Interesting. I am making bullet points here, please answer bulleted questions.
-
@Thyborg will you be leaving informal systems?
-
Will there be overlap between people working on hydro and people working at informal systems? I am asking if anyone will work for both orgs.
The Informal Hub team in 2024 consisted of 14 people, split between Forge, Hydro and Hub maintenance. For 2025, we believe it is possible to achieve our Hydro objectives with a reduced team of 6 Full-Time Equivalent staff: 1 Project Lead, 1 Technical Lead, 1 Product Lead, 2 Developers & 1 Growth Lead. We will use the same per-head total rate averages of $325K per year, which includes approximately $225K in salary (and relevant overhead such as employer taxes and benefits) and a standard margin to pay for operational expenses like legal, HR, finance as well as some profit buffer for the company. Like last year, these rates are aligned with the mid-point of market software development rates ($110-$220/hour)
Again I want to ask for clarification. My understanding is that you work at informal systems. You made this governance proposal.
The governance proposal details The creation of a new entity. I would like to know with written certainty, who will be working on hydro from informal, and whether or not they will work at informal systems concurrent to hydro.
Project leads, software engineers, anything creative, it’s a huge mistake to treat people like interchangeable parts. They simply are not. So I wish to not treat people as interchangeable parts, and learn who you’re referencing when you say:
6 Full-Time Equivalent staff: 1 Project Lead, 1 Technical Lead, 1 Product Lead, 2 Developers & 1 Growth Lead
This really isn’t clear to me.
Also, The community is evaluating this for investment and what you have done here is you have given very generic figures. I believe strongly that it matters greatly who is on that team and what roles they will fill. I also want to know how you feel that hydro will self-perpetuate.
-
Who is on the team?
-
How does this team stay funded? You’re asking for $1m for a six person team, which will have an annual cost on salaries alone of $1.8m
I would love to ask @Trix for his input as well.
overall, it seems that this is the hub funding the creation of a product team that could have different objectives than skip.
I think the community has pretty wide consensus that the consolidation was a good thing.
I don’t know why we would kick off a governance initiative to create a ~6 month runway for a new company.
- @Thyborg do you intend to raise money?
why would anyone build on top of code that is known to be authored by the world’s most prolific cryptocurrency theft organization?
This makes no sense to me at all.
I think that until that code is removed, there is no chance that the Cosmos Hub will enjoy the economic performance that it deserves. Every single rational investor would look at the numerous enormous hacks pulled off by North Korea and say oh gosh oh gosh I’m going to step back a bit now.
Even those investors who might put in let’s say $10, but might toss in $100 if that was gone.
Here’s a tweet about Lazarus
Skip got on cito show said LSM will be removed
Perfect.
I don’t think I support funding Hydro. But most of the issues have been eliminated.
skip just confirmed that LSM removal is done in prototype form
All good guys. Really my concern was about the North Korean code. I don’t think that I support funding Hydro but look this is good enough. There’s no reason for me to support veto here or anything like that.