I think the crypto world wants to see products that deliver rather than products that promise to deliver. Having said that, I don’t understand why other cryptos are capitalised so high as they don’t have many that use their services. Weird game
I’d say we have about found the price floor. Those who wanted to sell have mostly sold. Those wanting to buy have mostly bought.
I’d say we are mostly in a holding pattern, waiting for news or a tight squeeze to move the price.
In addition to what others have stated around people with exuberant optimism having been burnt in the last bull run as well as the need to deliver tangible results, there are other headwinds too. For example, fatigue with blockchain’s technical inability to deliver what it promises impacts all DLT, and increasing KYC/AML regulatory requirements on US crypto exchanges dissuades retail involvement. Overcoming an even higher bar is required to move people to trade/invest in crypto assets these days.
I think there are a couple things on the horizon that could help, I.e. more concrete news on Fleming’s release. The upcoming Hackathon could also boost interest—if positioned in away that attracts a wide number of devs to showcase what the Network can do. While I’m not a fan of EOS for a number of reasons, they did very successfully leverage the Hackathon concept to build awareness and adoption.
It may just still seem to be too early to many to tie up funds in MAID. To change, that maybe Maidsafe could adopt a deflationary mechanism: Tie the maximum supply to launch date of SafeCoin.
For example, for every additional year we have to wait longer the supply maximum should be reduced by 10%.
I see a lot of mentions of “MVP” an I still don’t know what people have in mind using that term. (Is that just me?) I want to add the meaning of it in my safenetforum glossary. Or determine that there is no current definition of an MVP, but that there is a roadmap working towards a TBD MVP.
We are working towards Fleming which right now looks like vaults from home (not only routing nodes) and clients. This can be considered an MVP, so could PARSEC though MVP is a thing we tried to discuss a while back, but it is too conflated as to what an MVP is when designing a decentralised network. So our next major release is Fleming and we are throwing everything at that just now. Expect some deliverables along the way.
That would be changing the terms of the initial agreement.
MVP means mimimum viable product. So a basic working network without computing.
so does that mean no “beta” either? I kinda agree its arbitrary where you draw that line in the sand. I think releases and deliverables are cold hard facts and not just semantics like “beta” or “MVP.” I would rather the price move based on things got done rather then “oh joy! today is the day we are now calling what there is a beta”
Anyways I still think you guys are attributing the move down from 3k to things that are not a simple as: Margins have to wind down and there are more longs then shorts. I think that’s what will temporarily drive the price and give us some great chances to buy leading up to Fleming where I would expect a nice move up based on milestones reached on the dev side.
Epic! The progress seems to be at light speed on github. Could travel a parsec at this pace, no problem!
that is big news dropped very nonchalantly!
As for MVP, I feel that it is not the right term for intermediate milestones, but I do believe there is (and should be) such a thing as an MVP.
I would define it as a bare minimum system in which the one and only SafeCoin exists, which means a robust storage and transaction network that supports it, and that can resist attacks on its integrity.
Everything else is just nice for adoption and to drive value etc.etc., but imo not essential to preserve the MVP that I just defined.
As for deflating SafeCoin, I wonder who would really complain about such a change other than people waiting on the sidelines.
Without a properly functioning network i dont think it is possible to create safecoin and expect it to be safe.
Sure that would be nice for the short term value of my MAID bag. I think on balance though I would not want to change the distribution. I mean if farmers are not rewarded enough we won’t see the network grow very fast. I would take a smaller share of the total safecoins if in exchange the network grows more quickly and makes the whole pie bigger. I think I really want the MAID generated SAFEcoins to be quite nominal. Like a small but fair tax for participating in getting the infrastructure up and running. The more factories people build the more that small tax adds up and no one complains. If you get people saying I am not setting up a factory because the tax is to high you get less tax then at a lower level where people find it an acceptable cost to participate in what you set up.
What really is a properly functioning network? For example: How much does it rely on PUTs and GETs to remain secure? Why does it need to grow enormously big fast?
Without data storage we would no farmers.
Without farmers we would have very few nodes.
Without many nodes it would be far to easy to attack the network.
It’s definitely subjective, but I view an MVP as an iteration of the product that provides users with realizable value, I.e. a network that allows developers (whether MaidSafe or third party) to craft dApps that consumers can use (even if they aren’t polished yet). I view this as distinct from commercialization.
Sounds like a Minimum Product, an MP
Once again, subjective, but viable to me means able to provide value. Value, of course, is in the “hand” of the user
If there is value to the users and not only developers I would agree. A system without SafeCoin, but with testsafecoin would be ok.
To earn the V in MVP the product needs to exceed certain level of robustness. If there is no SafeCoin involved that bar could be really low. Example:
MV0P - communication network without perpetual storage guarantee, and with imperfect security, but otherwise usable.
MV1P - same but with SafeCoin and basic security (many crypto currencies are fine even with occasionally successful attacks)
MV2P - security better than Bitcoin
Then what would be the tipping point? I thought there would be safeguards built in to avoid having such a threshold.
I would accept less decentralized initial system iterations (and we probably will have to) and put a lot of trust in @dirvine, (which we already do.)