity donations motivated by potential for a price rise, not charity. Price derives from value. If those people want higher prices then they need to find ways to contribute/donate to open-source projects that add vale to devcoin. Bribery gains are generally transient and difficult to extricate oneself from.

Wekkel

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 1538

yes

Quote from: Hunterbunter on February 01, 2014, 06:12:13 AM

Heya, yeah I'm running version 80501 on dvcnode.blisteringdevelopers.com:52333

I managed to make a connection with the Android wallet, but the stuck payment is stilll, uhm, stuck... Cheesy

weisoq

hero member

Activity: 720

Merit: 500

Quote from: melodiem on January 31, 2014, 09:21:10 PM

Would better quality writing do anything to address the issues you raise or do you see the whole thing as unworkable? ...

I agree with the vibe of what you write. If I didn't I wouldn't bother being here and I wouldn't bother making these points. Instead I'd just take the money and shut the hell up. But I view your basic objectives and philosophy and draw different conclusions.

Perhaps the simplest way to put it, is that any direct resources put towards one idea or work-ideal cannot be put towards another. I have zero issue with writing. I read. I write on devtome, I'm an admin on devtome and spend quite a lot more time on it than I need to - because I think such efforts matter even if only for concept. But I'm also a realist. I read most submissions, I have a fair idea of content and feel I can draw general inferences on motivations.

You're misunderstanding my perspective. I'm not a developer and I'm not guaging writing as less valuable as anything else. Quite the opposite, I'm repeatedly trying to make the point that a project focusing on open-source should treat all creative forms more equally. Administering a revenue element to one or more forms (paid direct or advertising or other) should be a bonus, not a principle, and justified by that form. Because devcoin serves to reward open-source I don't think it's too much to ask that involved participants play a role in building and supporting their relative creation base first, rather than being takers only. If they don't value their work why should I?

It's not an issue of not being workable/not, it already 'works' - just mostly for some over others. Quite similarly to bigshot bitcoin miners winning over everyone else. But bitcoin doesn't stake any claim on equity or reward for work or open-source. In general, I don't think the 'whole thing' justifyies its subsidy - yet perhaps. So it's simply that while I don't rate writing as less important than anything else I also don't rate it as more important. We should always be trying to objectively question whether the process is working as it should.

I won't take offence at anything you say. In response though, I would ask a couple of questions:
1) Does Devcoin paying us such sums to lay our creative souls bare add or subtract from the concept of growing, sustainable open-source (all open source) support?
2) Would resources be better utilised on those who value their work first for creation's sake, or does incentivising rolling input on content terms for monetary reward trump this?

unclejed613

newbie

Activity: 49

Merit: 0

Quote from: sidhujag on February 01, 2014, 03:22:12 AM

Quote from: weisoq on January 31, 2014, 04:50:10 AM

Quote from: melodiem on January 30, 2014, 07:24:08 PM

I dont quite understand, by one sided trade flow?...
I am putting an IRC chat module up on devcoinproject.com

'One sided trade flow'. I think too much talk and incentive structure is about earning/getting dvc. That results in a focus on how/why/where to sell. This undermines the entire point of devcoin, which is to fund open source work, and therefore needs as much if not more focus on support, buying and adding value.

I see dvc as by definition a mutual concept if it's going to take off. Some others see it as a client-employee relationship only; submit work - expect to get paid. That opinion is fine, but because I don't think that's sustainable until there's a much bigger base of support I'm not particularly interested in making transience and/or bounty hunting and/or word dumps easier. If others disagree that's up to them but, for example, if writers aren't buying dvc to support writing then who is and why do we pay for it.

You shouldn't give up on ideas at the first knock back. Whether I or anyone else disagrees doesn't necessarily imply a bad idea. If you've spent time thinking it through and it makes sense, then it may be an issue of explanation. Put it in simpler terms - explain like you're explaining to homer simpson, then people can give feedback on basics.

There's a dvc channel here I saw on first page of the thread: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=devcoin although I've never used it.

eeh: I'm not having any issues.

dexter: There's nothing stopping you giving to charity yourself - dvc or otherwise. Would you still be in favour of that idea if the dvc price didn't rise?

One of the first things i did in crypto land was put $5000 into devcoin when bitcoin was $100.. If writers would do the same put their money where their keyboards are we wouldbe sonewhere far bynow.. instead we still lack direction...

Writers are saying their work means alot.. what value are you putting on your work.. value that someone may read your work and make youfeel good? Or value that hey I get paid thousands of $ for stuff id never get paid for anyway??

