SIP-XXXX: Launch of BitcoinOS (BOS) Under Sovryn Incubation

1 / 92

Jun 18

Fellow Sovryns,

I have worked on Sovryn and BabelFish and for the last few months I have been working on BOS (BitcoinOS).

We want to propose that Sovryn launch BOS - and for this purpose, we would like to present the draft that follows:

1. Overview

This proposal seeks to launch BitcoinOS (BOS) through the decentralized Bitcocracy of Sovryn. Sovryn will provide the decentralized governance required to launch as a decentralized project. In return, and to facilitate this, Sovryn’s Bitocracy will become the owner of 10% of $BOS tokens.

2. BOS: Turning Bitcoin into a Decentralized Operating System

Theoretically, building on bitcoin—the largest, most trusted chain—should be a huge opportunity. However, in practice there are two questions that call the opportunity into question:

Given Bitcoin’s limitations, is it even possible to build compelling, trust-minimised applications on Bitcoin?
Even if it is, would developers and users care, given the large number of alternatives (e.g. simply HODLing, building on and using Ethereum)?

Over the last year, the market has offered a clear answer to the second question. There has been an explosion in interest in Ordinals, Bitcoin Layer 2, Bitcoin DeFi and BTC yield. The market is hungry for a Bitcoin-native ecosystem.

Unfortunately, the answer to the first question is still mostly unchanged - Bitcoin remains extremely limited. So there is a clear gap between what users want and what Bitcoin is able to deliver.

BOS uses ZK proofs to free devs from these limitations. We are bringing to Bitcoin fast, cheap transactions, smart contracts and the ability to deploy any VM (EVM, SolanaVM, MoveVM, CosmWasm).

Team: Our team includes Bitcoin and Ethereum core devs and founders of Bitcoin’s most successful DeFi platform.

Technology: In April, we published BitSNARK & Grail, a whitepaper detailing our ability to verify ZK proofs on Bitcoin. We have since launched a devnet and will soon verify the first ZK proof on Bitcoin.

Traction: Multiple partners are gearing up to launch the first BOS rollups. We will launch with a robust ecosystem.

Timing: A huge, competitive industry of Bitcoin layer 2 projects has emerged over the last few months. They all need our platform; they all need a true Bitcoin Rollup bridge.

BOS solves a real problem, has a strong competitive moat and a clear path to revenue. Through BOS, Bitcoin will be more than just digital gold. We will help turn Bitcoin into the next great crypto ecosystem—the operating system for the decentralized world.

3. DINO Killer - Crossing the Decentralization Chasm

Sovryn is one of very few projects that have managed to achieve a high level of decentralization and decentralized governance. The crypto space is awash with DINO (decentralized in name only) projects. New projects almost inevitably start out centralized due to size and the need for rapid iteration. Projects promise that despite starting out with a high level of centralization, they will decentralize over time. In practice, this has proven easier said than done and few projects seem to be able to accomplish this. Even with the best of intentions, most projects fail to progressively decentralize and cross the chasm to decentralization.

We wish to make sure BOS does not fall into this trap. Instead of promising decentralization in the future, we want to guarantee decentralization from Day One. To accomplish this we wish to distribute the $BOS token widely and, even more importantly, have the project launched by a decentralized community.

Sovryn is one of only a handful of projects that has consistently high levels of participation from a wide range of stakeholders. This is likely due, in great part, to the unique commitment of the Sovryn community and the structural incentives of Bitocracy. We request to piggyback on Sovryn’s success. In addition to the robustness of Bitocracy, Sovryn and BOS are strategically aligned. This too has impacted our decision to approach the Sovryn Community first, with the hope that this SIP will pass.

4. Giving Life - Birthing BOS

4.1 Project Development and Launch

BOS Development: The developers of BOS will be able to focus on building and refining the technology under an OSS (open source) framework.
Network Launch: Sovryn Sorcery, Sovryn’s technical arm, will be responsible for launching the BOS network under the OSS framework established by the BOS developers, ensuring its integration with the broader Bitcoin ecosystem. This will enhance BOS decentralization.
Token Launch: Sovryn will oversee the initial distribution of $BOS tokens, establishing a fair and transparent mechanism for their allocation.

