Just cos you do that doesn’t mean everyone will 
3 Likes
but I am right nonetheless.
3 Likes
So a MAID address with 10 MAID on it would be plenty for any testnet.
Maybe you should limit the amount of test-SNT given for any MAID address. So one with say 10,000 MAID would just be silly for a testnet
1 Like
Good point. Anyone can download Electrum quickly, or any other wallet that allows signing a message with a Bitcoin private key. (edit: I saw Mav’s discussion of this above, including that signing could be included in the process if it seems on balance like a good option)
If it’s just staying on the computer, you’re right that it’s not a big security risk.
Just to add to that, any eMAID process will be tested pre launch as well.
There will be rate limiting etc in there in the end. I imagine a live faucet would be desirable, but will need anti abuse mechanisms in place, so again, another good place to test them!
5 Likes
Is there a thread that explains the how and why of a MAID >SNT transfer at this stage of the project?
1 Like
why:
to test the conversion process, and provide an initial distribution on testnets
how:
Not yet as it’s still being worked on. Hopefully we can start testing here soon, though!
3 Likes
It has to be done on the final live network (via an app?) why risk anything less.
Sorry, I missed the talk around ‘Initial distribution on testnets’ …is this like skin in the game time…where it can become the real deal at a given point and you dont want folks with free coins…
Could be partly that if we turned off the faucet. (I wonder towrads a fauceet folk can send $$ to, eg, as opposed to endless disbursement of network coins).
But it’s also just testing the process, making sure a) it works and b) folk are comfortable with it
2 Likes
I would suggest an app on the network, together with a secure client/ wallet.
I’d also suggest the majority of that MAID has not moved in 10 years for good reason. Many including myself did enough to buy BTC with cash, wound up with two strings of numbers and that was the end of crypto for us.
I know enough about IT to say nothing is secure and would trust nothing less than a conversion on the live network, together with a fresh install of whatever client.
You need to get this right and communicate clearly to the chooks sitting on the eggs.
I’m not really sure what you think we are suggesting?
When we’re ready to test this process:
- it will be repeatable. So doing so now, does not impact the final network (beyond getting folk familiar with the process)
- it will be optional: do so at your leisure on this testnet, or another, or wait until live, no stress, no obligation.
- it will be as easy as we can reasonably make it (here above it’s suggested to be done via the CLI app, eg; there may well be more ways if necessary)
Does that help clarify things?
4 Likes
Repeatable, Optional, Easy are understood and appreciated.
Trusting the project, security will be a given when you offer this facility to MAID holders.
I’m just inquisitive, how do we get to that point of security, what has to happen to say… yes move some coins, how will they be safely held within a test-network environment where we start fresh with a new client each time.
This point where coins are held securely within the test-net environment, is not in view from the outside.
2 Likes
they will be test coins your original omni maid will still be in your omni wallet and same coins can be claimed again in the next test net.
if you want to come play make a wallet with private key in WIF format for testing and transfer a few coins to it for testing purposes and keep your main wallet offline.
4 Likes
Went to cold storage, so no omni wallet for me.
So the thing is, those key strings have to be typed (once) that’s why I’m fussed about doing the conversion directly on the network.
Thanks for the explanation, that makes it clear that it’s wallet centric.
2 Likes
Do you have any idea how many folk participate outside of us forum users?
Could the faucet somehow track this, the price you pay for free tokens is your data à la web2.
Yes I know that is opposite to what we are working towards but… it could provide some valuable information going forward.
2 Likes
Nope. If we rate limit, wallet limit we could start gathering this data from a faucet perspective.
I don’t think we’d even need data, so much as just seeing how many payouts within the rules there are?
Im thinking along the lines of user location and numbers. Not necessarily related to token use.
I know that can possibly be a little cringe but instead of tracking ip perhaps just a question or two answered to gain tokens which will also slow claims.
2 Likes
If we go with a structured set of tests then part of the reporting should be to answer location of nodes and type of connection
For me it would be Hetzner Finland - datacenter
if I ever get port-forwarding sorted then its Scotland 38/10 ADSL
No answer - no more test tokens
1 Like
I think it is a fair compromise, give a little to get a little.