Litemint

Litemint Apps and Games Platform on Stellar

What is Litemint?

Litemint is an apps and games platform built atop of an open source Stellar wallet. The platform boasts 36,000 monthly active users to date.

From puzzles to multiplayer to Cryptokitties-like games, Litemint runs and enhances any app with the Stellar blockchain.

Decentralized payments and cross-currency in-app purchases (path payments).
Game assets tokenization with creation of new digital markets like collectibles and non-fungible tokens (NFT).

Goals and Timeline

Litemint started as a one-man show about a year ago and has been 100% bootstrapped from personal funds. I would be delighted to see support from the Stellar community during this crucial seed phase to help booting the marketplace content, users and partnerships.

Q4 2019/Q1 2020

Non-Fungible Token Factory

enter image description here

The NFT factory is an integrated tool allowing code-less creation of collection games like Cryptokitties on Stellar. The goal of the NFT factory is to foster adoption of Stellar as a viable platform for NFT games and ease manipulation of NFT tokens.

Litemint IO

A massively multiplayer collectible card game on Stellar with endless, instant match ups (IO style). The goal of this game is to showcase all Litemint features and leverage the powerful IO games network for massive adoption (My previous IO game gathered 3 million players since 2017).

Further Partnerships

BlackSheep Games has now published 6 additional games on Litemint. Magnet.market, a digital good marketplace, is expected to go live within the next 2 months.

Additional partnerships are being discussed as I am writing this proposal.

Most efforts will be focusing on onboarding new game studios with a priority on 1vs1 strategy (Checkers, Chess, Go…), educational and card games as such games are usually strong with social retention mechanisms and engagement.

Problem and Opportunity

enter image description here

If we look at the crypto markets, we can see a strong correlation between the price trends and active users of Dapps. This is an anomaly that reflects the inability for Dapps to reach out to their respective audience.

e.g. whether a game is published on the blockchain, Facebook, Steam or Miniclip, it should be played by gamers, not crypto users.

Dapps are missing out on their respective market—potentially billions of users.

The Litemint Solution

The idea of Litemint is to use apps and games as prospective tools to funnel gamers into the crypto world.

Initially with 5 pilot games, the wallet has seen 600% user growth to 36,000 monthly active users since the release of its apps and games platform on June 19.

enter image description here

Litemint achieves this by preserving the games existing funnels (platforms and portals) and by providing an opt-in approach that smoothly opens new monetization options to creators without closing the existing ones.

enter image description here

Platform Details

Litemint is available on Google Play, App Store, Windows, Mac, Linux and as a Web App.
Litemint source code is available under the open-source MIT license. e.g. The platform can be built and run self-hosted.
Litemint accounts support Stellar Federation (e.g. hello*litemint.com).
Multi language support including English, Korean, Russian, French, Deutsch, Greek, Chinese.
Full SDEX support with mobile-first UI.

Links

Website: https://litemint.com/
Github: https://github.com/litemint
Web App: https://litemint.app/
Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.litemint.app
App Store: https://apps.apple.com/app/litemint/id1454801150
Blog: https://blog.litemint.com/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/LitemintHQ
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/litemint
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4d-ENpghypzHBB-N7hLN2w
Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/user/blockonomy
Discord: https://discord.gg/Sxq6UYp

MisterTicot

Do you plan to release your NFT implementation as an independent library?

I'm not sure how this could be handled, but that could be interesting to have it standardized & enable some inter-operability.

dzham

MisterTicot

Didn't @OrbitLens do a survey of a couple of possible NFT implementations? Maybe time to follow up on that?
I know people commented on my version (account-as-asset) as being too expensive, but IIRC, the litemint version is even more expensive (in terms of XLM, although XLM price has fallen at least 10x)

Litemint

MisterTicot dzham

The Litemint implementation of non-fungible tokens is de facto—that is, regardless of whether someone knows the implementation or creation process of the NFT tokens, the non-fungibility of such tokens remains intrinsic, natural and inter-operable.

Litemint NFT tokens are tradable like any other assets, no external assumptions (e.g. consider accounts as tokens) must be accepted or known by any other wallet, tools or people to demonstrate their non-fungibility which, therefore, cannot be repudiated.

In other words, that de facto property of Litemint NFT tokens remains forever whether a standard is adopted or not.

I would still love to see a standard being developed and adopted natively around NFT on Stellar so we could have a flexible way to extend their programmability for example to implement breedable cooldowns and so on.

I think cap-0023 will also bring so much flexibility to NFTs.

Releasing an independent library is definitely a good idea too.

Litemint

dzham To explain further, if you use accounts as assets for NFT, you need other actors to also interpret such accounts as NFT and implement a process to ease their transfer and trade. These NFTs are, by default, foreign entities to the assets system on Stellar—and so, refutable as NFT (i.e. yes an account is unique, but is it a token without an assumption?).

