►
Description
🙏 Thank you for watching! Hit 👍 and subscribe 🚩 to support this work
🌱Join the Community🌱
on Discord https://discord.gg/uM4ZWDjNfK
or say hello on Telegram https://t.me/tecommons
Join the conversation https://forum.tecommons.org/
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/tecmns
Learn more http://tecommons.org/
A
A
B
Well,
I
studied
two
things.
I
did
study
computer
science
from
several
years
ago.
Actually
and
then
I
I
changed
careers
and
study
music.
B
A
A
Amazing,
it's
so
great
to
have
you
here:
you're
you're,
a
gem
in
the
community
yeah
that
it
can't
me
and
jeff
were
talking
about
that.
It
was
awesome
when
you
moderated
the
discussion
between
jeff
and
griff.
A
B
B
A
Yeah,
okay,
but
there's
major
major
developments,
so
we
can
jump
in
so
okay,
great
yeah,
yeah,
there's
tons
of
it's
really
cool
this
proposal
inverter.
I
think
I
mentioned
this
last
time
where,
like
if
the
proposal
inverted,
if
the
proposal
inverter
existed
right
now,
we
could
definitely
use
it
to
fund
the
development
of
the
proposal
inverter
because
it's
such.
A
Hey
trent
we're
just
picking
up
on
the
proposal:
hey
nice
to
have
you
here,
we're
just
picking
up
where
we
left
off
last
week.
With
this
proposal,
inverter
there's
actually
been
a
lot
of
developments,
so
there's
three
repositories
that
I'm
gonna
bring
up.
I'm
gonna
save
this.
A
Okay,
so
this
is
from
block
science.
I
think
they
just
open
sourced
this
for
us.
Okay,
then
there
was
two
more
things
coming
up
proposal.
A
Okay,
so
I'll
go
ahead
and
link
okay,
now
this
hackmd
file,
so
so
what
I'm
doing
is
in
the
labs
channel.
Here
we
have
pinned
messages,
so
we
have
a
labs
agenda
as
a
doc.
Okay,
so
I
don't.
I
think
we
missed
a
couple
weeks
of
notes,
but
that's
fine,
so
we'll
say
friday
july
30th
and
I'll
just
link
from
there
to
this
proposal.
B
A
A
Okay,
so
probably
obviously
the
most
relevant
is
what's
actually
called
the
proposal
inverter,
so
I
figure
today
we
can
pretty
much
just
dive
into
this.
I
think.
Actually,
this
proposal
inverter
looks
like
that's
an
evolution
of
the
automated
general
contractor.
This
was
updated
march
18th.
It
only
has
two
commits
and
this
one
was
updated
june
10th
with
30
commits
so
okay,
we
have
overview.md
whoa
beautiful
streamer
agreements.
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
Hey,
if
you
check,
if
you
check
the
labs
channel
and
the
pinned
messages,
you'll
find
the
agenda
and
from
there
I've
linked
to
the
hackmd,
which
links
to
some
relevant
proposals.
Repositories
that
we're
going
through.
B
B
A
So
what
I'm
trying
to
do
now
is
map,
in
my
mind,
for
anyone
who's
seeing
my
screen.
This
diagram,
so
michael
zarghum
just
released
this
proposal,
inverter,
which
should,
in
theory,
be
the
same
idea.
That's
discussed
in
this
medium
article
that
we
went
through
last
week,
exploring
doubted
out
collaborations-
and
this
is
my
favorite
diagram
here
and
there's
also
this
one.
So
I'm
trying
to
resolve
in
my
mind
how
this,
what
we
see
here
is
the
same
as
the
stock
and
flow
diagram
that
we're
seeing
in
the
repository
now.
A
A
A
So
I'm
going
to
try
starting
over
on
the
right
here.
If
we
had
a
payer,
oh
and
but
this
is
using
a
real
world
use
case
called
streamer.
So
maybe
we
just
want
to
look
at
what
streamer
is
streamer
network
decentralized
platform
for
real-time
data,
distribute
unstoppable
data
streams
over
a
global,
open
source
peer-to-peer
network
and
help
build
a
new
data
economy,
discover
new
ethical
business
models
for
user
data
with
scalable
crowd-sourced
data
sets
interesting,
so
we're
seeing
a
real
world
use
case
here
for
streamer.