Judging by the constant selling at market its telling me the later and Im generalizing because thats the system we created. Ppl dont value their work as anyhing other than a means to get paid.. put ot this way.. if you werent paid for your work would you still have written on devtome?

Same goes for developers.. even though I created vokuntary bounties for a new client i really got a kick as an official bounty was offferrd... but I think I would have done it anyway or rsnel would have done it because it needs doing. Shares may help speed it up but shouldnt stop the train altogeher for you. If you wouldnt write without getting paid I personally think this is the wrong community for that.

What we need to encourage is the exact opposite as a writer you should be
holding coins or buying more and the writing to increase awarness so rhe value of your investment in $ or time rises...

By creating incentive for profitable businesses and we have admins willing tonwork for the community you create a wave of economic support that is easy to see... With devtome its like yea maybe one day itll get there.. but we certainly arent setting the right rules up or
leading people to proper conclusions to allow for sustainable growth.

The only way you will work for devcoin without major pay is if you hold the coins.. otherwise
you wont want to. If you dont want to
hold the coins then you are simply in it to skin the cat.

i'm probably not a "great" writer, but i am an engineer who has an idea. in order for that idea to find it's way into a finished product, i'm willing to put that idea up on devtome, and let somebody else run with it. if somebody is going to understand my idea, i must communicate it as clearly as possible, which means i have to write it well. my intention is to create a product (or line of products) that not only are "open source", but useful. one of the things said in the devtome instructions is " Writers should write what they know best. ", so that's what i'm going to focus on.... but to communicate my idea effectively, i need to use writing skills, which i hope are up to the task..... the way i see it, writing entails a clear picture of the goal, and writing it out in a clear and logical fashion (without being boring and dry). so devtome has become my outlet for this idea....

Hunterbunter

hero member

Activity: 994

Merit: 1000

Quote from: sidhujag on February 01, 2014, 03:35:58 AM

Quote from: Wekkel on February 01, 2014, 03:29:15 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 31, 2014, 08:17:16 PM

I know what's happening....

Its because the old clients do not accept these small payments and you need a new client to relay the transaction.... so simply just click anywhere on your android wallet, like goto block explorer, let it start talking to your window client again, and it will relay the transaction to the network. The block explorer should have this transaction but you cannot connect to the block explorer because its not a new version of the client.

I noticed as soon as android connected again to the new window client it relayed the transaction instantly, since new blocks formed since then.
[...]

Do you run a (permanent) node to the newest windows client that I can connect to?

I think hunterbunter is running an official seed he just put up with the new client. Hunterbunter can you confirm? If so can you use latest source? I made some fee changes.

Thx

Heya, yeah I'm running version 80501 on dvcnode.blisteringdevelopers.com:52333, not sure if that's the one you mean, though... I tried actually just doing a git-pull but it failed compiling at the start:

Code:

make -f makefile.unix
/bin/sh ../share/genbuild.sh obj/build.h
g++ -c -O2 -pthread -Wall -Wextra -Wformat -Wformat-security -Wno-unused-parameter -g -D_MT -DBOOST_THREAD_USE_LIB -DBOOST_SPIRIT_THREADSAFE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -I/home/amit/devcoin/src -I/home/amit/devcoin/src/obj -DUSE_UPNP=1 -DUSE_IPV6=1 -I/home/amit/devcoin/src/leveldb/include -I/home/amit/devcoin/src/leveldb/helpers -DHAVE_BUILD_INFO -fno-stack-protector -fstack-protector-all -Wstack-protector -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -MMD -MF obj/init.d -o obj/init.o init.cpp
In file included from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/mutex.hpp:14:0,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/mutex.hpp:16,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/thread_data.hpp:12,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/thread.hpp:17,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread.hpp:13,
   from util.h:26,
   from bignum.h:12,
   from main.h:8,
   from txdb.h:8,
   from init.cpp:6:
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:23:5: error: expected identifier before numeric constant
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:23:5: error: expected â}â before numeric constant
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:23:5: error: expected unqualified-id before numeric constant
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:46:14: error: expected type-specifier before âsystem_timeâ
In file included from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/mutex.hpp:14:0,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/mutex.hpp:16,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/thread_data.hpp:12,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/thread.hpp:17,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread.hpp:13,
   from util.h:26,
   from bignum.h:12,
   from main.h:8,
   from txdb.h:8,
   from init.cpp:6:
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp: In function âint xtime_get(xtime*, int)â:
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:73:40: error: âget_system_timeâ was not declared in this scope
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:73:40: note: suggested alternative:
In file included from /usr/include/boost/thread/locks.hpp:12:0,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/mutex.hpp:12,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/mutex.hpp:16,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/thread_data.hpp:12,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/thread.hpp:17,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread.hpp:13,
   from util.h:26,
   from bignum.h:12,
   from main.h:8,
   from txdb.h:8,
   from init.cpp:6:
/usr/include/boost/thread/thread_time.hpp:19:24: note: âboost::get_system_timeâ
In file included from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/mutex.hpp:14:0,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/mutex.hpp:16,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/pthread/thread_data.hpp:12,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread/thread.hpp:17,
   from /usr/include/boost/thread.hpp:13,
   from util.h:26,
   from bignum.h:12,
   from main.h:8,
   from txdb.h:8,
   from init.cpp:6:
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp: At global scope:
/usr/include/boost/thread/xtime.hpp:88:1: error: expected declaration before â}â token
make: *** [obj/init.o] Error 1

