Bible Pay

Read 1192 times

  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2051


    • 28
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
POOM Concept (Proof-of-Orphan-Mining)
« on: June 12, 2019, 04:57:48 pm »
June 12th, 2019

Concept:  Proof-of-Orphan-Mining (POOM)


 ** CLARIFICATION ON WHAT WE ARE VOTING ON, SANCTUARIES:
     The "Divert_50_percent_of_GSC_Budget_to_POOM" poll:

We are voting on creating an additional BiblePay GSC campaign called POOM.  This 50% poll means the budget would be capped at 450K per day.
(This would lower the POG/healing budget by 450k per day).

Each participant would receive rewards in POOM if:
- They have a credit balance with Cameroon for that Child Hex ID

Each daily reward would be capped at the exact amount of the expense.

The budget will not exceed the max 450K under any circumstances (rewards would be divided equally if we are overflowing with children).

(Please vote on the poll that you like the most - we have 3 sizes in ).


**

This concept has been discussed in various forms in the past, but I believe the reason we had no traction was the variants contained unreasonable expectations.  (Our first variation, [email protected] with orphanstats.com, required BiblePay to know personal information for each user (it required trust, contained collusion risk, and tracked personal info; and the poll indicated it was intrusive).    The second variation, asking compassion.com's IT department to create a custom API for decentralized queries, was proposed to Jimmy, CEO of Compassion - and to ciqueue - and all attempts were met with a very high resistance level ranging from not willing to hear the proposal nor have meetings nor nor creating a custom solution for us at this time).

So in light of this, this new concept places a different spin on the idea, and bends both parties a little more, revisiting the idea.  The base idea, imho, has such great potential, it would be a disgrace to ignore and drop the idea in its entirety rather than take another fresh look at re-engineering it to meet in the middle.

Some positive things have also changed in the interim; we now have GSC contracts, which facilitate a much more flexible server side environment for validating the orphan balance consensus in a decentralized way without forks.  This also provides a mechanism to reward home sponsors.

In this adjusted concept, we promote sponsorship of children at home (rather than through our governance superblock).  We do not eliminate our governance superblock; we offer POOM in addition to everything else we already have.  This has the added benefit of allowing the home miner to sponsor a home orphan and write directly to the orphan (1:1 relationship is fostered).  (Alternatively in the future, we may also allow the home user to Choose whether they want to write to the child or if they want our BiblePay-Web to write to the child- more info on this soon). 

Rob has contacted our second largest orphanage, Cameroon One, who is potentially interested in integrating with us.

In this new scenario, we simplify the API requirements, so that we integrate with a simple solution in baby step 1 (in contrast to birthing the complicated baby first, something our vendors do not want to do).  In this way we get a green light to became a partner with our valuable vendor, rather than shut down.

The first part of the concept is here:
http://wiki.biblepay.org/POOM

Part of the desire to create this pre-proposal discussion now is driven by our initial conference call.  I have a soft commitment from Todd, Director of Cameroon, and Shaun, Founder of Cameroon, and Raj (IT/Cameroon), that Cameroon will be on board with BiblePay to go forward with this design, proof of concept, testing and implementation.  (I also had a conference call discussing the IT solution, and we have a potential green light to do this).

Therefore, this proposal seeks to authorize BiblePay IT (devs) to work on this proof-of-concept, for three months, test it with Cameroon, and if it works, seeks to deploy this to production, and reward either 30%, 50%, or 70% (depending on specific sanctuary proposal entered this month) of our daily rewards out of the GSC budget, towards the sponsorship of Cameroon One children in lieu of POOM rewards, strictly for children who are sponsored through this program by miners who sponsor personal children at home through this system.  (The reason I am seeking approval of the entire program now, is it is a considerably large effort for both companies, and I want to see that we have pre-approval for this to move to production and pay production POOM rewards before we program the lions share of this).

Note, in the security section, we intend to create two rules that make this relationship much more than an oracle:

Rule 1:
When a miner wishes to sponsor a new child, they will enter a command in the wallet (IE 'sponsorchild').  When the sponsorchild command executes, they will receive a Child ID (a Cameroon One Child ID).  This will be a distinct global ID that will prevent Cameroon One from giving this child to any other donor!  Therefore, we will enforce a rule where an existing Cameroon One home donor cannot come to biblepay with an existing orphan, they must initiate the orphan through BiblePay.  During this step, Cameroon will create a childhood BIO URL for the miner, and, a tracking code in their accounting system (allowing BiblePay sanctuaries to track this childs balance as charges, and payments are made to this childs record).  We will have daily visibility of each childs balance per miner.

Rule 2:
A public method will be set-up to allow random checks for any orphan sponsored by a miner by a third party auditor (IE a normal end user can check the balance of a child and call Cameroon and check the integrity of the childs status, to ensure the child is with BiblePay).  (This is similar to what we have with Compassion), so that it will be 100% provable that sponsored children through POOM are really sponsored to BiblePay. 


