I see quite some proposals here that suggest a VPN like solution or similar services.
At the same time the only solution to monetize this in a way so that HOPR and HOPR holders profit was one where the service is paid for in HOPR. For me this has a very inconvenient feeling “pay for my service but please buy HOPR to pay me”, this does not feel forward looking.
A possible solution that I can think of for this, would be to offer some sort of staking contract later on, that gives an allowance to the holder to use HOPR services. For example if you stake 10000 HOPR you can use 1GB of data traffic/volume within the HOPR VPN per month. If you need more volume every month, you need to buy and stake more HOPR. This would give people an operational reason to hold/buy HOPR and at the same time the opportunity to participate in the DAO decisions because they could still vote etc.
I know this is not a technical dApp suggestion here but it could underly many suggestions that already have been brought forward. Also I do not know if this is technically possible or feasible as I do not possess the skills to assess this.
I would be very interested to gather some feedback if this is possible or makes no sense at all in the long run.
Look like nobody interested in your proposal. I will think it is a good idea, as far as we have whales from the very beginning.
Hi. Thanks for the proposal. I’ve marked it as invalid, because as you say this isn’t really in line with the topic.
The tech team will be able to correct me on this, but I believe what you’re describing is simply how HOPR will work? The more HOPR in your node, the more data you’re able to send, and also the more likely you are to be chosen as a relayer (on average, and not if people are using certain bespoke relaying strategies, but I think in reality this is how it will pan out)
Interesting suggestions, you have my support.
Maybe I wrote it poorly but I do not assume that every person wants to run a node. I do not foresee the broad population to use a service like HOPR in the beginning and of that part even less will want to run a node.
This would be the idea for people that want to pay for our product but not want to run a node, i.e. a person that now buys nord vpn with a subscription but should buy and hold hopr in the future to gain access to the service without being part of the infrastructure that the node network represents.
does it make more sense now?
I think I understand, but then how would you access the HOPR network securely without running a node? I agree (and it’s part of our mission) that not everyone needs to know they’re running a node or understand how it works, but that’s different from not running a node at all.
If User A outsources the node-running role entirely to Service B, how does the data get from A to B safely?
Perhaps @bot can give some feedback and help explain if I’m off base with this. Because thinking about it I guess this applies to any VPS node.
I think the lack of precise implementation details or something specific to build still means that this is an invalid DAO proposal for this topic, but it would be good to discuss this more.
I see, now I understand your point actually.
In this case I think it would need to be discussed how this barrier to entry of running a node to access the HOPR services/network can be lowered.
As I see this as a big point for getting users to onboard and use the HOPR network if they can only do so, if they run a node. Imagine how many people would use the ethereum network if they needed to run their own eth node.
I cant offer a precise implementation or suggestion but I would then actually say solving the problem of how can person A get data securely into the HOPR network without being a part of it via running a node would need to be solved.
Thanks for comments, now I can understand the limitations of the network better.