EDIT: Just doing an apt-get update/upgrade to see if it's outdated libs.
EDIT2: Hmm nope, that didn't help. Are there new lib dependencies?

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Wekkel on February 01, 2014, 03:29:15 AM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 31, 2014, 08:17:16 PM

I know what's happening....

Its because the old clients do not accept these small payments and you need a new client to relay the transaction.... so simply just click anywhere on your android wallet, like goto block explorer, let it start talking to your window client again, and it will relay the transaction to the network. The block explorer should have this transaction but you cannot connect to the block explorer because its not a new version of the client.

I noticed as soon as android connected again to the new window client it relayed the transaction instantly, since new blocks formed since then.
[...]

Do you run a (permanent) node to the newest windows client that I can connect to?

I think hunterbunter is running an official seed he just put up with the new client. Hunterbunter can you confirm? If so can you use latest source? I made some fee changes.

Thx

Wekkel

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 1538

yes

Quote from: sidhujag on January 31, 2014, 08:17:16 PM

I know what's happening....

Its because the old clients do not accept these small payments and you need a new client to relay the transaction.... so simply just click anywhere on your android wallet, like goto block explorer, let it start talking to your window client again, and it will relay the transaction to the network. The block explorer should have this transaction but you cannot connect to the block explorer because its not a new version of the client.

I noticed as soon as android connected again to the new window client it relayed the transaction instantly, since new blocks formed since then.
[...]

Do you run a (permanent) node to the newest windows client that I can connect to?

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: weisoq on January 31, 2014, 04:50:10 AM

Quote from: melodiem on January 30, 2014, 07:24:08 PM

I dont quite understand, by one sided trade flow?...
I am putting an IRC chat module up on devcoinproject.com

'One sided trade flow'. I think too much talk and incentive structure is about earning/getting dvc. That results in a focus on how/why/where to sell. This undermines the entire point of devcoin, which is to fund open source work, and therefore needs as much if not more focus on support, buying and adding value.

I see dvc as by definition a mutual concept if it's going to take off. Some others see it as a client-employee relationship only; submit work - expect to get paid. That opinion is fine, but because I don't think that's sustainable until there's a much bigger base of support I'm not particularly interested in making transience and/or bounty hunting and/or word dumps easier. If others disagree that's up to them but, for example, if writers aren't buying dvc to support writing then who is and why do we pay for it.

You shouldn't give up on ideas at the first knock back. Whether I or anyone else disagrees doesn't necessarily imply a bad idea. If you've spent time thinking it through and it makes sense, then it may be an issue of explanation. Put it in simpler terms - explain like you're explaining to homer simpson, then people can give feedback on basics.

There's a dvc channel here I saw on first page of the thread: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=devcoin although I've never used it.

eeh: I'm not having any issues.

dexter: There's nothing stopping you giving to charity yourself - dvc or otherwise. Would you still be in favour of that idea if the dvc price didn't rise?

One of the first things i did in crypto land was put $5000 into devcoin when bitcoin was $100.. If writers would do the same put their money where their keyboards are we wouldbe sonewhere far bynow.. instead we still lack direction...

Writers are saying their work means alot.. what value are you putting on your work.. value that someone may read your work and make youfeel good? Or value that hey I get paid thousands of $ for stuff id never get paid for anyway??