A
Streams,
sequences
of
timestamp
messages
delivered
from
publishers
to
subscribers
products
are
collections
of
streams
which
can
be
published
onto
the
marketplace
and
subscribed
by
other
streamer
users.
This
is
super
cool
data
is
the
cryptocurrency
which
powers
the
streamer
ecosystem
in
various
ways.
It's
an
erc20
token
on
the
ethereum
blockchain.
B
A
Maybe
we
should
run
this
or
just
keep
looking
okay,
what's
delegation
model.
B
A
Behavior
config,
p
sub
runs
state
and
we
have
the
model
quite
a
bit
here:
private
price
revenue,
okay,
so
I
think
I'm
putting
together
what's
happening
here
in
my
head,
I'm
guessing
that
block
science
was
hired
as
a
service
provider
to
build
a
model
for
a
streamer,
and
so
they
they
took
the
opportunity
to.
A
Shape
it
and
form
it
as
a
proposal
inverter.
So
what
what
they
have
is
something
that
models
streamer,
but
really
it's
could
be
generalized.
A
So
I've
forked
this
to
the
commons
build,
so
we
can
technically
like
hack
and
slash
on
this,
and
maybe
we
just
use
a
similar
format.
Okay,
here's
more
description,
so
we
should
actually
read
through
this.
I
think
I'll
read
through
this,
but
this
is
basically
a
spec,
so
we're
trying
to
arrive
at
a
spec
for
the
proposal
inverter-
and
this
is
what
it'll
look
like
we'll
have
a
flowchart
we'll
have
the
state
of
the
mechanism
we'll
have
the
parameters
for
parameterizing.
It
we'll
have
the
state
state
transitions
essentially.
A
A
Payers
pay
enough
to
replenish
the
funds
allocations,
drain
funds
brokers,
leave
brokers
join
okay,
so
essentially,
this
middle
piece
is
lo
is
where
the
transaction
is
happening.
So
we
have
here
this
pool
of
funds
and
the
brokers
are
providing
the
service
and
the
funds
are
being
drained
towards
the
brokers.
A
A
A
A
And
now
there's
so
there's
a
badge
which
links
to
the
hackmd5.
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
Okay,
so
and
there's
a
minimum,
so
it's
initial
value
is
seven.
A
B
B
Like
for
the
thing
we
are
building,
it
doesn't
really
make
sense
that
the
broker
has
a
stake,
which
is
all
sort
of
put
in.
Doesn't
it
oh
wait?
Am
I
getting
something
wrong.
B
Yeah
no,
but
I
I
don't
really
get
the
fact
that
the
brokers
can
leave
and
claim
the
stake
if
this
is
going
to
be
a
payment
like.
If
I
understand
this
model,
if
a
broker
leaves,
he
also
gets
the
stake
of
the
non-allocated
pun
or
if
a.
A
Don't
even
get
what
the
stake
is
at
all,
yet
I
I
don't
get
that
and
then
also
what
happens
when
they
whoa
oh
broker.
Oh,
so
are
you
thinking
that
so
a
broker
is
a
worker
right
yeah,
so
so
they
yeah
you're
right
and
so
they
have
to
stake
in
order
to
sort
of
show
their
commitment
to
the
job.
Do
you
think
that's
the
case.
A
S
s-I:
I
have
no
idea,
let's
see
if
we
can.
Let's
see
if
we
see
that
in
here,
broker
leaves,
which
means
they
keep
steak
or
broker
joins.
I
don't
see
like
where
the
stake,
maybe
should
we
read
all
of
this
or
just
the
pair
synthetic
state
change
broker
joints.
Okay,
I'm
gonna
read
this
a
broker.
I
can
join
the
agreement
and
must
also
join
the
stream
associated
with
that
agreement.
A
By
staking
s
I
greater
than
or
equal
to
sigma,
so
sigma
is
not
here,
nope!
Oh,
it
just
says
it
here
so
required
stake
s
min
says
s.
I
greater
than
or
equal
to
sigma
kind
of
confusing
seems
like
sigma
and
s-min
are
the
same
thing.
A
B
A
Yep,
brilliant,
that
that
is
awesome,
okay
and-
and
these
are
brokers-
and
these
are
must
be
brokers,
and
these
must
be
payers.
Is
s
payers.
A
A
Furthermore,
it
is
possible
to
enforce
additional
access,
control
via
white
lists
or
blacklists,
which
serve
to
restrict
access
to
the
set
beta.