Payment Mechanics:

So that we can scale to the maximum,  I propose that the payment owed to the miner is converted to a daily amount, and awarded as POG points to the miner and paid from the POG GSC budget.  This is primarily so this POOM budget is friendly to our existing POG budget (in that people sponsoring children do not abruptly take over their own program budget but instead part of the POG budget).

Example:

John Doe, Miner 001, CPK 001, Sponsors Abraham, Cameroon One Orphan #ABC, for $40.00 per month.
Since this costs John Doe $1.33 per day, (and our wallet knows the current BiblePay Price thanks to QT), this is auto-converted to 4430 bbp per day (via the GSC contract), and this BBP is diverted from the Total daily POG budget (by converting to points) and added to John Doe's GSC CPK for the day.  (This reduces the available reward for the rest of the GSC participants).
(We can discuss a separate project for POOM, which GSC certainly supports, but imho it would be better to divert POG -> POOM, more on this tomorrow).

If total orphan payments exceed GSC rewards, they then start to be split equally among all participants.

Electric:

As everyone can see, this concept has a huge potential, because it has the effect of diverting normal mining rewards over to orphan sponsorships.

Unlimited BBP Potential:

One other effect that is less obvious, and I intend to create a model for this and paste my hypothesis, is that I believe if we open up the potential sponsorship of outside orphans (as proposed here, through cameroon one) with home users (miners), via USD payment, with the tax deduction (this was confirmed with Cameroon, that the payment is tax deductible) - received by the end-user, as the BBP is remunerated back, this cycle should technically have a very positive impact on our market cap and price.  This is because our mining rewards would change into pass-through rewards (IE reimbursements) for a certain percent of our emissions.  Yes, some pass through reimbursements would be liquidated immediately to cover the costs of the orphan, but I believe a certain percent would be held by miners (IE in a sense a tax-deductible buy-and-hold of BBP).

What makes this POOM concept an attractive configuration?

Currently I view BiblePays emissions flow as:
POBH - Security - 25%
Sanc rewards - 25%
GSC (Primarily Staking/Giving) - 35%
Governance Budget - 15%

As you can see, this is a very good configuration already, but with POOM, we can potentially divert some of the Staking revenue over to fully productive orphan reward payments.  And, if the test pilot works, once we have chain locks in place, we could also potentially move some of our security budget into POOM (Optional, depending on various factors).


Decentralization:

And one of the very obvious advantages in this idea is it decentralizes biblepay, allowing us to scale (as each home miner sponsors their own personal orphan using their own funds).












« Last Edit: June 15, 2019, 08:19:59 am by Rob Andrews »


  • inblue
  • Newbie

    • 39


    • 4
    • December 20, 2017, 03:41:42 pm
    more
Re: POOM Concept (Proof-of-Orphan-Mining)
« Reply #1 on: June 13, 2019, 04:20:18 am »
We can discuss a separate project for POOM, which GSC certainly supports, but imho it would be better to divert POG -> POOM, more on this tomorrow.

So could you now elaborate on this? How will the budget work in each case?


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2051


    • 28
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Re: POOM Concept (Proof-of-Orphan-Mining)
« Reply #2 on: June 13, 2019, 09:27:11 am »
So could you now elaborate on this? How will the budget work in each case?
Sure, and it will probably be good to elaborate more on and end-to-end example of the whole process.

So we have two choices with GSC.  GSC is robust enough to handle a dedicated campaign for POOM, a completely separate campaign from POG and HEALING, maybe called POOM for example.

The benefit of doing it this way is its cleaner and makes more sense to outsiders.  If we, for example set up this new campaign to be 50% of the GSC rewards, this would immediately decrease the budget of POG by 50% (and impact healing as well).  But the question is, even if with the stringent safeguards of rewarding the POOM members with rewards for 'paid orphans', in the initial early stages, lets say we only have 2 users sponsoring 2 orphans.  The payment allocation of 450K would be split among 2 users (225K each) and this would obviously not last very long as people would jump in and sponsor some new orphans and this excess would dissipate quickly as people come on board.  The upside would be this confined environment and math would be very easy to calculate, as it would be a free running financial system in that the total budget (450K would simply be split by the number of orphans) - and yes it is possible for one CPK to host multiple orphans.  So over time, if we had 20 in there, each person would receive 22.5K.  If our price went up we could have 200 or 2000 in there.

The other option is to award POG points for POOM, thereby making POG a homogenized campaign (POG would be staking + giving + orphans). 
I'm starting to talk myself out of this already.  I think maybe we should ignore the initial effects and make POOM have a dedicated campaign and budget.

