Dan’s latest project is called EOS. Will move some discussions about this project to this topic.
EOS … how will he get it to scale? … SafeNet.
Apparently EOS does scale. Not looked closely enough to understand or be convinced, but the last interview I saw him in he was bragging about scaling and EOS being a practical rather than purely speculative tool. He does tend to build things that are useful and that work. We’ll see I guess.
From what I understand bitshares and steemit both scale very well compared to other blockchain systems and EOS is, I think, an attempt at running many blockchains in parallel so hypothetically will scale … but I wonder how all of that will be secured? Seems like it could be hard. Maybe Dan already has solutions in mind, maybe he thinks he can figure it out along the way, maybe he doesn’t care and is sipping Mai Tai’s in the bahamas enjoying the hundreds of millions EOS has pulled in! lol … not claiming he’s a scammer and he certainly professes good ideas … but power does corrupt. Anyway, I wish all who invested in that one the best and maybe it’ll work out well. My previous comment was just a joke … but who knows … maybe SafeNet could be his ultimate solution - even if he doesn’t know it yet.
I think he could have been asking because EOS doesn’t have a built in mass storage option. Perhaps he’s considering options.
The platform doesn’t seem to be lacking in other areas.
Yeah, I wouldn’t take Dan or his biggest fan Stan, seriously; they’re in it for themselves and quick to jump ship when it benefits them… cowboys. They’re too keen on pumping their interest and in sales and marketing, than actual delivery of a medium and long term potential.
That kind of interest in the short term does not bode well for their opinion on any other project, let alone ones they know too little about.
I read the white paper last night and all it did was outline what everyone wants and general ideas or solutions to do better than other Blockchain technology. Maybe there is a separate technical paper that I missed where it says how it will more specifically achieve what was outlined but I wasn’t entirely impressed.
The only thing I am still looking for is to know whether the data people store is stored on the Blockchain or is just a stored hash of where it is actually stored. In EOS not everyone is a node, people can choose to be, people who run apps I think have to be, and this is so much less decentralized than SAFE in my opinion as well as lacking in freedom. Say some bright kid somewhere where resources are scarce wants to publish his app to EOS but he only has so much money and not enough computer? Well so far it sounds like an issue except for with SAFE he could do so more quickly by just paying the network with what he can earn in farming. I think Dan seems reckless with his words considering how little an innovation this is over what already exists and especially how it sizes up compared to SAFE.
Blockchains are just compressed text files - literally that; and with tool you can read them as that. They’re big and troublesome for the proof of XYZ required.
What’s cool is the reality of distributed trust. If you can ever do distributed trust without the overhead, then that will prove a better solution that just blockchain tech.
I don’t know what EOS is but expect it’ll be just the next bright idea and they’ll do a grab of profit from Steem to fuel it. Insider trading by another name for the timing of those moves. You can tell I’m sore for having been stung against BTS when they did that last time…
Sounds like none of them have any idea what they’re talking about.
They’ve already done a huge (hundreds of millions of USD) grab of profit from their ICO … They’re probably relocating their headquarters to a nice beach resort somewhere.
It’s sad to me that people get so sucked into projects like this one - paying a huge premium just to own the tiniest part of Larimer’s projects. He’s walking away with a ton of cash and for what? It takes next to nothing in time/energy to develop these projects.
I’ve been involved for several years in trying to get a fusion energy concern off the ground - and we are only looking for a quarter to half of what EOS got in order to actually produce a working fusion reactor prototype… the disparity between popularity and real profitability is just jaw dropping to me. The risk of investing in either project is very high … so it just goes to show you what a big name can do for a project and how people are so sucked in by that.
[quote=“TylerAbeoJordan, post:25, topic:15890, full:true”]I’ve been involved for several years in trying to get a fusion energy concern off the ground - and we are only looking for a quarter to half of what EOS got in order to actually produce a working fusion reactor prototype… the disparity between popularity and real profitability is just jaw dropping to me. The risk of investing in either project is very high … so it just goes to show you what a big name can do for a project and how people are so sucked in by that.
I completely agree that Larimer is just cashing in on his reputation of past successes with a totally unwarranted and unneeded massive ICO. I think he will deliver, but it’s still a borderline scam to me, because he is cashing in on ignorance of investors. Sure that’s the investors fault, but he didn’t need to have such a large ICO, or even close to.
Also, Lockheed Martin is working on a fusion reactor. It might be hard to gather funding when your competition is one of the biggest defense contractors in the world with a myriad of high end engineering and physics talent on their payroll.
Fully aware of Lockheed’s project and many others. Lockheeds project has different aims than ours and has it’s own set of problems (different to our own). Our aim is cheap electricity via low maintenance reactors - Lockeed’s are very high maintenance by design in our opinion - but that’s not a problem for their market.
Still I do agree - all the competition distracts investors who don’t have a good technical understanding of differing design aims and that makes it much harder to do what we want to do.
I am working on a solution to differentiate us better and give us access to a bigger market though.
Make the reactor “blockchain enabled”, do a nice whitepaper, build a vague flashy website and launch an ico. Simple. Pull in a few mill nice and handy. Everyone’s doing it these days!
we’ve had a website for years … in fact when I first started this I tried to do an ICO - before it was all the rage … it went nowhere. But am re-working the site now and will attempt an ICO again in coming months.
What’s you current site? I’d throw a few coins your way in an ico, haven’t seen a fusion reactor one yet!
The ‘current site’ isn’t updated for an ICO. To be clear, my very first attempt was to do an ICO. That fell through, and I built the ‘current site’ which is selling a non-blockchain token for KWH’s at a huge discount based on what we could do with fusion.
I am now building a new website for an ICO again, but will be a while until it is up. You can check out the current website here: http://protonboron.com
It’s developed a bug or two from a year of automatic wordpress updates … so apologies for that. But the bulk of what we are doing is all there and is being translated over to the next iteration of the site and new business plan. Please direct message me for any more details as I don’t want to the moderators getting upset with me for taking the thread off-topic! cheers
Seems like they plan to have a storage option: https://markdownshare.com/view/994146b4-2028-488e-8694-2cf7bed52585
I’ve been reading about EOS project. It looks like EOS is trying to solve some of the issues (scalability, tx speed etc) maidsafe is tackling.
I read in a post that safenet will be able to accomodate millions of tx per second. EOS is claiming the same. Also it will support distributed file storage. I want to learn more about the similarities and differences between these two proejcts but I am not an expert in blockchain tech. Can someone be kind enough to shed some light on this matter?
They are in fact solving the scalability problem with centralization. It’s bizarre.
Block producers will be like Tier-1 Internet providers with dedicated fiber optic connections across continents. [*]
The scary thing is that I can see this working. They also provide free storage:
In addition to computational bandwidth, native EOS.IO software-based blockchain token holders will now have access to free cloud storage, hosting, and download bandwidth via IPFS / HTTPS; this access can be used without consuming or transferring tokens. [*]
Considering the centralization, it won’t be censorship resistant and hardly qualify as anything Satoshi or David envisioned, but it may be just the right architecture to onboard the masses who are more concerned with cost than abstract ideas such as liberty.
I noticed that they are doing heavy marketing on scalability the fact that EOS can support 100K to millions of tx per second. I assume safenet is capable of delivering all the core features EOS is planning to have. Isn’t this correct?