These
lists
may
be
managed
by
the
owner,
the
payers
and
or
the
brokers.
However,
scoping
an
edition
access
control
scheme
is
out
of
scope
at
this
time,
cool
I'm
just
going
to
keep
reading
claim.
Yeah
a
broker
is
attached
to
agreement
can
cl
and
I
think
it's
a
broker
who
is
attached
to
an
agreement
can
claim
their
accumulated
rewards
at
their
discretion.
This
came
up
last
time
like.
Why
do?
A
Why
does
a
broker
have
to
claim
their
rewards?
Why
not
just
direct
it
into
their
funds?
But
let's
see
so
now
a
and
f
allocated
funds
and
total
funds
cool.
A
That's
I
almost
feel
like
that
should
be
a
plus,
but
no
that
no
no.
A
So
allocated
funds
are
unclaimed.
A
Yeah,
okay,
note
that
while
this
decreases
the
total
funds
in
the
contract,
it
does
not
decrease
the
unallocated
or
remaining
funds
in
the
contract,
because
claims
only
extract
claims.
According
to
a
deterministic
rule
computed
from
the
past,
many
brokers
may
choose
to
claim
their
funds
more
or
less
often,
depending
on
opportunity
costs
and
gas
costs.
Okay,
so
there's
the
reasoning.
B
A
I
guess
opportunity
costs
and
gas
costs
preferred.
Implementations
may
vary,
see,
see
a
section
on
synthetic
state
interesting
and
then
leaving
in
the
event
that
the
horizon
is
below
the
threshold.
H
is
less
than
h,
min
or
a
broker
has
been
attached
to
the
agreement
for
more
than
dow
epochs
tau
epochs,
a
broker
may
exit
an
agreement
and
take
their
stake
and
outstanding
claims.
A
In
this
case,
set
of
brokers
is
the
broker
minus
broker.
I
the
stake
is
the
stake
minus
stake?
I
the
allocated
funds,
is
the
allocated
funds
minus
ai
and
the
total
fund.
This
is
total
funds.
A
Allocated
f
is
total
funds,
so
total
funds
is
total
funds
might
say
the
broker
receives
the
balance
s
I
plus
ai.
However,
if
a
broker
has
not
stayed
for
the
entire
period
tau
or
the
contract
is
not
running
low
on
funds,
the
stake
will
be
kept
as
payment
by
the
agreement
contract
when
the
broker
leaves
so
there's
a
basically,
you
forfeit
your
stake.
If
you
do
not
stay
for
the
so
so
tau
is
like
a
commitment
period.
A
A
B
B
A
So
the
stake
will
be
kept
as
payment
by
the
agreement
contract
when
the
broker
leaves
so
again
they're
leaving.
So
these
are
actually
all
the
same,
except
for
total
funds
will
claim
the
stake
and
they
will
receive
their
payment
and
not
their
stake.
Okay,
in
a
more
extreme
case,
we
may
require
the
broker
to
relinquish
the
claim
on
ai
as
well,
but
this
would
easily
be
skirted
by
making
a
claim
action
before
leaving
okay,
so
a
little
footnote,
but
that's
important.
A
So
as
far
as
I
can
see
it,
this
is
a
really
like
a
full
spec.
A
A
I
wonder
what
the
model
looks
like.
Let's,
I
think
I'm
going
to
open
this.
A
B
B
A
A
B
A
A
A
This
so
it's
slightly
different
it'd
be
nice
if
they
use
the
exact
same
terminology.
A
A
A
B
B
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
A
This
is
this
goes
way
back.
If
you
go
commonstack.org,
I
think
this
was
the
initial
idea
of
the
let's
see
layers.
They
have
this
idea
of.
A
There's
somewhere,
it
says,
like
components.
A
A
But
I
think
the
proposal
inverter
is
the
evolution
of
the
of
an
idea
that
the
common
stack
has
had
for
several
years.
So
I
get
the
feeling
that
I
think
these
model,
the
modeling,
was
actually
made
long
before
this
spec
that
we
just
went
through.
So
I
think
it
kind
of
it
has
to
be
kind
of
reconciled
where
maybe
we
make
a
new
model
and
we
can
use
these
as
reference,
but
I
think
we
can
make
a
new
model
that
reflects.
