Community Token Proposal :IF:

[loziniak]

@bytes

Congrats on being one of the Top 12 for Impossible Futures!

Thank you!

@bytes

I’m not sure how familiar you are with Gnosis / xDAI

@bytes

I’m unsure of what benefit there would be verses using ERC-20

Actually, I was not thinking about Gnosis chain, rather the Safe{Wallet} app, which was developed by Gnosis earlier under a name of Gnosis Safe.

Thanks for your effort of researching Gnosis/xDAI and the bridge, but most probably I won’t dig into that, because this project’s goal is rather oposite – to explore ways of escaping EVM-dependence, rather than developing new dependencies or spending time to switch. It would be nice to have 100x smaller fees, but the main problem is the complication of whole process, which would not disappear with new EVM network. And your comment about fork is also % right, we want to avoid that.

@bytes

I’m also hesitant about how adequate GraphEntry traversal performance will be, as the length of GraphEntry chains continues to increase over time (after all, double-spending needs to be checked for and prevented, etc). I try to think along the lines of “would the solution I’m thinking about be able to handle millions/billions of users everyday?” and at least for now, I’m not seeing it happening soon with today’s Autonomi implementations.

@maidsafe were working on a solution utlilizing DAG nodes:

@maidsafe

And last but not least, @anselme has refactored the DAG and audit code, making it more robust and fixing bugs. We’re starting to look at the requirements for running DAG nodes, in order to see how best this can be integrated into network operations.

And my idea is Forward validation together with Backward validation. Lots of work, but I think it is realistic, because it would mostly be done collectively. With a Native Token the checks would be even simpler, because only parents of a transaction would need to be checked, because instead of client, nodes were performing checks, so it was guaranteed, that all transactions were valid, otherwise they would not be added to the storage.

@bytes

I definitely would like a way for Autonomi clients to not pay so much more for Arbitrum transaction fees compared to ANT paid to node operators (my understanding is the value is currently on the order of a million-to-one and has been since TGE).

As we all do! But the million-to-one is also an effect of emissions, that incentivize node operators beyond simple payment for storage. If not emissions, there were much fewer nodes/operators, and price for storage would most probably significantly rise.