Are we following this schedule? Are we on year 2 emmisions?
2 Likes
Doubt it. The team was not on year 1 as the correction reduction has never been set back to year 1. This was because we had no consistent performance and they wanted to put emission somewhere else once the network was fully running. On top of that we had some node operators cheating the system, not a great time to increase the emission either. I’m expecting them to be back on track soon though.
4 Likes
Yeah I remember a comment by bux saying something a long while back about a pause.
Not heard anything since, hence unsure of where we are at in the emissions thinking.
Whatever it is, it should be clearly stated. New people reading the WP assume it is correct.
5 Likes
Didn’t the network launch in march, so year 2 would be next year?
Hmmm, I thought we are over a year but I could very well be wrong. I routinely forget my wedding anniversary 
But still, are we still on reduced emissions?
It’s just not clear from the WP, unless of course we are following it again.
There was never a following the schedule as advertised again announcement to my knowledge.
Idk.
2 Likes
We are AFAIK
Last word I remember from Bux was that they are continuing on the reduced until the review that should have happened happens. Something about not changing until they are sure of whats happening.
2 Likes
We are still on the reduced emissions
5 Likes
Not having a clear schedule for emissions and being able to manipulate emissions (either through a hack or deliberately via Maidsafe or the foundation), makes the token highly unattractive, hence more selling pressure.
When does the token emission process become decentralized and unmanipulatable to the degree that BTC is?
Not having an answer to my question also makes the token less attractive. I hope the management understands this fundamental market dynamic.
Markets (buyers and sellers) HATE uncertainty
2 Likes
A good question for the Spaces tomorrow.
1 Like
Thanks @rusty.spork, if I had my way it would remain that way.
Regardless of the plan it’s probably at least needs a little note on the WP so that newbs don’t feel like they got giving the wrong info when reading the paper?
I can imagine a big stink.
6 Likes
seconded.
As for price, a lot of other stuff to sort out before this becomes any kind of factor,
1 Like
Thought most people on the forum knows this, there are 10 years of emissions. @TylerAbeoJordan
As the network fills and gets larger then emissions will become a lower and lower % of total payments to the nodes.
As network and usage of the autonomi network grows larger then the demand for Ant will grow higher than the quantity of ANT’s that whales will be to sell daily.
If it works at this level, why not just assume this is year 7, adjust and copy what we already know works? In addition to emmissions, we have a Network Node Reserve and ridiculous divisibility.
The key is more people using Autonomi, more demand.
I have started uploading recently as things works well, planing on uploading maybe 100GB or more in the coming 6 months. At least every OG should start and try using the network more.
As Dave and the Network works well then we just have to show people how it works and guide them to Autonomi by making content.
Make more content, how the network works, how to get Ant store and use, how to upload/download, what cool things can be done with Friends and other apps. Apps like Dave, Friends and others might need a little polish to be ready for the general crypto public but it feels close now.
2 Likes
I was mainly referring to emissions. I don’t understand the obsession with this attempt to reinvent the wheel and incentivize nodes when we already know what works after nearly 15 years of observation with respect to the economics.
1 Like
The network needs a base level size, to work, security and similar things, current emmissions level gives the current network size. The total uploaded data and demand for storage is not enough currently to support the current network size. It would even be good if the network becomes like 10-100x larger quite fast as that would make it more difficult for a single whale to cause disruption or harm to the network.
1 Like
Thanks for the attempt to clarify for me and pardon my frustration. Sounds like emissions need to be dynamic as we do not have the luxury of simply withholding resources like a miner could do on the bitcoin network. In all these years, I guess I imagined storage as being analogous to hashing power when it is apparently a bit more nuanced. If that’s the case, I am not surprised that the schedule as outlined in the whitepaper has been deviated from. I suppose the silver lining in all these delays is that we now have real world examples and other DePin projects we can learn from.
1 Like