I think itād be great to clarify this proposal and put it forward to get detailed feedback on why it has been rejected so far, and what would be needed to make it work.
Was this a reason in the write up given against this solution?:
Is the above saying that an EVM bridge (which I guess would be key in achieving this proposal?), would not be possible within a reasonable time, so itās not being considered?
Iām no expert, but itās not clear to me how a 2-way bridge could be achieved if the network isnāt able to create tokensā¦ how could the ERC 20 token be locked in the network, and Native Tokens issued against them, all in a reverse & secure way?
It would be great to have a detailed breakdown from the team on the feasibility of this option, because if possible it would seem to;
get rid of the scaling issues & constraints on small-scall network actions (assuming these constraints community members envisage with L2s are in fact realā¦ I expect they will be)
enable ERC20 for on/off-ramps, security ahead of the native token being battle-tested
expel any fear that the native token will be left behind
The only down side I can think of just now from my limited perspective is that if the native token were exploited, it could lead to a loss of any native balances, and node earnings that hadnāt been bridged to ERC20 before any failure / exploit that inflated native token supply. If people know itās ERC20 for security, Native for usage, that may be an acceptable risk in the early days, though of course best avoided if possible!
I expect thereās a good reason the team hasnāt gone for this obvious solution, and itād be great to hear the reasoning, and what the main blockers / disadvantages of this concept are vs the full-ERC20 to pay nodes plan.
To be clear I am happy for a solution to the issues having been found. I am worried and upset that so many use cases are lost, and those use cases are what affects the general public the most.
Then to have what seems an obvious solution that allows for the previously sought after use cases and provides all the benefits that ERC20 brings seems to be an obvious solution to examine even if it ruffles some devs idea of doing it for every upload. Its appealing from a computer science perspective to have a system where you have all these transactions flying around between systems, but from a user point of view its a nightmare with tons of manual processing
I think we overestimate these people, regulators can talk to our AIs.
With 500 million cryptocurrency users, even if 1% run 1 node the Network would be reaching further than exchanges ever could. There are still 7.5 billion people out there, and I donāt think they share the same opinion that we need an āexchangeā. Nodes and faucet is the way SAFE gets distributed.
Please letās not get distracted, these people, institutions think they are relevant, but they are such a small number compare to the people out there who need this tech and AIs.
I just did the upgrade and Jippy I already got 1 nano Iām selling this 1 nano tommorow for ā¬0.01.
Please use ERC20 L2 to make it clear that we are not talking about the main net ERC. I would like to see the full presentation of what it will be and test it before making conclusions of what can, canāt be done, what will work and what will not work.
Weāre not talking here about the ability of a regulator to stop the technology once in the hands of the general public, but in terms of imprisoning specific people, that has to be on your mind all the time because itās happening and itās very, very real.
Thatās why I was shocked that somebody was working on the wallet code, AIs can code for the end users.
Playing with exchanges does seem like a waste of time, because hitbtc seems locked down and MAID is so scarce now, that itās better to focus on creating apps. Even Iām trying to create a app now, with the help of AIā¦ Thatās why itās useful to play with nanos incase AI makes an error in the wallet code, unless you have human friends who can actually check the code
Has anyone considered OP_CAT? If I remember correctly that is Bitcoinās old scripting language that looks like may be re-enabled for smart contracts.
Not crapping on Ethereum but to provide a storage layer tightly integrated with Bitcoin (the fastest horse) would be very quickly adored and evangelized by the maxis.
Seems like storage and speed has always been BTCās biggest problems. The common thread between miners and AI and Autonomi nodes and AI is also interesting. I could see people running bitcoin nodes also running Autonomi nodes in this scenario.
Just tossing the idea out there btw. I get that this could be a sidetrack and in that case just ignore it but maybe something to consider as this could be niche with a lot of support.
Scaling is the issue. At the moment they have gone for a per chunk/file solution which will never scale to provide a solution which everyone can us. Prob not even something people can use for daily files/photos/email/etc
While they insist on going for a per file/chunk basis then itāll be limited to people wanting to upload large files like over 1GB videos. Reason being they will only ever do a few a week/month style of uploading. The manual processing means a single person can only do so many executions of a smart contract.
We need to go to a per wallet system providing the advantages of using a blockchain solution with the network token, which we are told is what is used currently, for each upload. Then it can scale up and work for millions or more people.
Do we need a scaling solution if the plan is to ditch the erc20 again anyway? Maybe even a good thing if the weaknesses of Blockchain strike hard and if there is pressure for change (and not to get too far away from the vision by adapting to Blockchain limitations)
This is very sad, am I the only one who believes that as long as David is alive he will fight to achieve our dream?
This distrust is unnecessary, there is more than one way to achieve success.
