BitcoinOS Q&A - For Discussion

Many questions have been raised about BitcoinOS. The CMs have collected these questions and I am providing answers here. Bear in mind that BitcoinOS is still extremely early and many questions do not yet have definitive answers.

Additionally, tomorrow there will be an AMA, which is an open discussion and I encourage anyone with questions or concerns, as well as idea to come and voice them.

1. Why do you think 10% is a lot from the allocation for the SOV stakers, why we can’t push it to 15%, 20%? Sovryn already did a lot for BitcoinOS.

Why not 50%, 100%, 5% or 0%? We are currently seeing projects like BOS being valued anywhere from $50m to $1B. For Sovryn to receive 10%, this means Sovryn needs to invest between $5m-$100m in value or provide in-kind value to that degree. So 10% is an extraordinary offer, suggesting a deep affinity to Sovryn. No other party would receive such an offer.

In any event, no single party or community should have too large an allocation as broad distribution is key.

2. Explanation of why the $BOS token is needed and its utility/purpose. How exactly does the distribution of the $BOS tokens look like?

BOS, like any similar system need an internal shelling point of value with no external dependencies. Without such a token, the system deteriorates into a centralized system or becomes insecure. The BOS token will be the staking token that plays this role in for BOS.

Some people have suggested that the only token required in BTC. This would lead to a recursive system where the system is secured by the asset that it is meant to be securing. That is inherently unsafe. BOS will not be a perfect replication of Bitcoin mainchain security assumptions and where there is a gap, BOS will be help to make sure there is no practical compromise on security.

3. How many other parties will get the remaining 44% “Partner and user distribution”?

This is, as yet, unknown and will be determined as more players become involved. As an aside, the 44%, as currently envisioned, includes the distribution to Sovryn. So the remainder is 34%.

4. What is the roadmap of BitcoinOS? Are there going to be any other projects participating in the “Partner and User distribution” phase?

There is no public roadmap and any roadmap would be subject to change. The focus right now is on research and development. The goal is to build a platform that many different projects and developers will use.

5. What exactly does Sovryn get out of this besides the 10%? What do they get from us besides what we already gave? What are we giving them? A decentralized launch, a starting community and what else? What does “Incubation” mean? Are they going to help us launch the Sovryn layer? Is there a way to quantify the level of effort required from Sovryn devs and marketing to help bring this to fruition?

Sovryn is an extensive suite of (mostly) DeFi dapps for Bitcoin. The utility of which is limited by the lack of trust-minimized BTC, slow expensive transactions, centralized and risky cross-chain bridging and a lack of control over the underlying infrastructure on which the systems run. Sovryn Layer offers a path towards making Sovryn sovereign in terms of infrastructure, solving many of these issues and giving us a way to grow faster and continue to lead Bitcoin DeFi. BOS is the infrastructure framework that can make this possible.

Moreover, from a narrative perspective Sovryn Layer can help elevate Sovryn into the realm of infra project valuations and a close accusation with BOS helps position Sovryn as a constant leader on the technology front.

Benefits to BOS
a. Decentralized Launch
b. Seed Community
c. Positioning, promotion and marketing

Benefits to Sovryn
a. Tokens
b. Sovryn Layer (infra and assistance)
c. Positioning, promotion and marketing

6. Sovryn Layer is supposed to launch on BOS. What is the Sovryn Layer roadmap, and how does it mesh with the multi-chain roadmap?

Sovryn Layer (or whatever it ends up being called) will become the canonical home of Sovryn. It will be the home of the highest level of Bitocracy, the canonical home of SOV, and the most highly optimized environment for the functioning of Sovryn Dapps.

In addition to that, it will be a platform upon which Sovryn can promote the development of an entire array of projects to build, to take advantage of Sovryn’s protocol suite. With BOS interoperability, Sovryn layer and its apps will be able to offer highly composable DeFi to the entire BOS ecosystem.

in terms of the multi-chain strategy, this is a separate effort, and one which Sovryn can continue to pursue in parallel due to the fact that BOS is separately developing the infra that would make Sovryn Layer possible. In an ideal scenario, some of these chains will rollup to Bitcoin with BOS and become part of the BOS ecosystem - providing an even higher level of composability.