A
A
A
B
B
B
A
B
I
think,
maybe
that's
the
crazy
idea
I
just
came
up
with,
maybe
because
they
were
in
respect
in
this
text.
Here
they
were
talking
about,
maybe
accepting
people
working
without
a
state
and
such
maybe
just
a
delegate
if
somebody
is
a
broker
and
it's
working
but
has
some
other
projects
that
he
has
to
focus
on.
B
He
can
delegate
his
stake
to
some
to
someone
else
to
some
new
person
who
can
work
for
him,
get
his
allocated
funds
or
claim
them,
but
isn't
a
real
member
and
doesn't
have
a
stake
so
when
he
leaves
he
doesn't
get
to
remove
the
stake,
because
the
stake
still
belongs
to
this
guy.
Who
is
not
claiming
right
now
and
may
return
in
the
future?
A
Yeah
that
would
make
sense.
I
mean
that
would
be
a
delegator
that
would
be
delegation
and
it's
interesting
to
consider,
given
this
idea
of
shares,
I'm
just
seeing
here
that
the
delegator
object
is
instantiated
with
the
number
of
shares
so
shares
equals.
10
minimum
shares
equals
10..
So
this
is
like
a
default
delegator
who's
initialized
as
id
0..
It
looks
like
so
we
can
actually
check
that
out.
We
have
model
delegator.
A
Yeah,
this
is
mix
they're,
mixing
up
all
sorts
of
models
into
one.
I
think
because,
there's
a
whole
other
concept
of
revenue
sharing-
and
this
is
why
I
say
I
think
this
is
evolved
over
time,
because
we
have
two.
So
we
have
two
repos
here:
revenue
sharing
and
automated
general
contractor,
updated
in
march
and
may
respectively.
A
A
We
have
behavior,
we
have
bookkeeper
claims.
Helper
joins
leaves
payments,
so
it
seems
like
this.
Repo
is
almost
a
more
pure
version
actually
of
the
proposal
inverter,
and
I
think
this
is
what
they
used
to
call
it
automated
general
contractor
and
it
looks
like
they
rolled
together,
the
revenue
sharing
and
the
agc
all
into
one
into
what
they're
calling
now
the
proposal
inverter.
B
B
A
A
So
what
I
think
we
can
do
you
know
what
we
can
get
is
next
week,
because
jeff
emmett
is
really
passionate
about
this
this
project
and
seeing
this
built
out
and
he
works
with
block
science
and
obviously
all
these
repos
are
coming
from
block
science.
So
jeff
has
a
conflict
with
the
lab
session,
but
only
bi-weekly,
so
I
know
he
had
another
session
or
he
was
I
think,
meeting
with
get
coin.
A
He
works
for
get
coin
as
well,
and
so
he
had
he
had
that
this
week
and
next
week
he's
going
to
be
available
so
next
week
we
can
get
jeff
to
join
the
labs
and
he
can
walk
us
through.
All
of
this
he's
very
passionate
about
it
and
he's
said
to
me
a
few
times
that
he's
really
excited
to
do
some
collaborative
sessions
on
this,
so
maybe
he
can
clear
up
this
concept
of
delegator,
of
revenue
sharing
and
and
the
direction
that
we
should
be
taking
with
this
newer
merged
repository.
A
Okay,
maybe
maybe
I'll
for
the
last
few
minutes.
A
I
haven't
read
this
section
at
the
top.
We
had
skipped
down
to
broker.
I
think
so,
I'm
just
going
to
read
through
this.
While
we
have
a
few
minutes,
so
the
owner,
deploy
an
actor
within
the
streamer
ecosystem
can
deploy
a
new
agreement
contract
by
specifying
which
stream
the
agreement
supports,
setting
the
parameters
of
the
smart
contract,
providing
the
initial
funds
and
providing
any
unenforced
commitment
to
continue
topping
up
the
contract
as
payer
under
as
long
as
a
set
of
slas
are
met.
A
For
the
purpose
of
this
draft,
it
is
assumed
that
the
contract
is
initialized
with
some
quantity
of
funds.
F
such
that
h
is
greater
than
h,
min
and
beta.
The
brokers
are
empty
so
to
cancel
in
the
event
that
the
owner
closes
down
a
contract.
Each
broker
gets
back
their
stake
and
receives
any
unclaimed
tokens
allocated
to
their
address,
as
well
as
an
equal
share
of
the
remaining
unallocated
assets,
that
is
to
say,
the
quantity
delta
di
of
data
tokens
is
distributed
to
each
broker.
