Topic: [ANN] Cyber: A decentralized Google for provable and relevant answers - page 2. (Read 2069 times)
sr. member
Activity: 938
Merit: 466
~[f#
December 13, 2019, 05:58:55 PM
I heard that Euler 5 is starting soon. This is very good news.
December 09, 2019, 01:51:53 PM
We have released an Explain it like I'm 5 guide to help people understand what cyber is. The full FAQ can be found on our GitHub.
What is cyber?
The explanation below is NOT going to be simple, so please do not be put off by it. All the terminology used in the first explanation WILL be explained in detail later in this document. Let me assure you, that if you keep on reading, you will be able to understand Cyber with almost zero previous knowledge.
Cyber is essentially creating a brand new protocol (a procedure that helps computers to do things in a certain way) for adding and searching information onto a knowledge graph (a compilation of facts about something that provides meaning to the user). And rank this information.
Different types of users create links between 2 IPFS hashes (keep on reading to see what this is) and place them on a knowledge graph by spending bandwidth (amount of data that can be transmitted over a fixed period of time).
That content is then dynamically ranked with the help of digital tokens and the current parameters of the networks load. This makes the rank dynamic (characterized by continuous change, activity, or progress).
All this is computed (determined with the help of a computer) by validators (a program or a computer that are responsible for checking the validity of something). The validators do so, by using their GPU's (literally - graphics cards).
This allows to search data on the web, rank it, query it (look it up) and create knowledge databases without blackbox intermediaries (third parties that try to censor data, hide or push specific results to obtain money, track your data, etc).
The interesting thing is that such a simple mechanism allows creating a lot of powerful tools as a result. We will go in-detail further down the document into those. For example: unified semantics, SEO instruments, autonomous robots, and a lot more.
What cyber is NOT?
Cyber is not a commercial product. In fact, it is not a product as such. It is an instrument if you wish, or a tool, that anyone can use. That said, cyber allows for several ways for its participants to earn rewards.
Cyber is not THE new internet. It is a tool that can help to shape and to decentralize (distribute the power of authority) the new Great Web.
What problem are you trying to solve?
We are trying to solve the problem of data centralization and data censorship. Which in other words, is decentralization of common knowledge (assuming that data is the new knowledge and that we are moving into the digital age).
Why are you doing this?
Each person should be able to control their own data, their identity, their knowledge. The universe can become a better place if our children live in a digital environment where they are in charge of their actions.
What's wrong with Google?
Google is a brilliant idea. We do not deny this. But Google is the rebel that has overthrown the dictator and became the dictator itself. Google uses you to shape the essence and the fundamentals of communications between everyone and everything. Whilst at it, Google doesn't care for anyone and will make money on your action and your behalf.
It should be noted, that by this question I am attempting not just at Google, but at all the mega-digital corporations. Feel free to check out what this can lead to in the shape of Cambridge Analityca. If this case is too much to take in or too "loud" for you, feel free to watch some episodes of Black Mirror to see how digital control can "break" society.
Why now?
Because we are almost done with post-industrialism. We are slowly and surely moving into the digital realm. One can deny or accept this. Now is the time to either have the tools that will help us to shape the matrix the way we want to shape it or give those powers away to someone to control all aspects of our lives.
Why search?
Search is a global mechanism that is globally understood by everyone, regardless of language, race, age, etc. It is somewhat a basic instinct (searching for food to survive, etc). In the digital realm with the help of search, we gain answers to our questions, which we always ask. Search helps us to build a model around any subject that is of interest to us. With the use of search, we can build databases, which can lead to a great number of useful instruments (on these later).
Aren't there other, more important problems to solve?
There probably are. But we decided to focus on this because we understand how to achieve the required result. There are probably more problems and questions to be solved (like hunger, wars, ecology, etc). Our tool can help to play a role in solving if not all, but some of these.
Aren't there other things out there that solve this?
There is a lot of awesome, open-source technology on the market that can commit to making a change in the world. Most of the technology we use is not something we invented (although the code itself is written from scratch!). They are technologies that have existed previously and are awesome at doing what they do. Our software is a combination of existing technologies, protocols and our own work that has arisen from this. It is specifically targeted at fixing what is broken.
What is cyber?
The explanation below is NOT going to be simple, so please do not be put off by it. All the terminology used in the first explanation WILL be explained in detail later in this document. Let me assure you, that if you keep on reading, you will be able to understand Cyber with almost zero previous knowledge.
Cyber is essentially creating a brand new protocol (a procedure that helps computers to do things in a certain way) for adding and searching information onto a knowledge graph (a compilation of facts about something that provides meaning to the user). And rank this information.
Different types of users create links between 2 IPFS hashes (keep on reading to see what this is) and place them on a knowledge graph by spending bandwidth (amount of data that can be transmitted over a fixed period of time).
That content is then dynamically ranked with the help of digital tokens and the current parameters of the networks load. This makes the rank dynamic (characterized by continuous change, activity, or progress).
All this is computed (determined with the help of a computer) by validators (a program or a computer that are responsible for checking the validity of something). The validators do so, by using their GPU's (literally - graphics cards).
This allows to search data on the web, rank it, query it (look it up) and create knowledge databases without blackbox intermediaries (third parties that try to censor data, hide or push specific results to obtain money, track your data, etc).
The interesting thing is that such a simple mechanism allows creating a lot of powerful tools as a result. We will go in-detail further down the document into those. For example: unified semantics, SEO instruments, autonomous robots, and a lot more.
What cyber is NOT?
Cyber is not a commercial product. In fact, it is not a product as such. It is an instrument if you wish, or a tool, that anyone can use. That said, cyber allows for several ways for its participants to earn rewards.
Cyber is not THE new internet. It is a tool that can help to shape and to decentralize (distribute the power of authority) the new Great Web.
What problem are you trying to solve?
We are trying to solve the problem of data centralization and data censorship. Which in other words, is decentralization of common knowledge (assuming that data is the new knowledge and that we are moving into the digital age).
Why are you doing this?
Each person should be able to control their own data, their identity, their knowledge. The universe can become a better place if our children live in a digital environment where they are in charge of their actions.
What's wrong with Google?
Google is a brilliant idea. We do not deny this. But Google is the rebel that has overthrown the dictator and became the dictator itself. Google uses you to shape the essence and the fundamentals of communications between everyone and everything. Whilst at it, Google doesn't care for anyone and will make money on your action and your behalf.
It should be noted, that by this question I am attempting not just at Google, but at all the mega-digital corporations. Feel free to check out what this can lead to in the shape of Cambridge Analityca. If this case is too much to take in or too "loud" for you, feel free to watch some episodes of Black Mirror to see how digital control can "break" society.
Why now?
