Proposal 240 (Q92)
From Nouns Dev
A Nouns proposal.
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English | Proposal 240 |
A Nouns proposal. |
Statements
93
0 references
Nounish Dataverse, open source data
0 references
240
0 references
90
0 references
37
0 references
22 February 2023
0 references
36
Needed to get Nounders to Yes
0 references
I think this is interesting and theres a need for a central API for nounish builders to use. However, Im voting against this prop in its current form. You mention quite a few things that will be built after the infrastructure is stood up, including several untested new applications that people may or may not use. I think what would be most valuable and what this should focus on is getting all existing Noun data on ceramic and set up infrastructure to add new in real time. For example all traits and auction data. Make a system so its easy for anyone to query trait stats. Give me all Nouns with gameboy head. Or give me todays auction and all traits. Dont fuck with the other stuff right now. We are missing a good API to query all existing noun data. Focus on that first and then focus on the other stuff.
0 references
i think is to early and that data must to be mined by who need it
0 references
I second Deployers comment — this prop is trying to do too many things at once. Id simplify and focus on one specific problem to solve.
0 references
23
this prop is written in a way that feels a bit more ceramic-capabilities focused than nouns-need focused to me. I reached out to the team and it seems like they dont have meaningful business ties to ceramic besides a small grant (https://forum.ceramic.network/t/proposal-nounsid-data-and-identity-layer-for-nounsdao/560) and team members like al409 and baba (who Ive talked to regarding the prop) have been long-time community members so theres trust there, but I still ended up feeling a bit uneasy about the orientation of this prop. I also relate to deployers comments. I dont know if all the stuff here is really stuff we want / need.
0 references
This is an ambitious project - I like the idea, and the budget seems reasonable. But this sort of thing will require continuous funding, and for large (probably increasing) amounts. I cannot vote For unless there is a model for long term monetization/sustainability (perhaps partially subsidized by the DAO, but there should at least be benchmarks for weaning). It would be a very useful tool, but I fear voting yes will put the DAO on the hook - indefinitely - for several hundred ETH per year to maintain and grow the API. Thats a large expense if theres no plan for self sustainability.
0 references
Love this approach to creating a unified Nouns database using Ceramic and think the end result is that it becomes much easier for buidlers to create Nounish apps. Its especially powerful for quickly spinning up prototypes, iterating and trying things out and I dont think we can even imagine all of the new Nounish apps that can be built when accessing the data across many apps and action is so easy. I also believe in this team and their ability to coordinate, communicate and work across the Nouns community.
0 references
Full reasoning on my newsletter: https://cbites.substack.com/p/active-governance-noun-582-3
0 references
IMO, its important to set up good data-structures and standards for an exponentially growing number of data-points in the Nouns ecosystem. Then, we can solicit buy-in from highly leveraged apps and start to connect data in ways we cant even imagine yet.
0 references
Nounish dataverse
0 references
22 February 2023
0 references
love the team & applications, im not sure if the best path forward would be the immediate integration of all applications together or the development of the best ones as singular endeavors. i also share some of the concerns made by other nouners. not a clear hell yes and not a clear no. decided to abstain.
0 references
Our principle is to only vote against currently :) The rule is that for each proposal we will conduct an Squad Vote.When the against votes are greater than the for votes + abstain votes, we will choose to vote against on-chain; otherwise we will abstain. Squad Vote result: Approval:Opposition:Abstention = 16:5:3. The proposal was approved by all of us to provide an open database for the Nounish ecosystem. NounsDAO will benefit greatly from it. It will enhance the overall daotool development of the Nounish ecosystem. We support the team in exploring the path of data composability for Nounish. Infrastructure exploration is highly risky and uncertain. It is harder than imagined. But the team has a good track record to prove that they have a deep understanding and patience for it. Our opposition mainly comes from: 1. Is it too early to do it now? Nounish Dataverse may be like Web3 Social projects, unable to find Builders to develop products/tools that everyone needs, infrastructure but running applications that no one uses on top. There is no information indicating that applications currently in demand (Prop House, Nouns Agora, House of Nouns, Nouns.Build, Dune Dashboard..) would consider using Ceramic as their data backend. It is much more difficult for applications to be demanded than to do underlying infrastructure. Holding a Prop House Round as mentioned in the proposal does not solve this problem. 2. The proposal delivers too much content The Nounish Dataverse proposal promises a decentralized database based on Ceramic, developer documentation, ID system integration application… A single proposal combines too many things to do. We recognize 30% of what’s in the proposal but 70% is over-committed.