Judging by the constant selling at market its telling me the later and Im generalizing because thats the system we created. Ppl dont value their work as anyhing other than a means to get paid.. put ot this way.. if you werent paid for your work would you still have written on devtome?

Same goes for developers.. even though I created vokuntary bounties for a new client i really got a kick as an official bounty was offferrd... but I think I would have done it anyway or rsnel would have done it because it needs doing. Shares may help speed it up but shouldnt stop the train altogeher for you. If you wouldnt write without getting paid I personally think this is the wrong community for that.

What we need to encourage is the exact opposite as a writer you should be
holding coins or buying more and the writing to increase awarness so rhe value of your investment in $ or time rises...

By creating incentive for profitable businesses and we have admins willing tonwork for the community you create a wave of economic support that is easy to see... With devtome its like yea maybe one day itll get there.. but we certainly arent setting the right rules up or
leading people to proper conclusions to allow for sustainable growth.

The only way you will work for devcoin without major pay is if you hold the coins.. otherwise
you wont want to. If you dont want to
hold the coins then you are simply in it to skin the cat.

melodiem

full member

Activity: 232

Merit: 100

Quote from: novacadian on January 31, 2014, 09:02:54 PM

Could writers expect a half decent residual on ad revenues over time?
Some cons that come to mind are that it would likely shape successful writers; successful in the sense of reward in DVCs; to write in a fashion that is search engine friendly and could possibly put a bias on the writing if the motivation was reward related.
If their share in ad revenues was perpetual then is it possible to see the same reward, or better, over time that may, now, be had in one time share splits?

- Nova

[ Edit: typo ]

The problem with writing for ad revenue is exactly as you state. It slants the writing to one purpose: make money. Nothing wrong if that is communicated to writers clearly...There has to be a solution but I hope that is not it.... I dont want to write just for Google's tastes Undecided

melodiem

full member

Activity: 232

Merit: 100

Quote from: weisoq on January 31, 2014, 07:41:07 PM

That's not a popular opinion, and likely construed as 'writer-bashing'. It isn't, it's unsustainable economics bashing. People here seem to miss the point that devcoin prices on value. It swings to low prices and never really recovers as a function of pay, and then a function of the lowest common denominator. If the real world pays $X for 1,000 words then any equivalent dvc payment > X will be sold and the price will revert over time. All else being equal, at some point each/most rounds market mechanics work to drop the price to a level commensurate with or closer to what 1,000 words may be worth. And then lower because a lot of devtome writers aren't professional writers or, to put it politely, writers.

Would better quality writing do anything to address the issues you raise or do you see the whole thing as unworkable?

For a developer looking at a writers work, it must seem to have very little value- development is worth so much more based on the amount of money that development can generate and I am not saying developers are bad for seeing things as developers, I am just trying to understand how value is determined in this setting.

Artists and Writers have always needed sponsorship and patrons. A lot of Authors are paid in advance for words they have not written yet, in order to help them to write more, (If they are lucky and talented) and countries like Ireland recognise their value by releasing them from income tax obligations and giving their work value before a single word is written.

I don't know how other writers feel, but some of the pieces I have on Devtome are works that mean a lot to me. One novel took me ten years to compile because it includes my poetry, paintings and graphic art as well. (I am still editing part two and have not finished painting one of the pictures because I spend too much time hanging out in forums lol)

While I will get paid for the number of words, and the images I upload, any value they had to me - or to anyone else reading them - I have now "given" to the Devcoin community. The license I agreed to means I can never take that work back, I can re-use it but I can never take back the commitment I made to the community, any more than a developer can take back his source code.

I would like to think that the goal is that a writers value to the community is not valued in the DVC share alone, but also as a contribution to the resources/assets of a community. Otherwise I just gave a huge part of myself to something that amounts to a glorified blog paying me for posts to drive up traffic.

Please don't take offence at that comment, I am trying to illustrate a point and I am not attacking Devtome in any way, my opinion is just my opinion and I am not assuming to be speaking for any other writer. I am trying to understand because I have a vested interest in this

I am also not trying to suggest developers should be valued any less, just that maybe it isn't about writers as such, but about how the community determines the value of all its contributors?

novacadian

full member

Activity: 232

Merit: 104

Quote from: weisoq on January 31, 2014, 07:41:07 PM

If devtome's subsidy is perpetual without justification, then that's cool - creative commons writing is considered valuable for the mere sake of writing - but it's at the cost of everything else this project could be and that doesn't work for me.

Could writers expect a half decent residual on ad revenues over time?