The NFT generated in Litemint is a natural token, the sequence of operations itself and forever confers it its uniqueness. Any current tool exposing the DEX will trade it, any wallet will send it and receive it through existing operations, and no one can falsify their non-fungibility through any assumption that would not also falsify the whole Stellar blockchain.

addirktive

There's definitely need for a change or new standard for NFTs on Stellar.
Accounts as assets is a workaround but it's not optimal.

MisterTicot

My point was more that if there's something running & working, that'd be interesting to have specs & library for it. But yes, of course, it'd also be interesting to figure out what's the most efficient implementation that can be done at that point. I mean, both things can happen in parallel.

dzham

Litemint

I'm aware. We spent months on the slack going over the ins and outs.

Mind you, the cost of doing things back then was 20-200 times higher, so that had a bit of an impact on the discussion.

Litemint

dzham Compared to ERC-721, Stellar still has many advantages as the blockchain is scalable and optimized for token emission and fees. Ethereum needs to store and execute these programmable contracts for each unique asset and operations on them causing a lot of computational overhead and costs. It is trying to fix it with ERC-1155 (by Enjin originally) for example but in the process, the contract loses much flexibility and just becomes a reusable component. The limitations we have on Stellar are not by design as is the case on Ethereum. And the NFT factory I am working on may prove to be more powerful than anything that can be done on Ethereum for accessibility (I hope so).

Stellar smart contract features (sequencing a few operations in a specific order) ensures token uniqueness and we can also prove additional token ownership by factoring in additional payment operations. For example, if you own NFT X and issue a self-payment in the sequence creating NFT Y, we can infer ownership and inheritance (This is used to implement traits).
What I am still trying to figure out is the ability to implement creation cooldown. The proper way to do it would be by making sure that no token could be created before a specific time after an NFT is created but I don’t think this is possible without an external assumption (meta data lookup etc…)

If we had the ability to “freeze” a token on an account for a specific amount of time (like a coinbase reward unspendable for X confirmation) then that would be amazing. 😃

Litemint

dzham Mind you, the cost of doing things back then was 20-200 times higher, so that had a bit of an impact on the discussion.

For the creation costs, it was certainly a general problem before. Ethereum also saw fees at over $3 per transaction back in 2018, and that’s each time an asset would change owner. Adding to this the $6 fee by CryptoKitties back then (now around $1), an average CryptoKittie token would sell for $20 in average as the market and its actors would adjust to higher costs as it did during the bull run.

Litemint

MisterTicot If you take the Crypto Kitties contract as reference, we could define 2 domains where NFT properties reside:

The contract domain driven by consensus. It is immutable and confers a token its uniqueness. E.g. In CryptoKitties, it implements uniqueness with ERC-721 and provides a function to compute the gene of each kitty (GeneScienceInterface) and also controls the cooldown (cooldownEndBlock in the code).

The meta domain that is being referred to by the token defined in the contract domain. This domain is not linked to the blockchain consensus. E.g. in Cryptokitties this domain contains the graphics for each Kitty, names etc and it is fully controlled from Cryptokitties servers.

Essentially, anything can be added to the meta domain but since it is not linked to the blockchain consensus there are drawbacks. For example, cryptokitties devs may decide to change the graphics of their kitties or worse, the meaning of some gene properties etc. Some of these drawbacks can be mitigated (dzham implementation uses IPFS server for decentralized control) but metadata remain outside of blockchain consensus, the whole link token->meta could therefore be refuted.

So yes, it is always possible to implement cooldowns (or anything else a dev may fancy) within the meta domain, but in order to functionally emulate ERC-721 tokens, I was looking for ways to implement cooldowns in the contract domain.

Stellar NFT can implement uniqueness and traits in the contract domain then devs can associate the meta domain to it providing the semantic for the token (e.g. gene code interpertation in Cryptokitties).

Litemint

Overall we should open some discussions again as there are unmatched opportunities for NFT on Stellar because, just for the fees, we have a much more powerful environment for NFT economies. Even ERC-1155 on Ethereum is emulating in the same direction as Stellar (simpler framework for more generic and usable contracts). Very speculatively, even with crypto markets gaining 100 times their current value, NFT economies on Stellar would run almost unaffected, which is not the case on Ethereum where they would only become practicable for strong NFT markets (if at all).

MisterTicot

Indeed, those details are interesting.

So, while we can't mess with those NFT, I assume there's a set of rules an app must know to decide whether or not a token should be understood as an NFT having traits and so on. I think that could be useful to have shared specs about that.

I'm pretty sure there's a way to throw a generation delay clause in there, such as token A is valid only if it is Xs older than token A.parent, where X is a value encoded into A.parent minTime field. (minTime can serve to pass arbitrary values for free as long as they are low enough)

MisterTicot

Litemint I see, thanks for the clarification. 🙂

Litemint

One year old! 🙂

Litemint

A huge thank you to Stellar Community Fund and everyone who voted for Litemint in the final—together fostering Stellar adoption with gaming❤️

Here is our Trello tracker so you can easily follow progress and dev updates:
https://trello.com/b/kwTYYYAe/litemint-tracker

Thanks again!