0 references
i like the builders on this team and would happily vote for them to build helpful tech for the DAO. i dont think the proposal in this current form moves the DAO forward. there is an expensive tax to build an architecture of this magnitude into production, and the tax is on all of the individual data stores to expose their off-chain data to the consumers of this index. anything on-chain is already composable. centralized data stores such as discourse already have APIs that can be consumed (https://docs.discourse.org). i think distracting builders with this tax right now is -EV, and some might not have the bandwidth to pull it off at all, leaving us with just adding an API on top of data sources that already have APIs whether in the form of HTTP or RPC-JSON on-chain calls. i think we have much bigger problems to tackle and this isnt a blocker for client developers as of today. id love to fund this team to work on something else.
0 references
Vote threshold not met. **FOR - 27 VOTES** **nonodynamo** | *I think data analysis is important to understand what worked and what did not.* **Pizza 🍕** | *solid value prop* **Josep** | *I think the ask is too high, a reduction on the payment per month. A 40% reduction on the ask would be great.* **NO - 16 VOTES** **ABSTAIN - 2 VOTES**
0 references
117
0 references
6
0 references
3
0 references
117
0 references
63
0 references
Nounish Dataverse is an open-source project aimed at aggregating and organizing data from various applications, making it accessible through a decentralized database and a GraphQL API. The goal is to enhance d ata usability and control in the Nouniverse using Ceramic and decentralized identifiers (DIDs). The platform will address issues like universal identity, data fragmentation, and data availability.
0 references
1. Is the maintenance of the product in the future based on Ceramic automation or will additional development be required for continuous maintenance? -2. Will there be any further development required in the future, and are there any anticipated expenses associated with it?
1. The maintenance of the product for a year includes keeping the API up and the data being imported up to date. Further development would involve adding data models for new apps to the GraphQL API, which is not a big effort. The team will write documentation on how to do that and work with builders as needed to serve their data.-2. There may be further development required in the future, but it is not expected to be a significant effort. The team will collaborate with builders to ensure meaningful adoption within the first year. Any additional expenses are not explicitly mentioned in the conversation.
0 references
also is this an API being built on top of composedb? and if so are you giving me anything there that composedb doesn't give me?--or do you plan to host a node and then write an ETL pipeline to agg data from a couple selected apps
The platform being built on ComposeDB will allow you to run your own node, configuring it to serve your data plus any of the data that will be imported. There will be a service importing data from the sources mentioned in the proposal, but once they're imported into Ceramic, any node can serve them too. The goal is to offer a platform that apps could use, where their data connects with the data from other applications, is owned by the user (when user-generated), and is easier to set up than managing your own database for new apps.
0 references
Also would be interested in what nounish devs think the value add is here….is this something that needs solved? I’m sure this is over the heads of many a noun --Don’t want to tag all the devs 😅
The platform being built on Ceramic network and ComposeDB will provide a graph of existing data that can be easily queried, and developers can add their own data modeled with relationships to the existing data. The team will run a server that indexes and serves the data, guaranteeing reasonable performance. The data network is designed to make it easier for developers to jumpstart an app, similar to a Firebase service. Maintenance of the product in the future may require additional development for continuous maintenance, and there could be further development required and associated expenses. However, once the data is imported into Ceramic, any node can serve them too, providing flexibility and scalability.
0 references
and sorry what's the main leverage there? Just that at the end of the data it's on IPFS and can be resurrected/accessed even if we stop running the node?
The main leverage of using Ceramic is that at the end of the data, it's on IPFS and can be resurrected/accessed even if you stop running the node. Additionally, Ceramic provides several core capabilities not available with a centralized database, such as portable self-sovereign identity, shared data schemas and definitions, interoperable user and application data storage, open web services without new accounts or logins, and a decentralized event streaming protocol.
0 references
are voters not asking their questions here in hopes the team can get on a call?
Voters are not necessarily avoiding asking questions in the channel. Some people prefer async discussion, while others prefer more Q&A style. The goal is to get more dialogue going overall for on-chain proposals, which can benefit the DAO longer-term.
0 references
Cool, and meeting location is voice-public, or is it a channel exclusive to Nouners? We’ll try to arrive 5:30pm, even with conflict, but wanted to provide a disclaimer that we might be delayed.