I'm neutral on this right now.  I think we need a few additional sanc polls in the end, with half voting for dedicated POOM campaign, the other half for POG hybrid (IE the ones I just entered last night).



  • sunk818
  • Sr. Member

    • 251


    • 7
    • April 24, 2018, 02:02:20 pm
Re: POOM Concept (Proof-of-Orphan-Mining)
« Reply #3 on: June 14, 2019, 09:17:25 am »

First of all, PoOM is a great concept and glad to see some concerns with v1 and v2 being addressed. v3 sounds really promising especially with Kairos being onboard. I'm inspired to start sponsoring one child,


John Doe, Miner 001, CPK 001, Sponsors Abraham, Cameroon One Orphan #ABC, for $40.00 per month.
Since this costs John Doe $1.33 per day, (and our wallet knows the current BiblePay Price thanks to QT), this is auto-converted to 4430 bbp per day


Charitable Giving & Crypto Income?


If we contribute to Kairos, they give contribution summary at the end of the year (maybe as an encrypted PoDS?) When we "mine" BBP, we know the fiat price, so we generate "income" on the day the BBP is put in our wallets? One is charitable contribution, and the other is crypto income?


Pay out exact BBP or less?


Giving BBP to sponsors in exact amount (instead of fixed pot) will allow other projects to be sponsored. Having a fixed pot may encourage sponsorship early on, but s/he could drop the "orphan" as soon as PoOM was unprofitable. Remove the greed motivation by paying only exact or less (as sponsorship numbers grow).


Other charity integration?

Is there a plan to help other charities like BLOOM to join PoOM as well? Perhaps something simple as a Google Sheets or Airtable to use a database? This way other charities can be involved in PoOM without a backend developer to make the integration? Will the details of what's needed for integration be published at a later time?


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2051


    • 28
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Re: POOM Concept (Proof-of-Orphan-Mining)
« Reply #4 on: June 15, 2019, 08:16:35 am »
First of all, PoOM is a great concept and glad to see some concerns with v1 and v2 being addressed. v3 sounds really promising especially with Kairos being onboard. I'm inspired to start sponsoring one child,

Charitable Giving & Crypto Income?
If we contribute to Kairos, they give contribution summary at the end of the year (maybe as an encrypted PoDS?) When we "mine" BBP, we know the fiat price, so we generate "income" on the day the BBP is put in our wallets? One is charitable contribution, and the other is crypto income?
Pay out exact BBP or less?
Giving BBP to sponsors in exact amount (instead of fixed pot) will allow other projects to be sponsored. Having a fixed pot may encourage sponsorship early on, but s/he could drop the "orphan" as soon as PoOM was unprofitable. Remove the greed motivation by paying only exact or less (as sponsorship numbers grow).
Other charity integration?
Is there a plan to help other charities like BLOOM to join PoOM as well? Perhaps something simple as a Google Sheets or Airtable to use a database? This way other charities can be involved in PoOM without a backend developer to make the integration? Will the details of what's needed for integration be published at a later time?

Thank you for your compliments, and hopefully from a community perspective we can agree together that this could be a positive enhancement for biblepay, and thank you for the additional questions.

First, this is an endeavor with Cameroon One (not Kairos).  I was happy to hear when I spoke to Todd from Cameroon that he had a flexible vision of parternship with us and was more than flexible in the IT department so this sparked the conversation of integration POOM with their organization since Compassion was reluctant to hear about the idea.

As far as Tax deductions from a Cryptocurrency perspective, I cant speak to that exact answer because Im not a tax attorney for one but more importantly these tax laws are governed by each users local area/taxable situation and entity type, so I wont go into that, but what I will say is what the relationship looks like and most people will easily understand how to file it.  It looks like this:  A home biblepay user (a home miner), with a home CPK, decides to sponsor an orphan from Cameroon one at Home (but through the biblepay wallet command - to provision the new orphan).    We then ask this home miner to make payments for this orphan directly to Cameroon One - These payments are made in local currency (IE USD for example)  and go directly to Cameroon and those are tax deductible payments using your own personal SSN or company Tax ID number.  The payments you receive back from BiblePay are treated as mining income since they originate from our GSC smart contract reward.  To the end user, they get to sponsor a child, and get rewarded possibly all of the expense back in the form of BBP, exciting.  This is also exciting from a Bitcoin perspective, as I read there is a tax law that if you have unsettlled bitcoin mining income you may be allowed to use that bitcoin for a charitable expense (such as a donation to cameroon) but Im not sure if Cameroon accepts BTC, but I believe they will (I will double check) - but again this is yet another extended use case that has potential. 