Because we are almost done with post-industrialism. We are slowly and surely moving into the digital realm. One can deny or accept this. Now is the time to either have the tools that will help us to shape the matrix the way we want to shape it or give those powers away to someone to control all aspects of our lives.
Why search?
Search is a global mechanism that is globally understood by everyone, regardless of language, race, age, etc. It is somewhat a basic instinct (searching for food to survive, etc). In the digital realm with the help of search, we gain answers to our questions, which we always ask. Search helps us to build a model around any subject that is of interest to us. With the use of search, we can build databases, which can lead to a great number of useful instruments (on these later).
Aren't there other, more important problems to solve?
There probably are. But we decided to focus on this because we understand how to achieve the required result. There are probably more problems and questions to be solved (like hunger, wars, ecology, etc). Our tool can help to play a role in solving if not all, but some of these.
Aren't there other things out there that solve this?
There is a lot of awesome, open-source technology on the market that can commit to making a change in the world. Most of the technology we use is not something we invented (although the code itself is written from scratch!). They are technologies that have existed previously and are awesome at doing what they do. Our software is a combination of existing technologies, protocols and our own work that has arisen from this. It is specifically targeted at fixing what is broken.
December 03, 2019, 08:18:53 AM
I decided to add a high-level explanation to what it is we do in the form of a blog post:
The dawn of the great web
** Warning, what you about to read may affect your future…*
Original protocols of the Internet, such as: TCP/IP, DNS, URL, and HTTP/S have brought the web to a stale point. Considering all the benefits that these protocols have produced for the initial development of the web; along with them, they have brought significant obstacles to the table.
Introducing cyber: An inter-planetary search engine & a state of the art consensus computer, built with the help of go-IPFS and cosmos-SDK. Cyber introduces a protocol for provable communication between consensus computers of relevance. Based on a simple idea of content defined knowledge graphs generated by web3-agents via the use of cyberlinks - a simple, yet a powerful semantic construction for building a predictive model of the universe.
Our values
I could theoretically go straight to the point (and if you are eager to know more, simply skip to the next section), but I think it is vital to state that values are what keeps the world spinning around (or rather what keeps it from spinning around the wrong way).
We do not believe in captchas. We do not believe in KYC. We do not believe in licensing and any other similar to the above-mentioned bullshit. We do believe in code. We believe in innovation and in making use of our knowledge to make the world a slightly better place for our children.
With that in mind, what I'm trying to say, is that cyber and cyb are not just technological results. They are much more. At its base lay the values of the team behind cyber. We hope that our project can re-create certain values of what we believe the blockchain paradigm stands for. With that said, we are open to communication and will be happy for any feedback on our code, on our Github and our telegram channel.
The solution
I must say that there is no simple way to describe cyber without the use of technical jargon. Hence, below I may have substituted some technical words to draw out analogies. For more information, please visit our Github and see our launch FAQ for more information.
To keep this somewhat short, I will not go into any details in this article, as per why, there are issues (technologically and ideologically) with the current web and how it infects us, similar to a virus in every aspect of our lives.
The web needs a change. blackbox intermediaries, such as: Google, Amazon or Facebook became religions. Information is tampered with. Cyber uses the already available brand-new web-stack to deliver the Great Web to everyone who wishes to join it. A true web-3 technology. The first of its kind. Allowing for a fair and an incentivized general-purpose search of real and relevant answers.
Within the network, web3-agents generate knowledge graphs with the use of what we call cyberlinks. A cyberlink is simply a link between two content-based links. This allows for a naturally semantic link, which is needed for the computation of relevance of subjects and objects within the knowledge graph.
IPFS provides significant benefits with regards to resource consumption. Cyber links and IPFS provide us with the superpowers that were inaccessible to previous architectures of general-purpose search engines.
We must agree on the things we do, and here is where cyber introduces a consensus computer, its implementation is a 64-bit Tendermint consensus computer of relevance for 64-byte string-space. The computer process the links, along with computation, storage and the bandwidth. Computation and storage in case of a basic relevance machine can be easily predicted based on bandwidth; but bandwidth requires a limiting mechanism.
The relevance machine
The relevance machine is in some way a mirror of the will of the universe that surrounds us. It enables a simple construction for the search mechanism via querying and delivering answers, based on the will of the agents building the knowledge graph.
Instead of deducting the meaning inside of the consensus computer (and returning to the blackbox principle), we have designed a system in which extraction of meaning is incentivized. This is achieved due to agents needing CYB tokens to express their will, based on which, the relevance machine can compute rank.
With the help of Resource Credits (RC) and an agents stake, we build a very simple bandwidth model. The principal goal of this model is to reduce the daily network growth to a given constant. This is done to accommodate validators with the ability to forecast any future investment into infrastructure. RC and recovery windows allow the network to determine bandwidth and its load.
The relevance machine works just like the human mind in that it neither - stores the past, nor the current full state, to maintain usefulness. Or more precisely, it remains: relevant. Always. As a result, the cybernomics of CYB tokens, serves not just as will-expression and spam-protection mechanisms. It also functions as an economics regulation tool that can align validators processing the knowledge graph, and as demand for market processing.
cyber~Rank
IPFS hashes (or content identifiers or CIDs) are vital for the network. CIDs as primary objects are robust in their simplicity. For every CID, cyber ~Rank is computed by a consensus computer without a single point of failure. cyber ~Rank is a CYB (token) weighted PageRank, with economic protection from sybil attacks, and self-centred voting. Every round the Merkle root of the rank tree is published. Consequently, every computer can prove to any other computer a relevance of value for a given CID. The rank is calculated by using the outgoing and the incoming weight of the current state of the staked tokens in the system, that are used to form the CIDs, and the current and previous ranks in the system.
Ironically, the ranking mechanism is based on none other but the PageRank – yes, that was developed by Sergey Brin and Larry Page. The key problem with the original PageRank is that it wasn’t resistant to sybil attacks. However, a token-weighted PageRank is limited by a token-weighted bandwidth model, and does not inherit such problems as the native PageRank. It is resistant to sybil-attacks. The beauty behind the ranking mechanism is that it only accounts for the current intention of the agents and it encourages rank inflation of cyberlinks. At first, this might seem a bit unclear. But, it is vital for the system not to be interfered with (ensured by the agents stake against a CID) and is essential in order not to get cemented in the past. As new cyberlinks are continuously added, they dilute the rank of the already existing links proportionally. This means that this is a constantly self-evolving, mind-like mechanism.
Web-3 and DAO
We couldn't find a real web-3 browser (not a web2 based pseudo-tech), so we implemented our own. Cyb can be easily delivered from any P2P network. It allows embedding objects into snippets, which means that a web3-agent can interact with the search results directly… For example, you could buy items directly in cyb, and thanks to a transparent conversion, e-commerce can flourish and in turn - develop local markets. More so, those snippets can be interactive, meaning you could play a game, view a wallet balance, etc - directly from your browser.
