Alpha 3 and Alpha 4 release

Is there any orientation date when will be release alpha 3, alpha 4 and official release of network? I know you can’t know it and lots of things can happend, but I’m just curious if you have some orientation schedule like:
“alpha 3 could be this year, alpha 4 next year and official release at the end of 2019 if everything will be ok”.

Thank you.

2 Likes

No there are no timescales yet, and we don’t know when there might be.

3 Likes

And at least alpha 3? Do you expect it this year?

I would suggest reading David’s explanation of why we don’t venture with such guesses:

9 Likes

With the introduction of PARSEC they indicated “This marks the end of the unknowns we have to face before launch”
Was hoping they’d be able to give some general milestone dates with unknowns out of way.

5 Likes

They have not yet fully implemented PARSEC, fair to assume some unknowns remain.

I’m confident a roadmap closer to what we all desire will come once this is completed and working as expected.

I would add that I can see a few other unknowns too, as far as what is publicly communicated at least. Parsec showed us that some major progress may show up quite unexpectedly, so we don’t know.

So it’s hard to say how much progress various parts are at, and there is also the risk of giving too optimistic messages.

IMO it is far too optimistic to say that all unknowns before launch are gone. But that’s just my assessment from the part I know of what is publicly known. (So, obviously, quite a limited view.)

I would say that the community acceptance of not giving timescales, of not knowing when it’s done and so on, is very high, so it always hurts me a bit when I see the risk of too optimistic communication, because it is like giving up land that was won with big sacrifices.

I just want to keep everyone cool headed for when it turns out there are some more things that need to be done than expected (i.e. the unknowns turn up and bite you). In my experience they are never truly gone until you actually made it passed them and have successfully released.

11 Likes

Yes, many here are aware that unknowns turning up have been the order of the day since 2014. A few maybe years before that.

No timescales is likely the most contentious issue on this board and IMO the reason this project has not attracted any serious investment. That’s not to say that success will not come and patience be rewarded. But clearly this is still years away from launch.

The biggest concern for me is that so much rests on the brilliance of @dirvine , even though the capacity and capabilities of entire @maidsafe team are sufficient in the near term, this project relies too much on too few. That’s a problem. I replaced my enthusiasm with understanding and patience with a pinch of skepticism.

1 Like

Incredible long project time for the SAFE network. I’m a bit shocked, but at the same time it’s probably fine when looking at it from the bigger picture. I’m prepared to have a slow release of Alpha 3 and so on. And by developing for both the web and SAFE it’s possible revert back to the web if SAFE takes too long.

Well a bit of scepticism is always healthy. I was born sceptical and will remain so til I die. It’s not really an either or situation though. This is a high risk area in which most projects will fail. Almost all of them in fact. I think you’re wrong to say it hinges on one person though. In the early days perhaps, but the team has since expanded beyond that, and some of the most groundbreaking work (e.g. disjoint sections) was not done by @dirvine at all. So my position is keep cheering, stay positive, remain patient but don’t be a blind fanboy.

9 Likes

That’s not what I said.

But anyway, the project has taken on a life of its own. The person who would make the decision to change the course of that life, as has happened in the past, would be David Irvine.

@AndreasF we will never forget you! As well as all those who work tirelessly everyday @maidsafe. Same goes to those who have contributed to the newly minted PARSEC!

8 Likes

Skepticism is for the weak. Another few comments and this was going to turn into the trail of tears over nothing. All is well, just let these men and women keep grinding towards victory.

4 Likes

Yes PARSEC too (so equal big ups to @pierrechevalier83, @qi_ma, @bart, @anon86652309 and @ustulation) - just wanted to reach back in time a bit to make a point!

7 Likes

Lol! Excellent point. Clearly a problem with fanboys. Being objective can be an asset. As can a pinch of skepticism. Good to see lots of opposing views. Some have merit.

5 Likes

Yep - I’d see being objective and sceptical as the same thing, so long as the scepticism is honest. I think we’re on the same side, barring nuance (and the spelling of scepticism).

4 Likes

I’d like to say a big AMEN! to that.

1 Like

Any reason you asked the question? My guess is 2020 for beta release, but it’s only a wild guess.

Naw, I’d say these are two very different reactions. I’m very positive overall about this project but look at it objectively and comment as such. I’m not a fanboy heaping endless amounts of praise at every opportunity. I’m skeptical when I see certain events that do not align with a company that has existed for 15 years. I’m not posting here as part of a popularity contest. I would have shut my account long time ago if that was the case. Valuable people have left this project and community without explanation- including insiders and community members and outreach.

Onward.

Haha… In most of their senses, there is no difference between skeptic and sceptic. Skeptic is the preferred spelling in American and Canadian English, and sceptic is …

http://grammarist.com/spelling/sceptic-skeptic/

1 Like

My thought was that it was the unknowns relating to consensus and maybe routing. Not a global unknowns are now known.

For instance safecoin while the principle operations are known there are a number of areas of unknowns, some minor and some not.

1 Like