Topic: [ANN] [GDGC] GadgetCoin | IoT | M2M |Smart Contracts on Hardware - page 13. (Read 88518 times)

I am probably one of the earliest supporter of Ethereum, I have been enjoying the 1000% ROI in the last 2 weeks, but I have been telling here since January that IoT need something else than IBM's ADEPT, and decentralized blockchain on low power devices is an Oxymoron. Thanks DEV for confirming this!

In short, the is zero progress in IBM ADEPT, IBM does virtually nothing with Ethereum. What IBM does or doesn't do has no effect on the GadgetCoin project and we believe there is no reason to change our plan.

In more details, Internet of Things software and hardware engineers have been quite sceptical with regards to the IBM ADEPT project, its architecture and aims.
1) The first issue is, the industry is after a generic solutions that can be fitted into both more capable as well as miniature devices. Internet of Things is more and more about small, often wearable devices that are powered by cell batteries for years, in the meantime IBM solution is moving the bloated blockchain, torrent and Ethereum stacks into the IoT workspace. IoT sensors and actuators aren't designed to run such bloated software stacks (that's one of the reasons we needed to incorporate trusted nodes in our design to take away the heavy load from the low power sensors).
2) Other issue is privacy. The IBM ADEPT draft states "our  vision  is  that  privacy  is a key  feature  of future systems", in the meantime ADEPT builds on software solutions that are based on decentralized public blockchain and therefore such systems by definition does not address privacy requirements - everything is in the blockchain and traceable. IBM sates, "As ADEPT goes more mainstream, we will have much better clarity of the level of anonymity an ADEPT transaction would require. " i.e. this translates to that they have no solution at this moment in time for privacy.
We pointed out to IBM the issues with privacy, and our solution is the public/private blockchain which seems started to makes sense to others as Vitalik Buterin has just posted a blog about it (please see my above post).
3) The third issue is compliance with regulatory requirements. Majority of real world IoT businesses must comply with regulatory requirements (we are talking about sensors in nuclear power plants, automated cars, home automation systems, etc.) and we believe the only possible way to comply with regulatory requirements is to have centralized elements in the solution - the very opposite what IBM aims to implement with their "device democracy" solution that "removes the single point of failure that can be inherent in a clientserver based system." (quote from the ADEPT draft)

As for the ADEPT project, Paul Brody has left IBM, and since January 2015 nothing happened regarding ADEPT and our understanding is nobody knows if the ADEPT project still exists.

We think not IBM ADEPT, but the W3C WoT implementation will be the leading IoT platform and our plan is to continue working with W3C to make GadgetNet the primary payment platform for Internet of Things.


Exchanges:

One of the major exchanges started to review GadgetCoin and if everything works out then the coin will be added next week. We paid the fees and hope the listing will go through. We will keep you all informed.

hi devs! what's the story with Ethereum and IBM ADEPT? lots of news and hype about IBM using Ethereum, does it effect Gadgetcoin, can we go ahead with the plans?

any news from the exchanges?  
 

The exchanges could bring new supporters which could help in building the platform. Day trading seems an important factor in community development. You can see there are many coins with hundreds of supporters while the coin is absolutely used nowhere, other than fucking selling to each other by talking up and down the price. This has been crypto for years - the coins are used absolutely nowhere than day trading.
I can't wait these new projects like Ethereum, Skycoin, GadgetCoin started to be used in all kind of applications, which real world usage combined with day trading could be very interesting.

I can't we gadgetcoin to be on the exchanges. I already recommended the coin to friends who missed the IPO, they are waiting and going to buy a few. If the price is right I will buy more.

The mining is a cracking subject to me as well. Every day a new coin come to life in this environment, and then the developers and supporters mine the coin. Nobody is using the coin at all in relation to any real world business process, but they mine it, and then the hunt for buyers start. If the coin has a new feature that's cool, others can benefit from the open source features, but 99% of the cases there is no new feature nor innovation just pointless mining (pointless because there are very few buyers in this market already).

thanks dev, good progress but I don't care about the exchanges    i can't wait real world businesses start using Gadgetcoin. finally at least a coin, this coin will be used for real purpose and not only mining and day trading. i am sick of the purposeless mining and day trading. Bitbay is the other which has real purposes, but i think Gadgetcoin is closer to be used in to the real world. Maidsafe and Monero have real purposes too, but i don't have those.

The first version of the light, web UI open source wallet is available at https://github.com/gadgetnet/gdcwallet

The functionality and look & feel are exactly same as the HTML5 wallet. We have created this wallet primarily for the exchanges so they can can create an executable from the source. For end users (others than exchanges) there is not much point to create an executable, but of course please feel free to build the wallet if you want to experiment with it. The readme describes to process to create the executable.  As we explained in this thread, this system must uses centralized components to filter out illegal video content (child pornography, etc.), and therefore the wallet connects to our back-in services via API to interact with the trusted nodes.