Some of the donated funds to cyber will be run by an Aragon DAO. cyber doesn't just have a community-run fund, but also a DAO-managed blockchain, which functions under the Tendermint consensus algorithm with a standard governance module. Together allowing for a community-run governance mechanism for the fund and for the chain itself.
The unimaginable future
The future is unimaginable, but it has a shape. At its base lay information. The alchemy of today is being able to process that information.
Our proposed semantics of linking data offers a robust mechanism for predicting meaningful relations between objects by the consensus computer itself. The source-code of the relevance machine is open-source. Every bit of data accumulated by the consensus computer is available to anyone if one has the resources to process it.
Though the system presents the necessary utility to allow an alternative for a conventional search engine, it is not limited just to this use case. The system is extendable for numerous applications and makes it possible (for example) to design economically rational, self-owned robots, that can autonomously understand objects around them. It is also possible to construct cyberlinks with ’proof-of-location’ based on remarkable existing protocols such as Foam, hence creating a provable location linked object.
cyber allows for programmable semantics. Currently, the developers of successful apps have very limited ability to explain to Google how to structure search results in a better manner. The cyber approach gives this power back to developers. Developers are now able to target specific semantics cores and index their apps as they wish.
cyber allows for off-line search! IPFS makes it possible to easily retrieve a document from such an environment without a global internet connection. cyberd itself can be distributed by using IPFS. This creates the possibility for ubiquitous, off-line search!
Don’t believe, don’t fear, don’t ask – cyber...
The dawn of the great web
** Warning, what you about to read may affect your future…*
Original protocols of the Internet, such as: TCP/IP, DNS, URL, and HTTP/S have brought the web to a stale point. Considering all the benefits that these protocols have produced for the initial development of the web; along with them, they have brought significant obstacles to the table.
Introducing cyber: An inter-planetary search engine & a state of the art consensus computer, built with the help of go-IPFS and cosmos-SDK. Cyber introduces a protocol for provable communication between consensus computers of relevance. Based on a simple idea of content defined knowledge graphs generated by web3-agents via the use of cyberlinks - a simple, yet a powerful semantic construction for building a predictive model of the universe.
Our values
I could theoretically go straight to the point (and if you are eager to know more, simply skip to the next section), but I think it is vital to state that values are what keeps the world spinning around (or rather what keeps it from spinning around the wrong way).
We do not believe in captchas. We do not believe in KYC. We do not believe in licensing and any other similar to the above-mentioned bullshit. We do believe in code. We believe in innovation and in making use of our knowledge to make the world a slightly better place for our children.
With that in mind, what I'm trying to say, is that cyber and cyb are not just technological results. They are much more. At its base lay the values of the team behind cyber. We hope that our project can re-create certain values of what we believe the blockchain paradigm stands for. With that said, we are open to communication and will be happy for any feedback on our code, on our Github and our telegram channel.
The solution
I must say that there is no simple way to describe cyber without the use of technical jargon. Hence, below I may have substituted some technical words to draw out analogies. For more information, please visit our Github and see our launch FAQ for more information.
To keep this somewhat short, I will not go into any details in this article, as per why, there are issues (technologically and ideologically) with the current web and how it infects us, similar to a virus in every aspect of our lives.
The web needs a change. blackbox intermediaries, such as: Google, Amazon or Facebook became religions. Information is tampered with. Cyber uses the already available brand-new web-stack to deliver the Great Web to everyone who wishes to join it. A true web-3 technology. The first of its kind. Allowing for a fair and an incentivized general-purpose search of real and relevant answers.
Within the network, web3-agents generate knowledge graphs with the use of what we call cyberlinks. A cyberlink is simply a link between two content-based links. This allows for a naturally semantic link, which is needed for the computation of relevance of subjects and objects within the knowledge graph.
IPFS provides significant benefits with regards to resource consumption. Cyber links and IPFS provide us with the superpowers that were inaccessible to previous architectures of general-purpose search engines.
We must agree on the things we do, and here is where cyber introduces a consensus computer, its implementation is a 64-bit Tendermint consensus computer of relevance for 64-byte string-space. The computer process the links, along with computation, storage and the bandwidth. Computation and storage in case of a basic relevance machine can be easily predicted based on bandwidth; but bandwidth requires a limiting mechanism.
The relevance machine
The relevance machine is in some way a mirror of the will of the universe that surrounds us. It enables a simple construction for the search mechanism via querying and delivering answers, based on the will of the agents building the knowledge graph.
Instead of deducting the meaning inside of the consensus computer (and returning to the blackbox principle), we have designed a system in which extraction of meaning is incentivized. This is achieved due to agents needing CYB tokens to express their will, based on which, the relevance machine can compute rank.
With the help of Resource Credits (RC) and an agents stake, we build a very simple bandwidth model. The principal goal of this model is to reduce the daily network growth to a given constant. This is done to accommodate validators with the ability to forecast any future investment into infrastructure. RC and recovery windows allow the network to determine bandwidth and its load.
The relevance machine works just like the human mind in that it neither - stores the past, nor the current full state, to maintain usefulness. Or more precisely, it remains: relevant. Always. As a result, the cybernomics of CYB tokens, serves not just as will-expression and spam-protection mechanisms. It also functions as an economics regulation tool that can align validators processing the knowledge graph, and as demand for market processing.
cyber~Rank
IPFS hashes (or content identifiers or CIDs) are vital for the network. CIDs as primary objects are robust in their simplicity. For every CID, cyber ~Rank is computed by a consensus computer without a single point of failure. cyber ~Rank is a CYB (token) weighted PageRank, with economic protection from sybil attacks, and self-centred voting. Every round the Merkle root of the rank tree is published. Consequently, every computer can prove to any other computer a relevance of value for a given CID. The rank is calculated by using the outgoing and the incoming weight of the current state of the staked tokens in the system, that are used to form the CIDs, and the current and previous ranks in the system.
Ironically, the ranking mechanism is based on none other but the PageRank – yes, that was developed by Sergey Brin and Larry Page. The key problem with the original PageRank is that it wasn’t resistant to sybil attacks. However, a token-weighted PageRank is limited by a token-weighted bandwidth model, and does not inherit such problems as the native PageRank. It is resistant to sybil-attacks. The beauty behind the ranking mechanism is that it only accounts for the current intention of the agents and it encourages rank inflation of cyberlinks. At first, this might seem a bit unclear. But, it is vital for the system not to be interfered with (ensured by the agents stake against a CID) and is essential in order not to get cemented in the past. As new cyberlinks are continuously added, they dilute the rank of the already existing links proportionally. This means that this is a constantly self-evolving, mind-like mechanism.
