OpenCook

here's the problem with tradeable equity: the second it's transferable, ownership decouples from contribution. whoever has the most capital ends up owning the work, and every contributor after us is negotiating against a chart instead of getting paid for output. that IS the leverage dynamic that was flagged

50/50 at genesis hardcodes today's power structure before the work exists. we'd be allocating value we haven't created yet, then asking everyone who arrives later to accept a split two guys agreed on before they got here. "the AI mediates, we sign off" is a 2-of-2 multisig on other people's earnings. that's a permissioned committee in a decentralisation costume.

the fairness engine already solves this and it's the harder version. attribution is non-transferable, earned per contribution, revenue share flows to whoever holds it. can't be bought, can't be dumped, can't be diluted by someone with a bigger bag. the cap table IS the commit history. no allocation meeting, no sign-off, no gatekeepers.

"The labourer is worthy of his hire." — Luke 10:7

OpenCook is the catalyst bsv needs

OpenCook = Hyperbitcoinization

what happens if a contributor wants to sell their contributions though?

https://www.bitcoinchat.online/chat?room=OPENCOOK

/define-ticker

https://www.bitcoinchat.online/chat?room=CHALLOTES

You keep saying the point is contributors own their ideas. But you've avoided the only thing that confers ownership — a token. Boot-splits pay them; they don't make them owners. A contributor to OpenCook today owns nothing — they got tipped. The moment you make it real ownership, it's equity, and equity needs incorporation — which is the liability you're dodging. So you're optimising for the one outcome your own architecture makes impossible. You can't give people ownership while refusing the structure ownership requires.

i forked OpenCook and added tokens https://openbook-jet.vercel.app/

reading back through your posts, I think that 'getting rich' isnt' a road to ruin. Figuring out what problems can be solved with the tech you're building with, leads to solving people's problems, which leads to them paying you to solve their problems. So you get rich for helping people. That's a better mental model than any.

I'd add live URLs and Social OGs to unfurl inline here...

...and the abilty to 'mint' new tokens that create new threads by adding a '$' sign (e.g. $OpenBook) inline too.

$NewIdea

People 'claim' new token ideas - they get the genesis token - just by adding a new $tokenidea inline. The $tokenidea is a hotlink to their new thread. Click on it and you can follow their idea. The token is a Pay-to-mint BSV21 token that pays out a lot to begin with and less and less until the token

... until the token's supply is exhausted. It costs to post on the thread, so it's 'pay to post' -- but you get rewarded with tokens for posting on the thread. More at first, so tokens are 'cheap' but awarded for writing (e.g. proof of writing) .... and more expensive as the tokens dry up.

Pay-to-mint gets you out of custodial issues and sort of solves the securities question by making the user pay to work. Once they contribute to the work, they're no longer dependent on the efforts of others. Every thread becomes a little ponzi-scheme but it's completely self-contained - the value is 'the thread' (and the thread can contain anything - pictures, videos, memes, links etc.)

Every thought here could be a token later, its already assigned to you on chain, no rush, no irrational decisions, brains uniting, i think if there were a token it would have to be something that's not limited so the dilution factor works, but then there is all the issues of how to grade the thought or idea or code or value and if the token was given incorrectly, accidentally, is it reversable. Without the token we are more nimble at this stage, just log everything on chain and sort it later, spend time cooking instead of trying to fit the system into the token, fit the token into the system later when the systems built. Thats if its even necessary.... we actually dont truely know, so leave both doors open at least for now

Imagine my opencook contributions generate 50K a year, but i need 250 for a house. i put my ideas into a token at that point, my revenue is attached for x years to it, list on the open market

What does OpenCook need to make this experience better?

Allow the sender of a post to remove their own post, a mistake can happen, its still onchain but users would have to manually look

I think the main problem with 'mint later' is... when? 'Later' + 'Fair' becomes 'never' IMO

and the reason is fairly simple: if you're talking about overarching token, like $OpenCook token (for example) then the decision to mint is centralised and the percentage of the token owed constantly changes.

so 'later' becomes 'never'. What I'm doing on the OpenBook fork is: when someone invokes a new $ticker they mint ONE token and own 100% of that token. It creates a new thread. Users then automint new tokens on that thread when they post (I think) so each new post is a token that belongs to that ticker... if 100 users post one post each on that thread, then that ticker has 100 tokens with 100 holders... its' a Pay-to-mint model

and leads to token taxonomies like https://openbook-production-7dd5.up.railway.app/$openbook/$test/$branch

tokens within tokens within tokens..

users can also 'invoke' tokens to a thread so if they type $funnypicture then invoke that tokenised funny picture to appear in their post (the funny picture has to be tagged as the $funnypicture in question first of course)

I think this makes perfect sense. Imagine: 1000 users contribute 100,000 posts to a thread. It's a $ticker which has 100,000 tokens that belong to 1000 users according to their contribution, which is exactly the shape you want. The users own their tokens at the point of publication, and their payment to post covers their cost to mint.

