[DISCUSSION] BitDAO L1 Infrastructure

With so many EVM compatible L1s nowadays, is there anything that the BitDAO L1 can do to be special?

3 Likes

Actually, I am thinking to play a plan bigger than this. Why not build an L1 reference with the elastic of Avalanche subnet with the bigger vision for Game products and DEXs services? And reference the advantage of Cosmos SDK for its convenience for bridging.

3 Likes

Some ideas drop in here. (0-7)

  • 0/ That’s one small step for $bit, one giant leap for #BitDAO universes. :BIT: :airplane: :rocket: :full_moon:

  • 1/ so, is there any more elaborate plan for the L1? Do we have a rough prototype yet, or it is still on the suggestion step?

  • 2/ Will Ben take place an AMA recently, if yes, when?

  • 3/ Would it prefer to be a POS chain more than a POW chain? (I suggestion it will be POS only) But if it is using POS, how we handle the decentralize issues, as we have Top 1,000 holders (From a total of 17,741 holders) but the Top 10 holder occupy 95.89% of Bit token.

  • 4/ Based on the bold predictions and observations, the future web3 world will be the Ethereum plus multi-chain ecology. What kind of consensus will bit chain prefer? the snowman like Avalanche with subnet; the cosmos SDK; or the Parallel chain like BNC.

  • 5/ Personally, a combination of Avalanche subnet with Cosmos SDK would be a game-changer. As we can not only take advantage of the elastic of Subnet but also exploit the bridging mechanism from Cosmos.

  • 6/ The bitdao multi-subdao Structure would be a good fit to subnet, owning several game subnet for game7; on-chain Dexs for leverage borrowing, and derivatives; DAOs operations, and participation.

  • 7/ more discussion and idea…

13 Likes

1: Cheap gas
2: ETH way gas fee burns Bit
3: Join the ecological chain USDT, USDC… stable currency, cheap gas, attracting people to use.

6 Likes

I also want Ben to have time to talk about this specifically.

4 Likes

Hey all,

I would like to express my support and contribute to R&D/tokenomics of this proposal, some opening comments here:

My suggestion: Two tokens + Roadmap with EVM (ZK-Rollups) and L1 (Sharding) + Compliance

EVM Equivalent

For approved and ongoing projects it is important to maintain a certain compatibility with Ethereum, where most developments have been created and planned.

The choices should aim to balance the Blockchain Trilemma: Security, Scalability and Decentralization.

Main types of scalability for L2:

  • Side Chains
  • Plasma
  • Optimistic Rollups
  • ZK-Rollups

⁃ Use BIT as native token

BIT currently has a design that concentrates two functions: governance and staking, but there is a tokenomics problem that does not allow both functions to operate at the same time, so BIT holders must decide if they want to earn rewards or vote and submit proposals, this decision switching is not healthy for the ecosystem.

When we increase the importance of BIT as a native token of L1, this tokenomics flaw becomes a general critical flaw, because staking native tokens are responsible for ensuring the security of the system, the basis of Game Theory present in POS/DPOS systems depends on a lot of it.

Solution:

My suggestion is that we have two tokens, a token for the governance of BitDAO and another token for the BIT Protocol (L1 BitDAO), this guarantees the governance, economic and security interests of the protocol.

We can plan a high-performance EVM that meets project requirements in the short to medium term and design a fully independent shard blockchain in the future. If possible, the EVM could be developed with zkrollups in collaboration with zkSync in which we invested $200M USD in the zkDAO proposal. In the meantime, we would do research and development to have our own blockchain for BitDAO.

Other comments:

  1. My suggestion is also effective in the field of regulations, by separating the utility token from the “financial” token, we preserve the autonomy of both areas and can make more specific uses and developments for each of them.
    In the Continent DAO proposal, we decided to create utility NFTs that represent the ownership of the hotspots and separate them from our governance token, so under the law both tokens are different objects.

  2. As @RJ mentioned, 95.89% of BIT tokens belong to the top 10 holders. In L1, this centralization will not be seen well by the industry, for comparison, Ethereum’s top 10 has approximately 24% of the total existing supply.
    So if you decide to create a new token for BitDAO and make BIT the native EVM/Blockchain token, we should think of a way to improve these numbers and decentralization. I previously conclude that it is better to keep BIT as BitDAO’s governance token and a new token for L1’s native token.

11 Likes

It’s good proposal well…

3 Likes

I would love to see BitDAO have its own network.

4 Likes

I will support this proposal

2 Likes

Is it such an issue, to combine both?.. ie., both staking & governance. In fact, it makes more sense, when the voting power attained is a function of tokens staked and time, imo.

100% :+1:

5 Likes

Hi!

I am a community member at Moledao, a blockchain ecosystem builder. https://twitter.com/moledao_io

Thinking of doing a Twitter space on this topic! Great if we can get Ben or someone from Bitdao to share more on BitDAO’s L1 plan.

Anyone else keen to join? DM me on TG or twitter @defipaca and let’s plan sth!

6 Likes

Good idea, have sent a DM to you on Twitter from the @bitdaoaembassy account :+1:

4 Likes

I don’t agree with some of your points.
“governance and staking, but there is a tokenomics problem that does not allow both functions to operate at the same time”
Maybe you should learn about DOT system,could support both staking and governance at the same time.There are many similar protocols that work this way.I don’t understand why you came to this conclusion? Is there any theoretical basis?

1 Like

As a builder, biggest issues: can we beat Polygon or AVAX on the following?

  • Speed
  • Gas fees
  • Carbon neutral
  • Reputation
8 Likes

Possible, there is always that room for improvement on existing technology.

3 Likes

I’m very excited about this proposal as an L1 would bring a lot of potential not only to the bitDAO ecosystem but also to the entirety of Web3, looking forward to how everything will pan out, and I’m glad we’re moving towards a direction that empowers blockchain tech as a whole and us as community and DAO.

3 Likes

-Very good idea of a layer 1 with BIT as the native token.
-Very good idea of @Piti1936 to start building it on Cosmos SDK to leverage already existing tech.
-I’d suggest that BitDAO funds projects to build Dapps around the use of BIT (and not other projects= other tokens). Dex and lending platform would generate fees that could be shared by BIT hodlers who lock their BIT as suggested by @WhiteHat within these protocols. We should support projects only focus on BIT instead of projects creating another AAA project fork with their own protocol token for governance/locking period
-Projects funded by BitDAO could use this layer 1 to process their transactions thus creating activities and fees. Environment DAO would use it for minting NFTs and to process any transaction.

Do we have a team of experienced developers who could be funded to do this job ?

6 Likes

Welcome Justin, nice to have you around.

2 Likes

I want to believe that’s what this proposal is focusing on, by funding the R&D entity in the foreseeable future and this could open tje door for top-notch developers to help achieve this big dream.

2 Likes

Hey @kravi

Technically it is possible to combine them, but not in the current configuration of BitDAO and using the snapshot that today is the main governance service of Ethereum. But even at L1, the combination of this and concentration on a single token would need to create other mechanisms to prevent tokenomics attacks.

Sushiswap, one of the early adopters of BitDAO, created a token (SushiPowah) for their governance and continues to use the snapshot.

/////

Hey @Norton,

The point you mentioned is not my opinion, it’s a fact, today you can’t staking and using BIT in governance at the same time. The reason is simple, the snapshot reads your token balance (or delegating them), if you have sent your tokens for staking in a smart contract, there are no tokens in your possession for it to identify.

There are several ways to approach this problem. If you better substantiate your disagreement, I can argue with more theoretical and practical elements in my suggestion, including quoting Polkadot.

5 Likes