What will the basic functionality include and how much more needs to be done to reach that point? Is it just vaults and farming and transferring MAID for Safecoin? I saw the website has a roadmap page but it has nothing posted on it.
However you’re referencing a quote that was made at the end of the development cycle for the C-language version of the network.
I’m sure that post was made (Feb 2015) almost immediately before the switch to the Rust-language.
So yeah, pulling out-of-reference quotes is fun, but the context is always important, the network at that time was nearing testnet quality, and probably would have been released (edit: within a few months) had the switch not been made.
The roadmap should be updated within a week or two, they’ve been working on outlining a new roadmap since their massive progress in the sprints (weeks of intense coding).
The basic functionality of the 1.0 release will allow farming of safecoin, storing public and private files, decentralized apps, and encrypted messaging.
Right now they’re debugging and making stable the current code libraries. After that they’ll be testing client-side vaults, then implement messaging (chats/chatrooms), and finally testsafecoin.
Along the way there’s debugging, refactoring, and bug-hunting.
I’m impressed with the speed of the dev team in the sprints. Meaning that they can get minimal versions of each part working very quickly, it’s just the stability testing that drags it down.
Funny you should say that because while choosing a quote I noticed - but at first didn’t want to include - this one, which took Rust in consideration but is also going to be wrong only 3 weeks from now:
I’ve made some bad calls too, so it’s not like I got better insight than most, although it has to be said that one of main selling points of switching to Rust was that it was going to make everything faster. Last time someone from MaidSafe commented on this we were told it did.
If that is true then original (C-based) availability estimates were horrendously wrong. If a Rust-based v1.0 will come out this summer, then a C-based version wouldn’t have been ready before 2017 which makes me think what is the basis of the original estimates by the Dev team that were made back in 2013.
Damn the routing library!
You’ve brought up an interesting point. Which is if the Rust implementation is supposedly developed faster, how could their predictions of the C-version have possibly met their goal date?
I don’t really have an answer to that, but one of David’s reasonings for switching to Rust, was purely for the size and legibility of the codebase. He wanted as many people as possible to be able to go through it, understand it, and improve it. And in that regard, he has been tremendously successful:
The “predictions thread” recorded expectations in FEB 2015… based on knowledge at the time. Obviously, a lot has changed since then. We can look at the project in terms of milestones for a less fuzzy view.
Major Milestones 2015 to 2016
3/3/15… Rust vs C++… we talked about switching to rust. Now the code is written in Rust.
5/8/15… Non-persistent vaults… we discussed benefits of non-persistent vaults. This improves Network speed.
6/27/15… RFC Decentralized Naming System… we discussed using human readable names for websites. This is why we pick a public ID before uploading a website.
6/27/15… RFC - Unified Structured Data… we discussed the benefits of SD (Structured Data). This is a big deal.
2/26/16… SAFE Network Client Testing Commences… we tested the first (SAFE Launcher) client.
2/26/16… Post your .safenet links here!… we uploaded test websites on the SAFE Network.
These are just highlighted milestones that have come to fruition. There are others (vault installation) on the way, but have not come to fruition… yet.
Ultimately, everyone should to determine where the project is… from their own point of view.
I’m happy at this point because my crowd sale investment has quadrupled ($0.02 to $0.08)… meaning the market is “currently” optimistic about project SAFE.
Actually, at their current run rate they will more than likely run out of funds this year if they do not release an MVP to get additional VC funding.
How do you know their financial situation?
See Nick’s post below which was posted on September of last year.
Also, the purpose of the MVP is to get much needed VC as far as I understand.
I think your interpretation is right, or at least I would interpret it the same. I’ve always wondered what would happen if building the Safe Network would take longer as the funds allowed.
Have the devs made any recent statements regarding the above?
Just as @Powersign assumed they have enough funds, I assume they do not and based my interpretation on what I know about the crowdfunding issues and the posts I shared.
You may request a statement from the dev’s if you choose. I have no need because I am pretty confident the MVP will be released soon because it must.
Yes I think my statement “regardless of a time schedule” was too lenient.
It would be better of me to say “by the end of the year”, which is moreso realistic to what I believe and to their funding.
Maidsafe is a charity, isn’t it? I’m not familiar at all with their foreign laws but the charity must have some responsibility to post quarterly earnings publicly?
I think they bit off more than anyone can chew. I think that’s the point. I think maidsafe is a starting point, not a destination, and this is evident in some of the team’s recent forum posts.
Some might see this as a bad thing or an indictment of the project / team’s efforts. To me, however, it shows the depth of the vision behind this project. I know that soon, I’ll buy a few KUSD in Safecoin and I think it’ll provide a great return… but suppose it doesn’t?
If it doesn’t, then I’ll still have supported the cause of the most noble and ambitious distributed systems project the web has yet known, and I’m happy to do so.
Do you mean that they won’t be able to fully complete the network? Any examples of the dev team’s comments?
I believe they’re on track to implement everything they want, however it makes sense to release the network in stages, otherwise we’d be waiting another 2+ years until zksnarks are finally implemented.
The pressure is definitely on them, I think they’re handling it quite well though.
@faddat can speak for himself but I think he meant they have done more than most.
I’m assuming they don’t have to or they would have. Either way, at this point they would be reporting costs and liabilities and not earnings anyway .
I think that they’ll be able to accomplish incredible things.
Yeah I haven’t seen anything but I asked anyway. I trust them whole-heartedly, but the dichotomy of building an open network but not posting the charity’s expenses is confusing to me.
Not that it would show much.
In terms of cashflow and management of this we post often. There is no limitless cash and we are working on some options right now. There is no immediate danger or similar, but also no requirement for us to show everyone our hand whilst we are negotiating. I really hope there is not a push for us to open up everything whilst anyone we speak to does not require to, it makes the playing field uneven if you see what I mean.
In terms of the foundation, it does have to provide full accounts of all activities and costs to OSCR (Scotland’s charity regulatory body)> am not involved there much as I ensured I was not a trustee of the foundation I created to allow it to follow it’s charitable objects without any influence. I am sure these are published, but I have not had the need or time to look. The foundation is called “The Maidsafe foundation” so I am sure it’s on line. Maidsafe limited certainly has to publish all accounts and I know these are available via companies house in the UK.
So it’s a side issue we are pursuing but really we want to get the MVP out before we enact ou plans. We feel it’s imperative, so all effort is there from the tech team. Nick and several others have a well thought out monetisation and investment plan, but that is not published.