This wallet will be the base of the future open source wallets and P2P video applications. We will be adding step by step new functionalities such as loading the public/private blockchain into the wallet, I2P networking, decentralized peer to peer communication, IoT integration with WoT, CoAP, CBOR, etc.

Now we switch back to the original objective to wire up the CCTV cameras and adult studios, and continue working with the outside of crypto businesses to let them use the GadgetNet network as soon as it is possible.

You have invented the public/private blockchain concept, now Vitalik Buterin talks about it. W3C is interested in your IoT blockchain software. It's getting better and better. :-))

For these reasons I am very happy to support this project. Won't be easy to make it work, there will be lot of difficulties, but if you keep working on it then eventually this could develop to a very successful project.

It's interesting to see and many way it is reassuring that one of the best developers of the industry thinks "private blockchains are unquestionably a better choice for institutions".

Vitalik Buterin talks about public and private blockchains at https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/08/07/on-public-and-private-blockchains/

I believe we were the very first who talked about the public/private blockchain concept in the GadgetCoin white paper 9 months ago. 

It has been operational and every transactions utilizes the public/private blockchain concept in the GadgetNet blockchain. This can be reviewed at http://wallet.gadgetcoin.org - users have access to their own transactions but regarding other users' transaction and sensitive data there is a message of "Record not disclosed to the public".

Update on the development front:
It seems the open source wallet is operational, we are packaging it and releasing to the public very soon. Following that we will apply for listing on the exchanges.

That's very true.   

That's very true.
Apart from Bitcoin, only projects that innovate can and will survive. There are a handful of projects that innovate, one of them is Gadgetcoin - that's why I support it in the first place, not to mention that because of the innovation and real world use cases, this is the very few projects that can actually make money in long term. Even I have doubt that Ethereum or NXT will make money in long term, because there is no assurance at all, more precisely it is very unlikely that for example any country will switch its land register to a new technology by using the Ethereum's smart contracts, so I am not sure where the money is going to come from to Ethereum or NXT in the long term. In the meantime, at least Gadgetcoin/Gadgetnet has a realistic chance to make money by addressing real world use cases such as empowering Internet of Things (connected) cameras.

Innovation is hard but it's valuable.

I sold all my cryptos except Bitbay and GDC. i won't sell my Gadgetcoins under USD 5 on the exchanges. devs! I signed up to Slack, thanks for inviting me    

The Chinese GadgetCoin QQ group is 148838719

The name of the QQ group is GadgetCoin官方群

I think the artificially high exchange price is a valid concern. To mitigate that risk we can start the network fee pricing using the exchange price after 2-4 weeks of the exchange listing. Also, probably better to take the average exchange price of the previous week instead of daily, in this case the market manipulations or unexpected market events won't cause much problems for the network fee price.

We will be sending the Slack invitations later today.

@mtomcdev

Thanks for your reply.

I think the pricing mechanism of No.2 will be absolutely fine, that will work for everyone, but in my opinion the coins won't be on the exchanges in a big volume and for that reason No. 1 option would work as well.
I don't think there will be lots of action on the exchanges. Firstly, as you posted in this thread majority of VICR owners are outside of crypto investors, probably they will never sell the coins on exchanges -  I assume they don't even know what an alternative crypto exchange is. They are with the project to support and crowdfund it so it is unlikely there will be much exchange action from them. Secondly, I think majority of crypto investors are also will be holding the coins, I don't think VICR owners will be selling a lot coins for USD 3-4 price. I am sure they will sell some coins, but not the majority of the coins. I think not all, but most VICR investors will wait until the project take off and then sell the coins on the actual daily network fee price.

We have been discussing this within the team and it seems there are two options

1) Do nothing about the network fee price, let the market determine the price and allow end-users buy the coin on the exchange and pay the network fee using the purchased coins

2) Control the price by enforcing rules via network fee collecting smart contracts. In this case the end-users must pay the network fee using an automated process in which the GDC price set by a system process, and the coins purchased on the exchanges cannot be used to pay the network fee.

As we said earlier in this thread we think No. 2 is the better option. No.1 could cause lots of complications like theoretically it is possible that there won't be any GDC available for network fee payments because the whole coin supply is held by a very few users who don't sell the coins.

To avoid such complications we will propose a pricing algorithm to determine the network fee related GDC buy back price. A simple algorithm like this could be used for the pricing:

NfCp = Ep * 2 <= Lp ? Lp : Ep * 2

where
NfCp refers to network fee related coin price
Ep = exchange price
Lp = last NfCp price, but will be set to 5 at the start of pricing

Using this pricing mechanism the network free related and automatically enforced price will be
a) never less than US$ 5.00 due to the last price variable set to 5 at the start of the pricing
b) always at least twice as much as the all time high exchange price
c) it cannot be less than the previously set value, so regardless from the exchange price, once the price reach for instance US$ 15.00 then the price later won't be less than US$ 15.00

The exchange integration requires lots of modifications and work, it takes away resources from other tasks, but we understand the community requested it so it must be done. The plan was to do the exchange integration later when we have a robust platform, but we started it earlier and it's almost done.