# Argo — the hosting pact: dilution-pool incentives for serving the decentralized web *Argo is the host network; the hosts who crew it are **Argonauts**. Part of the Silent Mode stack (hub: `D:\Dev\SilentMode\README.md`).* Status: design idea (July 2026). Not yet implemented. Companion to [PROTOCOL.md](PROTOCOL.md); assumes BNS names on BCH and content on a storage network (Sia, IPFS, or on-chain `h` records). ## The idea in one paragraph A site owner funds a **pool** tied to their name's content (monthly / quarterly / yearly). Hosts **join permissionlessly** — no one selects them — by bonding a small stake and proving they store/serve the content. Each epoch the pool pays out, **split among all current provers**. More hosts → thinner slices; fewer hosts → fatter slices. Replication count is not configured anywhere: it is the *equilibrium* of pool size vs. hosting cost, discovered continuously by the market. Paying more is the owner's only knob — and it directly buys more redundancy and serving capacity. Client software suggests a price from the median of on-chain host asks. ## How Sia works, for contrast Sia is **renter-driven, closed-membership**: the customer's agent (`renterd`) scans the host market, *selects* ~30 specific hosts, forms bilateral fixed-term contracts with each, monitors them, and migrates shards when hosts die. Hosts advertise general capacity and wait to be picked; they cannot volunteer for a specific dataset. Repair requires the renter's agent to be online and funded. ## Why Sia's model is not enough (for websites) 1. **A manager must exist.** Sia heals because *renterd* notices dead hosts and re-uploads. If the renter agent is offline or unfunded, redundancy silently decays. The pool heals **without any manager**: a dead host stops proving → its share flows to the survivors → each slice fattens → the pool becomes more attractive → new hosts join. The noticing is done by economics, not by an agent. This is the core automation the idea adds. 2. **Membership is closed.** In Sia, a host that *wants* to help serve a popular site cannot join its contract set. In the pool, joining is the default; the algorithm that "decides who hosts" is replaced by self-selection under price pressure (the same open-entry mechanism as Bitcoin mining: reward fixed, participants join until marginal profit ~ 0). 3. **No serving incentive.** Sia pays for *storage possession*, never for *serving the public* — the gap that killed Skynet (decentralized storage, centralized unpaid portals). The pool's payout can cover gateways/seeders, the actually-scarce resource for websites. 4. **Designed for private data.** Sia encrypts client-side and hides data from hosts — right for backups, unnecessary for websites, which are public goods. Public content is exactly the case where open membership is safe: there is nothing to leak, and anyone may legitimately serve it. 5. **Lifetime is administrative, not economic.** Sia contracts expire per contract term. A pool's site lives exactly as long as someone values it enough to fund it — a market-driven expiry that doubles as the namespace garbage collection Namecoin lacked (cf. Kalodner et al. 2015). ## Known hard problems (and mitigations) - **Sybil splitting** — one disk posing as N hosts to collect N shares. Mitigate: per-host-unique erasure-coded shards (k-of-n), so each identity must store distinct data; stake per identity; diminishing returns per new host as slices thin. - **Proof of possession** — challenge from a future block hash → Merkle proof over the host's shard. Verifiable in a BCH covenant post-May-2025 limits (clunky but plausible); v0 can verify in an auditable coordinator. - **Proof of serving** — unprovable on-chain (true for Filecoin/Sia too). Layered approach: watchtower spot-checks, client-side reputation, coordinator attestation; shrink the trusted surface over versions. - **Pool exhaustion** — funding dries up → hosts leave → site dark. Feature, not bug (see 5 above), but resolvers should surface "pool low" warnings so owners/fans can top up (anyone may pay into a pool — patronage built in). ## Sketch on BCH 1. Site → storage network → per-host shards (off-chain tooling). 2. Name's chain record: `{"cid"|"s3": ..., "pact": }`. 3. Hosts post asks via beacon txs; wallets suggest the median (owner's knob). 4. Pool = covenant UTXO funded by owner (or anyone); hosts join by bonding stake in a registration tx naming their shard commitment. 5. Per epoch: block-hash challenge → hosts submit proofs → covenant releases the epoch tranche split among provers; missed proof = no pay (+ stake slash on repeated failure). 6. Resolvers discover hosts from registrations and fetch from any of them. ## Version ladder - **v0** — coordinator does audits + payouts openly on chipnet (trusted but fully auditable; all money flows on-chain). - **v1** — possession proofs verified by CashScript covenant; coordinator only attests serving quality. - **v2** — multi-watchtower serving attestation, coordinator eliminated.