We should have but we didn’t and so what do we do now?
Wow David, that says a lot about the type of leader you are for sure. So should we give you more garbage to clean up? I say we let you focus on getting the MVP as currently defined out ASAP instead and as @nhial said, let you get some rest first.
What is VC investment and why is it relevant to the community or anyone else especially if it’s off the table? Why is it relevant for the definition of the MVP if it’s off the table? Why are we defining project goals based on a defunct investment goal?
Yes but given that the implimentation of safecoin relies on the technology that will allow messaging (and video streaming and all the rest of it) it seems the former must be implimented before the latter so both are crucial. Check the roadmap.
Well this is something I’m wondering. I’m not THAT worried about whether or not safecoin is released with the MVP but rather if it is not then how will you run the network given the nessecity of safecoin to the network. As I’ve said it’s more of an engineering question for me. How do you fly a jet without an engine?
Oh thank God an explanation. Sounds more like a PoC to me but whatever. How would you handle network resource overload? That is if the network can handle x amount of data what happens if there is x + y amount of demand for data for whatever reason on the network?
You get a network full message as you would now 
Okay that explains that. I’ve never seen one of those so yeah.
Call it what it is…pure and simple. Anything else is inaccurate.
An MVP IS minimum full features with all the bugs. Stop using the term MVP when we’re clearly at POC level. It’s inaccurate and boarders on being straight out dishonest.
You don’t need to be giving me hell as I agree with you. But it’s the maidsafe team that apparantly doesn’t agree things like safecoin or messaging are considered core features. Read the above quotes by @dirvine and you’ll see he’s referring to proof of concept as MVP. I agree with you that MVP = full features w/ bugs. In short it’s alpha or beta software. From the roadmap alpha will not have safecoin but beta is looking like it will.
My apologies. I didn’t mean to be rude. I’m just tired of hearing over hyped terminologies and selling those coins for public outreaches etc is just outrageous in my opinion. If they must sell them, then ALL the money should go to coding. Everything else should be on hold.
My suggestion is to drop the term MVP and simply make public announcements by its developing stages, ie. network alpha ready, safecoin alpha, etc… that way the expectations are unambiguous.
Or simply keep announcing testnet #.
I suggest for PR purposes to save the term MVP when the testnets are over.
I agree that ‘MVP’ should be sent for the Saudi treatment…nothing good has resulted from it’s use.
The only definition of MVP I really care about in this context is the definition being used by MaidSafe to describe a stage of their product readiness.
If you don’t think the MVP term is being used how you’d like it to be used, but that doesn’t really matter (though it’s interesting to discuss).
We all need clarity on what MaidSafe mean by MVP, then it will be clear to us, so lets stop muddying the water & try to get clear of what it means in this context.
Also I think the MVP term is being used correctly by MaidSafe: Minimum Viable Product should be the smallest set of features to get a working, usable & stable product out the door. Given that Safecoin wasn’t even intended to exist when the Safe Network concept was originally thought up, I don’t see how it can be ‘essential’ to the MVP.
MVP by definition cannot be ‘full features’ as in all planned features - it’s the MINIMUM features to get a fully working, market-ready product out the door. The internet doesn’t have a built in cryptocurency or messaging. Bittorrent doesn’t have built in crypto-currency or messaging. However, they are both finished products, so to say that the Safe Network is not viable without these features doesn’t make sense, despite the fact that they will greatly enhance the network’s utility.
Perhaps the ‘When will I be able to start using the SAFE Network?’ section on the Wiki could be updated to include an official outline of the features to be included in Alpha, Beta, etc, and which of these will be labelled the ‘MVP’ so we don’t need to keep discussing this?
I think the only definition of MVP that matters here is MaidSafe’s definition, which I think is basically a stable, secure, smoothly running Safe Network running from people’s computers around the world. This is a requirement for the development of Safecoin.
The thing is, SAFEnet without SAFEcoin is a different product from SAFEnet with SAFEcoin. They have a different economic engine, so to speak.
So “MVP” is contentious because all three words lack clear and commonly agreed definitions in the context of this discussion (as compared to dictionary definitions).
and the Alpha’s…however many of those we’re likely to get.
As many as it takes. What is your question, exactly?
Then stop calling what we have anything other than POC because that’s all it is. Lets start from a place of honesty. This community is testing POC nothing more than that.
Networks, client API’s, client apps, launcher, proxy, language interaction and more. Call it what you want really many POC’s, testnets on the way to Alpha releases then Beta then release candidates. Semantics aside this is iterative roll out and that should be very clear,
We should just STOP with all the “secret” “great” “immanent” “amazing” “just around the corner” “new efficiency” posturing that’s been going on around here.
Lets just talk about facts…you know, the things that are actually happening, what we actually have.
Or maybe you should just keep your unproductive thoughts to yourself? Registering not even a week ago, with a FUD name screams troll, BTW.
There are plenty of other threads discussing there here/now (such as dev updates).
blatant Faker #gohome
short your margin account all you like but take your ''quotation marks" somewhere else
Honestly, if you acted like a complete jerk, that would still be preferable compared to this dishonesty. Should you just stop using the pronoun “we” to start with.