Such crypto thinking really.
Also your burning will not start kicking in for a few years.
And when there is only* the bag holders holding token then the project is dead
\* not completely but effectively and uploading will slow down due to lack of token not being held after 10 or 15 years.
This is not a crypto financial project and crypto blockchain thinking will cause troubles, just look at emissions which is applying crypto practice
I understand that you feel that this should be the case, but in reality we are observing the exact opposite. This version of Autonomi is a crypto project and a financial product, among all other things. It has all the characteristics of one - we have Tokenization, High Volatility, Global Accessibility, Transparency and Traceability, Automation through Smart Contracts. These are the facts and the reality.
Check out the Impossible Futures!
The image that this project, supposedly one of the oldest in the crypto world, is starting to give is one of being led by amateurs with constant lurches and changes.
Not only that. Bag holders are people who kept the price of MAID/EMAID/ANT for a decade at such level that helped its development. Right now bag holders are the pillar the network is standing on. Without them the shares unlocking and emissions would collapse price to such level that network would not be able to be funded from emissions at all. Day traders and speculators are important too. They help to bring future problems to present, the price behaves on future expectations thanks to them. They help to bring future problems to present.
All that greed and future profits are backed by risk taking.
Future rewards are very important part of the network stability. Without future rewards there are only current risks. And as a result price collapse and network collapse. This network needs to keep large market cap, to support those millions of nodes to prevent attacks.
I am not telling that 2% burn is a solution. But if this token becomes only utility token, and loses chance of massive gains than speculators will sell, will stop support it and network which requires more and more hardware over time canāt shrink and will collapse. This is not a blockchain, which can survive with a single guy having copy of a blockchain. This network simply canāt go much lower in market cap without dying.
Sadly I agree. I realized this after muting the Autonomi X because it bombed my feed with spammy, generic tweets, and I was like, this is our social media presence? The team cannot do better than this? It sort of snowballed from there.
Right now it can. We have 20+ people running nodes, the guy with 85%+ nodes who immediately dumps will leave if the price drops further, but the remaining 15% nodes can run for years at 0 price.
Check out the Impossible Futures!
That is not a live network capable to survive attacks and grow. But yes, since there are not any significant data stored yet, everyone can close its node and start again from 0:) But in such scenario I and many others would not stay in touch with such dead project anymore.
If you want to bootstrap a network with value, it may be preferable to burn maid, emaid, ant to convert to fork network currency anyway.
Without (indirectly) injecting that value into the fork network, payments for node hosting would be rock bottom.
Ofc, forks would be free to do as they please and that is the beauty of open source, but worth considering
Itās interesting how many people left Bitcoin when it was first hacked and declared dead the first time. The good news is that no matter how many people we lose along the way, there are billions more who will never even know that these problems ever happened. This is where I base my hypothesis that the price could drop below 1 cent and the network could be successful in the future.
Check out the Impossible Futures!
It would also mean those 15% remaining would be paid about 6x more, by my fag packet calculations.
Given the amount of data on the network, we actually have far too many nodes, really. Ofc, they do add security and distribute the hosting base further, which is good for network health though.
To add, this is the danger of too high emissions too, rather than burn.
Iām far more worried that emissions have caused an unnecessary spike in nodes and have diluted the data fee payments too. Thatās a debate we have had already, but I wanted to frame my relative lack of concern for burn (right now, at least).
Could it be Maidsafeās cluelessness, how tokenomics should work. 
fiat 
matters 
, in a digital universe 
with digital atoms 
that while those digital atoms make dns/tx/storage etc obsolete on clearnetā¦ Nobody stops the Anterrnet not even Maidsafe, with their fiat needs to go to noderunners ideas.
No itās not, you may not know how to spend a quintillion atoms, but an ai does. Furthermore we should be pushing for trillion tx per second on the Network, so that aiās can just do their jobs.
imhco robots are the best noderunners, they got the storage/cpu/gpu and they can collect data in the real world that they can sell on the Network, todays noderunners are just cry 
's. 
Lol Iām a noderunner btw, love the Maidsafe payouts 
, better than receiving attos
Well folks. I dont see why you are all up in arms about this.
Just about every project does it. We have a huge supply.
I see no issue and agree with Rusty statement that the foundation needs to become self sustaining.
The project benefits when the price goes up because those who hold it can afford to invest in it.
Living in the bush singing kumbaya is a lovely thought but it will get us nowhere.
This is standard crypto stuff, we need to attract investment.
Or we can like I say sing kumbaya while other projects attract investment and we fade into oblivion.
People who build want returns.
Majority of builders here currently do so for a reward in the form of IF, they are not singing kumbaya or doing it for free.
I honestly believe that, after reading this topic, itās time for the team to remove this forum from the official links. Iām seriously considering starting a new, heavily moderated forum and/or offering to help moderate an official Autonomi forum.
With all due respect, I truly appreciate that everyone has their own opinion. But just look at all the nonsense the team has had to endure in this thread. None of us seem to be listening to one another; instead, we keep running in circles, shouting louder about how our own opinion is correct. We judge, we insult. This is nowhere near a constructive discussion. The chances of someone from the team actually engaging with us have dropped from 99% to 1% in less than a day.
I hear people say that this project could be perfect, and that adoptionānot shady tokenomicsāshould drive the price. But with the way we treat each other and the team members here, weāre never going to get that adoption. All weāre doing is scaring away newcomers and burning out the team.
Iām genuinely saddened by what this forum has become.
Think you posted this in the wrong thread are you not looking for the ant price thread ?
It could be in any thread, but this one in particular stood out to me. Not you, opening this topic, but the insulting reactions to team members by some. And also a select few that continue to preach how itās either super bad that the team introduced the burn and on the other side how itās good to introduce the burn.
You initially asked since when did we have a 2% of coins added to the tokenomics. And that is the one question nobody answered. Was it in from the start and did we miss it? Was it added recently to be introduced in an announcement by the team soon? Was it āsneaked inā? Nobody knows and yet we have so many people judging and insulting the team, itās a shame.
This is a place to share opinions @anon75844067 thatās what people are doing. Calling it preaching is a little over the top.
We should also start a thread about people who run insane node farms and ruin it for the little guys. That will also get people preaching.
I do agree about insulting however.
I dont remember burning ever being a thing and my worry is that we are losing the oil that the network runs on if we are chucking 2% down the drain with each upload.
And yea people go a bit Tard the day before an anticipated release itās like full moon for the forum 
lets burn the foundation supply by at least 50%, go closer to being truly decentralized and do donation based dev. Would actually make me start investing again. Foundation supply is a burden, not helpful at all at this marketcap. A 2% burn tax for uploads is better than nothing if you want price go up, period.
Why not just give the 100% to node operators if the reserve is full? Why add the complexity of the burn and essentially make the rich richer?