Web-3 and DAO
We couldn't find a real web-3 browser (not a web2 based pseudo-tech), so we implemented our own. Cyb can be easily delivered from any P2P network. It allows embedding objects into snippets, which means that a web3-agent can interact with the search results directly… For example, you could buy items directly in cyb, and thanks to a transparent conversion, e-commerce can flourish and in turn - develop local markets. More so, those snippets can be interactive, meaning you could play a game, view a wallet balance, etc - directly from your browser.
Some of the donated funds to cyber will be run by an Aragon DAO. cyber doesn't just have a community-run fund, but also a DAO-managed blockchain, which functions under the Tendermint consensus algorithm with a standard governance module. Together allowing for a community-run governance mechanism for the fund and for the chain itself.
The unimaginable future
The future is unimaginable, but it has a shape. At its base lay information. The alchemy of today is being able to process that information.
Our proposed semantics of linking data offers a robust mechanism for predicting meaningful relations between objects by the consensus computer itself. The source-code of the relevance machine is open-source. Every bit of data accumulated by the consensus computer is available to anyone if one has the resources to process it.
Though the system presents the necessary utility to allow an alternative for a conventional search engine, it is not limited just to this use case. The system is extendable for numerous applications and makes it possible (for example) to design economically rational, self-owned robots, that can autonomously understand objects around them. It is also possible to construct cyberlinks with ’proof-of-location’ based on remarkable existing protocols such as Foam, hence creating a provable location linked object.
cyber allows for programmable semantics. Currently, the developers of successful apps have very limited ability to explain to Google how to structure search results in a better manner. The cyber approach gives this power back to developers. Developers are now able to target specific semantics cores and index their apps as they wish.
cyber allows for off-line search! IPFS makes it possible to easily retrieve a document from such an environment without a global internet connection. cyberd itself can be distributed by using IPFS. This creates the possibility for ubiquitous, off-line search!
Don’t believe, don’t fear, don’t ask – cyber...
December 02, 2019, 05:34:49 AM
We have made a release of our White Paper. For now, it can be found here.
Would love to hear any feedback on the document itself.
The Wp contains the current vision of the protocol, main functions, formulas for rank calculation and the main description of the protocol.
It also contains some ideological background and an apps section. Those are the possible apps that we think can be implemented in the future with the help of the protocol.
Would love to hear any feedback on the document itself.
The Wp contains the current vision of the protocol, main functions, formulas for rank calculation and the main description of the protocol.
It also contains some ideological background and an apps section. Those are the possible apps that we think can be implemented in the future with the help of the protocol.
November 28, 2019, 03:18:41 PM
maxcapibarius,
I do not wish to engage in this discussion (I just simply do not agree with you), but I have kept the thread open (not self-moderated, as I highly value transparency) so it is up to you to decide on whatever you want to say.
I do not wish to engage in this discussion (I just simply do not agree with you), but I have kept the thread open (not self-moderated, as I highly value transparency) so it is up to you to decide on whatever you want to say.
I like how Cyberd "highly values transparency" only in situations where it does not have admin rights to censor everything.
Deleting everything from from official TG channel which was not to liking of Starodubcev should probably be also taken as marker as to how highly transparency is valued within CYBERD.
It also seems that lack of willingness to engage in any discussion should also be taken as indication to promote healthy dialogue within community.
I just cannot see any reason at all, why investors and users should steer clear of this stuff or have any concerns at all.
November 27, 2019, 05:24:15 AM
maxcapibarius,
1) By nemby - I was referring to your status on BTT, I do not see how this is an issue. It says it directly under your name. If that offended you, my apologies
2) No, I did not know who you were until now. And even now, it took me a while to find out this information.
3) I will keep this answer short, as I do not see it any other way:
The project is in testnet, it says all over the place (github, readmes, etc) thats this is a non custodial solution that should be used at your own risk.
I didn't make that decision, but I believe it was the right decision that was made by the team at the time.
Things may still change. Even now. Anyone who uses this soft must understand that it can be insecure, buggy and prawn to changes until a functioning release is made. Then the community may take that release and work with it as it wishes.
To my personal belief this is the thing with open-source tech mate. The final beaty if this is very simple IMO. If you do not agree with something - you fork it out, change what you believe wasn't right and do it your way. The open market will put things in place.
I do not wish to engage in this discussion (I just simply do not agree with you), but I have kept the thread open (not self-moderated, as I highly value transparency) so it is up to you to decide on whatever you want to say.
As you can see though, you are the only community member that has this opinion
1) By nemby - I was referring to your status on BTT, I do not see how this is an issue. It says it directly under your name. If that offended you, my apologies
2) No, I did not know who you were until now. And even now, it took me a while to find out this information.
3) I will keep this answer short, as I do not see it any other way:
The project is in testnet, it says all over the place (github, readmes, etc) thats this is a non custodial solution that should be used at your own risk.
I didn't make that decision, but I believe it was the right decision that was made by the team at the time.
Things may still change. Even now. Anyone who uses this soft must understand that it can be insecure, buggy and prawn to changes until a functioning release is made. Then the community may take that release and work with it as it wishes.
To my personal belief this is the thing with open-source tech mate. The final beaty if this is very simple IMO. If you do not agree with something - you fork it out, change what you believe wasn't right and do it your way. The open market will put things in place.
I do not wish to engage in this discussion (I just simply do not agree with you), but I have kept the thread open (not self-moderated, as I highly value transparency) so it is up to you to decide on whatever you want to say.
As you can see though, you are the only community member that has this opinion
sr. member
Activity: 938
Merit: 466
~[f#
November 26, 2019, 03:55:15 PM
maxcapibarius, This project is in the testnet, so I think this is a good time to fix bugs and other errors.
https://github.com/cybercongress/cyberd
I think the guys made the right decision. The network had bugs and the accumulation of rewards was not the goal of this testnet. The current distribution looks very successful. You can check it out.
https://github.com/cybercongress/launch-kit/tree/0.1.0/lifetime_rewards_tool
I think that early validators did not receive too much. But this is not as wrong as you might think.
You should also know that the project is self-financing. The guys spend their strength, knowledge and money to create a project. It is good that they give us the opportunity to join in at an early stage.
The project should develop along the path that will be optimal and will bring more benefits to the project.
https://github.com/cybercongress/cyberd
I think the guys made the right decision. The network had bugs and the accumulation of rewards was not the goal of this testnet. The current distribution looks very successful. You can check it out.
https://github.com/cybercongress/launch-kit/tree/0.1.0/lifetime_rewards_tool
I think that early validators did not receive too much. But this is not as wrong as you might think.