Some cons that come to mind are that it would likely shape successful writers; successful in the sense of reward in DVCs; to write in a fashion that is search engine friendly and could possibly put a bias on the writing if the motivation was reward related.

If their share in ad revenues was perpetual then is it possible to see the same reward, or better, over time that may, now, be had in one time share splits?

- Nova

[ Edit: typo ]

bit-fxtrader

full member

Activity: 166

Merit: 100

Quote from: weisoq on January 31, 2014, 03:50:16 PM

Quote from: bit-fxtrader on January 31, 2014, 02:55:35 PM

so to post pics on devtome I have to have them hosted somewhere else correct? Devtome doesn't have storage space where I can upload pics?

media manager - panel on left. http://devtome.com/doku.php?id=devtome_how_to_post_an_image

Thank you.

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Wekkel on January 31, 2014, 07:02:55 PM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 31, 2014, 07:01:29 PM

Quote from: Wekkel on January 31, 2014, 07:00:26 PM

Tested Android client 1.0.5 with Windows wallet 1.0.15.

Windows -> Android : 0.0001 DVC ends up in 1.0001 DVC payment (1 DVC payment fee)
Android -> Windows : 0.0001 DVC ends up in 5.0001 DVC payment (5 DVC payment fee)

All received and OK.

ok good thats what I saw...

I spoke to soon (see my editted post above).

I just did a 10 DVC payment from Android and that one immediately comes through on the Windows wallet Huh

I know what's happening....

Its because the old clients do not accept these small payments and you need a new client to relay the transaction.... so simply just click anywhere on your android wallet, like goto block explorer, let it start talking to your window client again, and it will relay the transaction to the network. The block explorer should have this transaction but you cannot connect to the block explorer because its not a new version of the client.

I noticed as soon as android connected again to the new window client it relayed the transaction instantly, since new blocks formed since then.

Its that or that there was not enough fees (maybe it wanted 6 DVC, 5 base fee + 0.5 txout fee + 0.5 txoutput fee = 6 DVC) so it just takes longer to relay the transaction... but I saw the payment go through after I started to navigate my android wallet again and it reconnected to the network.

The android wallet doesn't do the dust fee 0.5dvc per txout, it simply always is 5dvc per 1kb transaction. Most of the time this will get your transaction at the top of the queue but sometimes at the end of the blocks it will get put behind other clients whcih pay more fees to transfer the transaction.

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: melodiem on January 31, 2014, 08:02:07 PM

Quote from: sidhujag on January 31, 2014, 06:53:26 PM

Reinstalled the same client? You did not delete the data directory or anything? That's odd, its the same thing.

Now you worry me lol

I dont know if I have done this right, but it does seem to be working ok? Up to block 124199 now

Its all good, I tested new client and it downloads entire blockchain everytime...

melodiem

full member

Activity: 232

Merit: 100

Quote from: sidhujag on January 31, 2014, 06:53:26 PM

Reinstalled the same client? You did not delete the data directory or anything? That's odd, its the same thing.

Now you worry me lol

I dont know if I have done this right, but it does seem to be working ok? Up to block 124199 now

weisoq

hero member

Activity: 720

Merit: 500

Quote from: Hunterbunter on January 31, 2014, 06:26:07 PM

I don't disagree with you, but my impression of the whole devtome thing was to get more people involved, as a basis to better support open source development with the rest of devcoin. I thought the problem was that progress was just too slow / ineffective, and other things (like attracting commissioned work) was the next approach.

I don't know what the metrics of devtome were, but say if only one out of every 1000 people are actually interested in having a long term relationship with the devcoin project, as a supporter/investor, what's the best way to find them?

Sidhujag mentioned in his post that the devcoin project started becoming an umbrella for profitable open source developments. I actually think that's a far better idea than to rely on donations entirely. It reminds me of China Pre and Post capitalist restoration.

Slow progress - perhaps. People don't need to have a long-term relationship with devcoin, but then getting paid needs justifying through value to others or it's just random charity.

Not going to happen, but I think the best way to find them would be to stop paying. Focus resources on actually funding valued open source work and people who value their work first for the sake of that work not financial reward - either direct payments where value is demonstrable, or revenue driven where debatable and let participants build or not build up what they think has value. Which may still include devtome and many devtome writers but not with current incentive structure.

