ANT Token - Price & Trading topic

[TylerAbeoJordan]

@Profess

If someone has so much talent to have created a network like Autonomi, they also have the knowledge of how to bring it into the main stream

This is fallacious logic. Having one set of skills does not at all imply having another set of skills.

I’m only offering criticism that can be used to strengthen the weak points that currently exist. Whether or not they are considered is up to the team.

To not analyze the network as a whole and offer analysis would mean leaving it all to them - and that is not being a communitarian – that’s being a leach to be perfectly frank. I’m offering my abilities to analyze what see and giving frank feedback - why do people criticize me for chipping in and doing my part here? David himself has encouraged the community to get involved.

If you have genuine counter arguments (and not simply criticism of me in some way), then please present them - that’s helpful.

[TylerAbeoJordan]

@Audity

Look at all this FUD to keep the price down

What is keeping the price down is the lack of buyers - large numbers of new buyers do not come from this forum, they will come from marketing.

The team isn’t doing much marketing (or at least they haven’t unleashed whatever they may be working on in the background yet), so that is why the price is depressed.

A few comments in this thread are not depressing the price much at all as most everyone here - myself included are long term hodlers.

Also, I don’t see actual FUD here either - I have no fear, uncertainty, or doubt that the problems will be resolved. But if we don’t talk about them and simply assume the team is really aware of them, then we are not doing our part.

Just to remind folks - as I posted about this in 2024 in my marketing thread; The ability to convert MAID to ANT and to easily sell into liquid market is what many long term old time MAID people have been waiting for - There are many who have simply been unable to easily sell their large holdings because even if converted into eMAID, there was too little liquidity.

This is why I wanted strong marketing from the start of launch, because we need new buyers. The existing bunch of us simply can’t absorb all the new tokens on the market and the price was bound to go down.

Waiting for the perfect network before marketing isn’t a good strategy IMO. We market the product on the promise of it’s future performance and abilities - that is what attract buyers into the market - the belief that there will be gains in the future. And this is precisely what we need to soak up the dumped tokens from old MAID holders who are no longer interested in the project.

[Michael_Hills]

@Audity

Of course, the price being where it’s at may as well turn that breathing right into hyperventilating.
So people are converting that feeling into their words of concern and frustration.

Agreed. But price is down all over crypto town. It’s not just ANT.

If we all took our balls, and went home, as the price falls even further, the thing that comforts me is that the team would continue improving Autonomi, regardless.

There is one step left before we can take the elevator to the next level, and that is permanent uploads.

We are close.

The millions of nodes are helping us get there. It’s all a process, and it can’t be rushed. And it was never about coin price.

The thing that is so fascinating to me, is I listen to some OGs that have been supporting this project for at least a decade, suddenly giving up, and taking their balls home.

And yet we have never been in such a good place.

A year ago we were the eternal RnD project, now we have an incredibly solid foundation of a live network; and yet people, who seemed to be happy with small test-nets that lasted 24 hours, are unhappy with a live network that just needs a few more weeks, months of love and care, for it to fulfil its utilitarian promise?

What?

Like I say, if Autonomi was the Kitty Hawk, our flight has only just begun. So sit back, drink a beer, and enjoy the ride.

GO Autonomi!

[Mightyfool]

@Michael_Hills

There is one step left before we can take the elevator to the next level, and that is permanent uploads.

I don’t want to sound negative or pessemistic, and I kinda do agree that uploads is what’s holding us back. But the shareholder ANT releasing schedule change to 50% in 3 months and 50% in 6 months is also still hanging over the market. The amount of tokens coming into the market then is nothing to sneeze at. I’m afraid that by the time uploads are fixed we’re already eyeing the first 50% release. Then after the second, this bull market may be over.

[Traktion]

@Michael_Hills

There is one step left before we can take the elevator to the next level, and that is permanent uploads

To be fair, we’re basically there already. It’s just hard to upload without retries and any file bigger than about 50MB is almost impossible. Splitting larger things into those sizes or smaller is fine though, which points towards it being fixable.

Permanence seems to be a done deal now too. Not seen anything go missing since a couple of test nets ago.

We just need reliability for uploads and performance in general, really. Even APIs are coming along nicely.

Ofc, many more features could be added, especially native currency, but the basic pieces are coming together well.

[chriso]

Just to let you know btw, we have some pretty promising code being evaluated now that is looking like it eliminates two of the big sources of error: not enough quotes and chunk proof verification. At least in the staging setup anyway. We would be hoping to release next week.

At the moment though, we still have only about 50% of people upgraded since the last release. Hopefully that trend won’t continue.

[Michael_Hills]

@Traktion

To be fair, we’re basically there already.