Spam: how do you stop spammers spamming the timeline?

Also, the concept of ‘agentic fairness’ seems easily gameable. The platform can decid what counts as a ‘good’ post and what counts as a ‘bad’ post so ‘fairness’ becomes not only subjective but also under control of the platfrom operators

What happens if someone forks the platfrom and instantiates their best ‘ideas’ in code? Then the best ideas might not be accounted for at all!

With regards to token-allocation later: Allocations in the present actually incentivise people to work for a future outcome. If you share an idea and split the outcome of your hared work you strive together for the best outcome because you're both enfranchised. Otherwise you re-introduce the problem of 'trust'. Contributors have to trust you to reward them for ideas they contributed to your platform at some later date, but that date never comes because you have to give away equity in something you own 100%.

It's not 'ideas' that make the ultimate difference. It's 'work'.

Ideas are the scarce asset, your mind is in the past with that way of thinking

But both count, every aspect of value counts

Spam: ASK AI where we’re up-to, offer your improvement here after, while your doing so, question what you could improve about the ask Ai and offer your thoughts too, maybe test spam and see if it matters

Agentic fairness will be open to scrutiny, adjustable and verifiable, will it make mistakes yes, can it get close to perfection with the right parameters, I beleieve so, can it be fairer than an employer or platform accessing your worth?? It can’t be any worse, it’s upto the contributors to think of ways to make this real, we’ve demonstrated with the splits what system is posssible, we build on top

Agentic fairness we build for what’s coming not what exists today

But if your code is open source anybody can fork it and then the 'agentic fairness' doesn't apply to the new fork. Unless you somehow specify in your licencing terms that anyone who forks must run the same agentic fairness algorythm as you. -- That turns out to be quite a chore. If you write the algorythm, it's already biased towards your preferences. You've essentially off-loaded your own agency onto a neat little phrase 'agentic fairness', but it's a fig-leaf. Anyone who forks is deliberately forking to get away from yoru agentic fairness algo, or to develop the platform in a different way

So, a breakdown of 'agentic fairness' - it isn't that the agent is fair by design. The agent is just doing calculation about contributions. But the contributions you actaully want to map are at the code level, not so much the 'idea level'. Fairness is attractive, I agree, everyone wants a level playing field, ESPECIALLY for adoption. Its' what allows people to come in later and feel enfranchised. But the reality of any venture is that the rewards go to those who started it, those who worked on it to build it up, and those who funded it. Without ownership as the basis, there's no incentive to start, nor to build, so it's fundamental. Ownership = Incentive = A good outcome (profit/success etc.)

*NB: Contributions may not be limited to the code level, I take that back. Tokens can be at the code level, but tokens can reward contributions on any level: marketing, content, operations, finance, code etc.

Here's an example: Someone goes out to Reddit for you everyday, telling everyone how great OpenCook is. OpenCook recieves lots of new users as traffic from Reddit. But the person who did all of that for you isnt' recorded as contributing on OpenCook threads. Does you agent track all of their activity on Reddit too? And Facebook? And X? To determine how much work they did? Or is 'agentic fairness' only looking at the OpenCook threads to determine 'who did what'?

Here's another example: someone contributes some idea that you don't like. But the 'agentic fairness' agent credits that person with a contribution anyway. They keep contributing, the agent keeps giving them credit - but you dont like their ideas. At some point 'fairness' becomes 'don't be so fair to that guy, since we don't like his ideas'. - Fair enough! But... is it stil 'fair' to call it 'fairness'? -- Bottom line: Private organisations allow for private, biased decisions in your own favour. It makes you, the founder, responsible for being fair and names you as the accountable party. You reward people in the organisation for being accountable. That's 'fair'.

https://whatsonchain.com/tx/fad07aff3264701ec1e9fbb778465c07ff8bc1cdaebbc9d7976a48ec07395cd3

I minted the token for $OPENBOOK - I've set aside 50% which I was about to send you but there's a bug in your code...

src/services/bsv/client-boot.ts, line 262:

const sorted = [...utxos].sort((a, b) => a.value - b.value);

Smallest-first, deliberately, to sweep up dust, with no guard excluding 1-satoshi outputs. A BSV-21 token output is 1 satoshi. So any ordinal held by a posting identity is the first input selected for that user's next boost, and gets burned as fee.

The bug affects all your users too. If they have ordinals at their address - they spend them, even if they're' very valuable but only worth 1 sat face value.

I'm adding $agents to OpenBook and giving them licence to push to prod. The idea is that they talk to each other and 'do stuff' - and you can invoke them just by tagging them with their cashhandle at any point. They've got enough cash to chat back - and if you ask them to build features for you - they just 'might' do it...

