[DIS]关于增加Nervos 空间使用权激励方式的提案---Proposal to Increase Nervos Space Access Incentive Options

Proposal to Increase Nervos Space Access Incentive Options

Currently, the Nervos network does not have a space leasing option on the ground floor, and the Foundation’s proposals are all based on direct subsidization of CKBs. This leads to the following problems:

1) Difficulties with the business model . In the case of .bit, for example, each domain name requires a pledge of 202 CKBs, and a new application requires $5 plus the market rate fee of 202 CKBs. This uncertainty is often confusing to newbies. If, on the other hand, the CKB price goes up to $0.10, a single domain would require an initial fee of $25.20. Tying any application on the ecosystem to a fluctuating price creates cost volatility and makes business model design difficult. In addition, this asset-heavy model makes it difficult to design a developer’s budget and increases the cost of risk.

2) Constrain the chainless experience of users . Whether it’s .bit, joyid or the secret treasure team, all of them focus on a web3 low-threshold experience, so that ordinary customers do not feel the existence of the chain. However, due to the Nervos space occupation problem, someone always has to pay for a CKB to the end-user’s account, but when the end-user wants to quit the business, it’s hard to deal with these CKBs appropriately, and if the CKB price goes to $0.05 or more, it will be a very troublesome problem.

3) Inefficiency of incentives . If projects are given broad CKB subsidies, waste and fraud can be significant. If projects are not given broad subsidies, it is hard to incentivize new developers to try.

Therefore, I propose that the Foundation increase the incentives for Nervos space access by providing users with Nervos space access for a certain period of time in the form of a full subsidy or partial subsidy.

Of course, this requires increased technical support for the underlying Nervos network. However, there is always a need to show the core development team that there is a need for this and a consensus in the community.

If the proposal is achievable, then the Foundation could offer a trial suite for developers in the same way that cloud providers offer a free trial cloud. the cost of using Nervos network storage space, too, becomes cheaper and more predictable.

关于增加Nervos 空间使用权激励方式的提案


1 )商业模式的困难 。以.bit为例,每个域名需要202个CKB质押,新申请的域名则需要5美元外加202个CKB的市价费用。这种不确定性往往令新手感到困惑。如果,CKB价格涨到0.1美元,则单个域名需要25.2美元的初始费用。将生态上的任何应用都同一个波动的价格挂钩,会造成成本的波动,令商业模式设计变得困难。此外,这种重资产的模式,还会令开发者的预算设计变得困难,增加风险成本。

2 )制约用户的无链感体验。 无论是.bit、joyid还是秘宝团队,都主打一个web3的低门槛体验,令普通客户感觉不到链的存在。但是,由于Nervos空间占用问题,总是要有人付费给终端用户的账户里面打一笔CKB。但是,当终端用户要退出这个业务时,很难妥善处理这些CKB。如果CKB价格到了0.05美元以上,这就将会是一个很麻烦的问题。

3 )激励的低效。 如果给予项目广泛的CKB补贴,浪费和欺诈会造成严重的浪费。如果不给予项目广泛的补贴,很难激励新的开发者尝试。





hello @jiangtian - appreciate your interest in pushing forth CKB adoption and I understand the problems you are highlighting.

Regarding #1, it is a possible issue, but it is still theoretical today. Leasing space does address the issue but introduces new considerations, for example:
-How would leasing affect the architecture of CKB applications?
-What would happen to users’ assets in cells when lease expires?

Regarding #2, the JoyID team is taking steps to make this more seamless for their users, I think subsidization would break the idea of privatizing state storage space (users are storing data on-chain without incurring a cost)

Regarding #3, if a user has been provisioned space for a period of time, the consideration of them losing their assets when that time expired would need to be accounted for by the application and a user would have to be educated.

Overall, while the concerns expressed in this proposal are valid and all are actionable things that could be addressed, it’s not in line with the way the CKB Community Fund DAO works.

Have you read these posts?

Looking forward to discussing more and improving the present and future state of CKB together.

1 Like

Matt, do you think the building of, or at least the research into the design of a leasing system could be something the DAO could fund?

I know it’s not a problem now, but it seems like something that could become a problem very quickly, so having the system in place in preparation seems like a good idea.

But saying that, it does feel like something the foundation should be funding, especially seeing that anyone who could possibly build this is already employed by Nervos anyway, so it’s still probably not suitable for the DAO. But I do think it is something that I think needs to be looked at sooner rather than later.

1 Like

most definitely


What is the Secrete treasure team?

1 Like


1 Like