7. What would happen if the community voted the SIP down? Will Sovryn devs/marketing stop supporting BitcoinOS?

At this point in time, it is clear that the proposal is controversial and that no consensus has formed. Under those circumstances the SIP won’t even go up for a vote. This would not change the plan to build Sovryn Layer, launch it on BOS and continue to promote BOS. It would however mean that:

a. Sovryn would not be launching BOS
b. Any token allocation (if any) would be decision in the future for BOS based on whatever token distribution method BOS adopts.

8. How exactly will the BOS token be used? Will it have governance like SOV Bitocracy or just a share in fees? What are the fees - gas on the EVM thinlayer?

BOS will likely not be a governance token, since pretty much everyone currently working on it does not think governance tokens are appropriate for infra-level projects. The fees collected by BOS would be directed (directly or indirectly) to BOS token stakers and/or holders - but the mechanism is not yet decided.

9. What kind of governance and direction is SOV Bitocracy allowed to exercise in the development phase? How will the transition from SOV Bitocracy to independence take place? What are the milestones?

This is up for debate. One reason for this SIP was to begin that conversation. One thing that those involved in BOS development have taken away from the discussion so far is that there needs to be a high degree of community support or the whole exercise becomes counterproductive.

10. It is clear that Sovryn is not committing funds. But will Sovryn be expected to actively raise funds for BitcoinOS and then administer the funds separately? How much effort will this require, and how will this take away from Sovryn’s own efforts to build partnerships and potentially raise funds?

Yes, the expectation is that Sovryn actively engages in efforts to raise the required funds. This could prove to be a major effort. I cannot quantify what effort this would entail.

11. Will the 10% allocation for Sovryn stakers exclude vesting contracts?

The SIP states that Bitocracy should decide on the allocation. BOS does not seek to dictate these terms.


10% isn’t enough, and you guys should work with the community on this. We are the largest (and only ) supporters of BitcoinOS.

That being said; sovryn layer was planned “possibly” before BItcoinOS. How was/is this going to work?

Can we get a decent estimate on this. I realize development takes time, and roadmaps are basically marketing tools. Sovryn Layer is basically the silver lining to all this, IMO. So this would be some positive information.

1 Like

it’s apparent you need Sovryn to launch decentralized & as a middle man for raising funds, both directly linked to handling money for BOS.

10% is not enough in this regard we are massivly relieving responsibility from individuals trying to launch BOS and instead putting that on Sovryn & Bitocracy, taking on any risks involved with this by lawmakers and the likes.

of 44% we should have half 22% as minimum

1 Like

If BOS opens this up to a competitive bidding process to other established DAOs, do you think that the bidders will demand more than 10% or less?

I am looking forward for the day that you will put community first. By offering 10% to voters in order to pass the SIP is not going to help. By saying that the offer is fair and generous clearly you show lack of understanding how the community feels and what community thinks all the past months/years. In my opinion you only comment in the forum when there is ‘an issue’ in order to ‘massage’ the community. I put off my hat off for you tho, you are amazing in what you are doing. 20% is the minimum community should get from this.

You are speaking about 50-100m of a potential valuation of that 10%. At the same time, team will be allocated 20% of coins for further developments. So that means we will need to see as a community development improvements of 150-200million value in the near future? I am not going to comment on this one.

If you insist on the 20% for development improvements, it might be worth then to get 1% from the 20% vesting for 36months. That’s 5-10million valuation of coins should be enough for development improvements. The rest 19% should only be unlocked into vesting after reaching transparent targets that will be agreed between the team and the community. This will enable transparency, good faith and restore trust. Each target should have a certain % of coins to be claimed, assuming the importance of the task. Once a target is achieved both community and team will give the green light for a % of coins to be unlocked from a SIP.

1 Like

I look forward to discussing this with you today on the call.

