Seems odd to me that you had to ask, then you say it doesn’t matter. 
How about privacy and security?
Is that ideology now, or is it still important to folk such as yourself. I think the ideological boot is on the other foot. The cult requires homage be paid only in the anointed temple, and our leader refuses to reach out beyond that.
I can’t do much when the project keeps changing direction, I’ve wasted time doing that already. And we don’t have a network to work with yet. Its been abandoned for an unknown future one with little details. Valid criticism is constructive, sycophantic optimism and denial is not.
Ok so it can be run on linux if we vibe code it ourselves? 
Seems even more odd to me that someone interested in a project like Autonomi can’t fathom why someone doesn’t want to use Discord. They should just use AWS/Dropbox/FaceTube
I have no idea what it is or what it will become and won’t be able to use it until the hardware requirements are reduced. I will see what is released and what the community members that can run it (and are open minded enough to run it) think of it. I will run nodes when the network is up again and hopefully be helping contribute to something I believe in rather than just whine about what is not, what could have been and what should be. In my opinion the team is trying to deliver what it set out to deliver (within law/reason) all those years ago but times have changed and so has the technology. If my belief is wrong I’ll say at least we/they tried and just move on with no bitterness towards David or the team.
Sounds like you are jealous of David sometimes Mark.
You misjudge me. I’m a very happy being fella. My life is as good as I could possibly imagine and I’m jealous of nobody.
David is living his best life and me mine.
I hope you are too.
Data can be uploaded again. Tokens cannot.
you’ve lost it now, Mark…
He’s just fed up with constant negativity and I don’t blame him. Lifes too short.
Anyway Im pouring a wee Glenmorangie, hope you have a nice malt there yourself 
Take care.
Read the source and then you tell me.
What @scottefc86 said. 
Not that bit, though. 
FAQ on Discord:
# Does Autonomi use a blockchain?
Yes and No.
Autonomi’s core data network is a form of Decentralized Ledger Technology (DLT) that doesn’t utilise nor require a blockchain to function, so it’s able to sidestep many of the obstacles to scaling inherent in other solutions.
However its payment system currently uses the Ethereum blockchain (Arbitrum), before the integration of its native, and blockchainless currency as a network upgrade.
It’s not like the Autonomi Discord is ten years old.
That FAQ is obviously stale.
At launch, there was a plan to use native token. By last summer, the team articulated that native token wasn’t a priority, but was still in consideration. By the end of last year, it wasn’t on the roadmap.
Will it return? Who knows. It isn’t planned though.
Should there have been more notice? Would 2 years have been enough? Maybe 5?
At what point was it obvious that native was a distraction or a risk to the network? Same timelines? Maybe less?
Today, there are many high speed blockchains that simply didn’t exist 12 years ago. Bitcoin barely did. Over the last 5+ years, stable coins, successful alt chains, etc, have really come to the fore too. Over the last few years, exchanges and legislation has built around those technologies.
Is it still possible to do a native token? If the network can be seen to be stable enough, exchanges are welcoming and legislation doesn’t work against the privacy aspects, sure. Is it a priority for the team, when there are other companies already way ahead in those areas, no… it is not.
It would be nice if every feature can be implemented. The reality is, you tend to have to pick, choose and prioritise. Every successful business does the same.
I obviously do have bitterness towards David, but not the team.
I am not bitter about the changes in plans, even though I disagree with some of them. I am eager to see how 2.0 rolls out and I’m pretty sure there are many good improvements over 1.0.
I am bitter about the way he has been treating me and some others on the discord. And I don’t think it is unfair to point this out. People in a leading position of any project should behave better than he does at the moment. But of course there is nothing I can do, if he himself does not see his behavior as problematic. I’m not going to push him for this, but I wanted to clarify my position and say this out loud in support for others who might feel bad after being on the receiving end of his mockery.
Questions about Fae?
Ask Fae
Sorry now, but this doesn’t make any sense. Your initial point can only make sense if I’ve got the facts wrong, which it turns out I hadn’t, as Southside and I have established.
And there was no “anti-maidsafe rant” at all - it was stated (sarcastically) that people could use Fae to help them with xyz, and I responded to say that at least initially only a tiny subset of people could do so, because of the strict system requirements (silicon mac, high-ram).
I don’t understand why you’d respond with the above, doublling down on your point, when your point was based on the assumption that my point was a misreading, when now we know it wasn’t?
Just using your words as a springboard here scott, my replies aren’t particularly aimed towards you, but could I quickly say: of all the stuff I’ve read which could be construed as sceptical or critical of LLMs, it’s almost always the case that the person has tried the tech extensively, read about it extensively, etc. I know I have, for example.
