$307… would be nice!
ANT would need a market cap somewhere between XRP and ETH to achieve that (assuming circulating supply around 800m).
I certainly think Autonomi could bring more utility to more people than those, so it’s not impossible given time & development 
thanks for that detailed explanation. very good.
Revolut says it is available in MetaMask, but I guess not for me here in US, or just not yet.
#2-- as I first read this I just assumed the ETH would be Arbitrum One ETH and it would go straight to your chosen wallet.
#3-- why would you not just use Arb ETH to swap for ANT directly?
RE #5-- if you must include the USDC step, can’t you send the USDC to your ArbOne address straight away???
I feel like such a bonehead not being able to understand why the 3ring circus is necessary. If I can spend fiat to buy eth or usdc or usdt or other eth, ytf can’t i just buy the ANT!!!
I’m no expert with erc20 either, so don’t worry - it’s just what worked for me and there may he better ways.
To answer your questions:
#2, it is the gas to more the erc20 USDC, I believe
#3, I didn’t have any and Revolut doesn’t speak Arbitrum. So, I needed DEX to bridge from Ethereum to Arbitrum.
#4, see above.
You may get a simpler experienxe using an CEX (centralised exchange), but I had Revolut setup and wanted to try the fully DEX route.
I’m sure some of the big players with fiat onramps will eventually list ANT, but it probably won’t happen for some time due to low volume / being under the radar etc.
What are your thoughts on the incentives for running nodes that are being paid out now?
It seems to me that there is huge potential that this ends in tears.
There will be significant sell pressure from node ops sooner or later to counteract that we will need many buyers.
I don’t doubt that the buyers will come, I am hesitant that they will come at pace to keep up with the rewards that are going out per month.
Short term issue I hope.
Looking at node numbers, I think that incentive is clearly too high,
I don’t know what you’re trying to accomplish, but if you want to buy ANT the shortest way, you don’t have to buy it on DEX,then send USD to your Binance account (if you have an account, you may have to go through KYC there), in Binance convert USD to USDT (you can do a very favourable swap) and send USDT via the Binance BEP20 chain without fees to your Bitmart account, and buy ANT there. Then you can send ANT to MetaMask.
ANT has only just been launched and probably the costs of launching a Fiat → ANT exchange are too high for now, someday there will surely be such an exchange pair possible .
Isn’t this just something that will balance eventually? Node operators will scale up till a certain point of profitability. If you reduce the rewards, nodes will scale down and it will come just as profitable again. What I would expect is that the team thought of what network mass they would want at the early stages. This could be for whatever reason, partner data size required, network mass for less vulnerabilities etc.
If you compare it to other early phase crypto projects, the emission really isn’t even that big. Plus we need the liquidity in the market for buyers that want to upload & exchanges look at volume too to determine if they want to list or not.
I dont see the emission in general as a problem, but the lack of inflow of new people is. If that changes, I really don’t think price suppression
is something we have to worry about.
There are different angles to view it at for sure.
Dynamic node rewards are entirely irrelevant at this time.
The design is intended to increase rewards to nodes when space is needed, clearly space is far far far from needed, yet people are incentivised to pour nodes onto the network.
Idk, it doesn’t seems blanced and anything that is not balanced eventually falls over.
I agree, and honestly I think the team agrees too. What I expect happend is that they had something planned for after launch (bux mentioned an node update as early as last Thursday), but for some reason it didn’t happen yet. Could be the upload issue, I also saw a post where someone was able to upload without paying etc. so I’m expecting the team to be busy fixing fires left and right again, and really no time to review the reward schedule which is just really time consuming. It’s all just speculation of course, but if they would be working on adjusting the emission for the reasons you just mentioned I’d start to worry because that’s the moment they acknowledge that the time invesment is worth it because the state of the network is probably not changing anything soon.
I don’t really know how to say this without it seeming like a jab. To be clear it is not, I run a stupid amount of nodes too.
But my feel is that any resistance to my argument of rewards are too high will come from large node ops who feel it is a make hay while the sun shines moment.
It’s not unfair though, large node ops are taking a substantial risk, its not a small investment.
So all good 
I feel they’re unnecessary & could be better used incentivising app devs etc… or put aside for that when that becomes possible.
I shared that on Discord and Bux said some more info next week may clarify the teams thinking on this, so we’ll see.
Maybe there’s a reason the team wants a massive network of empty nodes for testing purposes or something, but beta already showed big node numbers work.
We also know that nodes will join very rapidly when incentives are there, so there’s no need to worry about space running out when demand increases; the only concern should be ensuring there is demand for uploading data.
The biggest issue for me is that the unnecessary nodes mean the network is basically empty, which suppresses the store cost so nodes won’t get paid anything much from uploads (theoretically, as right now node ANT payments are broken, with uploads being free in ANT terms. (Edit: uploads are now working well at least for small files!).
For now, the only people who get paid when we upload to Autonomi is ETH / Arbitrum node operators. While it’s early days, having too many nodes will mean it takes longer before uploading actually pays nodes significantly.
Saying all this, TGE must have been a huge focus for the team, along with getting the launch network out there and working on top priority issues with the network’s performance (working on fixing uploads , payments etc), so tweaking the payments to nodes probably isn’t a huge priority, and I don’t think it’ll cause any lasting problems.
Also perhaps have the incentives dynamically adjust same as node rewards.
Uploaders are indeed what’s lacking, but unfortunately getting more uploads is going to be difficult because of all the issues we know about.
Worse, it will be skewed towards larger uploaders rather than individuals, and towards the cryptocurrency savvy rather than ordinary folk.
Even though running nodes is relatively easy, and can be made easier for ordinary folk, they will also be held back or discouraged by receiving tokens that require complex blockchain stuff to do anything with them.
We desperately need the team to set out whether and how the blockchain barriers to both can be mitigated.
I asked @rusty.spork if he would try to get some details on methods and plans for this yesterday (on Discord) but have not had a reply.
Yes, even once tokens have been earned, a new node operator will need to get ETH to pay gas etc to then upload… not a huge challenge, but it’s all friction that won’t exist with Native.
I do feel it’s a good thing that we have a network at an earlier time that at least caters to the crypto-savvy crowd ahead of Native being ready. Once Native is here, it’ll make the experience smoother for all… especially the non-crypto savvy.
I hope developing Native is a top priority once the network is functioning well.
Not sure if the team had any clue that we would have over 1 million nodes in a week. They planned incentives a year ago. So, it is as it is. The ones who know how to upload data can take thi opportunity. It’s great incentive for them.
Sorry, but I see this being minimised and that means ignoring the fundamental that the network is supposed to be “for everyone”. For almost everyone outside our tech, nerd, crypto bubble this and even the word blockchain represent an insurmountable barrier.
If we don’t recognise this I fear we have lost our way, which has been my concern since September.
If it weren’t for the ETH fees, there would be a mountain of uploads until the nodes started to fill up… I’d have done TBs of photos already 
I certainly regonise it, but I also recognise that the network isn’t finished.
I would feel as you do if I also felt Native had been abandoned, but I trust the team when they say it’s very much in the plans, and I also see value in the trade-off taken to get to a viable network more quickly.
Minimum viable network doesn’t require native token… but optimal network certainly does.
We’ll see if your fears are well placed or not in time, but it’s good that many people are being vocal about wanting to see Native as soon as possible so it’s kept as high priority.
That’s all fine and not a debate I need to have, but ignores the point I was trying to make - that it is not true to say “…need to get ETH to pay gas etc to then upload… not a huge challenge” and doing so minimises what will be an important issue until it is solved, one way or another.