Burn-Drop is a tokenomics design where IOTX is burned/dropped for every new device registered to the IoTeX Network, such as Ucam and Pebble.
Burn-Drop directly rewards long-term stakers, reduces the total supply of IOTX over time, and provides funding + network incentives to onboard new “Powered by IoTeX” devices.
By the Numbers:
1 Billion IOTX (10% of total supply) will be burned/dropped as we onboard 1 million devices
900M IOTX will be burned and 100M IOTX will be dropped to long-term stakers (91 days or more)
Should a phone that has geo-location enabled, through IoTeX, be added to the total count of devices onboarded onto IoTeX?
Yes
No
I need more info to decide
0voters
After you answer this poll, please leave your thoughts on this topic.
If you are interested in DePIN you can learn more about the latest developments in the sector and compare projects by visiting DePINscan. DePINscan powered by W3bstream and IoTeX is designed to empower intelligent investors in the DePIN sector.
Your burn-drop statistics are not accurate. It is no longer a 900M burn and 100M drop, please update.
Larry previously said all ‘meta-pebbles’ would count as burn drop eligible devices. This sounds similar. You are activating some geo-location feature through IoTeX with the potential to share and monetize this data. This is therefore factually a burn drop eligible device imo.
While we are on the topic I will ask you a question: Do you think it is fair to ultra longterm stakers who locked up prior to burn-drop tokenomics to be disadvantaged by the design of burn drop? I am talking about the requirement for stake-lock. Please remove the requirement for stake–lock and instead make the criteria 91 days of stake duration remaining. If you showed the conviction to stake for 3 years you should not be trapped into that 3 year lock in order to be eligible for burn drop rewards. You should be eligible for burn drop as long as there are > 91 days of stake duration remaining on the bucket. If you care about your OG community members please fix this.
Thanks for raising these issues. I’ll work to get accurate info re: burn-drop stats. This original post is meant to spur a definitive ruling on what a qualifying device is and yes, we should probably revisit the stake-lock requirement.
See Larry’s August 2022 proposal under Governance Proposals. This was the latest update to burn-drop tokenomics.
Thank you so much, it is nice to finally be heard on the stake-lock issue by a member of the IoTeX team. Several delegates (everyone I have talked to) agrees with me on this issue. Burn-drop is meant to reward longterm stakers, so please do so without putting your extra longterm stakers at a disadvantage.
Is it actually registering as an Iotex appliance? It is an Iotex app (ioPay), yes one would think it would count. If Iotex is benefiting in some way by geolocation being enabled.
Maybe an alternative should be provided for those with stakelock on, if people fully understand the term of having stakelock on and still continue with stakelock on, they deserve to be rewarded.
Yes but there should be some regular contribution to data coming into webstream otherwise its just a bunch of fake numbers… a little bit like how many wallets we have and how many are actually active or hold iotex. Any data contribution would probably need to be incentivized for it to be a sustainable flow but who wants to pay for our geodata? Ultimately this is where we have a big chasm to leap over - getting enough attractive data and finding someone that wants to pay for it… but as far as phone as a device yes… metapebble was i believe supposed to be an NFT that enabled certain permissions on mobile to send data so whats the difference if permission can be obtained by NFT or an in wallet app/ protocol? I think in order to count as device thiugh it should provide daily data. Sorry for the ramble.
Let’s you and I agree that we’re thinking out loud and not rambling. That’s a fair concern that a more meaningful thing to count would be data. And yes, there needs to be a market for geo-data. What size or type of data sets will be attractive to buyers?
But the scope of the question is devices on network. So it looks like the sentiment, so far, is in favor of counting IoTeX connected devices towards the burn-drop count. Thanks for the… thinking out loud.
Only question I have is once geo tracking is turned on and counted towards devices/burn drop what happens if it’s turned off? Can’t take back the burn drop after it’s been dropped lol. How much will this affect the float of iotx?
For any devices that gets
turned off (breakage, disinterest, etc.)one possible solution is to not burn drop until the total number of connected and monitizable data streaming devices goes up. Bonus rewards should only be rewarded when there is an actual bonus achieved.
Ok so lets take this thinking outloud a step further, because kenneth raises a good point about switching device on and then off and will that device still count, and it kind of comes back to my thought on making a data flow sustainable or making it sticky, worth it to keep coming back…and i got to thinking if we have normal staking of iotex why cant we create a concept of data staking? As in you commit to a smart contract that stipulates that you contribute certain amounts or types of data on a daily/hourly/weekly basis through your mobile in order to receive a monthly data staking reward…
Maybe the contract is given permission to harvest the data automatically.
It would mean the count is constantly changing so maybe once that DID is registered the first time it cant contribute to another burn. So we could have a count for deployments that trigger burn drop and a count for active device data (stakers/harvesters/farmers) not sure which term best describes function… ok those are my thoughts for today
Now that’s an interesting idea! Splitting the actions we want to incentivize: one for registering and the other the ‘flow’ of data. That 2nd one could get complicated and would vary by the kind of data being captured.
IMO, it would work exactly as it is for Ucams: burn/drop is triggered as a consequence of a new device identity registered on the IoTeX blockchain, regardless of any data sent or not sent - that depends on the specific use case. So if I enable trusted geolocation on my phone, the first time it would register it’s identity to IoTeX, which triggers the burn-drop. Then I can disable/enable the use of the feature, but still, my device has been registered so the burn-drop was due.
Rewards for contributing data should come from dapps using the data, while burn-drop is just a catalyst for more devices to get on-chain and be ready to join dapps.
Not sure its that unique streamr have a data union concept where data is pooled and sold i think we (iotex) have entertained the concept previously with swash.
Thanks for putting together this thread which covers an important topic - how to shape the burndrop (an IoTeX-specific token-economic design, ama IoTeX’s EIP-1559) in a way that captures the growth of real-world-web3 and MachineFi use cases. To me, burning merely on the number of devices is not enough, one additional set of metrics that indicates the activeness of devices onchain is important, e.g., the amount and frequency of data flow through w3bstream (which is pending on the devnet/testnet/mainnet launch of w3bstream for sure). In the meanwhile, I voted yes on @marcosd’s poposal.
If you are interested in DePIN you can learn more about the latest developments in the sector and compare projects by visiting DePINscan. DePINscan powered by W3bstream and IoTeX is designed to empower intelligent investors in the DePIN sector.
Can we add metapebble nft to be distributed to all applicable devices as well? Unless you guys have a different plan for it. If we can attract nft artists to make IoTeX their new home, that would be awesome. Especially those who are into real world graffiti, art exhibition etc.
That’s a fair concern that a more meaningful thing to count would be data. And yes, there needs to be a market for geo-data. What size or type of data sets will be attractive to buyers?