You should also know that the project is self-financing. The guys spend their strength, knowledge and money to create a project. It is good that they give us the opportunity to join in at an early stage.
The project should develop along the path that will be optimal and will bring more benefits to the project.
November 26, 2019, 02:57:53 PM
Dear All present and future potential stakeholders* of CYBERD project.
(*hereinafter I refer to stakeholders not to people who are merely holding holding stake, but rather all participants of the platform including investors, validators, users etc, in other words how word stakeholder is used in general business sense).
I decided to letter this letter because of unethical and scam-like behavior of CYBERD team which is very alarming to me. I would like to strictly stick to the facts here, be as objective as possible and also ask for opinions of community members, in other words everyone but not the team involved in the project.
By this point I’ve already had a very lengthy and in-depth conversation with project team leader and so far my logical arguments were not countered by anything else rather than “this is bullshit” and “you don’t understand anything”.
Here are the facts:
1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMVJpjnOQqk&list=PL-MRS5fkWajCmfAS1WxBVgtMdFPmS4WTZ&index=3 January 26 2019 Dmitriy Starodubcev made presentation covering CYBERD platform. You can see whole presentation within link attached.
2) During presentation it was made very clear that all rewards created due to validation in testing phase will be transferred to mainnet – according to the following schedule.
3) It is not entirely clear what this table says, but if you listen carefully to Dima’s speech and look at this graph long enough you’ll see that for example in first testnet you get +100% inflation, however only 1% of allocation (presumably of annual inflation, not sure what allocation means in context) – in other words as test-net validators everyone cheered on the idea that you can keep your validated tokens to main net.
3) I was very keen on idea of this platform and made effort to become the very first external validator (not belonging to the team) who joined the testnet and had perfect opportunity to observe dynamics from the very start.
4) As first rewards started to accumulate on my account I compared them to what Dima proudly presented in general chat. His figure was around 99,531,510,691,819 CYB for several weeks, I had comparable “magnitude” of numbers so I felt that everything was going alright
5) By mid of July I accumulated roughly 829,887,601,504,433CYB. You have to keep in mind number of validators was increasing, hence each individual reward was decreasing, additionally I would imagine that Dima originally had a very big stake staked, meaning that his reward was quite big.
6) This is where things start to get TRICKY: Dima communicated that there was a bug in the system and all rewards must be divided by 100 – which clearly caused some confusion, so I took my time to carefully investigate the matter, this is what I inferred:
a) As external stakeholder of the platform one can only interpret statement made in Minksk in January 2018 as offer to participate as validator on those particular terms
b) Any external stakeholder does not and cannot by definition have any control over parametres of the protocol.
c) Therefore any stakeholder who choose to participate as validator can only observe OUTGOING parameters as given by the designers of the protocol INCLUDING amount of rewards received by any validator.
d) One cannot reasonable assume that team of people who undertook such a complicated endeavor as launching next generation protocol do not possess enough skill, so as not to build in mathematics of distribution which was laid out in original presentation in Minsk.
e) Team members specifically advised to claim rewards EVERY DAY because network can go down (being a test network) any minute. I cannot be sure what happened with other validators, but as for myself I did as instructed and claimed rewards everyday, so I could see the daily generating.
f) Presently it is impossible post-factum to establish whether any parameters were changed on the go, in it is impossible to validate anything BUT the TX on chain, which can only be the only feasible metrics.
7) CYBERD said that everything was bugged, all calculation were incorrect, initial offer made during Minsk presentation is not valid, in fact nothing is valid, but what is forced to you which is this:
3Terra CYB = which is 3,000,000,000,000,
Whereas only on my validation alone in mid July 2019 I had approximately 830TCYB.
830 3 = more than 1000x discount.
CONCLUSIONS:
- I cannot know if other validators had comparable results, however almost 100% of time all stakes were equals, implying that everyone should be getting equal rewards. Hence I would imagine that all other validators got similar magnitude of discount
- This situation raises great deal of concern for current and future investors as whether their capital will be dealt with in a fair fashion
- I urge all stakeholder of the platform excluding the team members in order to avoid bias to voice their opinion on the matter, and whether they were treated fairly, when they rewards were arbitrarily heavily discounted
- Another alarming opinion which I got from Dima, is that they are validators themselves and should also be rewarded for validation. However in my view team’s reward has already been declared as fixed percentage. CYBERD team are insiders to themselves and are in advantage to the rest of the stakeholders, hence all rewards created by validation due to testing by the team itself should be included in the in fixed percentage already allocated as team rewards, otherwise it cause unfair dilution of valuation of current and future stakeholders of the platform.
- Additionally if you feel that my line of arguments were incorrect I would be happy to follow your logic and if you can prove me wrong would happily admit it, I’m strictly man of reason – logic must stand above all.
- MOST IMPORTANTLY – its been long established that CODE IS THE LAW. On one hand we’ve all seen DAO, on the other hand it wasn’t for immutability of Bitcoin, we would never see such incredible rise of blockchain assets.
So, I call on to everyone in the community to express the opinion on the matter, as it’s a dangerous precedent, if parameters can be changed at will, then this cannot be called true permissionless protocol.
(*hereinafter I refer to stakeholders not to people who are merely holding holding stake, but rather all participants of the platform including investors, validators, users etc, in other words how word stakeholder is used in general business sense).
I decided to letter this letter because of unethical and scam-like behavior of CYBERD team which is very alarming to me. I would like to strictly stick to the facts here, be as objective as possible and also ask for opinions of community members, in other words everyone but not the team involved in the project.
By this point I’ve already had a very lengthy and in-depth conversation with project team leader and so far my logical arguments were not countered by anything else rather than “this is bullshit” and “you don’t understand anything”.
Here are the facts:
1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMVJpjnOQqk&list=PL-MRS5fkWajCmfAS1WxBVgtMdFPmS4WTZ&index=3 January 26 2019 Dmitriy Starodubcev made presentation covering CYBERD platform. You can see whole presentation within link attached.
2) During presentation it was made very clear that all rewards created due to validation in testing phase will be transferred to mainnet – according to the following schedule.
3) It is not entirely clear what this table says, but if you listen carefully to Dima’s speech and look at this graph long enough you’ll see that for example in first testnet you get +100% inflation, however only 1% of allocation (presumably of annual inflation, not sure what allocation means in context) – in other words as test-net validators everyone cheered on the idea that you can keep your validated tokens to main net.
3) I was very keen on idea of this platform and made effort to become the very first external validator (not belonging to the team) who joined the testnet and had perfect opportunity to observe dynamics from the very start.
