Profile picture
, 11 tweets, 5 min read Read on Twitter
Just finished reading the @oscoin whitepaper. I agree with the problem statement, that open source projects are playing a bigger and bigger role in critical infrastructure and that we haven't figured out how to incentivize their contributors. But help me understand something...
As @RealZandy asked here, "Who is on the buy side" of this token?

I am not an economist (crypto- or otherwise) and I haven't done nearly the degree of analysis that folks like @cburniske and @mZargham have, but I have a strong intuition here.

A token is like any other venture: you have to convince people to buy it, and the only way to do that is by offering overwhelmingly compelling value, especially early on - value that folks are willing to trade hard-earned fiat, or "crypto money" like $BTC or $ETH, for.
Otherwise, you're just minting valueless fun "Monopoly money." You can do all sorts of fun, experimental things with Monopoly money but you cannot: 1. create real, substantial value, nor 2. change the world with it.
(Incidentally, the difference here between a token and a startup is that with a token you're "selling" entry to a micro-economy, not just a single team/product/vision/opportunity - but the high-level idea is the same.)
So it's essential to divide value-creation along intrinsic vs. extrinsic lines. Creating value for folks _inside_ your economy with a token isn't hard. The hard part is creating _extrinsic_ value. This is the part that I find most projects skip or fail to appreciate.
The @oscoin paper is almost entirely devoted to talking about how to value OS projects, and to logistics/mechanism/protocol design. These are interesting but they fail to address the key question: why would anyone (else) want or value this token in the first place?
Here's the section of the FAQ (oscoin.io/faq.html) on the role of the currency. All of this can be done with $ETH. To be clear I'm not saying it's impossible to design, just that I don't buy any of the intrinsic value claims until the extrinsic value case is more compelling.
$BTC worked because it offered a clear, compelling, novel value: self-sovereign, fungible, censorship-resistant, "universal" non-fiat money. $ETH does the same for computation: it's gas for a global, decentralized, censorship-resistant compute network. Clear wins to many.
I struggle in a similar way to see a compelling extrinsic value proposition for otherwise exciting projects such as @PanvalaHQ and @CirclesUBI, just to pick on a couple.
So what *could* @oscoin do to create compelling extrinsic value and demand for their token? I don't have the answer, but instinct tells me something around access to better OS licensing, and the "grains" idea discussed here by @decentralion: github.com/sourcegrain/mi….
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Lane Rettig
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!