4.2 Resource Mobilization and Governance

Capital and Resources: It is anticipated that funds and resources will be required to ensure BOS’s success. BOS is requesting no funding from Sovryn. Instead, Sovryn’s exchequer will secure the necessary capital and resources, with latitude to offer BOS tokens within the framework of the token distribution attached to this SIP. These funds will not remain with Sovryn or the Sovryn Exchequer and will be directed solely for the benefit of BOS. All funds raised will be directed to, and managed through, multi-party smart contracts, ensuring that they are used solely for the development and promotion of BOS. Sovryn will not be expected to make an investment of funds in BOS.
Community Engagement: The Sovryn community will actively promote and communicate the benefits and functionalities of BOS, fostering wider adoption and engagement.
Promotion and Partnerships: The Sovryn Adoption team will spearhead promotional activities and forge strategic partnerships to enhance the market presence and usability of BOS. Additionally, Sovryn will support any efforts made by others to independently promote BOS.

4.3 Token Distribution and Stakeholder Incentives

Token Allocation to Sovryn: Sovryn will receive 10% of the initial $BOS tokens as a part of the incubation framework. These tokens will be distributed to SOV holders and stakers via the Bitocracy voting system, aligning the interests of both communities and incentivizing participation and support.
Distribution: Sovryn Bitocracy will determine the distribution of these tokens.

4.4 Oversight and Continuous Support

Node Operator Nomination: Sovryn will nominate qualified agents to act as BOS network node operators, ensuring the network is managed by individuals with a deep understanding of its technological and governance frameworks. It is anticipated that even at the beginning these will represent a minority of operators and that operator numbers will rapidly increase.

5. Supporting Documentation

5.1 Tokenomics

To be attached to this SIP will be a high-level token distribution plan. While some changes may yet occur, the 10% allocation to Sovryn will be fixed by passing of this SIP.
In order to achieve a high level of decentralization, it is anticipated that the majority of $BOS tokens will be distributed to multiple communities and projects in advance of mainnet. Sovryn exchequer will assist in this distribution.
10% of $BOS tokens will be allocated to Sovryn.
No more than 36% of tokens will be committed to sales with the majority, 20%, open to permissionless purchase by all.
20% of tokens will be held for future development requirements.

Details on BOS’s tokenomics will be provided. It is proposed that BOS tokens be integrated within Sovryn’s token ecosystem to streamline governance and reward mechanisms.

5.2 Additional Documentation

To be attached to the SIP is the BitSNARK and Grail whitepaper as well as a presentation deck providing an overview of BOS.

6. BitcoinOS Independence

To maintain credible neutrality, BOS development will be independent of Sovryn. Further, Sovryn Bitocracy will have no decision-making power over BOS after the platform launch.

7. Sovryn Layer

BOS devs will be assisting Sovryn in launching the Sovryn Layer, using BOS. The teams will work closely as design and launch partners.

If this SIP is approved by Sovryn Bitocracy, the Sovryn core team of contributors and the BOS developers will work hand in hand to accomplish the goals set out in this SIP.

SIP-0083 Proposal: Sovryn - BitcoinOS Contributor and $BOS Token Launch

read 19 min

I would say discussion about this draft is needed first, before you continue to put it up for a vote.

A small peak in the DoJo tells you that a big number of Sovryn investors don’t agree with this proposal and they don’t feel represented by it as long term Sovryn investor. Including myself.

I would like to see a fair distribution between those who create the idea and those who invested in it. I am sure this can be achieved, but it needs to be discussed on forum before it will be brought up to a vote.

Especially this SIP should be discussed.

“A big number”. Basically none of them.

I’ll be voting no on this proposal. 10% is not enough.

Sov holders and stakers are getting shafted on this. This was presented as a Sovryn initiative. Team should be ashamed of themselves.

I think you might be confusing Sovryn Layer with BOB. SOV is intended to be the token for the Sovryn layer. It was never implied that SOV would be the token for BitcoinOS. It was made explicit that BitcoinOS is a separate development.

if that was never intended for bitcoinOS, then where did the original funding come for it & how was it materialized & by who?

why dont we get these details delivered to us if we are the ones the bitocracy is intended to deliver to?

it seem as insiders are playing their own game
against the community with their own ever changing incentives.

new coins preform better than an old 99% dumped low float high FDV token with year-long investors full with resentment waiting for any pump to sell it all. Obviously from a marketing perspective a new token removes all these factors and can easily find funding & incentives from promises & a bullmarket.

I see two levels of discussion in the dojo :

Architectural Consideration: From an architectural standpoint, it makes sense to decouple SOV services from BOS services because they provide two different kinds of value (e.g., financial services vs. infrastructure services).
Value Distribution: The key question is how, and to what extent, the value generated by BOS can be distributed to SOV holders.

To keep the discussion constructive, we should focus on:

Determining an appropriate percentage of BOS value ( 10% enough ?) to be allocated to SOV holders.
Exploring other methods for SOV holders to capture the value generated by BOS (such as through gas fees).
Considering what kind of governance mechanisms (bitocracy) are possible for SOV holders regarding BOS decisions that could impact Sovryn.