4) As first rewards started to accumulate on my account I compared them to what Dima proudly presented in general chat. His figure was around 99,531,510,691,819 CYB for several weeks, I had comparable “magnitude” of numbers so I felt that everything was going alright
5) By mid of July I accumulated roughly 829,887,601,504,433CYB. You have to keep in mind number of validators was increasing, hence each individual reward was decreasing, additionally I would imagine that Dima originally had a very big stake staked, meaning that his reward was quite big.
6) This is where things start to get TRICKY: Dima communicated that there was a bug in the system and all rewards must be divided by 100 – which clearly caused some confusion, so I took my time to carefully investigate the matter, this is what I inferred:
a) As external stakeholder of the platform one can only interpret statement made in Minksk in January 2018 as offer to participate as validator on those particular terms
b) Any external stakeholder does not and cannot by definition have any control over parametres of the protocol.
c) Therefore any stakeholder who choose to participate as validator can only observe OUTGOING parameters as given by the designers of the protocol INCLUDING amount of rewards received by any validator.
d) One cannot reasonable assume that team of people who undertook such a complicated endeavor as launching next generation protocol do not possess enough skill, so as not to build in mathematics of distribution which was laid out in original presentation in Minsk.
e) Team members specifically advised to claim rewards EVERY DAY because network can go down (being a test network) any minute. I cannot be sure what happened with other validators, but as for myself I did as instructed and claimed rewards everyday, so I could see the daily generating.
f) Presently it is impossible post-factum to establish whether any parameters were changed on the go, in it is impossible to validate anything BUT the TX on chain, which can only be the only feasible metrics.
7) CYBERD said that everything was bugged, all calculation were incorrect, initial offer made during Minsk presentation is not valid, in fact nothing is valid, but what is forced to you which is this:
3Terra CYB = which is 3,000,000,000,000,
Whereas only on my validation alone in mid July 2019 I had approximately 830TCYB.
830 3 = more than 1000x discount.
CONCLUSIONS:
- I cannot know if other validators had comparable results, however almost 100% of time all stakes were equals, implying that everyone should be getting equal rewards. Hence I would imagine that all other validators got similar magnitude of discount
- This situation raises great deal of concern for current and future investors as whether their capital will be dealt with in a fair fashion
- I urge all stakeholder of the platform excluding the team members in order to avoid bias to voice their opinion on the matter, and whether they were treated fairly, when they rewards were arbitrarily heavily discounted
- Another alarming opinion which I got from Dima, is that they are validators themselves and should also be rewarded for validation. However in my view team’s reward has already been declared as fixed percentage. CYBERD team are insiders to themselves and are in advantage to the rest of the stakeholders, hence all rewards created by validation due to testing by the team itself should be included in the in fixed percentage already allocated as team rewards, otherwise it cause unfair dilution of valuation of current and future stakeholders of the platform.
- Additionally if you feel that my line of arguments were incorrect I would be happy to follow your logic and if you can prove me wrong would happily admit it, I’m strictly man of reason – logic must stand above all.
- MOST IMPORTANTLY – its been long established that CODE IS THE LAW. On one hand we’ve all seen DAO, on the other hand it wasn’t for immutability of Bitcoin, we would never see such incredible rise of blockchain assets.
So, I call on to everyone in the community to express the opinion on the matter, as it’s a dangerous precedent, if parameters can be changed at will, then this cannot be called true permissionless protocol.
November 26, 2019, 02:50:04 PM
well, first of all I'm not a newbie, you are perfectly aware of who I am, secondly what you call a bug, I call scam.
Starodubcev claimed that there was OPEN discussion with regard to the distribution and further development of the protocol etc, however in reality, all opinions which were not aligned with opinion of Starodubcev were censored.
TG channel was cleared of all messages, and no discussion took places - everything was simply deleted.
In my next message I will post open letter, which was originally posted in TG channel and which was subsequently deleted, along with any connected replies.
To that effect, I think it is impossible to call CYBERD free, next generation censorship protocol, given the simply TG discussion is not possible.
I've spoken with a number of people who were financially and work related to the project at some point, and who were kicked out / scammed in a similar fashion, just because their opinion was different from Starodubcev. Since those were private conversations, I'm not at liberty to disclose any information regarding those situations.
However if those who were similarly excluded from genesis / in other words those people from whom Starodubcev stole money would like to step in and join the discussion, please do.
I strongly feel that blockchain assets markets are polluted enough already, to have another dodgy project on our hands.
And yes I have comprehensive proof of my involvement in the project. I was test validator from one of the very early days, still have all the keys, hard drives and blockchain itself. I can easily proof of ownership of tokens if it comes to that.
But you be the judge - the next post describes everything in great details. I specifically wanted to be as objective as possible, and get the situation correctly, so all the details are in place.
Starodubcev claimed that there was OPEN discussion with regard to the distribution and further development of the protocol etc, however in reality, all opinions which were not aligned with opinion of Starodubcev were censored.
TG channel was cleared of all messages, and no discussion took places - everything was simply deleted.
In my next message I will post open letter, which was originally posted in TG channel and which was subsequently deleted, along with any connected replies.
To that effect, I think it is impossible to call CYBERD free, next generation censorship protocol, given the simply TG discussion is not possible.
I've spoken with a number of people who were financially and work related to the project at some point, and who were kicked out / scammed in a similar fashion, just because their opinion was different from Starodubcev. Since those were private conversations, I'm not at liberty to disclose any information regarding those situations.
However if those who were similarly excluded from genesis / in other words those people from whom Starodubcev stole money would like to step in and join the discussion, please do.
I strongly feel that blockchain assets markets are polluted enough already, to have another dodgy project on our hands.
And yes I have comprehensive proof of my involvement in the project. I was test validator from one of the very early days, still have all the keys, hard drives and blockchain itself. I can easily proof of ownership of tokens if it comes to that.
But you be the judge - the next post describes everything in great details. I specifically wanted to be as objective as possible, and get the situation correctly, so all the details are in place.
sr. member
Activity: 938
Merit: 466
~[f#
November 26, 2019, 01:20:02 PM
it kinda sux that the rewards have been private members only till now - I think you missed the point, its not that reward were restricted to private members only, it was all indeed public, and promise was made that everything validated on test-net will be moved to mainnet, except at some point "executive decision was made" not to do that, and all those who disagreed were kicked out from community.
November 26, 2019, 08:13:56 AM
BTT keeps deleting all my messages. And Im not sure as to why this is happening (
Those include network updates, news and answers to the participants of the thread. Hoping this will go thorough!
In reply to the newby above. I am not sure what you are talking about. All of the rewards are public. Please use the launch-kit repo to validate your validations, provide a hash and get your rewards
Those include network updates, news and answers to the participants of the thread. Hoping this will go thorough!