That's not a popular opinion, and likely construed as 'writer-bashing'. It isn't, it's unsustainable economics bashing. People here seem to miss the point that devcoin prices on value. It swings to low prices and never really recovers as a function of pay, and then a function of the lowest common denominator. If the real world pays $X for 1,000 words then any equivalent dvc payment > X will be sold and the price will revert over time. All else being equal, at some point each/most rounds market mechanics work to drop the price to a level commensurate with or closer to what 1,000 words may be worth. And then lower because a lot of devtome writers aren't professional writers or, to put it politely, writers.

All else isn't equal though, so price variance is higher. But the point remains. I see the incentive structure (not devtome, or writers, or dumps) as the problem. If devtome's subsidy is perpetual without justification, then that's cool - creative commons writing is considered valuable for the mere sake of writing - but it's at the cost of everything else this project could be and that doesn't work for me.

Wekkel

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 1538

yes

Quote from: sidhujag on January 31, 2014, 07:01:29 PM

Quote from: Wekkel on January 31, 2014, 07:00:26 PM

Tested Android client 1.0.5 with Windows wallet 1.0.15.

Windows -> Android : 0.0001 DVC ends up in 1.0001 DVC payment (1 DVC payment fee)
Android -> Windows : 0.0001 DVC ends up in 5.0001 DVC payment (5 DVC payment fee)

All received and OK.

ok good thats what I saw...

I spoke to soon (see my editted post above).

I just did a 10 DVC payment from Android and that one immediately comes through on the Windows wallet Huh

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Wekkel on January 31, 2014, 07:00:26 PM

Tested Android client 1.0.5 with Windows wallet 1.0.15.

Windows -> Android : 0.0001 DVC ends up in 1.0001 DVC payment (1 DVC payment fee)
Android -> Windows : 0.0001 DVC ends up in 5.0001 DVC payment (5 DVC payment fee)

All received and OK.

ok good thats what I saw...

sidhujag

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Hunterbunter on January 31, 2014, 06:26:07 PM

Quote from: weisoq on January 31, 2014, 04:50:10 AM

'One sided trade flow'. I think too much talk and incentive structure is about earning/getting dvc. That results in a focus on how/why/where to sell. This undermines the entire point of devcoin, which is to fund open source work, and therefore needs as much if not more focus on support, buying and adding value.

I don't disagree with you, but my impression of the whole devtome thing was to get more people involved, as a basis to better support open source development with the rest of devcoin. I thought the problem was that progress was just too slow / ineffective, and other things (like attracting commissioned work) was the next approach.

I don't know what the metrics of devtome were, but say if only one out of every 1000 people are actually interested in having a long term relationship with the devcoin project, as a supporter/investor, what's the best way to find them?

Sidhujag mentioned in his post that the devcoin project started becoming an umbrella for profitable open source developments. I actually think that's a far better idea than to rely on donations entirely. It reminds me of China Pre and Post capitalist restoration.

Yea I think that was the original intent:

intent a) Donations to open source developers.. people can get paid for work that they wouldn't have otherwise, creates incentive to become an open source developer and thus un-commercialize the software sector
intent b) Support profitable developments that come out of this. So if you have some source code that is yours or you can distribute and others can copy at will, as long as it is still open source then if you create a business out of this, Devcoin will support you. I think what I'd like to see is profitable businesses that Devcoin supports, however that help devcoin in some way such as accepting devcoin or if it is a Devcoin funded project then provide all profits directly to Devcoin... as more projects come along and compete for scarce devcoins for funding, they start to become more valuable and higher profits as a result if they already aren't profitable from the getgo.

Devtome was supposed to start getting small amounts of shares to attract some quality writers that would ge tnothing otherwise, providing an avenue to do what they love, aswell as providing quality reading material, and at the same time drive ad revenue up which I think was supposed to be the source of income for writers. So as revenue rises, more writers come in, more attention to devcoin itself. At some point if there was so much revenue that we put a cap on writing profit then we would use the rest to buy devcoins at market or something like that. However what we ended up morphing into was solely a share based system where the investors buying devcoins are the only ones to basically support or provide income to writers... and there is no notion that I see of ad revenue, or it being a factor at all. If there is no incentive for it to go up, then it won't. If we see some numbers like word count is 2x from last 3 months and ad revenue is 1.5x for last 3 months and we track these metrics then we can get a timeline and extrapolate how much money we need to support a profitable writing site, and then decide we keep with it or should we use that thousand or two thousand shares to maybe fund a different model.

Topic: [DVC]DevCoin - Official Thread - Moderated - page 202. (Read 1059181 times)