As I wrote earlier, today it’s probably not someone of the big players but tomorrow it might be someone who wants to see if the technology works to possibly have it on their radar (monitor development or take control), of that I’m sure.
Musk once said officially that Tesla monitors all startups and energy storage technologies that emerge in order not to overlook a technology that could threaten its position, and it’s not that a startup will suddenly grow but that a big competitor of Tesla could take over such a technology before Tesla.
The big players know that the world develops by budding and you can’t underestimate anyone or anything because you could make a strategic mistake - the bigtechs know this for sure.
My feeling is that this is unlikely to happen. They’re more likely to release billions of nodes in their copy of Autonomi with “improvements” like being able to delete bad data and adding nodes being permissioned.
It’s perception… but it’s also not very helpful to what you’re aiming to achieve either is it?
Some people may be unhappy, but not all. It’s also only very early days too. And while we have a few kinks to work out wit thew APIs… it’s also very very very cheap data storage at the moment too… and the dynamics will change once data starts rolling.
Only if we can reliably and quickly upload both large and small files. I have approx 7GB (and growing) of archives that I said would be the first thing to get stored on the network.
No matter the cost in ANT and ETH, I can’t do that yet.
Easier perhaps but not necessarily more economical for someone attempting to game emissions harvesting. Nodes require a fair bit of memory and that’s expensive at a large scale. A ghost node could use 1/10 the memory. Re: more to a response than a canned message, yea sure, I haven’t looked into creating such a ghost yet so you may well be right. I guess I’ll find out.
As a non-native english speaker I’m not 100% certain what kind of meanings the phrase “gaming the system” carries, but if it means that there’s something wrong or malicious going on, then I don’t think there’s enough proof of that.
I think that to run nodes and sell the tokens earned, is a legitimate way of doing it.
It’s a shame that the price is tanking because of this. But I would start to wonder about malicious motives only if the price tanks so low, that it clearly can’t be profitable at all.
Different kinds of meanings. Usually context indicates it.
In this case I am trying to walk the line between good/bad. Because as you point out there is valid reasons to maximise (game) the system, but also the negative where its pure milking by using earnings to get more and more till your king of the hill, and the normal person has closed their nodes
On another note, it’s quite interesting to see the very human thing, that when faced with such a scarce information, we start to speculate, guess and project so much - me definitely included.
I wonder about website traffic to the instructions on running a node. If this is organic and decentralized network growth, then we’d expect to see a lot of different IP’s coming to the site(s) to learn how to set-up/manage a node. If it’s just a few huge arms though, we wouldn’t see much new traffic.
As Maid team has access to that web traffic info, @rusty.spork - how about giving us an update on that?
If it’s a few huge node farmers, pushing out the little farmers, then what happens to data when they shut it down eventually … cascade collapse of the network IMO.
I think these bonus rewards need to end or they will end the network itself … what is the advantage here - can anyone provide concrete evidence that they support any advantage to the network?
We can’t expect to mimic bitcoin’s path as these days, the whales that scoop up the rewards, aren’t going to hodl it, they are simply going to convert it to BTC.
Further we have no counter-example of a ‘first’ crypto that didn’t give out rewards - so we don’t really know what would have happened to BTC if it had only relied upon transaction fees instead of rewards & transaction fees. It may have even done much better. But regardless we aren’t in the same boat as bitcoin was back then.
The only thing that appears to be happening is that we are nerfing our own network and our own token holders by taking value from the network and the existing token owners and handing it over to whales … this makes no rational sense in todays marketplace - assuming it ever made sense in the first place (for bitcoin).
After mulling this for a bit, I’ve come to a conclusion that such rewards are akin to a ritualistic sacrifice … people doing something that wounds themselves or their family in some way to appease the gods in the belief that it will bring good tidings to them in the future. Of course there is no sound rational behind it, it’s all just a belief system … and bitcoin has wrought this upon us … I used to be a believer myself, but no more.
Once data uploads are fully operational and the network starts filling up, then these whales are doing the network a good service.
No one knew the network would grow so fast. I suspect the dev team thought they had a bit more time to refine things before it did.
Tbh, I think there were some folks here who were looking to make good coin themselves off running nodes in data centres. The fact that whales have swept in and stolen their lunch is leaving them bitter. The spare resources for a whale may be far cheaper than what they would sell you to do the same in a hosted environment.
I’d suggest focusing on using spare hardware and using unmetered power and data sources. This is where the profit is likely to be had, imo. It also reflects the network design goals.
The team will improve uploads, folks will upload more, requiring more resourses from hosts, which will temper node growth. Sequencing these things can’t be easy.
Yes and I would consider the possibility that there are some quiet people here with very large rigs at home or their business they own.
We have a few who were more open and vocal about home setups.
Like one of the team who speaks of it here
Like Mighty who gave us updates on his home upgrades and he mentioned running vps
Like Dimitar with his nodes at home(s) and his helping friends, family and associates to run quite capable setups
Like the business owner who ran like 30K nodes during the waves and could run themselves over 200 or 300K nodes now with all the optimisations and improvements.
I mention them to show that running more than 10K nodes each is being done by some vocal ones in the forum. How many others are there out there helping to populate the network for good reasons. If the tip of the forum iceberg (vocal forum members) is capable of running perhaps 1/2 million to 1 million, then how many watching have rolled up their sleeves and perhaps running many times what the tip of the iceberg is running.
As @Traktion says once uploading is working fine then this all changes and the usage will hurt any who are running say 30K nodes with 2TB backing it up. Datacentre storage is not cheap. But those I mentioned are not affected by that since they have home setups and just add cheap disks
Do you mean when we have native token? As I don’t see it even starting to fill up until then.
This isn’t real growth, it’s artificial due to a subsidy provided by the network. Real growth is through uploads and payments for uploads. So again, I ask, what is the benefit. Are we just pretending here? And to what ends?
What!? Whales are using data centers too - the only diff is that they own them … what you are saying here makes no sense to me. Better it be people who believe in the project and will hodl rewards, than those swooping in to harvest the value of years of hard work, merely to dump it for ETH or BTC.
Correct me if I’m wrong but the purpose of emissions is to incentivize sufficient capacity being available until the free market of people paying for uploads takes over?
It would have been interesting to launch with no random rewards/emissions, and see if it was even necessary. Is it possible to remove random rewards/emissions, if even temporarily, to test if it’s actually needed?
AFAIK that is wrong. There is an algo that ensures we have sufficient capacity by adjusting the price (tokens) per chunk as the network size grows/shrinks. There is no need for any rewards.