Regarding the distribution of BOS value, one idea could be to mirror BOS and SOV staking. For example:

If I have staked #n SOV for x years, then at the time of BOS launch, the system could lock #f(n) BOS for x years for me, allowing me to benefit from BOS staking rewards.

Let’s discuss this further

Sovryn has not been funding BitcoinOS. It’s a separate team of developers. It’s currently self-funded.

@ratiyo4985 - this is not a second token for Sovryn. Sovryn will remain Sovryn and use the SOV token. SOV will also become the revenue-capturing token of the Sovryn layer.

BOS is a separate project, with a separate set of contributors and a separate token.

What’s your role in/with BOS?

Many of the comments here are based on the misunderstanding that Sovryn has been, or will be, building BOS. Part of this confusion may be due to my involvement. I have been very publicly involved in both projects. In addition to that, Sovryn has been promoting BitcoinOS and even created a web page about it. The reason for this is that BOS is a huge win for Sovryn (even without any additional tokens, which is a potential massive windfall). Infra like BitcoinOS is strategically crucial to Sovryn - for growth, security and decentralisation. It will allow us to launch our own rollup: Sovryn Layer.

However, while BOS is a huge win for Sovryn, it is not a Sovryn project. It has separate contributors, funding and goals. It also probably won’t have a need for Bitocracy, since it likely will not be a system that is actively governed.

I intend to be very involved with BOS, much as I have been with Sovryn. This does not mean that I plan to leave Sovryn. Quite the opposite. I don’t see the two as conflicting but, rather, as extremely complimentary projects. The best Bitcoin rollup platform partnering with the leading Bitcoin DeFi platform: POWAful.

I don’t have an official role with Sovryn. I also don’t have an official role with BOS. But I have been very dedicated to both ideas for long before Sovryn existed, and will dedicate all my energy to seeing them both succeed to the greatest of my ability.

How well paid is well paid? It’s like 6 people I understood. Or maybe couple more. How many millions does a person need to have in its life? After the development of the project was funded by Sovryn investors.

Do the devs need to buy an island?

I think it would be awesome if we all eventually bought an island.

How can you say that if you outweigh the community with the suggested distribution?

I appreciate the people who are working on this, ofc they slice a themselves a nice piece. However, as someone speaking without an official role, like you said: how many millions does a person need in his life?

You have now a great opportunity to show if POWA TO THE PEOPLE is really true.

Lets discuss this as community and let us come to fair terms. Don’t be greedy for your own.

First, I have always thought that BOS was phase 4 of Sovryn’s roadmap for 2024. The idea that Sovryn would create an infrastructure called BOS has been a community assumption since it was announced. Sovryn’s journey would not conclude with BOS, but it would achieve its greatest momentum with BOS.

Secondly, reading the SIP, it would seem that the Sovryn brand could harm BOS. That’s why BOS must emerge independently from Sovryn, with independent developers and independent funding. There is talk of neutrality. I believe it’s a brand shield. I wonder what chances BOS would have to emerge if Sovryn had never existed. All the work of every developer, present and past, and the financial, advertising, and community resources of those who have believed in Sovryn have been necessary to reach this point. Some were there at the beginning of Sovryn and are returning now with BOS.

Thirdly, the SIP is quite vague, lacking a lot of information related to estimates of required resources and timelines. It would have been bold to disclose the development team, the tokenomics… Furthermore, from my point of view, it contains several contradictions related to the desire to differentiate the projects while requiring collaboration in all kinds of resources. For example, the SIP says that BOS will not request resources from Sovryn, but Sovryn’s treasury will secure the necessary capital and resources. At the same time, the community must promote BOS and Sovryn’s adoption team as well. All this indicates to me that BOS needs Sovryn, just as much as Sovryn needs BOS. That’s why they are united in their genesis and in their destiny, no matter how much we try to neutralize the links.

Fourthly, I cannot discuss whether Bitocracy deserves 10% for services rendered. Or whether developers deserve double or triple. For me, it’s more important to discuss why BOS is not entirely a development of Sovryn.

Fifthly, why is a BOS token necessary? Is funding needed? Can it not be obtained in another way? Could the Sovryn community not provide the necessary financial resources to lead this new development?

In the absence of community discussion, my vote cannot be affirmative.

If you read the discussion between Sovryn investors in the TG DoJo: Telegram: Contact @sovryncommunity

Would you still jump to the same conclusion?