In reply to the newby above. I am not sure what you are talking about. All of the rewards are public. Please use the launch-kit repo to validate your validations, provide a hash and get your rewards
November 24, 2019, 07:19:13 AM
just one question , where are my tokens which you owe me for test validation?
it kinda sux that the rewards have been private members only till now, gonna be like VBK and when this goes mainnet there will be millions of coins from testnet carried over? : /
kinda feels like "ok we got our bags full, now time to go public"
ill still probably participate as a validator, but i definitally suggest others beware speculating when this hits exchanges haha
i know i will be
learnt that lesson b4 on these type distros lol. its not bad when its public, but ya when private groups stack in private THEN go public after thats kinda sketchy to me : /
it kinda sux that the rewards have been private members only till now - I think you missed the point, its not that reward were restricted to private members only, it was all indeed public, and promise was made that everything validated on test-net will be moved to mainnet, except at some point "executive decision was made" not to do that, and all those who disagreed were kicked out from community.
ooo this is pretty cool, <3 me some Tendermint, i think its one of the more interesting validation methods being developed right now
i need to get me some more info on this one, still in testnet i see? so not too late for us plebs to maybe become validators?
Very exciting to see this here finally, as i have heard about it here and there in the Cryptosphere over the last year or so
It's not too late to become a validator. But you need to wait a bit. A new test network will begin soon, and you can become a validator. The current testnet no longer rewards validators. After 7,000,000 blocks, a snapshot was made and the rewards that the validators will receive after Genesis are counted. Euler-4 (old testnet) validators rewards is 2.7 TCYB.i need to get me some more info on this one, still in testnet i see? so not too late for us plebs to maybe become validators?
Very exciting to see this here finally, as i have heard about it here and there in the Cryptosphere over the last year or so
What is the difference between using cyber and google in the browser search bar? You said the idea is amazing but is there really advantage of using cyb? Have you tested its usability?
I think that at the moment it is difficult to compare Cyber and Google. Cyber is a Web3 type search engine and uses IPFS. Cyber is at an early stage of development. Developers and the community will have to create a good knowledge graph and a search engine for it.it kinda sux that the rewards have been private members only till now, gonna be like VBK and when this goes mainnet there will be millions of coins from testnet carried over? : /
kinda feels like "ok we got our bags full, now time to go public"
ill still probably participate as a validator, but i definitally suggest others beware speculating when this hits exchanges hahai know i will be
learnt that lesson b4 on these type distros lol. its not bad when its public, but ya when private groups stack in private THEN go public after thats kinda sketchy to me : / it kinda sux that the rewards have been private members only till now - I think you missed the point, its not that reward were restricted to private members only, it was all indeed public, and promise was made that everything validated on test-net will be moved to mainnet, except at some point "executive decision was made" not to do that, and all those who disagreed were kicked out from community.
November 23, 2019, 12:00:28 PM
Upon seeing this, it will become interested for me, I would like to be part of this project when it will start, the propose platform is innovative and creative that's what we want to see that much far from this present blockchain innovation.
Hey. Thanks for your feedback.
I would like to point out that the project has actually started. You can already join the dev net as a validator in order to see how it functions. Validators that validate blocks during the test nets are entitled to receive part of the inflation as a reward. Also you will be able to participate in the game of links, cyber Auction and much more. Im in the midst of preparing a FAQ as to whats all this is simple terms. Hopefully I can publish it by beginning of next week. For now, all that info is available through out our GitHub.
Will be glad to answer questions if you have any
November 21, 2019, 10:09:52 PM
Join our dev meeting (in a bit) on our tg channel if you're interested (will share the latest updates on the dev net launch):
https://twitter.com/cyber_devs/status/1197127548423020544?s=19
https://twitter.com/cyber_devs/status/1197127548423020544?s=19
Upon seeing this, it will become interested for me, I would like to be part of this project when it will start, the propose platform is innovative and creative that's what we want to see that much far from this present blockchain innovation.
November 13, 2019, 12:36:38 PM
Just a short update from our dev meeting:
Forwarded from our TG channel
Good news!
We have successfully tested the needed cases using the internal devnet and are ready to launch the community devnet - Euler-5 the coming week. Last week @savetheales released part of the launch-kit for calculating and validating Euler-4 rewards. 5 validators have already mentioned their success in calculating the hashes. We are calling all others to also do so!
Right now we have successfully built by using the upgraded launch-kit genesis file for the devnet, which includes the calculations for the Ethereum and Cosmos gifts.
The community devnet will launch along with Euler-4 rewards, Ethereum and Cosmos gifts. There will be a lot of work with governance for adjusting rank and bandwidth params; load testing.
Two days ago, the Cosmos team released a branch for IBC testing where we are actively contributing to the testing. We made cross-chain transfers using two independent chains, and I can say that everything works fine in general. A huge step for the Cosmos community and all of us!
In regards to this, I have decided to launch the Gaia devnet with IBC support from cyber~Congress. The reason behind it was to start preparing our community to work with IBC on our IBC hub, and contributing to the testing of IBC v1.0, which will be released along with Cosmos-SDK 0.38 (also maybe with onchain upgrades!).
We are actively following this
Join our dev meeting (in a bit) on our tg channel if you're interested (will share the latest updates on the dev net launch):
https://twitter.com/cyber_devs/status/1197127548423020544?s=19
Forwarded from our TG channel
Good news!
We have successfully tested the needed cases using the internal devnet and are ready to launch the community devnet - Euler-5 the coming week. Last week @savetheales released part of the launch-kit for calculating and validating Euler-4 rewards. 5 validators have already mentioned their success in calculating the hashes. We are calling all others to also do so!
Right now we have successfully built by using the upgraded launch-kit genesis file for the devnet, which includes the calculations for the Ethereum and Cosmos gifts.
The community devnet will launch along with Euler-4 rewards, Ethereum and Cosmos gifts. There will be a lot of work with governance for adjusting rank and bandwidth params; load testing.
Two days ago, the Cosmos team released a branch for IBC testing where we are actively contributing to the testing. We made cross-chain transfers using two independent chains, and I can say that everything works fine in general. A huge step for the Cosmos community and all of us!
In regards to this, I have decided to launch the Gaia devnet with IBC support from cyber~Congress. The reason behind it was to start preparing our community to work with IBC on our IBC hub, and contributing to the testing of IBC v1.0, which will be released along with Cosmos-SDK 0.38 (also maybe with onchain upgrades!).
We are actively following this
Join our dev meeting (in a bit) on our tg channel if you're interested (will share the latest updates on the dev net launch):
https://twitter.com/cyber_devs/status/1197127548423020544?s=19
sr. member
Activity: 938
Merit: 466
~[f#
November 12, 2019, 09:55:43 PM
Euler-4 validators rewards distribution looks good
Visualisation of validators work
Quote
Per each validator
More dark color represents the part of rewards won for more last blocks
Downward displayed rewards changing if coefficcient 𝐵𝐾 increasing
Conclusion
If 𝑟𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑=𝐾∗ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡+𝐵 and increasing 𝐵𝐾
new validators get less;
old validators get more.