Yes, it could have been avoided if the communication from the team was at a better level, but the end goal is important, and the battle for it continues in full force. The night is darkest before the sunrise!
Im reading a lot of negativity about the lack of native token. All the use cases that canāt be covered with ERC-20, etc.
I agree.
This makes me believe it isnāt a long term, ideal, solution. I donāt believe it is a conspiracy. I believe the team genuinely want the network to be used, to prove the reliability, performance, etc.
Then the focus will switch to supporting all of the other use cases. Which sounds like they will need a native token.
The drive for a native token will be resolving the problem of not having one.
We have disappointment about the native token, but it feels like the real disappointment is the lack of transparency ans community engagement - something that was present in the past, but has been displaced.
The commercialisation of the project into a working, reputable, network was always going to bring changes here. Maybe it could have been handled better, but most of the same folks are still involved and the cynicism seems a bit disproportionate.
I say we cut the team some slack and try to celebrate the win of launching a working data networkā¦ warts/limitations and all. It can be refined later, but delays canāt happen forever and income streams for the team are surely needed sooner rather than later.
But would this really help? imo no, because it would not be a true statement.
Solutions (exchanges,legal blah blah) still need to be discovered/invented (and they will) but we cant expect a definitive statement ,its not really fair to ask that atm imo.
It still is a key part of how it works. You still donāt need any external on/off ramps to get data on the network if you donāt want, or need to. That srill works at the individual level, or after onboarding, or for general use.
But, if you look at the overall economy, the network needs continual growth, and that can only happen with data inflow and money entering the system (and of course exiting to allow node ops to cover expenses).
The network doesnāt stand alone. Itās connected to a complex open system (the world!). It will also be challenged by direct alternatives.
We could ignore the other potential motives (even in the face of crunching the numbers an the growth analysis) and just have a go at full barter onlyā¦ but itās quite a risk!
I believe for 1 that the native transaction types are vastly superior to blockchain in many ways. However my ideal would be no audit back to genesis, but instead use dynamic parent checks.
This means a fully very high speed mechanism that is code correct and no requirement to keep history of each transaction. I believe that history is not required and that will be a big change to society, but one I think we have to make.
I think folk want a date to switch to that, but I donāt think that is feasible. The way I see it happen is the alternative currency builds alongside the erc20 stuff. So erc20 is how nodes get paid. Then SNT happens to transfer other value and grows. As it grows then we see how fast it is and over time the cry will be to speed up data handling and use this high speed no history secure currency.
I see it happen as a natural thing, a proven thing and over time. Users, exchanges and the whole eco system should want it and be crying for it. Not for some feeling or naming or other belief, but due to pure functionality and capability.
For that we need to show it working and being useful and that is where app devs can help. This currency can be started by anyone, many of them can be, even millions of them. The apps that find that nugget that goes viral will lead the way.
Who knows what that will be and when is not possible to date, but I believe if the tech is this good, and I think it is, then this outcome is inevitable.
So itās not a love or feeling or giving folk something they feel they should have or any other such emotive issue, to me itās all about proof and capability and that being very clear.
The blockchain/not blockchain crypto/not crypto stuff is all just noise for me right now. Itās digital currency, folk will call it crypto or blockchain for a very long time. So what?
Thanks Traktion, appreciate the sentiment and also the candidness re: communications as well. From my perspective, without trying to make things seem overly simplistic (we all know nothing could be further from the truth), we canāt just keep talking and imagining/expecting these millions, or indeed hundreds of thousands of users - we have to find them ā¦ we have to offer something people want, not just need, and even with a live Native token on an incredible network, there is no instant nor easy way to do this. There are billions of devices in the world yes, but they are all hooked up and being used - for photos and messaging and banking etc. Transferring that type of storage and convenience to be supported by Autonomi isnāt just about ensuring ātheyā have somewhere to go to - but that there are the bridges and also the desire to cross them. We have to start by starting, and (imo) itās not just about 1:1 personal uses cases - some of whom will be alright without having access across multi devices (hardrives etc) and some who love the experience of their digital photo apps which will take a long time (and some good builders) to disrupt - we need data at scale (for nodes and growth). Ensuring we can be considered credible, while we continue to build out (while proving there is a desire for what weāre building), isnāt something I feel is wrong, insincere or misaligned with the vision that David has never and will never compromise on.
I do partially agreeā¦ but my retort to this is how does For Everyone work if Everyone (or perhaps even Hardly Anyone) canāt access the token to put data on the network?
Should we delay serving anyone until we can serve everyone?
If not, where is the line between these extremes? And why not serve many, and then expand to all?
I canāt help but feel this might be a perfect being the enemy of the good scenarioā¦ which if we are honest we (my self included!) have been guilty of over the course of this epic project!
Iām selling this 1 nano tommorow for ā¬0.01.