A
A
B
A
And
thus
the
pen
ultimate
financial
state
of
the
contract
is
s,
equals
zero
r
equals
zero
a
equals
zero.
When
the
contract
is
self-destructed,
cool,
forced
cancel,
there
may
be
conditions
under
which
any
address
may
trigger
the
cancel,
but
these
conditions
should
be
indicative
of
a
failure
on
the
part
of
the
pair,
an
example
policy
would
be
to
allow
force
to
cancel
when
n
is
less
than
n
minimum
and
h
is
less
than
h
minimum,
and
possibly
only
if
this
is
the
case.
More
multiple
for
multiple
epochs.
A
Pair
a
payer
who
may
or
may
not
be
the
owner
may
contribute
funds
to
the
agreement
in
order
to
ensure
its
continued
existence.
Pay
a
payer
takes
the
action
pay
by
providing
a
quantity
of
data,
tokens
delta
f,
which
increased
the
unallocated
funds,
and
thus
also
the
total
funds
cool,
so
allocated
funds
has
increased,
total
funds
increased.
A
Furthermore,
the
horizon
h
is
increased
by
delta
f
over
delta,
a
cool
synthetic
state
change.
The
synthetic
state
change
is
a
change
the
contract
state
that
is
not
realized
until
later.
In
this
case,
the
automatic
allocation
of
funds
from
the
pool
r
to
the
pool
a
is
implicit
for
reference,
see
geyser
contracts.
Although
rewards
each
participant
is
entitled
to
are
deterministic,
they
are
not
actually
resolved
until
they
make
a
claim,
see,
broker
actions
per
epoch,
t
of
length
delta
t
let
broker
set
at
t
be
the
set
of
brokers.
A
B
A
They're
evenly
distributing
the
funds
amongst
all
the
brokers,
so
delta
a
is
the
change
in
allocated
funds,
so
those
are
the
funds
moving
from
the
unallocated
to
allocated
so
paying
the
brokers
and
it's
just
each
one
gets
an
even
share
and
the
allocated
funds
is
increased
by
delta.
A
and
the
unallocated
funds
is
reduced
by
delta.
A
note
that
f
is
constant,
so
no
tokens
are
actually
flowing
in
terms
of
total
funds.
This
bookkeeping
reflects
the
amount
of
funds
broker.
I
will
receive
in
the
event
that
they
make
a
claim
or
other
payout
event
occurs.
A
Furthermore,
if
the
nt
equals
the
sizes
less
than
and
men
payments
are
not
issued,
as
the
terms
of
the
agreement
are
not
considered
met,
an
additional
allocations
are
not
accrued
for
the
passage.
So
if
there's
not
enough
workers,
then
everyone
just
stops
the
tote.
The
funds
stop
flowing,
the
work
stops
and
they'll
have
to
find
another
worker.
I
guess.
A
If
one
broker
suffices,
then
setting
n
min
equals
one
is
recommended
above
I
have
considered
a
very
simple
conditional
allocation
policy:
oh
cool
that
provides
a
fixed
reward
of
delta,
a
per
epoch
delta
t
evenly
over
the
brokers
and
the
agreements.
As
long
as
the
minimum
broker
count
is
met,
this
is
placeholder
logic.
Both
the
total
flow
and
the
allocation
rule
can
be
state
dependent.
An
example
alternative
would
be
to
release
an
amount
of
funds
which
is
a
scale
factor.
A
Gamma
s,
the
max
of
gamma
s
and
delta,
a
max
where
each
broker
received
delta,
ai,
plus
delta
ai
equals
ai
plus
minus
a
t
equals
gamma
s.
I,
unless
I
have
no
idea
what
he's
saying.
A
A
A
A
B
A
I
hope
so
I'm
gonna
bring
that
to
him.
I
think
he's
gonna
be
down
for
that.
I
haven't
confirmed,
but
if
he
doesn't
join
then
we're
just
gonna
start
hacking
and
run
the
models
and
dive
into
the
code,
and
maybe
even
I
think
it
might
be
a
good
to
actually
just
make
a
model
from
scratch
as
well,
and
then
we
can
compare
it
with
the
modeling.
That's
already
been
done
and
probably
leverage
a
lot
of
the
work.
That's
been
done
so.