What the actual fuck. Really I can’t believe this is e even proposed. I am speechless. We have been through this over and over. No more tokens ffs. Either don’t do any tokens or do $SOV everything else is not to be negotiated with the Sovryn bag holder - period end of discussion.

i will vote no with 7 figure+ voting power unless a proposal more in line with human rights & common sense is written.

My apologies, I misread that earlier comment. My bad.

I meant the initial 10% suggested, like you said yourself.

Fuck you Yago really. I have been a real supporter of this project have tried whatever I can to help. This is the FIRST TIME you mention BOS is not part of Sovryn, The SOVRYN ROADMAP has BOS launch on its agenda. Its completely misleading from the beginning lying to our face. Its absolutely the end of this whole project. No-one will trust Sovryn ever again if this goes through. This is a break with the most die hard supporters.

Phase 4 would be a Sovryn Rollup. That would be Sovryn Layer. BOS is a platform for launching interoperable Bitcoin rollups. So BOS can facilitate Sovryn Layer.
We all stand on the shoulders of giants. Every idea has antecedents.
The SIP does not contain these details because they are not yet know - and more importantly - they are not relevant. Sovryns treasury is not being requested for anything. Instead what is being asked for is the formal structure of the exchequer. The exchequer will be able to act to raise the funds but the funds raised will be raised via $BOS tokens and will not come from Sovryn.
There are many reasons BOS is not a development of Sovryhn. Different missions, different teams, different skill sets, huge amounts of funds required that Sovryn cannot provide. Perhaps most importantly, other DeFi projects might want to launch their own rollups and won’t want to do it on the infra of Sovryn. One project is a defi suite. The other is ZK bridging and interoperability. Two extremely different projects.

it must be easy to stand here righteously in defence of this SIP when knowingly you already secured your very large bag. Even though you previously have made it very known bitcoinOS was indeed a part of Sovryn , but now that story is changing in a blink of an eye.

what happened, did you find a better “path” than through Sovryn and are now forced to cut deadweight knowing everyone cant catch this train unless its at expense of you and your newfound partners?

imagine pulling stunts like these on your own community after all the stunts that has been pulled over the years you must believe we can be fed any bullshit and eat it.

not much else to say. this is clear as day.

@lactarius I have been pushing for Sovryn to be closely associated with BitcoinOS. I think it is a powerful lever to help drive Sovryn forward, technologically and also from a narrative perspective. And at the same time I have been saying again and again that BOS is being built externally.

I think Sovryn has indeed benefitted from this. Would you have preferred that we put more distance between Sovryn and BOS?

I am trying to create and to capture as much value as possible for Sovryn. The opportunity to have a piece of the BOS pie, in technology, narrative and tokens, and at very little cost to Sovryn is a huge opportunity.

I have been greedy Greedy for Sovryn. Greedy to see SOV benefit and rise.
And at the end of the day, what I have managed to orchestrate here is potentially a massive airdrop for Sovryn.

This is about funding. At its core.

Devs and team have been working on this and is only right they continue to be compensated.

Here’s my proposal:

We continue to make SOV the governance token it’s always been meant to be.

Keep BTC the asset as it should be.

And fund with our development funds as was always meant to be

everyone on the sovryn payroll that worked on BOS should forfeit the BOS tokens! these tokens should go for this community who have been already paying these devs wages.

10% is small and should be closer to 30% if we feel we must separate from BOS. The funds should not go to any adoption fund or anything else but directly to stakers.

If I’m not mistaken many of the devs from sovryn have been contributing to BOS and I’m sure have been compensated accordingly.

However, this will fracture the sovryn community with devs/community/etc. into the future dividing attention, tokenomics, teams, etc. it’s hard not to look at this as a nail in the coffin than a launch of something greater for Sovryn and all its contributors/community behind it.

Travis, which Sovryn devs have been working on BitcoinOS?

It simply has never ever been mentioned that BOS is a different project - never - not once. ALL marketing material all talking all Community calls say BOS is a Sovryn project. There is absolutely no spin you can do to reframe that. I can show you all the videos where you actually say this with you own words. So trying to reframe here is absolutely not possible without loosing every single member of this community and loosing all your reputation.

Make us a deal that we can actually live with - like 80% BOS tokens go to SOV stakers 10% sold for funding 10% to the dev team to keep them going. Its something I could maybe live with. Or say we buy 80% of the tokens with the Sovryn development fund and then the 80% BOS fees earned get distributed to SOV stakers its also something I could live with maybe. This right now is just such a punch in the face.

it seems to be the case they dont want our funding, because there is new partners in the picture that have pushed us out.

Yago -AT BEST- has possibly bargained us 10% cut which is a joke, but most likley they dont want/need our help or money.

