Amend Proposal

[DSB-117]

This is an amendment to PR #591

Primarily includes changes to the 2nd milestone;
Changes to the payment address & requested currency.
The DEV protocol & approach was replaced & more powerfully realized using IP Licenses & IP Tokens.

[Noc2]

Thanks for the amendment. However, it looks like you removed the estimated duration completely. Could add this again with an updated estimate? It’s a key requirement of our grant program.

[DSB-117]

My apologies. Both milestones under the grant are technically completed, so I wasn't sure how to go about that.
I included the number of real working hours that were approximately spent on each (since I figure that's the KPI metric of interest).

[Noc2]

Thanks for the update. I’m happy to mark it as ready for review and I personally would be willing to accept the changes to the first milestone.

However, the second milestone changed quite significantly. It no longer contains the UI, the DAO or the worklog pallet. Why did you remove these? Also something to be aware of, we usually don’t support the deployment of a specific implementation, since this isn’t helpful for others.

[DSB-117]

@Noc2, I have to get to bed now because I actually have 2 back-to-back meetings with Parity in a few hours, but I'll be happy to expand in further detail & then get your full feedback with our explanation in mind. I'd be happy to look into adjustments after if you still feel the same.

In short, and until I have a moment to come back to this wide awake, the objective of what to achieve remained the same; however, after feedback, reflection, & adaption, realized this goal much more effectively & powerfully than what was originally proposed. I would argue that the former was quite application-specific (1-2 chains could incorporate before creating redundant use/spread of resources for its services), whereas now we have something that is able to transfigure and serve many more chains while also providing niche possibilities.

[DSB-117]

The DAO & worklog pallets were designed in a way that predefined the structures in which IP could be collaborated. The anatomy of IP assets under this amendment proposal provides a composable framework for defining new digital assets in the runtime of a Substrate chain, while now also including enhanced components & functions that allow them to be transported & utilized in even more ways that in the originally accepted version of this grant. Our team has checked & verified that IP Sets & IP Files under the INV4 protocol are the most composable non-fungible assets built using Rust in the entire Substate ecosystem. is certain IP Licenses realizes both multi-layer governance & version-control flexibility for digital assets and our updated IP Tokens conclude these improvements with the most advanced & composable organizational structure for fungible tokens in the tech stack, making things such as Scalable Incentivized Proof of Attendance (SIPA) protocols deployable for various needs.

By plugging INV4 assets into their Substrate chain, protocols are able to provide a plethora of flexible functionality for developers to build new applications that are fundamentally different that anything seen before. Different SIPA economic structures (which are customizable & vary among different dApps for their specific use-cases) can have the potential to provide discrimation-resistant business models, transparent promotional pathways, and even energized incentives that increase & decrease to scale with the rate of one's of participation. While we haven't released it yet, we've developed a Git client that integrates native Git support for INV4 assets on local computers; the ability to use Git to manage & interact with IP Assets. That's how composable they are.

There was a moment when Gavin Wood determined that one of the most empowering things Polkadot could achieve for future protocols to providing an environment where the least amount of logic is predefined & controlled as possible; instead leaving this for future projects on the network. Inspired by this approach, INV4 assets are designed in the same spirit; INV4 realizes new digital assets & even enhanced on-chain functionality, but at a lower-level are designed so that they are powerful in various & unconnected use-cases for dApps. As a result (and we've been validated on this by other members of the community & the Web3 Foundation - Parity ecosystem), INV4 realizes much more possibilities for many more developers on many different chains built for many unique purposes.

[DSB-117]

@Noc2 At a high-level, the focus of the grant was & is to provide Substrate developers with a framework for defining & managing intellectual property as abstract digital assets, and to do so in a way that allows individuals to elaborately collaborate on these using flexible social frameworks. We have achieved this; however, at a lower-level we have achieved so much more. Substrate developers will be able to provide developers the ability to organize abstract data types & non-fungible assets more freely than in any other ecosystem today.

I understand that you don't support the deployment of a specific implementation, so if you would suggest it not be included I will strike it from the proposal. We felt that a custom UI would only be good for a specific deployment or maybe to showcase a single implementation to end-users, so we thought that committing to providing a testnet where developers can experiment & gain more advanced exposure would be better since they would be the initial adopters of these Pallets.

I understand that the second milestone changed quite significantly, although not it's higher-level objectives. It's my understanding that significant changes to approved grants are the precursor for an amendment to be proposed, compared to slight adjustments which don't require such steps. If you believe the change is too drastic then I'll have to respect that of course, but I just ask that anyone who was interested in the DEV structure please understand it is substantially less powerful and more restrictive than what we have developed now & we are not willing to continue that pathway.

[Noc2]

Thanks for the detailed reply. We are always willing to adapt the original application as long as it’s reasonable. My suggestion would be to remove the “Brainstorm Testnet”, since we usually don’t try to support the deployment of specific testnets via web3 grants and focus on the open source software development, which is useful for everyone (web3 needs to be neutral). If you remove it, you can maybe either reduce the price a little bit more or add the UI again.

[DSB-117]

@Noc2 I understand, I've gone ahead & removed the Brainstorm Testnet as the final technical deliverable. Rather than adding the previous UI milestone, I've replaced it with our INV4-Git middleware. While not your typical end-user interface, this will allow developers to use their computer's command-line interface for managing INV4 assets using the standard git CLI commands transparently.

In a nutshell, INV4 assets are the files, folders, and licenses of web2 fused with the non-fungible & fungible token technologies of web3. INV4-Git is a tool that's used to manage versions of IP Sets & File edits that are then transferred to Root IP Sets on the InvArch blockchain (or any other Substrate-based chain that incorporates the INV4 Frame in their runtime).

[DSB-117]

Regarding the costs (if that is still a point that you believe some would be on the fence about), I personally wouldn't have an issue lowering the amount; but I honestly believe that our team, specifically our engineers, earned it. They worked very hard to produce a valuable new toolbox for developers to tinker with & create solutions/services that bring quantifiable value to web3.

[Noc2]

Thanks for the update. I’m happy to go ahead with it.