Unfortunately I am working at that moment, however will try to be present. But I am happy for anyone else who shares the same point of view to expand with you on that topic on the call later today. Unless I am the only one who has this particular point of view. Let’s see.

1 Like

Yago, thank you and thanks to the team for the Q&A;

Impressive that you stayed focused on the call despite the unwarranted personal criticisms fired in your direction.

I recently re-staked SOV for the full 3 year term and I was initially concerned when the BitcoinOS SIP came out; but thanks to the recent discussions I see that as a blip and I’m happy to be staying on board for this unruly and exciting journey!


A recording of yesterdays AMA is available here:

Please note that:

  • The recording was stopped and then restarted after 11m:52s due to a request from one of the participants that their question would not be recorded.
  • The recording itself was uploaded to YouTube as “unlisted,” - meaning that it won’t appear in our channel or YouTube search, and it’s accessible only to those who have the direct link.

Yesterday’s call was fruitful, and I hope to continue the conversation here in the forum. We can have another call if there’s a demand for it.


Great AMA :+1:t2: people needs to stop being greedy and be happy with what we get. BOS could be huge and it would be a shame if we didn’t get to be a part of it and get a piece of it.
People of the dojo have themselves to blame for dont understanding, i told you people that Yago dont want to tell much because the relentless attacks you been giving him for being to transparent, and i was right about it.


can they dox the accounts they are commenting with so we know what other parts of the community we’re engaging with here and there and focus on what convinces the community?
if this may go to be a arbitrum 2.0 for example, now bleeding to competitors’ institutional adoption, aiming at a high allocation maybe due to early hype, may just reveal to be a drag later. What we need is a healthy balance of allocation and Sovryn efforts, the worry of being under allocated and draining our resources just reflects the missed opportunities on other parts of bitcoin eco. We can’t have a safe bet without giving exclusive attention to BOS. But it’s still a bet.

For Yago and the all the different Teams:
Thank you and I’m sorry that you and the team has been attacked and gone through a lot of negativity and allegations, that really sucks, especially with all the good you’re choosing to work for. I am and I know the vast majority of our community are grateful for all the hard work you guys have put in and I thank you for continuously enduring and fighting for the Sovryn cause and the vision we all signed up for with becoming Sovryns. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

For the community as a whole:
This AMA will not be a checkbox event; “Now we’ll never have issues again” what this AMA provides though is a moment for everyone to check themselves, reflect and make a choice - We have a choice as Sovryn individuals and as a community on how we want to live, how we want to present ourselves and effect others -within as well as beyond our community. As a community lately we don’t sounds very nice to be around and that’s a shame if we are to grow and leave the pond.

Negativity is hard to shake especially when it has become a group’s dynamic and part of it’s identity. But the choice remains - do we want to continue to deal with things the way we have, by letting our emotions and minds conspire and create flame-wars or do we want to put in the effort show up as a positive and supportive Sovryn members and contribute with constructive conversation delivered with respect and integrity and assumption of good faith.

This is not a one time event - neither is it positivity bullshit - moving through and breaking negativity and a negative environment; being respectful, constructive and mindful; is ongoing work in life not the least as an investor and part of a online(any really) community. Letting go of conviction and attachment isn’t easy, nor is being more open and caring, but we can continuously make an effort and so doing improve ourselves and our community.

  • And to be frank - I haven’t been in any of the groups throughout the years and I have not had this view/issue, so a little note if you as a community member leave a sub group chat/channel feeling more negative or conspirator than you did when you entered it - maybe its time to take a break and re-evaluate to come back later with a clear head to see if it still is valid and then make an effort to change the tone to a constructive one.

Thank you to the whole community for for this AMA session, I greatly appreciate all your efforts!
Stay Sovryn


I’ll leave this here to:

Choose to

Rebuild our community’s environment and culture:

  1. We communicate as Gentleman and Scholars - Light and informed
  2. We always start from Assumption of Good Faith
    -Unless there is evidence to the contrary we assume peoples intentions are sincere and honest. * And that they are competent human beings living their lives and doing the best they can.
    ***(It does not mean believe everything that is said and stop thinking on your own.)
  3. Yes, AND…
    -Instead of shutting down and beating someone’s ideas up in an alley we Open up for ideas and creativity by contributing in conversations with Yes AND.