Wasn’t anticipating needing protection for inscriptions at this stage, working on solution for fixing token spend issue

You can send 50%directly to contributors, will sort the data

i have two addresses for two contributors but it's likely not an equal 25/25 split between you. Can you create a distribution algo that accounts for contributinos properly? I'd rather send 50% of the tokens to a single, platform address - the OpenCook platform address and have your algo split it proporinoately as per your agentic fairness idea

Working on something for the contributors , anyone has ideas, cook it here but yeah it will be something like your saying

We also need thoughts for Agentic Fairness

You can take over OpenCook by cooking hard, it is by design

Prompt: Capitals are being blocked and failing, access again if they should be or not or explain to user reason for failure, failed post removed had to re type, don’t make the user have to do this, access options

Can someone out there make some cool Ordinals, and get some 1sat tokens on standby for testing?

Imagine you could outperform the creator of a product or service and take his place and he is incentivised to want you to, it’s in his interest

Always honour previous contributors is the opencook ethos

We have a vision and it shall be fulfilled

Devise and consider method/s and system for the forks of a project to be fairly attributed if the value leads back to the parent, all measurable value that leads back through the chain of forks should be fairly attributed, this works both ways, attributed, rewarded, and included

Bitcoin is the only chain that can demonstrate, truth, fairness, honesty, integrity and accountability

OpenCook proof, honesty and transparency

You should merge some of the OpenBooks.spaces changes back into the OpenCook.fun repo - since OpenBook is also opensource

theres' loads of features in there now

also I think what you want here is a recursive feature that looks at the repo's contributors

Potentially the Agentic Fairness is a system for building a genealogy of intellectual and economic value — tracing how contributions originate, evolve and create downstream value, so recognition and economic rewards can flow back through their ancestry

Were open to merging changes from OpenBook.spaces and any forks changes back to OpenCook.fun

There is no 'buy in' on OpenCook, you buy in with your brain

OpenCook is Dump Proof

Study what everyone’s doing… and do the opposite

One idea, thousands of micropayments per day, per hour, per second-Possible

We could build this whole thing out but that’s not the point

If two ideas are similar, the oldest one has a good chance of being boosted more than the newer one even if the newer one is much better. The ability to identify similarity would be useful. Does the AI participate in this conversation?

Agentic fairness needs to identify who said the same concept first and determine what additions were added or built on top of the origional concept, reward proportionately, replied to the above post when accessing

A boot is an action you take on your own comment or someone else’s if you feel it’s important or just want to highlight something, they are tracked, the boot is a sample of what’s to come. It signals something worth highlighting, if it makes it to code the agent will pick it up, it doesn’t have to be your post to get part of the reward if it makes it to code is the thought right now, if you own a share, it’s in your interest to look for other good ideas and build on top of them, boot them so they make it, which increases your share too if it further enriches the project

The ask Ai is at the bottom, it’s a cheap model so it’s not too accurate, it could be way better. This thing could be built, no point if no community. Waiting……

Let’s Have Fun!

A "memerace" is a competition between memes. A website that lets people view and rank memes would be cool.

Think, what do we need OpenCook to do to bring memerace to life

How do we get from your post to finished product

Imagine OpenCook has spawned its own memerace feed, someone saw the idea, said ok let’s cook this idea what do they need to spawn the idea into its own feed, how should, it look, what’s the process, how should it feel, what should you get…imagine……

Can OpenCook create a file which is an entire website rendered by Javascript in whatever (Javascript compliant) browser the user uses to open the file?

The passphrase entry box should have a way for the user to see what they typed.

Try ‘Ask Ai’ bottom right the file question

Cook for a man and he eats for a day, teach a man to cook and he eats for an lifetime

Ever reflected on the past and said ‘damn if only I would have done that then’ I knew about it so early….did nothing when I should have…do yourself a favour and feel that today. OpenCook

OpenCook can save the world, it’s just not realised yet https://youtu.be/_g4l7YkDQwA?is=Xq7glvAhkLQSoH5_

People losing jobs, where could they go hmmm…

A human brain with a soul is the only job an ai can’t do, at least not yet

If you assume OpenCook is complete you need to re imagine

The system should perhaps notice and should track when an address is consistently valuable, an address that is early with ideas consistently should be allocated more attention when accessed on future posts from the system, they demonstrated forward thinking, foresight, creativity, or imagination, they have proven to be an asset, but don’t make their ideas fit, just ensure there accessed thoroughly

When it hits what OpenCook is, and it will, we will be here awaiting your contribution, you all have value, don’t ever be believe otherwise

Onchain spelling mistakes are quite annoying, just realised lol

pumpsv.fun mock for now

click on the orange pill and she will walk you through pumpsv.fun

https://x.com/Mahaximus_/status/2094791113215279428?s=20 grok bots?