I don’t understand, I have put between the square brackets the exact title of the article.
apologies - we’ve been misunderstanding each other.
The misquote was in this post: ERC-20 Transition
The first line is “Bcash only has on average 200–400 transactions per block…” when if you follow the link, the term “Bitcoin Cash” is used, hence the misquote. If editing it, it should have perhaps been written as “[Bcash] only has on average 200–400 transactions per block…”.
Sorry for making you think I was saying your link was somehow a misquote, which it was not!
Interesting thread. I was thinking about this today and had a look on the forum to see if others had discussed and sure enough. Here are my thoughts after reading through:
Managing a MAID-exchangeable token [ MET for short ] on another (non-omni) blockchain would be akin to running a bank in the sense that people could trade for the new token if they want, but wouldn’t need to if they didn’t want. Once Safecoin is implemented, MET could still live on if there was demand, but presumably demand would die off.
I like @DavidMc0 idea of a multisig wallet system - that would lend credibility via security. Really we would need two multisig’s through right? One for the MET and one for the OMNI MAID tokens. This is a bit of management though and as using multi-sig would require multiple managers. The problem here is cost really - we’d need to charge enough of a fee to cover paying people what their time is worth to support this system - two problems emerge, 1 is that there aren’t many people who could do this sort of a job and two the volume of MAID token trade currently probably isn’t high enough to cover the labor costs. If there is a way to automate this (in a trustless manner) however then we only need pay a developer to build/maintain a secure system.
Ethereum is a great platform but transaction fees on Ethereum are only going to go higher with time (at least until they get sharding going and that will likely be after or around same time as SafeNet/SafeCoin launch). So IMO, while accessibility will be greatly improved transaction fees would only be marginally improved - especially now that the lightning network is coming online (bitcoin fees are going down, hence OMNI fees are going down).
So, I suggest we revisit this topic in eight to twelve months as a few things will happen - 1.) we will have greater clarity on when SafeNet/SafeCoin will launch, if still unclear on launch then I think this will become a more important issue. 2.) EOS, RSK (rootstock), Cardano, Credits, IOTA, and others will be coming online – all of which will offer more and arguably better alternatives to Ethereum.
Miners don’t mine off-chain transactions.
ERC20 has worked well for our project.
Many holders have reported using trezor and we have seen many transactions all with very low fees
Sorry but that’s ridiculous. You don’t need to contact every single maid owner, they will find out as they use it. They won’t be able to send maid as an omni token to an ethereum address so they’ll check on forums and see what’s going on.
Contacting exchanges isn’t hard. Development Teams do hard forks all the time and exchanges have to follow. We don’t need to make absurd amounts of effort for exchanges to follow. The exchanges make the effort to follow the teams, not the other way around, as otherwise if other exchanges do, the ones that don’t will be out-competed.
If we put an serious effort to doing it, by the time the nay-sayers finished ranting about it it’ll be done already. Contacting exchanges doesn’t take long. And listing another Erc20 token out of the millions they already have is a piece of cake for them.
Although, with that said, I am concerned with the technical process of transitioning from MAID to Erc20 rather than any fundamental side of things. We definitely need a smart contract to do this. A manual transition is really difficult.
Once we do it and it’s on ethereum it’ll be much easier to set up smart contracts to do it automatically to safecoin. Transitioning from omni to anything is hard. But transitioning from Erc20 to anything isn’t as hard.
Because maid have people like @neo who makes ridiculous excuses to hinder its progress and make everything sound a million times harder or “can’t do” than it actually is. We need more “can doers” in the community and make a change than these “can’t doers” holding us back.
Altho, all things aside, the technical side and time wasted on this instead of going towards development are legitimate concerns.
There are legitimate points on both sides, but it seems to me that there isn’t majority support, and I think you need a substantial majority for such a change, and for good reason especially when it appears things are ramping up.
Not saying you here, but I hear a lot from people in favour of this idea who have not engaged or been active in other aspects of this community, while those who have seem to me less interested in this.