At -WORST- this is fraudulent behavior & with everything thats been going on ranging from;
-Promoting people Stake for bitcoinOS benefits.

-Shady unclear behavior around Adoption funds/Exchequer funds, possible manipulation.

-Fooling investors into Liquidity pools thats since been drained for 90 days straight

How is it that everyone responding to this proposal is all misunderstood in the exact same way?

This is not a misunderstanding or we wouldn’t all be on the same page and so opposed to this proposal.

For the benefit of this discussion, I want to confirm that no Exchequer funds have been used for BitcoinOS development. Funds were spent on research, mostly over the course of 2023, but the result of this research relates primarily to the Sovryn Layer and the realization that a rollup framework (which the BitcoinOS team has been building) is a prerequisite for the Sovryn Layer. In addition, a grant of 1 BTC was provided to the BitVM researchers late last year. Their research is important for all Bitcoin L2 and scaling solutions, Sovryn Layer included.

I believe that this context is important for this discussion.

so what is the sovryn team really working on this year?
staking rewards is a copy paste, multichain on bob is a copy paste, taproot assets is other team that is working on…what are sovryn dev’s actually doing?

“I think Sovryn has indeed benefitted from this. Would you have preferred that we put more distance between Sovryn and BOS?”

Not speaking for lactarius, but what I would have preferred is honesty and transparency about the plans and intentions of the team.

“I am trying to create and to capture as much value as possible for Sovryn.”
I actually don’t doubt this / believe you and the core team feels there isn’t a way for BOS to succeed unless it’s separated from SOV and there are room for other investors. But what leads you to the conclusion that SOV has to have such a small ownership & responsibility for BOS, for BOS to succeed? What forces are at play besides you and the 6 devs? Who do you have to negotiate with to capture value for Sovryn?

So how many of these 6 BOS Team members are also paid contributors to sovryn? If there is overlap who is overlooking that they actually work on sovryn in their working hours and not on BOS?

so what is the sovryn team really working on this year?

•⁠ ⁠Massive security upgrades
•⁠ ⁠Dev portal
•⁠ ⁠Huge number of bug fixes and dealing with technical debt
•⁠ ⁠Bitocracy 3.0
•⁠ ⁠dApp 2.0
•⁠ ⁠DEX 2.0
•⁠ ⁠Runes
•⁠ ⁠POWA
•⁠ ⁠BOB
and more.

so nothing that was advertised in the roadmap presented in community calls

Hi,

A bitcoin bridge based on zk tech (BOS) does require 1 token: $BTC. Because that’s the only thing that is accepted on 1 side of the bridge. Tokens on the L2 still do make sense. Not for bridging purposes, but for the typical DeFi stuff. $SOV has a good system with fee sharing from Sovryn smart contracts. If the contracts see more use because we have a trust minimized bridge to bitcoin, it’s great. If Sovryn smart contracts run on zk rollups (which i understand is Sovryn Layer, NOT BOS), this may improve possibilities and user experience by a lot. Such a system does require $btc for the bridge and for base layer fees. It does not require a BOS token or a SOV token for transaction purposes or gas fees. Advertising those tokens for such things seems odd. We have a dream to built DeFi for $btc, not to build DeFi for $SOV or $BOS.
On L2’s there is not much money to be made on transaction fees and most likely not on bridging fees. It’s a race to Zero. What can generate good revenue is products that require a fee to use: $SOV is built for that and could capture a lot of value from those L2 activities, much more than those pennies for cheap transactions with (almost) unlimited blockspace. 0,1% fee for AMM use, 2% fee for Zero origination, 1% for Zero redemptions, some profits from medium sized lending pools, perps, Sovryn Mynt and so on.
BOS is a very important system to enable the Sovryn Layer, our rollup that will host our smart contracts. That’s the goal. If they need a token for funding, fine with me. If they help build Sovryn layer with their tech, it’s a deal that makes sense.
I see no use case for BOS token right now, why should it have any value? What’s the mechanics behind it?
It’s a smart play from a legal perspective to have Sovryn help with BOS token distribution. They out source risk to Sovryn Bitocracy. But Sovryn can get attention from the fiat lords. This should be worth more than a 10% token allocation. Make it 20%. Give it to SOV Stakers based on their Voting Power.

I think that’s that “Gaslighting” thing I keep hearing about.

I think 20% is too low…

But 10% is a definite NO vote from me. Sovryn has been marketing BitcoinOS as a Sovryn project on Twitter, telegram, community calls, and even our website.

The whole “Not Sovryn” bullshit doesn’t seem to be fooling any of us.