In terms of development, according to this, JL says:
It is my expectation that Nu client 2.0 development of our shareholder approved protocol changes will be completed prior to the conclusion of the auction.
Can someone details what is in client 2.0?
After 2.0 is released, my understanding is that the team will focus on b&c development while continuing working on NuBot.
Marketing wise, what is the current situation and the strategy ahead?
Anyone? @tomjoad ?
Tks for clarifying the situation?
I believe the main feature in v2.0 is the functionality for shareholders to vote for NuShare custodial grants, so that we no longer have to rely on Jordan and his undistributed shares, which the remainder should be burned sometime after v2.0 releases. And as Jordan has mentioned, NuBot is very important to B&C, so that will continue to be worked on. I’m not sure of the rest of the changes in v2.0 though.
I would personally love to see the ternary voting system implemented in Nu, but I’m not sure where the team stands on that. Letting people make active “yes” or “no” votes and preventing non-votes from affecting the tally makes sense to me.
I don’t understand. Of course all 2.0 features have to be implemented, they cannot just leave a half baked code base behind, because BKS holders will then be fully aware of what to expect from the development of their code base. So I sincerely hope that all this will be finished before abandoning it.
Unfortunately this is not so easy, because we will have to think about a new decision rule to let a motion pass. Right now it is 5001 “yes” votes within 10,000 blocks. So what would we do with “non” votes? If we apply the same decision rule then “non” will be just the same as “no”.
Let’s assume we instead apply a score to each vote, “no” = -1, “non” = 0, “yes” = 1. Then we calculate the sum over all scores in the last 10,000 blocks and look if this is greater than 0 … The problem with this method is that a single shareholder could decide for his own voting simply by not making anyone aware of it, so it will get 9999 “non” votes and one “yes”.
So you would need to define “voting participation”, i.e. only consider the last blocks where no “non” votes were set. This however means that you can block a motion from passing by simply voting “non” instead of “no” such that the participation rule is violated.
Increasing the block span dynamically would be another approach, but also suffers from disadvantages and would be a very critical protocol change (because min age / block maturity depend on it by design).
Not so simple, but I am with you that this shouldn’t be given up that easily and I am sure that this can be solved in some way.
I think you misunderstood me. I simply meant that I don’t know what the remaining changes were supposed to be. I only know of the major feature, which was NuShares grant and burning.
Could you not just set a lower threshold for consensus, like 2501 more “yes” votes than “no” votes within 10,000 blocks?
It’s true, this requires a vast majority of active voters for things to pass, and should be thought of more in depth. It heavily weights someone who is strictly against a motion, so if you simply don’t like a motion you should probably just abstain.
The only working approach I am aware of, which is getting close to the desired voting system is the vote frequency modulation as described here:
In fact this can be implemented as a client feature which in no way touches the protocol. You can do it right now simply by including a motion only with a certain probability.
While it wasn’t considered any further for Nu, as most of those things, I think the voting system of BKS partly structured in a frequency based way, so at least the idea was picked up there.
That would be helpful to get an official statement by @JordanLee and @tomjoad since we are now heading to a phase in which the team would focus on b&c .
@desrever, will the stage 3 rollout of our website be impacted by this? I was also wondering if there was any update on that.
Edit: Often I’m not near a computer where my client is installed, so I’m unable to see the current liquidity. From what I understand the stage 3 website will feature a lot of details like this, correct? If so, it will be great to be able to see this info in a centralized place without first running the client or asking the assistant.
What is the next step in Nu development and what is the roadmap?
It is important to make it clear so that we can focus energy on the right thing at the right moment.
2.1 will contain some much needed updates as well as the share number adjustment and the potential addition of units of account. Then we’re basically on hold for a while so B&C can get off the ground. Then, eventually, Nu 3.0 will contain volume-dependent fees.