Rejoice! Cheers

[Michael_Hills]

@chriso

we have some pretty promising code

This is awsome!

[Southside]

@chriso

we still have only about 50% of people upgraded since the last release.

Would it be reasonable to assume these are mainly datacentre whales? Who have no real incentive to upgrade anyway.

Whatever, thanks for your tireless efforts - especially on a sunny Sunday afternoon - and I look forward to trying out the new code ASAp

[chriso]

@Southside

Would it be reasonable to assume these are mainly datacentre whales? Who have no real incentive to upgrade anyway.

Honestly, I wish I knew, and could get them to upgrade .

[Josh]

@chriso

could get them to upgrade

Bring out the shun gun!!

They are bad nodes.

[Southside]

I am for the BigHammer solution - pause emissions for 10 days.

Starve them out. They will soon find more profitable uses for their hardware. Meanwhile we get on with it with a far more “realistic” mix of home users and VPS.

Yes it will be a smaller network but still many times bigger than we had previously.

Anyway I know this is not your call - thanks again for the code

[riddim]

@Southside

pause emissions for 10 days

Since the quote sampling algorithm should have access to the version info too it could just start ignoring nodes with current version -2 and could probably count the version -1 only half (if that’s not possible with large changes just count up to date version nodes 2x)… If you grab them by the money they’ll be updated in no time…

[Josh]

CZ has a message for all the folk in this thread.

[Neerajkashyapp]

Is any plan to burn supply automatically… By network yearly or qurtly it automatically increase price of token… In regular basics

[DavidMc0]

@Neerajkashyapp

Is any plan to burn supply automatically

If you look at the tokenomics part of the Whitepaper you’ll see the plan to automatically burn is there when the ‘Network Node Reserve’ fills up.

There’s a good diagram near the end of the Whitepaper that shows this concept in the flow of tokens around the network.

Whether the reserve ever fills up remains to be seen based on upload rate consistency and how the node reserve smart contract is set up.

Further commentary on the node reserve now I’m thinking about it:

If the reserve does fill up, then 98% of payments from uploads will go to nodes + 2% burn, vs 82% to node operators, 18% to reserve, and no burn when the reserve is filling (but 18% being taken out of circulation short / medium term).

It’d be good to hear more details about plans for this from the team in due course.

If the reserve fills, the network would likely be in a good balance, but then node rewards will suddenly jump 16% (if I understand correctly), incentivising more to join, and putting downward pressure on token price, despite being in balance previously.

I wonder what will then happen if the network switches from full reserve + burning, to reserve paying out & refilling… will payouts to nodes from the reserve be greater than / equal to the 16% drop in payouts to nodes from uploaders be enough to incentivise nodes to remain, and will the support level taper down if the reserve diminishes, or abruptly finish once reserve is empty?

I like the 2% of payments burn idea, but the potential dynamics of the reserve make me nervous… more explanation of how it’ll operate may help calm my nerves

An equal rate for reserve filling & burning (e.g. 5% of payments to nodes) would avoid the potentially risky stepping up / down payments to nodes based on reserve status, and reduce the risk of any negative feedback loops being triggered by these potentially abrupt shifts in incentives.

Another possible tweak is that the reserve could be full from day 1 (using 50% of emissions supply ), and the smart contract worked on to ensure smooth operation / minimising distorting effects when the reserve switches between full / paying out / filling modes.

@Neerajkashyapp

automatically increase price of token

Burning will put upward pressure on token price over time due to decreasing supply, but what happens to the token price will depend on the market in aggregate, as price isn’t controlled centrally.

[Erwin]

Would it be possible to exclude older nodes from earning ? Let’s say if you’re more than 2 versions behind: no dough for you.

I think someone not that skilled has fired up a gazillion nodes on a dirt cheap vps without thinking about a plan to keep them updated. Or even aware that the nodes need updating.

[Southside]

@Erwin

I think someone not that skilled has fired up a gazillion nodes on a dirt cheap vps

I think someone quite skilled has fired up a gazillion nodes on their otherwise under-utilised datacentre - and is probably well aware that NOT updating those nodes is working to their advantage for now.
But if we can use the version info to ignore nodes which are not on the latest release then maybe we can sort this
Yes I know we need to move to something more subtle in time, as others have stated, normally we should offer a grace period of one or two versions befoe punishing nodes.
But for now if they are not on >=0.3.7 then they get zero emissions.

[Audity]

Always darkest before the dawn. And it’s actually just a dim dawn.

[bridge]

This approach undermines decentralization. It was stated that the upgraded nodes are planned to be updated in a way that allows them to gain relatively more profit. So, we just have to wait.