LIMIT CORETIME BIDDING AND SALES TO THOSE WHO ACTUALLY DEPLOY ON POLKADOT?
How i understood cheap coretime is actually a desired and important feature for making Pokadot attractive for builders. As such it should not be possible for coretime to be used by traders who only try to make personal profits even if this damages the ecosystem. As such I want to propose a change where coretime bidding can only be done by those who are actually deploying on Polkadot with either full parachains or at least some active smart contract. And to prevent further price-speculation, these bidders can at a maximum buy double the amount of coretime they actually managed to use based on their previous month usage. This just in case they expect a big increase in user adoption for the next month.
Coretime should not be used for financial speculation or traders profit. Since reliable, cheap, and abundantly available coretime is the most crucial feature for attracting builders to deploy on Polkadot. Uncertainty about coretime availability and/or pricing is a huge danger to the entire ecosystem and should never be possible to exist.
Terrible suggestion.
There is no such thing as a guaranteed cheap resource. Resources are always going to behave according to supply and demand.
By trying to add extra steps you’re just making it harder for new customers to onboard and buy Coretime.
Also this doesn’t prevent anything, because the buyer would’ve just created a rollup to bypass your constraint.
I for one don’t think that this is a great danger to the entire ecosystem.. Actually Coretime costing more is a great sigal for Polkadot. Coretime is already a leased resource that has TTL preventing long term speculation like done on Dot or on NFTs. So this inherit behavior prevents hyper speculation.
Coretime should cost exactly how much customers are willing to pay for it, no less no more. If we want it to become cheaper we should create more Coretime, because as I understand it us artificially limited currently.
When building for 10-25years industries, reliable and stable supply of the main resource is a must be. Otherwise these big players will build somewhere else.
There is a chicken vs egg problem here: You must buy before you deploy. A griefer-speculators can always run bullshit opaque tx.
We’d expect https://github.com/polkadot-fellows/RFCs/pull/17 fixes the underlying problem, but yeah sure maybe griefer-speculators with higher risk tolerance could still grab up coretime, and then resell it higher, which sucks.
If griefer-speculators continue after RFC 17, then we know many more options:
We could require some KYC for buying more than one core, but this doesn’t stop randos buying them one-by-one. We could require some KYC for buying even one core, but this stops anonymous projects. We could’ve seperate anonymous vs KYCed prices, but this feels unfair in the anonymous stuff does really important ecosystem work.
We could limit coretime transfer to selling on-demand coretime using the on-demand system. We could limit coretime transfers to approved resellers, who’d be major projects like Mythical who buy the coretime for their own elastic scaling, and resell to others when not in use.
We could create easier treasury proposals, or some caretaker thing, that can only be spent on core time, so then if you’re a smaller project you simply ask for y coretime restricted DOTs corresponding to roughly z months. You might ask for USDT at the same time. If y were high enough, and the treasury generous enough with coretime restricted DOTs, then those parties could increase costs for the griefer-speculators.
We should first pass RFC 17, see how it handles this griefer-speculator, and then discuss further options.