shame about the price though
@JimCollinson @Bux surely it is now time to reduce/eliminate random rewards to nodes and instead prioritise rewards to those who are adding value by uploads instead of utterly meaningless boasting about millions of untested and likely fragile nodes?
I donāt see the problem. Surely all this new supply is a good thing. Itās going to increase volume in the markets which will eventually increase the price.
As per the disagreements going on I would recommend the following " other peopleās opinions are no business of my own" If Iām getting offended thatās my problem.
I agree with @Southside. Emissions to producers (node runners) inflate the value. Emissions to consumers would bring more users and demand ā higher value. And those coins would end up to node runners as well.
Supply ā Volume(liquidity)
It was me, I was the realistic investor ever MAID along the way.
So yeah this is an interesting development. Going to take awhile to read all this. Must be all about node amount, marketing, GUI, apps, functionality, reviews, stuff.
How can we help?
I have a feeling, that their absence here is a significant (if not main) source of the hostility.
I hope it will not turn to one of those capital-driven DAOs out there, turning Autonomi into DeFi money-making machine.
This is true ā¦ the key word here IMO, is transparency. Many of the frustrations Iāve had were because things have been randomly dumped on the community by surprise with little explaination ā¦ then after complaining heavily David will come on the scene and explain in detail and (giving more transparency) and that eases everyoneās concerns.
Announcements need to be worked out in advance - considering the communities concerns, then when made, there should be a feedback period to take into consideration things that may have been overlooked by the team.
If our help is desired, then we must be heard as our help is only via ideas and finance.
Team-members need to work on toughening up their skins, while discussions may get heated, in the end none of it should be taken personally. We are all just humans, we make mistakes, we learn, we grow, we change our opinions - but not in a vacuum - we need feedback and hiding ourselves away fro fear of hearing or seeing feedback is an anathema to growth and development.
That may sound like I think the team is hiding away - I donāt think itās as bad as all that, Iām just being hyperbolic to make the point more clear.
Itās great and very appreciated that David is back on the forum and helping the community understand the decisions of the team. Also nice having the new PR guy who is dedicated to the same.
Dealing with investors does take a thick skin, but thatās really necessary and important for the success of the project in order to provide the transparency needed to encourage people to onboard.
+1
Maybe the programmers themselves donāt need to be here so much, but some kind of presence from the team is needed.
I see this as a growing pain of a company/project. Things change, and suddenly something that used to happen just by itself needs a special attention and sort of methodology developed. But first the need for it needs to be recognized.
We need a solution that is something bigger than just every individual trying to be better. The problem is on a social level, even though the symptoms manifests through individuals.
No but all the existing holders hardly trade so the volume is never present. Surely more supply increases the chance that it gets traded.
We have to ask why? Why is that? Why is it that most OSS maintainers really have a hard time? Why do users of OSS see themselves in the same light as āinvestorsā (which btw I have noted to mean ājailersā in many senses or even āslaversā, not all but the loudest many times are).
So we need to stop a minute and ask why? Why is the relationship not just humans helping other humans out? Why are some voices to be heard while the silent majority are supportive, but quiet?
Thereās a lot in that.
I subscribe to @Guybrows note, iā¦e āyour opinion is not my businessā in general life, but here I enjoy listening. I enjoy the various inputs and help and advice, I am pretty good at not being affected by peoples personal opinion of me personally or technically, but I am very defensive of the team and the community at the same time. Thatās a balance 
I think this is true, but also the devs likely should be aware of where issues are etc. Not so much the economy stuff as thatās mass opinionated stuff in many cases, but the basic algorithms etc., for sure. The user feedback in terms of usability are really important though. However gathering that feedback means navigating a sea of very opinionated content that is not necessarily gonna make folk feel happy and motivated Thatās not simple either. Thick skin will not help here as we want folk to listen but have skin thick enough to ignore That is what we are asking for. So kinda not a simple thing
Again itās the OSS maintainers curse, you give and give and folk take and take and then when they have taken a lot, they start to command and direct and demand etc. not all, but it happens. It seems to be "humanā So I donāt single myself out in any way here.
Yes, I donāt know if it exists, but as a target, it would be nice to find.
So we end up stuck with a few folk who can navigate these waters, doing so means no real time to concentrate on the gnarly algorithmic changes or detailed code as the levels of concentration for that need to be quite intense. So we have folk that communicate and donāt do deep thinking etc. (unless they work crazy shit hours like me 
) and others who do deep thinking etc. but cannot have bandwidth also to be here.
I think this is the way itās working, just from a 10,000 foot viewpoint
Just ran some stats on log files and there is one IP address with just over 60K nodes running on a bare metal server in a datacentre. That has to be about the absolute max you can have on one computer considering only 64K ports available on an IP address
Are you sure @neo That seems like there ay be a bug somewhere, ports are a u32 (~35K) unless things have changed, the max ports are 35K and 1024 of them privileged.
Well no, I use ports 50001 and up for my nodes. And its a max of 64K u16
u32 is 4 billion
Network header (TCP but UDP is similar with differences in the seq# etc)
standard ports for Kubernetes is above node number 35k
Iām pretty sure itās the 64k Neo mentioned above
(but is he running with exposed ports or as --home-network nodes to reduce load on his side and not acting as relay?)
Doesnāt matter, since each node still has a listening port. And his networking is high grade data centre. So I doubt relay duties would phase it
right - the port needs to be bound to get answers
Yea my bad, I was thinking 35K for some reason, not sure why? also 16 bit. Not a good morning for thinking apparently 
Its still an impressive feat by that person to run so many nodes on a data centre machine