Regarding the mechanics of capping the reward (IE pay the BBP amount or less):
I like that idea, and Id like to take the time to clarify something so the sanctuaries who vote on this proposal know exactly what this proposal is proposing.  To make this very simple for everyone to understand, Im going to remove the verbiage above about "homogenized POG reward", and lets make the assumption that we will be :
- Creating a new Campaign called POOM
- If the vote is for 50% of the GSC budget, then this campaign would pay out 0-450K per day in POOM rewards
- Each participant will be capped to only receive Up to the maximum exact amount in BBP that the orphan expense was for (IE if its $1.33 per day, the max reward per orphan-cpk per day is $1.33 in BBP) - Note 2: Our rewards are only paid to people who have credit balances with Cameroon (thanks to our integration) , so someone with a new orphan that didnt actually pay for the orphan will get zero in the days GSC row for their CPK :)
- If we have so many sponsorships that we exceed the entire budget, then they start getting split by user equally (IE if we had 250 orphans, and this resulted in a .65 cent payment per day per person, then this campaign would still be capped at 450K per day and each participant would receive .65 cents each)

So when voting, please vote the above scenario (not the homogenized scenario as that will be deleted).

One piece of info I received yesterday, which is really awesome, is Cameroon One accepts global payments through Paypal (they take credit cards or checks), and Paypal does the auto-conversion of country currency to currency.  So this first phase rollout will be available in the UK, Europe, etc.  We believe it will not work in China due to the firewall rules. 

The user will be instructed to paste the Biblepay Hex orphan ID into the Paypal transaction.  Whats nice is anonymity is preserved as BiblePay will never know who paid for the child, but Cameroon will keep the Paypal records private, etc.

Regarding other company integration:
Yes, it is definitely possible to integrate all the companies in, as long as they meet security requirements.
First, right off the bat - we can't have a google sheets public transaction register - as that would not meet the security requirements.
We must have a full integration with the company itself, so the API is hosted on their computers, and can only be accessed by them, and the RESTful queries are served from their top level domain.  This is to prevent collusion with any representative from biblepay (or from any other domain).
We overcome oracle/collusion/provability risk by asking the company to provide something similar to compassion - a way for a third party to provably check the history of the child, and at the minimum to know at a point in time the child is sponsored by "BIBLEPAY".
So, basically the requirements would be:
- They own a professional top level domain (like Bloomcharity.org for example).
- Their IT dept follows the spec in the OP post to implement the api
- They expose the API on their top level domain (IE bloomcharity.org/biblepay/api)
- They provide a method to prove an orphan ID is sponsored by biblepay when asked by third party
- They honor the rule that we create the Hex orphan ID code when the orphan is provisioned (initiated by our wallet command)
- They create a BIO for the orphan using their URL from their top level domain, using our naming convention (which has our hex child id in it)

Kairos and Bloom are possibilities, as long as Kairos can use their mother companies domain (or buy the kairos.org domain etc), and Bloom could be possible but they currently cost twice the amount per month per orphan that cameroon does (cameroon is $40, I believe bloom is $80 per child) so we would need to build in our interface the ability to store the default commitment amount (Ill take care of that in case we get more than one api started).





  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2051


    • 28
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Re: POOM Concept (Proof-of-Orphan-Mining)
« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2019, 08:41:07 am »
And here is a very encouraging piece of math:
Even at our current low price, if POOM has a 450K budget, we could sponsor 135 new orphans per day (450K * .0004 / 1.33 = 135).

That's really encouraging, to think that 135 new miners (or for example less miners with more children each) could make this much of a positive impact - and that would bring our global impact back up to 215 orphans in that bleak scenario alone.

But I think the picture would be much rosier if our price rose (due to the pass-through expenses/reimbursements).  The reason a person would want to donate through BiblePay is they also gain cryptocurrency exposure.





  • sunk818
  • Sr. Member

    • 251


    • 7
    • April 24, 2018, 02:02:20 pm
Re: POOM Concept (Proof-of-Orphan-Mining)
« Reply #6 on: June 17, 2019, 12:01:33 pm »
So when voting, please vote the above scenario (not the homogenized scenario as that will be deleted).



I'll vote for 70% so there is capacity for growth, but will only pay out the fiat equivalent (according to QT), so I don't see any 70%. Whereas if you have 30% or 50%, you may need to recode (or is it a spork?) in the future.


  • Rob Andrews
  • Administrator

    • 2051


    • 28
    • June 05, 2017, 08:09:04 pm
    • Patmos, Island Of
    more
Re: POOM Concept (Proof-of-Orphan-Mining)
« Reply #7 on: June 17, 2019, 12:58:52 pm »

I'll vote for 70% so there is capacity for growth, but will only pay out the fiat equivalent (according to QT), so I don't see any 70%. Whereas if you have 30% or 50%, you may need to recode (or is it a spork?) in the future.

Its a spork, so we could change it if we had a future vote to change it - without coding.

I was kind of leaning toward 30% since this is such a new technology, maybe with a future vote to change it if its stellar.

But Ill probably get behind whatever the general consensus is in the sanc polls.