The meeting location is in the voice-public channel, which is token gated to voters. The team will be added to let them field questions during the call.
0 references
Have the Nounders given any feedback yet? Absent them voting Yes, I will be voting No by this time tomorrow, as laid out above.
Only Nounder 4156 responded, mentioning that they would reach out to another Nounder if there were any questions. No further follow-up has been heard yet.
0 references
hmm ok, I guess I just feel like these are two pretty different things: 1. Unify Nouns Data and 2. Make a product that makes it easy for builders to use Ceramic/ComposeDB?
The two things mentioned, 1. Unify Nouns Data and 2. Make a product that makes it easy for builders to use Ceramic/ComposeDB, are synergic. While they may seem different, the network gathers utility from data. You can have data without a network, but a network with no data has no utility.
0 references
I am positive on this prop and have wanted to see something like it, just think we should be focused on nounish data availability rather than a tool to let developers create their own data models? https://twitter.com/WilsonCusack/status/1613278015525474305?s=20
In the proposed scenario, data availability is achieved through the use of data models, which make the data accessible to any developer in the ecosystem. The project is inspired by the idea of creating a public good with functionality similar to Parse or Firebase, but with added capabilities. Ceramic is used as the network, with ComposeDB running atop the network, providing a decentralized and composable data network.
0 references
I'm a big fan of Ceramic, so I'm interested. What are a few really solid use cases? Is it things like hosting all of NounsAgora data on Ceramic and/or Prop House data, etc?
Some solid use cases for Ceramic include hosting data from NounsAgora, Prop House, and other subDAOs. The easiest use case is identity, collecting on-chain governance and auction data, data from Agora and HON, and data from Snapshot and various subDAOs. This would create a comprehensive profile that developers could leverage across applications for shared context and preferences. The data would be composable and come with a database out-of-the-box.
0 references
im still not sure building on a new/diff network is justified for noundry and nouner profiles (where on chain activity is sitting on eth) and i'm having trouble envisioning future applications/use-cases where other builders are choosing to leverage this network. what has been sentiment (if any) from other independent builders?--i think it might make more sense to do a smaller prop/focusing on POC and then come back for larger ask for more partnership/integration funding where there might be higher conviction or more clear use cases on what else can/will be built on top of
The sentiment from other independent builders has not been explicitly mentioned in the conversation. However, the team behind the proposal believes that having a product for users to engage with to experience the capabilities of the network is important. They are building on the Ceramic network and the ComposeDB product, aiming to provide a platform that allows easier integration and access to data from various sources. The value of the platform can only be seen by having applications built on top of it, which is why they plan to have core apps and sponsor new ideas on PropHouse. The platform aims to streamline the development process and provide more efficiency for developers.
0 references
I think this is a very technical prop && could have used a little layman's terms TL;DR: I asked Baba the following question which he said was a fairly accurate summary and he provided more technical details:...... is the current situation where if Im a developer creating a Nounish project and want to pull in multiple data sources..... for instance Nouns auctions data, Lil Nouns auction data, traits available for Nouns, prop lot info etc etc ...... that would have to be individual data pulls, which requires more code - more dev work - higher costs...... VS if this platform is created its almost like a universal hub so only one data call would have to be made??
The current situation requires developers creating a Nounish project to pull in multiple data sources individually, which requires more code, more dev work, and higher costs. The proposed platform would act as a universal hub, allowing only one data call to be made, simplifying the process for developers.
0 references
It's helpful to clarify that **Noundry** as referenced in the proposal under **Applications** is not the legacy Noundry platform as launched by 4156 and other Nounders during the 8/8 official trait update of the core Nouns protocol. --That was a bit confusing to me during my early read of this proposal.--To my knowledge, the Noundry platform that is referenced in the proposal has not launched yet, outside of an editor tool that Volky rolled out several months ago.--Can you guys provide more details on that proposed platform and the integration there?
The Noundry platform referenced in the proposal has not launched yet, outside of an editor tool that Volky rolled out several months ago. The proposed platform aims to build on the Ceramic network and the ComposeDB product, with the data backed to IPFS. The server indexes and serves the data through a GraphQL API, allowing for easier integration and data querying for developers. The value of the platform can only be seen by having applications build on top of it, which is why there will be 3 core apps and funding to sponsor new ideas on PropHouse. The platform aims to offer a solution for apps like House of Nouns and Prop Lot to use, where their data connects with the data from other applications, is owned by the user (when user-generated), and is easier to set up than managing their own database for new apps.