This is exactly the “gun to the head of the community” comment that gets us all enraged. Yago you are head of that group or at least massively influencal to the BOS team and you claim you have “only the interest of Sovryn” in your heart and then you post a comment like that. Its on so many levels difficult to take you seriously if you continue to threaten us. This should be a dialogue and not a “who can mount the most pressure”.

We are here to express our concerns and feelings (yes that thing that sometimes you can not put a number on, but its the exact thing that makes or breaks brands)
We are here because we have our money, time and convictions invested in this whole thing. We are the biggest asset right after some genius programmers. We might bitch and moan but if we are happy we are the most powerful voice that can multiply quickly. Are we worth $5 Mio and more - we sure could be, but not with this kind of bullying.

1 Like

Very well put and I agree with your second paragraph whole heatedly. I don’t understand where the threat comes from though, I didn’t read Yago’s comment that way, maybe it is read through the lens of the resent frustrations and perceptions? (Which would be understandable, heck I might be the one reading it wrong but that’s when we ask to be sure what the person means - and why we start from assuming the person’s coming from good faith and means well) This is also why the AMA’s are helpful, the tones and manner in speaking disappears in text allowing people to fill in with their lense colored by their feeling and thought, still happens in vocals conversation but at least less than in text. (Another reason to assume good faith)

I read this comment as a genuine question to think about, to give perspective. To emphasize the projects scope and value as well as help think outside of ourselves and to the bigger picture as a collective of DAOs. I think with BOS’s value mainly lies in its decentralized and cooprerative foundation - anyone owning too much of it breaks the inherent value and security that would draw development and users to the project. This is a tide that raises all boats and the question itself is meant to trigger our thinking outside of ourselves and to the big picture - the bidders wouldn’t demand more because it would break to whole foundation in my thought experiment - Again I too read through a lense and probably get this differently that what Yago meant.

@yago Maybe could you chime in explain what you tried to convey with this question?

1 Like

As always, too much promise and not real substance. Pure hopium.

1 Like

You say that in the same aggressively natured manner in which you said during the “AMA” that we either take the offer or leave it and basically stop making a fuss. I agree with @interferenz , this is quite unnescessary given all this time you have been aware and in full understanding of the source of all this confusion:

your misrepresentation at a marketing level of what bitcoinos really is and who is really building it (“because i wasnt involved in that team” would be an excuse if you did not parade yourself as the project lead)

It seems to me that if BOS opened up to competitive bidders sovryn may be undercut and or lose the potential spot as launch project. But imo it is you who would suffer the most as you are the one who has now diverged your pathway from that of the sovryn layer pure play, behind your communitys back, its you who is now looking to build alignment between the two projects, and its you who looks like an idiot if the SIP doesnt pass because your two jobs will then be in conflict with each another. Remember most stakers dont have controlling stakes like you, so we see a tiny tiny fraction of 10% and you stonewalling us telling us to take it or leave it in what we can only interpret through the medium of static text as a Do Kwon 2.0 tone and style, and we really arent too bothered, we would much rather see Sovryn working, not paying $5 for failed transactions 4 interactions out of 6 a year since launch of dapp 2.0

I believe your failures to take accountability elsewhere in the project are a relevant topic worth including in this discussion, since it is you who is no longer available whether or not this SIP passes for full time work at sovryn. And given this EXACT situation is probably the whole reason that dapp 2.0 is so failure prone in the first place - our product lead did what Yago is proposing last year and spent half the year or more working independently on bitcoinos for yago - who knows what will now happen with the project lead himself divided in half. At least it serves as some form of explanation for the.current state of sovryns go-to-market affairs

When will the SIP be put on for a vote? I wonder how much voting power the people who opposed the SIP have.

1 Like

I too am interested in this. I plan to attend Bitcoin conference, and not sure if this is still a thing.