Rewards depends on 𝐵𝐾 , not separate 𝐵 и 𝐾
https://github.com/cybercongress/launch-kit/tree/master/lifetime_rewards_toolMore dark color represents the part of rewards won for more last blocks
Downward displayed rewards changing if coefficcient 𝐵𝐾 increasing
Conclusion
If 𝑟𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑=𝐾∗ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡+𝐵 and increasing 𝐵𝐾
new validators get less;
old validators get more.
Rewards depends on 𝐵𝐾 , not separate 𝐵 и 𝐾
Visualisation of validators work
November 12, 2019, 07:39:18 AM
Quote
it kinda sux that the rewards have been private members only till now
It is not correct. The project has been announced at cyberc0n almost 1 year ago (please keep in mind that the distribution from this presentation has been significantly changed based on the community feedback). Access to validator set was available for everybody since euler-1, every bit of decision has been discussed in #fuckgoogle at telegram. Those who participated last year in euler-4 have rewards in the form of 0.27% of Genesis for supporting the network which is not significant but really important for guys who invested into bootstrap.
Quote
github public
IMHO to be "github public" has more grassroots than "bitcointalk public". To be honest I did not want to post on the bitcointalk because I saw how bloated and scamy it become. So I wanted to attract real engineers first. Sorry for that.
November 12, 2019, 04:29:52 AM
Quote
Our values:
We do not believe in captchas. We do not believe in KYC. We do not believe in licensing and any other similar to the above-mentioned bullshit. We do believe in code. We believe in innovation and in making use of our knowledge to make the world a slightly better place for our children.
We do not believe in captchas. We do not believe in KYC. We do not believe in licensing and any other similar to the above-mentioned bullshit. We do believe in code. We believe in innovation and in making use of our knowledge to make the world a slightly better place for our children.
This is one of the statement that caught my attention, Simply and Intact! Absolutely, INNOVATION is what we need today, blockchain are already invented all we need is to focus on INNOVATION.
Glad you noticed this! I'll be honest with you, after spending 7 years in the space roughly and meeting in-person guys from top projects (I shall not name those here). I am a bit disappointed that most of them don't have any core values. This can be expressed in terms of "taxation" or in terms of not understanding why blockchain matters (regardless of its monetary values) to humans =(
My last visit to Baltic Honey Badger in Riga (which was an amazing event overall, filled with great people) just proved it. A few of the speakers I spoke to, didn't care about anything but either publicity or money. It's ashame really.
I'm glad too that someone in the blockchain and crypto industry saw the vision, yeah I really agree with your statement, if we have the technology (Blockchain) why some of the project needs KYC etc etc. What if, if they begin to start to look what technology inside the blockchain that we don't need KYC or other things and take advantage with it.
Exactly...
The whole KYC / AML story with blockchain pretty much like the story with centrasingly running your nodes. And I guess I'm doing the undoable here by advertising a side project - but Urbit solves this. Check it out. In fact we believe in Urbit so much we decided to give 1% of the total supply to them, just because. period.
Back to Cyber - we are utterly discouraged by the modern practises of centralizing crypto assets. And want to do whatever we can to prevent this. Hence no KYC, no AML. No bullshit.
I guess Cyber also gives you the power back with your most meaningful - ideas and thoughts. In the terms that you can finally compute your own knowledge and your own thoughts (without any intermediaries). After all the biggest religion of today is, of course - Google. But that's not ok. We believe this should be changed.
November 11, 2019, 06:58:51 PM
Quote
Our values:
We do not believe in captchas. We do not believe in KYC. We do not believe in licensing and any other similar to the above-mentioned bullshit. We do believe in code. We believe in innovation and in making use of our knowledge to make the world a slightly better place for our children.
We do not believe in captchas. We do not believe in KYC. We do not believe in licensing and any other similar to the above-mentioned bullshit. We do believe in code. We believe in innovation and in making use of our knowledge to make the world a slightly better place for our children.
This is one of the statement that caught my attention, Simply and Intact! Absolutely, INNOVATION is what we need today, blockchain are already invented all we need is to focus on INNOVATION.
Glad you noticed this! I'll be honest with you, after spending 7 years in the space roughly and meeting in-person guys from top projects (I shall not name those here). I am a bit disappointed that most of them don't have any core values. This can be expressed in terms of "taxation" or in terms of not understanding why blockchain matters (regardless of its monetary values) to humans =(
My last visit to Baltic Honey Badger in Riga (which was an amazing event overall, filled with great people) just proved it. A few of the speakers I spoke to, didn't care about anything but either publicity or money. It's ashame really.
I'm glad too that someone in the blockchain and crypto industry saw the vision, yeah I really agree with your statement, if we have the technology (Blockchain) why some of the project needs KYC etc etc. What if, if they begin to start to look what technology inside the blockchain that we don't need KYC or other things and take advantage with it.
November 11, 2019, 09:49:22 AM
I have checked also how to become a validator and seems that it is not too complicated.
@dev, I'm compiling your main.tex file but it is giving me error in line 45.
I even tried xelatex and lualatex, but to no avail.
I'm using TexShop Version 4.44 (4.44)
Can you share the final output instead? Want to see what you have here. Thanks.
Fixed this now. Please use Xelatex. But please bare in mind that the fix is in a pull request (mind you, it has the latest grammatical fixes too. so I'd use it, rather than what's in the master).
I guess for now, it's best to just pull it from my fix. Thanks for understanding!
Quote
Our values:
We do not believe in captchas. We do not believe in KYC. We do not believe in licensing and any other similar to the above-mentioned bullshit. We do believe in code. We believe in innovation and in making use of our knowledge to make the world a slightly better place for our children.
We do not believe in captchas. We do not believe in KYC. We do not believe in licensing and any other similar to the above-mentioned bullshit. We do believe in code. We believe in innovation and in making use of our knowledge to make the world a slightly better place for our children.
This is one of the statement that caught my attention, Simply and Intact! Absolutely, INNOVATION is what we need today, blockchain are already invented all we need is to focus on INNOVATION.
Glad you noticed this! I'll be honest with you, after spending 7 years in the space roughly and meeting in-person guys from top projects (I shall not name those here). I am a bit disappointed that most of them don't have any core values. This can be expressed in terms of "taxation" or in terms of not understanding why blockchain matters (regardless of its monetary values) to humans =(
My last visit to Baltic Honey Badger in Riga (which was an amazing event overall, filled with great people) just proved it. A few of the speakers I spoke to, didn't care about anything but either publicity or money. It's ashame really.
Jump to: