Please forgive the time (it is still Thursday somewhere …), but wanted to share with you the latest/updated White Paper for you to digest. I’m sure there will be questions and comments for us to enjoy working through together, there are several ways you can do this beyond the Forum (form link provided by Rusty and/or voice chat in Discord Tuesday next week) … although I’ve no doubt is where the majority of discussions will be!
A couple of quick highlights following some initial well- measured feedback:
Network emissions have been adjusted, along with the maximum supply
Payments (including Network Node Reserve) have been further described/broken down
All updates are clearly signposted via blue highlight (not as bad as it sounds!). The fundamentals of the Network, as I hope you would expect, remain unchanged.
Can we get some concrete numbers for those of us who don’t understand math and formulas. How many tokens will be distributed in the first 1 year for Emission Incentives?
My thoughts on reducing the supply are that this will inevitably lead to accusations of unfairness and greed and that we have left too little meat on the bone for the next 8 billion people.
Personally I don’t think this is a bad thing because if the network is successful it’s a good story why should “fair” copies of it be released where the initial investors don’t have such a large percentage of the total supply. Competition is a good thing.
The comparison table states that Arweave runs on Commodity Node Devices, but according to the doc section of their website you need 3 machines with the following characteristics (which is far from normal hardware):
1x mid-tier Ryzen CPU (e.g. Ryzen 5/7/9)
1x motherboard with at least one PCIe 3.0 8x slot
1x 16-port Host Bus Adapter (HBA
SAS2 or SAS3, LSI or Broadcom HBA, 16i or 16e
For example:
LSI SAS 9201-16i (SAS2)
Broadcom 9305-16e (SAS3)
4x Mini SAS to SATA breakout cables
Mini SAS ports can be either SFF-8087 or SFF-8643
16x 4TB 7200rpm SATA HDDs
1x PSU with at least 16 SATA ports
Storj really runs on ordinary hardware, but the uptime requirement is like a server in a data center and I have personally tested that it is unattainable in home conditions:
Uptime (online and operational) of 99.3% per month, max total downtime of 5 hours monthly
We can remove the check mark for Commodity Node Devices from Arweave and Storj from the table, I haven’t checked the other competitors to see if they really run on regular hardware.
Given the fact that ANT is divisible (whereas Safecoin originally was not), I don’t think this is the case.
I think the following excerpt from the white paper is very well put:
The decision to use a blockchain payment solution for the early launch phase of Autonomi (ahead of the network implementing its own Native Token) is, along with deployment time to market advantages, to assist in the network’s ability to scale. Ethereum (Autonomi is using a ‘roll-up chain’ - Arbitrum One), is a battle-tested blockchain with proven and respected security features.
Until Autonomi has attracted significant levels of participants and data, accessing and benefiting from one of the biggest ecosystems of users, tools and applications (block explorers, DEXs, CEXs, wallet applications etc), will provide the network with significant advantages (via user access, assurance and experience) in its early phase of growth.
I was talking about the so-called initial token allocation for mining - in Autonomi it is called Emissions Allocation, but in practice it is the same thing.
And Bitcoin has Emissions Allocation. As it is expected to stop in 100 years and be supported only by fees just like the Autonomi is expected to be in 12 years, why these new terms are being invented is not clear since there is an imposed terminology in the industry…
20% is extremely small in the crypto world. For Filecoin, for example, it is 70%:
@Bux A major flaw, or omission in the White Paper calculations for storage cost is the assumption that new storage is being provided. While the discussion talks of bringing what you have, we have the calculations, and formula, etc being based only on new storage being provided.
With “bring what you have” the pricing chart for a storage device/space is essentially near zero except for cases where people supply purpose built hardware.
While it is fine to show the cost for new storage usage it is the follow on effect of these calculations that have some issues. The cost per record will be overpriced if normalised to market price since someone will have used new storage costs to build a normalising function and any incentives provided also have the wrong calculations used.
For instance if I renew my computer every 5 years with storage 5 to 10 times what I had, then there is still very near to zero cost to running Autonomi nodes involved in that storage. My only costs are micro-dollars in the incremental increase in pushing electrons around transistors to run the node s/w and store data on my SSD. It’d be 10s of micro-dollars for a rotating disk drive accounted for extra work done to store/retrieve node records. The cost of the new SSD or Drive is immaterial to my running costs since I’d have the drive anyhow
Thus for “bring what you have” the incentives are extra “bonus” for being a nice chap helping out the world.
The reduction from 50 years to 12 is quite significant =O
And now I’m getting doubts if the network in every aspect can already take care of itself without emissions afterwards. But I guess 12 years is indeed something and probably marks the end of the erc20 dependency of the network.
Max supply shrank further from 1.5 to 1.2 billion - right?
And in the glossary now there are some terms that shouldn’t be there anymore - right?
I assume it became clear that with 50y running smart contracts we’d be somewhat bound to the Blockchain and its faith (possibly at some point skyrocketing fees, eth success +arbitrum long term success on top [without skyrocketing fees]) for 50 years
So the foundation is over 50 years with 85% of it in the first 12 and last 15% over the other 38 years. Or someone did not do the maths right and instead of the 100% they only showed 85% and forgot to change the 50 year to 12
And then the emissions to help for the early network is over 12 years
It’s my bad - I need to add the final percent line from 12 years - but you’re exactly right Neo, Foundation pool release is over 50 years, only the emissions are over 12.
Not exactly, at any time the smart contract can be copied to its own blockchain, you don’t even need to airdrop to the holders in this option, because they are also easily copied - for reference, PulseChain copies the entire Ethereum blockchain with all smart contracts and addresses including eMAID:
Sorry to disagree, but this statement isn’t technically incorrect- While the uptime requirements are high, they use auditing, suspension mechanisms to control this - in reality running a node from home for 30 days offline will get the node booted, an online score which becomes low just stops ingress to the node while it recovers - it still earns $$ from downloads - unlike the Autonomi network which relies on 50% cpu usage and node churn I’m hopefull we will see a change to the node logic, but there is a huge gap in the code. Link to info and blueprint also link to network stats, as you will see over 9k Storj nodes run from links at ISP home nodes instead of hosting.
On the whitepaper, I hate how we have become a crypto project, what happened to the storage system, I see no love in the paper for that.
Can one of the OG’s do a TL;DR on what all this token stuff means please, I just want to know how much will it cost to store 1TB forever and are we going to get the short end of the stick as node runners, tyvm.
Nobody can say precisely, as it depends on supply and demand. But, if you want to store 1tb forever it should be a lot cheaper on day 1 (while nodes are empty) than it will be once the network is maturing with fuller nodes, as nodes will set their cost of storage based on their fullness levels.
No. It’s a market between those running nodes and those who want to upload, so if your costs are higher than average, you may not make a short-term profit & vice versa, but it’s an open market.
Given the very tightly constrained token supply (reduced from the original 4.3bn max to 1.2bn), any tokens earned by node runners that are held long-term will likely grow in value over time in line with the growth of the network and demand for the tokens, so even inefficient node runners who hold for the long term should do very well (assuming the network succeeds and grows).
Churn is an essential part of the operations, without it your node would just fill up and never earn again. The network would be made up of full nodes and nodes in the process of filling up.
Churn makes sure the data is distributed throughout the network and while not 100% perfectly, but very close to fully distributed it is so much better than data always remaining on the node that first stored it. Also a nightmare for addressing and finding the chunk requested.
Maybe i missed something, but in the Zoom meeting we discussed going down from 4.3bn tokens max supply to 1.5bn, and now I read 1.2bn. Any explanation behind this change or did I misinterpret something?
You didn’t miss anything - but following feedback we worked further on the emissions schedule (now 12 years), have updated the WP to include the following explanation:
Based on community feedback this pool has been reduced to 240,000,000 tokens (20% of Max Supply), which will be emitted over a 12 year period. This is a change from 3,167,866,884 tokens, representing 70% of the Maximum Supply, which was to be emitted (at a diminishing rate) over a period of 30 years.
Maximum Supply
There will be a total Maximum Supply of 1,200,000,000 (1.2BN) tokens created over the Network’s lifetime. This has been reduced from a Maximum Supply of 4,294,967,296 (4.29BN) tokens. The reason for this decrease is derived from two factors:
1. A more limited emissions schedule, with the same now only applying to support the early phase of the network 2. Decrease in number of tokens held by The Autonomi Foundation (emitted over time via Smart Contract release)
Maybe an idea to update the weekly newsletter as well, there 1.5bn is still stated in the image that was added.
It might be confusing to some that read the newsletter but not the whitepaper. And as a firm weekly newsletter reader, i know things have changed over time… but in 1 day, that is a 0.3bn record!!
I’m hopefull we will see a change to the node logic, but there is a huge gap in the code. 
and are we going to get the short end of the stick as node runners, tyvm.