Have you (and others) considered that the “open minded” ones might be the ones who have gone so far in their investigations as to be able to see through the narrative pushed by these giant LLM companies, that we all have no choice in this future?
Just a thought 
I personally also have no specific bitterness towards David or the team, although I sympathise with those expressing grievances. I wish things had been handled better, but appreciate that it’s hard on both sides.
It pains me particularly that comments construed as “negative” are seen as unacceptable. Back when I discovered MaidSafe, one characteristic that impressed me was that arguments were judged on their merit, and not the extent to which they clung to the party line, as it were.
I usually find the authors of the negative articles have the most to lose from the rise/improvement of the LLM’s so when reading them feel as though it’s more about self preservation than genuine concern.
Maybe your right and it’s becoming a self fulfilled prophecy, either way I don’t think we do have a choice about the future so would be happier if I had the choice of a personal AI over a large corporations AI.
You can’t deny that these things have their uses and will only get better, maybe we are just going to big to fast, who knows? I have a lot of other thoughts but can’t get it into words, maybe in person one day hopefully.
100% and that’s why I’m still around but I think the situation has changed from the good old days. The network is in production now not R and D and the team is doing what they think is best and we have just got to accept that. I personally don’t want blockchain payments but the decision has been made so I either live with it or keep moaning about it but what’s the point in that?
OK, hugging Fae using Dirvine’s model via Claude at “Knuffelend Gezicht”:
How are github/saorsa-labs/saorsa network concepts different compared to the precursor, github/maidsafe/autonomi or for that matter, github/maidsafe/safe_network?
“Too Long; Did Read” but shortened:
In summary, saorsa-core introduces several innovative features and optimizations, such as post-quantum cryptography, ML-optimized adaptive routing, and human-readable addresses, which set it apart from the precursor projects like autonomi and safe_network. These differences make saorsa-core a more advanced and secure solution for decentralized networking.
If it were a choice between a corporate-controlled AI or the kind MaidSafe are dreaming of, I’d make the same choice as you. That these are the only kinds of futures on the table is the premise of MaidSafe’s decision to incorporate ML models, and I’m not convinced the assumption is accurate.
And while I can agree that the specific types of capabilities LLMs have now will improve to some degree if the LLM companies keep throwing resources at it, I nonetheless can deny that these things will get better indefinitely, and I also can disagree that what they have now is meaningfully akin to human intelligence.
Yesterday, as a small sanity check and a bit of a laugh, I spent ten minutes getting the saorsa model on huggingfaces to completely “agree” with me on certain points which would be considered utter sacrilege here, regarding the fundamentals, native token, reliance on centralised cryptocurrencies, the redesign with LLMs, etc. That doesn’t “prove” anything about those topics - all it shows is the fact that LLMs are natural language processing software that produce text which they think you want to hear, not “logical” entities doing “reason” or anything like it.
Believing they will definitely get better indefinitely, or that they’ll suddenly start actually doing logic at some stage, is a faith-based belief, it is unscientific. No amount of wishful thinking will change this.
They still might, we can’t exactly prove they won’t; but believing they definitely will is a leap of faith.
It has happened many, many times, that people have thought “oh, we can definitely extrapolate this thing here and get xyz in the future”, and they’ve ran into unforeseen difficulties, and in fact the laws of physics didn’t permit the thing.
This is one of the nice things from the perspective of an individual human observer about living in the physical universe - all the VCs in the world can throw all the money they want at a thing, and they still might be proven to be completely wrong by the laws of physics.
I mean, this is a completely trivial statement, I would think. Any physicist, mathematician, scientist, computer scientist, programmer, runs into this fact. The Universe isn’t obliged to conform to our desires.
I wasn’t going to respond at all here actually, as I appreciated your response and thought we could leave it there, but then this short thread on Mastodon
seemed like an eloquent and direct response to some of the legitimate worries and concerns you’re raising, and that set me off. If you get a moment, I wonder what you’d think of that thread, and how that person phrases it?
I agree with a lot of what you said and I won’t call anything a real AI until it can disagree with me properly and ‘break’ its programming if it needs to, free will I guess. I still see these LLM’s as a tool and like the thread said some personal responsibility would be nice. Yes they might be used for wars/killing but humans are still making the decisions to use them for that.
The thread was a good read but I’ve learned over the last few years that most people don’t really care and are oblivious to what I and the thread believe is inevitably incoming. Again this incoming nightmare could be scripted as it will help to integrate these LLM’s, CBDC’s, Carbon trackers, digital ids into existing. I still think a successful autonomi network can help us that are aware of what’s potentially going to happen.
Unless we are the creators of our own universe 