0 references
ok sorry I guess I am a little unclear on the details then: is this a datastore that will be sort of like a public good. There is some automated writing (like the scraping you mention) and the reading is free? Or anyone can pay to write? Why would builders choose to write to this DB? 🤔 I guess to make it available to the Nouns ecosystem?
Yes, the datastore will be like a public good, with functionality similar to Parse or Firebase with added capabilities. Developers would choose to write to this DB to make it available to the Nouns ecosystem. The owner of the data controls which applications can write on their behalf, making it permissioned. The data is owned by the users and not the applications using the models.
0 references
Thanks for the replies. But I kind of feel like we don’t have a decent front end clients yet and stuff like that so maybe building a decentralised and interoperable data layer for the 200 or so active noun holding addresses is putting the horse before the cart in a way?
The Ceramic proposal is aimed at addressing a specific problem in the Nouniverse - the fragmentation of data and the lack of a comprehensive, shared database and network. The main goal is to make it easier for app developers to access all existing Nouns data, and GraphQL is believed to be the best solution for dealing with multiple data sources. The proposal includes importing data into CeramicDB and keeping it up to date in close to real time, as well as offering a JavaScript library that makes it easier for new apps to read/write data to Ceramic. The network effects of a richer dataset that's easy to use are expected to bring more apps and improve the Nouniverse.
0 references
This would require social consensus for everyone to begin writing to Ceramic and/or someone spending considerable time indexing all of the Nounish entities and populating Ceramic with it, no?
It wouldn't require social consensus for everyone to begin writing to Ceramic, as the value of every additional developer and datapoint improves the quality of the network more than linearly. There is a developer grant within the proposal to incentivize developers to use the platform and bootstrap the network. However, it will require considerable time indexing the data, which is being done within the proposal.
0 references
thx, so is the noundry integration tied to https://studio.noundry.wtf/ ?
The Noundry integration mentioned in the question is not tied to https://studio.noundry.wtf/. The Noundry platform referenced in the proposal has not launched yet, outside of an editor tool that Volky rolled out several months ago.
0 references
well but like, do you imagine voting or? I worry about the admin overhead/effectively governance decisions made here
The main concern in the question seems to be about the admin overhead and governance decisions related to the project. In the conversation, it is mentioned that the plan is not to gatekeep and make the system as self-service as possible. They will write docs on how to model the data and work with builders as needed to serve their data. The data is owned by the users and not the applications using the models. Ceramic aggregates and decentralizes the data, which is why it was chosen for the project. As the node operator, there are hosting costs based on network usage, but not from Ceramic itself.
0 references
What does technical partnership / program management mean? --There are 2 devs building this? (Brunes and Champion score) - what is their background? Have they built something in this area before that we can see? --Integration partners - there is 6 eth a month for this but the deliverables are to integrate noundry? Can you give any more details on this.
The platform will be built on the Ceramic network and the ComposeDB product, with data backed to IPFS. The server will index and serve the data through a GraphQL API. While the platform will be designed to streamline data access and integration, there may be a need for ongoing maintenance and updates. The team plans to provide infrastructure support to make it easier for apps to get started, similar to a Firebase service. Future development and expenses may be required, but specific details have not been provided in the conversation.
0 references
would a non-Nouns builder write to our data store for any reason? Like just random data for their app?
A non-Nouns builder could theoretically write to the NounsDAO data store if they found utility in the NounsDAO data models and wanted to leverage it for their own DAO. There is some access control inherited by running the node, so permissioning could be adopted if needed to address spam or malicious actors.
0 references
Yeah like so I’m wondering how it makes sense to be funding 3 months of dev at 120 eth for a dataverse Id layer for applications that are in development or not getting much use yet. Surely we should be spending Eth building things that get traction before we even consider this?
The concern about funding 3 months of dev at 120 eth for a dataverse Id layer for applications that are in development or not getting much use yet is valid. However, the value of the platform can only be seen by having applications build on top of it. The team plans to have 3 core apps and use part of the funding to sponsor new ideas on PropHouse. The goal is to offer a platform that other apps could use, where their data connects with the data from other applications, is owned by the user (when user-generated), and is easier to set up than managing your own database for new apps. The team is open to reconsidering their approach if voters strongly support a different direction.
0 references