I have pointed out what I think was a fairly straightforward way of implementing this change while also saying I am not in favour of it, but I haven’t made my arguments against it because there is so little support for it in the general community I’ve come to know here.
So IMO the arguments for it have not found sufficient support in the community for it to be taken seriously.
Rather than attack those who oppose it, anybody in favour should IMO try to make a better case for what they want. If you can’t do that, I think it’s better be graceful in defeat or lose respect.
I’ve been inactive because I’m so busy with other stuff atm and I feel like my efforts aren’t really doing any help. I’m happy to spend time if it makes progress. Although have been looking at the forums here and this topic really did struck me so I took some time to type even tho I have a lot of errands today.
Because this was one of the things I recommended for marketing ages ago along with other things such as rebranding etc. I recommended other things mainly to development other than marketing but just like marketing I didn’t feel like the team was listening much. Anyway. The points are laid out, faster transactions with lower transaction fees, easier for new exchanges to list. And easier for people to store. You’d be joining the bandwagon with all the other Erc20 tokens so to speak. Omni is pretty tedious to use in my experience. And omni wallet website doesn’t even give you an option to do a secure back up if their website goes down(although I spoke to one of the people they said they’re working on it) but as of now, I Who would be comfortable putting their maid there? And it’s like one of the main options.
Anyway…I’m not trying to attack anyone but I feel there’s always the SAME people who is constantly against most of the changes I proposed(not just this one in particular) , which gives me a feeling that they just dislike changes in general. Which is fine. Most people seem to be like that, it’s natural for humans to have a tendency to resist change. But I do think those people won’t help the team progress. Honestly speaking.
For your information @neo is on holidays for a couple of weeks which also means away from keyboard…
That’s cool. I’ll be away from keyboard too now. And also I’m not trying to attack @neo as a person, rather just using him as an example for the type of personalities that I find frustrating when people like me are trying to help the SAFEnetworks progress, which includes saying fairly invalid reasons against this particular suggestion I’ve suggested a long time ago about switching to Erc20.
If you’ve not convinced people, it is not because of personalities, but because your arguments have not been convincing.
Can be a bit of both too. I get that. But I must be an extremely bad arguer if all my past arguments for every suggestion I made is unconvincing. In which case I won’t waste any more of anyone’s time.
It’s either that you are not good at putting your case or that your case is not as convincing as you think.
I think the case for this has been put well enough, by which I mean that I believe understand the points made in favour. I just don’t find them compelling, and since others didn’t either I haven’t bothered to put a counter argument.
that I find frustrating
Don’t forget your username
@foreverjoyful if it’s not too much hassle, could you point out the flaws you see in Tyler’s suggestion above?
It’s accepting of the need to examine this topic further but gave some pretty good reasons why moving to the erc20 token could wait just a little longer.
For the record I agree with seeing what 2018 brings us both as far as alternatives and the network status (let’s be direct/frank Alpha 3 is a big job, bigger than many perhaps think, and it won’t be completed in a hurry, quite possibly until after these further options rear their heads).
As for your other posts being a waste of time, no they aren’t, they’re generally really good thought experiments which you should keep on with the further we progress, your contributions are helpful just maybe a question of when in the timeline they become relevant
The biggest advantage of an ERC-20 token is the ecosystem. ERC-20 token are supported by many more exchanges, hardware wallets and various software than any other types of tokens.
There are some pros and cons to moving to erc-20. IMO maidsafe is focused on finishing this project 1st and foremost. This is great, but for short term and MaidSafeCoin investors their goals don’t align perfectly. I think most would agree that more exposure is a good thing. I wonder, if MAID was in the top 10 now how many new devs would come into this project? Maybe, we are not ready for a mass inflow of new devs. We can go on and on. Ultimately, the more exposure the better, and if erc-20 helps it is worth serious consideration.
We all agree that delivering should be a number one priority. I wouldn’t even mention ERC-20 if it looked like SafeCoin was a short to medium term prospect, but let’s face it, it’s not like we’re seeing it this summer. If history has anything to teach us, it can be years before we get there, so for the time being we might as well transact with a more capable token.