Merging Blender with the Blockchain

What happens then when your hardware can’t process the blockchain anymore (due to the size and complexity)? What happens when the company sees double or triple the contributors, but no growth in revenue?

Would you be satisfied with having to constantly upgrade your machine, would you also be satisfied to fight to increase the company’s revenue so your paycheck doesn’t shrink? An artist could actually lose money if he also has to keep buying hardware (so as to not be left behind as blockchain parsing takes more and more creative time away).

I know what a blockchain is. I could program one myself, but I could also fork one of the dozens of implementations from Github and have my own shitcoin. I’m not doing that, because a blockchain by itself solves nothing. It’s all about the people using it and accepting whatever is happening on that blockchain.

The Block Chain eliminates the Lawyer, the Government (I would think this would be a libertarians dream come true), The Block Chain becomes the Government… because everyone on the block chain has evidence that So and So has ownership of this and that… it’s just as simple as that…

It’s not! The best example is Ethereum’s blockchain. Somebody wrote a buggy smart contract, people lost millions in a theft, so the developers agreed to reverse it. The people that disagreed with that forked into “Ethereum Classic”. If you look at the fact that Ethereum is trading at 600$ and Ethereum Classic is trading around 20$, that should tell you that people want human intervention. They don’t want just the code to be “the law” when push comes to shove. In the real world, if you forget to lock your door and somebody steals your TV, they don’t automatically become the new owner just because you made a mistake.

People lose significant money due to faulty Ethereum smart contracts all the time, but those smaller incidents don’t get reversed. In the end, the developers have a say in what gets to be the official blockchain, not the users. The developers essentially become “the government”. Users can emigrate to other blockchains, if they don’t like it…

any effort to ‘steal’ the ‘artwork’ or ‘copyrighted’ ‘trademarked’ ‘patented’ maternal is easily checked by looking at the block chain file to see… boom there it is… dispute solved… it has a date stamp with it and everyone has the file… so anyone who tries to forge the file would have to forge everyone’s file… a practically impossible task…

Copyright disputes generally don’t involve forgery. They’re about whether somebody has infringed or not. If somebody copies Mickey Mouse verbatim, there’s no dispute. The copyright is violated, but it still needs to be enforced (courts, government, police…). On the other hand, if somebody uses a character very similar to Mickey Mouse in satirical (and pornographic) fashion, the courts need to decide if that’s allowed.

The same goes for patent violations, plus courts need to decide whether a patent is even valid, because that’s not a given when a patent is issued.

Why is there a need for a billion dollar court case when Apple sues Samsung over a similar design? Apple was provably first to market. Would it change anything if Apple had the design registered in a blockchain? Absolutely not.

All business is done on Contracts… (again a Libertarian Ideal) and that is what Block Chain is a ‘Contracts’ platform
yes there are Block Chain Tech projects going on right now that intend to replace the ‘paper trail’ of old with Block Chain Technology that literally you will not be able to get paid for your work until you have paid your subcontractors or fulfilled some other stipulation contained in the contract…

Let me ask you, how does the blockchain decide if I fulfilled a stipulation in a work contract? If my client says the work doesn’t fit what was negotiated and refuses to pay, how can the blockchain arbitrate? In such a dispute, you need the real-world legal system involved to make anything happen.

Now granted, if all the contract is about is how virtual tokens are shifted from A to B (like in a video game), then smart contracts can work by themselves. Unfortunately, we don’t all live in virtual houses, eating virtual food, driving to our virtual job in our virtual vehicles.

Seriously? No one has bothered to research?

Quick Google:

It is not hard to fathom giving who the boards of directors are.

Can no one see how this could go horribly wrong?

It might take a while for the possible negatives of blockchain to really gain traction (because there is such a huge infatuation with them among tech people and investors right now).

To drive it home, a company that gives the mere mention of going into blockchain will see their stock value double in price or more (because it’s supposedly the best and most liberating invention from mankind since the wheel). There was even a small drink company here in the US that changed its name to “Long Blockchain” and investors couldn’t pour their money in fast enough. :eek:

I’m not sure what this has to do with the idea of a decentralized digital arts studio? I’m not ignoring the fact that those bad actors are getting involved with the blockchain. Those same actors already control the existing financial system. Those same actors already control gold/silver supplies. Nothing removes them from power until people stop playing their game, which is what this idea I’m proposing is aimed at doing.

There are many options in the cryptocurrency world that aren’t attached or infected by the moral virus carried by the globalists. Just like there are many corners of the internet that aren’t infected. Just like there are many corners of the physical world that aren’t infected. Just because there are predators that operate in any ecosystem doesn’t mean that ecosystem isn’t valuable and usable.

I have thought of a few ways things could go horribly wrong, yes. I know I have a lot of blind spots, especially in understanding the work flow of an individual project. This is why I wanted to start the conversation with a group that’s experienced where I am not to see if the idea can work outside of my own imagination…

I’d be very interested to hear where you think things are likely to go wrong.

I’m working up a more detailed business model explaining how payments could be processed and validated through the smart contracts, hopefully this clears up some of your concerns.

Each project would operate as a semi-sovereign entity on the platform, meaning the group of actual human beings creating the production would be able to determine how work was validated and accepted as well as how income rights for the full production were distributed. The blockchain and smart contract platforms are just tools, though very powerful tools, it’s always the actual human beings doing the work which create the underlying value.

During the daily work flow the workers would earn digital tokens representing the work they had performed. These tokens would grant rights to income from any sales the production produced for as long as it was sold or distributed. These tokens would also be exchangeable on an open market so anyone with interest could acquire ownership rights to a movie or series if they were offered for sale.

Nothing is preventing you from setting up a storefront and selling your assets using Bitcoin (or any existing cryptoasset). There are even a ready-made solutions for that which are plug & play. Nothing is preventing you from creating a central hub for artists and programmers to share their stuff by using cryptocurrencies.

Putting “Blender on blockchain” is simply the standard ICO spiel where the founders want a big payout on the backs of speculative gamblers. It provides no additional value outside enriching it’s founders and early adopters.

I think the ability to have no middlemen in transferring value is a great thing. But you don’t need a token for that.

99.99% in this space (ICOs) is complete useless bullshit. (excuse my language)

Also if you’re thinking this is how you avoid taxes, just don’t.

would it actually do any good to blender, or rather put blockchain stronger in place ?.
I’ dont like the idea of someone encrypting mp3 either.
There are allready enough methods and places to earn money out of 3d content.
And looking at that i really dont see anny added value to the industry.

Block chain is allready entering musicindustry, before you know it youtube be some kind of blockchain paywall, and it would hurt my naieghnor who is just singing a song in a normal pub, suddenly music has becomme even less free, suddenly singing becames crime.

People seem to have serious misunderstandings on what a blockchain is. Currently it costs about 50 BTC to put a 100 megabyte FBX “on the blockchain”. Which is currently about 460000 dollars. You’re saying that you’re willing to pay 460,000 dollar fee to put a 3D model made by a hobbyist that will sell for 5 bucks “on the blockchain”?

Blockchains are the worlds most horribly inefficient databases. It’s just in the very special cases (like censorship resistant money) where you need distributed consensus (Byzantine fault tolerance) where it’s actually applicable.

It only costs that much on the BTC blockchain, there are more efficient solutions that would have nothing to do with the btc blockchain.

There are ways to enable market driven incentives for resources or computing power, Proof of Resource consensus mechanisms using hard drive space already exist and could be used as one of the methods for this idea. Graphics power for renderings as another PoR mechanism we could use, as is bandwidth.

You judge to quickly and very inaccurately.

I’ve asked for nothing other than the time and ideas of anyone interested. I doubt an ICO is necessary for anything like this, in fact I prefer keeping as much ownership within the productive community as possible. Eliminating middlemen and gatekeepers is the name of the game in the blockchain economy. This idea I’m proposing is intended to continue this trend.

I study and use many of the projects you refer to as 99.99% bullshit professionally. My opinion of them is very different than yours, but that’s a conversation for another place. I also have no intention of this being any sort of tax evasion scheme, that thought is your own and has nothing to do with this conversation.

To try and make the idea a bit less abstract I’ll try to describe how the platform could function. We’ll break the finished video down into three sections;

1 - Story creation (Character development, settings, dialogue, etc.)
2 - Animation (3d object creation, sculpting, texturing, rigging, lighting, movement, etc.)
3 - Audio (music selection, editing, character vocals, etc.)

To make things as simple as possible I’m going to use an animated music video as an example for now.

A band tastefully named the Periwinkle Snozzberries have a song they are very proud of that they wish turn into an animated music video. They (PS) represent the audio portion of the process. They hire Jane Doe to come up with a story line based on some inspirations behind their song. They hire John Doe to do all of the modeling and animation.

Since there are 5 band members who wish to equally share the audio portion of earnings, they create five tokens in the Audio section of the Project platform. These five tokens have equal rights to 33% of the Artists income from all sales or earnings from the video.

Jane Doe decides she may want to sell a portion of her Project tokens in the future if the video is a success, so she creates 1,000 project tokens which have rights to 33% of the Artists income from all sales or earnings.

John Doe has no intention of selling his Project tokens, he creates 1 Project Token for the animation work he is responsible for. His 1 token represents rights to the 33% of Artist income he gains through his work.

Since the band members are the creators of this particular piece their account is granted Director rights and responsibilities which makes them responsible for approving and accepting the work of John and Jane. They create one Project token for each band member, these 5 tokens receive 1% of Artists income for all video earnings. Once they are happy with the finished product, they approve the video and audio submittals and the project tokens are released to all three parties.

Once the video was finished it would generate a smart contract for peer to peer sales on the blockchain platform, another smart contract deploys to receive income from the youtube red channel the video is published on, and a 3rd smart contract which received sales from advertisers on the Viuly blockchain where it was also published. After the artists work was complete and processed back onto the main chain for publication they have no other work, except managing their account to access or move their income. Income could be converted to whichever digital or fiat currency they wish, so long as it was readily available for exchange.

These smart contracts are set to distribute all earnings on a daily basis. Artists would earn 80% of total sales, distributed as described above. Blockchain miners would earn 15% of sales for the computer resources provided (video rendering, hard drive space, processing power, smart contract management, bandwidth, etc.). The platforms marketing department would earn the last 5% which they used to promote the platform services and content.

This is a very simplified example of the process and how the distribution of sales would work, but it should be enough to give an example of how the internal structure of the blockchain looks.

bottom line, I’m against it.
@ambi: only curious…aber bist du Deutsch?..your previous post stated ‘ico spiel’, I assumed you meant ‘game’…anyway…not important, just curious.

only thing I would throw in to the mix that BPR has layed out is a KickStarter where tokens are sold to help fund the project…
the tokes could either have a permanent profit option or a temporary profit option that last only a certain length of time or a immediate buy out option as soon as the video has raised enough money to payback all the KickStarter backers…

I’m not sure what this has to do with the idea of a decentralized digital arts studio? I’m not ignoring the fact that those bad actors are getting involved with the blockchain. Those same actors already control the existing financial system. Those same actors already control gold/silver supplies. Nothing removes them from power until people stop playing their game, which is what this idea I’m proposing is aimed at doing.

I for one can see that… I have set up business in times past and had to mess with Venture Capitalist and Investors… there are legitimate reason to allow some one with monetary resources ‘invest’ in your business and get you up and rolling faster than you could on your own… but all to often these investors only want their ROI and they honestly could care less about the real potential of the business…

Blender it’s self has some experience with this…
see this Blender Guru interview with Tonn for more info…


BeerBaron wish I had time to argue facts with you but I don’t…
BeerBaron meet my ignore list…

What happens then when your hardware can’t process the blockchain anymore (due to the size and complexity)? What happens when the company sees double or triple the contributors, but no growth in revenue?

can you give me an example of when this imaginary scenario has happened before?

for the blockchain agreements that BPR is proposing above each BlockChain file is unique to the job set out at hand so the file sizes would remain small… compared to like Bitcoin or Etherium files…

one of the differences in a Bit Coin and Etherium in fact is the difference in the handling of the file size issues… So it’s well within reason to expect that file sizes will go down as Block Chain Tech advances…

Plus…
If there is no growth in revenue who would want to invest?

Plus…
When I company has no lots of investment money but on growth in Revenue they file for Bankrupcy…
That’s what happens in the no-Block-chain system now…
So I’m not seeing the point in your above argument…
we already have Bankruptcy as it is…

With a Kickstarter Campaign no money gets taken out of anybodies pocket until the necessary money is raised to fully accomplish the Kickstarter… which is way better than investing in a penny stock where your money goes in first then everyone prays the stock goes up…

With Block Chain the contract can be written the same way… no money goes out until the project is fully funded…
then once that happens the money goes out the product or production gets made… then everyone gets a copy of the product or production and any shares of profits made after that…

there effectively is no ‘dry period’ of revenues… the start-up cost is covered… just like kickstarter…

Seriously? No one has bothered to research?
Quick Google:
https://steemit.com/endthefed/@ronma…obalists-plans
It is not hard to fathom giving who the boards of directors are.

How about this research?