Using Ethereum in open innovation...

Hello Ether fans!
I've been reading the white paper and understanding as much as I can. However I would really appreciate some help please with how Ethereum can be adopted into a collaborative platform for innovation to arbitrate value to original ideas in their correct chronological order. I am in the process of early stage development and looking for the right tool to be able to assign value to people's ideas whilst they collaborate so that at the end, when a winning idea is chosen, all the people who've contributed are given fair value for their work. We would also be looking at an internal system of keeping the value, like a crypto currency, and so I wonder whether the Ethereum algorithm can be used throughout the platform to moderate the attribution of ideas as a modus operandi, and the Ethers can be awarded and traded in a more tangible format? All and any ideas are most welcome and I am very happy to discuss the project in detail. Thank you very much for your help!


  • JasperJasper Eindhoven, the NetherlandsMember Posts: 514 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2014
    I havent really gotten into it much, but there was a guy that.. well some kind of way to combine ideas and evolve them. Called idiologi or something, cant find it. (Tbh, i didnt really get the idea well)

    An imo more interesting idea that came up much earlier is to timestamp the checksum of content, and then later release it.(Other people dont have the data to generate the correct checksum before you release it)

    Then find a way to figure out if different documents("content", could be anything) are based off each other. You dont need to find the direction because of the timestamping.(longish thread, think last post represents it reasonably) Perhaps people could just point out document-derivedness, and a reputation system determines the weight of those opinions. Similarly you could do that, but with ideas instead, but that is much more subjective.

    Of course, that is much easier said than done, it has to be attack proof and stuff.(there are tonnes of pitfalls for reputation systems too) Different kinds of document might have different approaches. i.e. in a wiki, lots of things are just edits of existing pages, entered in the system as particular edits already. (So some links are known) In the case of software, dependencies could be used. Infact, there, there is the idea of doing it 'on the honor system', or having "package managers" figure it out for you.(starting to become more centralized)

    The above seeks to make the creation of documents that result in popular(earning) documents profitable itself. Seems like a lofty goal, making the very activity itself pay automatically, with little overhead, but maybe it tries to achieve too much. You could also have a DAO, a distributed group of people that make documents. How power is distributed in the group could affect how documents are attributed, and how they affect how much people in the DAO earn from them. Income being from advertisements, donations.(i suppose you could look at ideas from Eris to try enforce copyright and try force payments) So basically the authors have confidence in being paid for their job because the part of the group they trust has enough power to ensure confidence.

    Note that the 'group' approach might still use timestamping, and expose an API so in the future, if a more general publishing DAO is invented, the content can be incorporated into it automatically.
  • AnewDesignAnewDesign Member Posts: 2
    Hello Jaspar! Thank you very much for your reply. I didn't fully understand it and so I asked a friend who is more technical than I to help me with your suggestion. His response was as follows:

    "This bit of his message seems to offer a potentially useful suggestion but it is inherently flawed - he suggests using a checksum (an algorithm which generates a uniquely identifying piece of data from a file - in this case, it could be the document where an idea lives - it is essentially used as a way of detecting if a file has been changed since it was created, when downloading software for instance, once should verify the checksum or risk downloading a virus)

    The flaw is that while it provides a way to identify an idea, it doesn't help you find the derivations a few generations down the line."

    This was why I was interested in the block chain as it might provide a tool for following the derivations as the idea progressed to a winning idea. Then we could look back at the block chain to see who had satisfied which rules for the idea to progress and assign the idea owner with value for their input. Does that make sense at all?
    Thank you for your help!
  • JasperJasper Eindhoven, the NetherlandsMember Posts: 514 ✭✭✭
    The flaw is that while it provides a way to identify an idea, it doesn't help you find the derivations a few generations down the line."
    Yeah, the checksums just does the timestamping. Dunno how he got otherwise from that text..
Sign In or Register to comment.