I don’t understand any of this stuff. I come here only to check the pulse . Looks like we are trying to cram a lot in a very short period of time. How can anyone be confident in the network that crashes 2 weeks before launch? Are we really close to launch?
On the other hand, I also think about the phrase ‘Work expands so as to fill the time available’. Nothing gets done without set deadlines.
I’m confused where we stand at this point of time.
Good luck to the whole team and thanks for the effort you guys are putting in
Why exactly are we refusing to test smaller chunk sizes?
For all I think I’ve seen the 4mb chunks even cause issues client side when not having the best Internet connection at hand…(==close to city but suburbish German fully wired land line Internet… This is not sub standard in Germany I think… Which should be pretty good in a global comparison I guess… )
The reason we didn’t see that more often is the missing API and the lack of community uploads/lack of data being utilised from the network … What precisely is the benefit of giga chunks and why would performances increase with them/what’s the upside of them…?
Since cost per chunk (no matter if it’s a 1kb chunk or a 4mb chunk) clients will optimise for maximum chunk utilisation… e.g. Embedding pictures as inline base64 encoded images within a website… Instead of uploading the picture as file and referencing it from the website… At the same time pushing really transmitted chunk size (and the issues we see with those large chunks) up and defeating data deduplication
(and just btw that’s not theory… I already did that with my awe websites in the beta phase to save nanos on uploads)
As for real launch, ie token distribution who knows, but I don’t expect it can happen in January without creating an unacceptable risk for the network and all stakeholders, not least investors and token holders.
Goals were not what I was talking about as much as presentation. I do agree goals are necessary and useful, until they are obviously unrealistic and counter-productive. The plan is unrealistic (and has been for a long time). An unrealistic plan creates excessive pressure and is causing things to be rushed. Putting meeting the deadline above other priorities causes a range of problems in a complex software development which I don’t intend to re-iterate again. This has caused and is continuing to cause problems for network implementation and testing, and I believe is jeopardising the project.
A Network that crash is only good, because you can learn a lot and it’s better to push it to the limit…
We want this Network, so it’s better to keep going, Maidsafe please do keep experimenting super ants.
People who focus on fiat, don’t realize that fiat doesn’t buy you Network resources, please keep feeding these kids nanos…
A Network in the wild is only better, because eventually some kids will come along and make PRs
What’s with all the negativity lately? Unproductive way to channel energy. Not even saying criticism can’t be constructive. It’s just plain pissy and negative.
Common sense! I get that most on here are very smart intelligent people, but there’s a bit too much over analysing going on, just let the devs get on with it. More positivity needed around here.
When the people who actually understand the problems (not me) have concerns, it might be best to take notice and address the issues rather than just dismissing them as negative Nellie’s.
Ethereum got hacked first week it launched but after that they did well. If the network maybe has some struggle early on to reach critical mass, maybe it is not the end of the world.
This attitude is what led this project to where it is today these many years later. Consider that there are people here who have build novel computational systems that are generating serious real revenue from solving seriously hard problems. Comments like yours are what make us bring it up. It’s not to brag, but rather point out that our comments are from a place of real experience. There are people in Maidsafe who know that and yet somehow pretend that everyone in the community is an idiot who’s never built anything new lol. What an utter joke.
This latest one is especially baffling. You had a stable network that the 4 mb chunk change borked. Just go back to what was working for stability. If there’s a reason why you have to stay with the 4 mb chunk size, then be honest with the community about it.
The pattern of constant snags keeping this project from delivering needs to be broken (whether those snags are bad luck or self-inflicted). The community continuing its own pattern of coddling this stuff isn’t going to help at all.
It was a test. Are those not allowed to find what variables are optimal?
Now it looks like they may be testing variable chunk size? Which could be interesting or promising. Won’t know til it is tested in the wild.
People are being incentivized to participate, that may be flawed as well but it is well intentioned. Apparently not good enough.
Is there something fundamentally wrong? What am I missing here?
Not discounting anyone’s knowledge or skillsets by saying this but almost everyone thinks they are an expert and that their opinion is right. Everyone could run the country better, or a company, or whatever.
The point is most of the criticism isn’t constructive. It’s mostly been, “you’re doing this or that wrong”. Not all of it, not saying that but a large amount is just useless whining.
Just my observation is there are too many emotions flying around and it seems to defy the normal logic I see here. Not blind support as suggested.
If I’m way off base, feel free everyone to take out your frustrations on my misunderstanding! I’ll be your punching bag for a minute. I do want to understand and haven’t been reading every single thread here.
OK, I’m not getting into a debate as I’ve got a life outside of here, but ill say what I think. I think some of you OG’s are grumpy old farts, who are set in your old stubborn ‘I know it all’ ways.
At the end of the day, the dev team are launching whether some of you like it or not. So why are some of you even still here if you don’t ‘agree’ ? Doesn’t make sense.
I think many of us feel like passengers and we are worried as we want to see the network succeed. Many of us want to see this network become as successful as possible, that is why we fight and argue.
To fight and argue is a good thing, not always pleasent but leads towards the best results in the end. Results are what matters. Too much in this world cares about finding consensus and that everyone should be happy even if it leads to bad results and a horrible future. The temperature rises as we get closer to launch and the stakes are getting higher.
That’s what I’m seeing is people “heating up”, getting emotional in other words.
I agree with some level of that for accountability, absolutely.
Buuuut the level of negative and useless comments are excessive and clearly not able to be satisfied.
The shift from endless all out support from when it was nothing but an idea to being a real network in testing and disliking every single move or announcement is such disappointing behavior to see.
Anyways, like Lisa, I’ve got other things to do to prepare for a successful and enjoyable launch.
I’m responding to you because I respect you and appreciate our interactions on this forum over the years. But the time has come to show or shut up.
Literally said “go back to the 500 kb chunks”. How much clearer can the suggestion be?
There’s a reason most companies and enterprises fail. The combination of mindset, hardwork, intelligence, etc. that get a business to work is extremely rare. Very few have achieved that. I’m lucky enough to have done so (to be blunt). So unless you have done so yourself, sorry you have nothing to teach me here.
PS: forum likes may make you feel like you’re right. Guess what, again, most shitty ideas get wild support and fail. Go back and look at the forum posts with the most likes over the years. Yet here we are.
I really don’t have time to put this message through any filter right now, so you’ll just have to forgive my bluntness.
Don’t mean to be blunt here either but you are falling into the colleralation = causation trap.
We’ve repeatedly said we do not have enough information to conclude that this is the cause; there are numerous variables at play here.
I can understand how one might jump to that conclusion, when the headline change is 512KB → 4MB and this has a failure, and therefore it’s obvious!
But if we let the tail wag the dog, and not stick to a testing plan, get clean data, and have a sober response then we could end up back with 512KB, same failure, and more loops of the same process.
So, through the useful critiques of some (which are noted and understoof), criticism of others, and unnecessary put-downs of a small minority, I’m encouraging the devs to stick with their plan and trust the data.
…but aren’t you falling into the trap that just because you say there is no proof for it to be the root cause you conclude that it can’t be the cause …? that’s even worse than the correlation == causation trap (!?)
. Looks like we are trying to cram a lot in a very short period of time. How can anyone be confident in the network that crashes 2 weeks before launch? Are we really close to launch?
…