There does seem to be an awful lot of trust necessary for supernet to work. I know many of the names involved and have no reason to suspect any mal-intent by those names, but personnel will change and the temptation may well be too much to resist for someone one day. I appreciate that we put trust in coin devs everytime we invest, but the extension of trust required is several magnitudes larger and constantly needs updating with supernet.
M of N multisig would require M of these trusted peoples to collude. If that happens, then crypto is doomed anyway and we might as well go back to the fiat slave states.
There would also seem to be ample opportunity for insider trading, back room deals, supertraders going crazy and the like. Is there any way to police this behaviour or do we have to rely on people's honesty?
From the investors point of view, maybe they like the fact that the supertraders have some advance knowledge. This is a concern though, if SuperNET is creating a signifiant amount of the news, then this gives the supertraders an "unfair" advantage. In the past I have posted the "inside knowledge" and waited some time before acting on it. In crypto, there are no defined set of ethics to cover this. If you want to form an ethics committee to make some guidelines, then you are welcome to do so and the assetholders can vote on it. We certainly dont want it to get to where the supertraders are just making all the profits to be made in crypto and leaving nothing else for the rest of the people. Do we?
The assets such as MGW being part of supernet are probably the most complex part of this project. Do they have any direct relevance to supernet or are they bundled in purely as a profit generator? Could supernet exist without them?
MGW is one of the few of my assets that are not part of SuperNET. SuperNET can certainly exist purely as a financial fund, like sharkfund0 was and most likely do quite well. I thought bundling some revenues would make it have both capital gains and dividends and potentially create valuations that would be impossible via just financial fund. If you calculate a penny a day per user and apply standard PE, remembering the overhead is really low. Why to remove this?
The advertising sort of feels "tacked-on", it doesn't seem relevant to the project. I understand that it could produce an income, but would it be a worthwhile income? To me this seems rather incongruous and I struggle to see how it could produce anything significant.
google tacked on context specific advertising, it seemed to do ok for them. Do you realize the value of the SuperNET demographic? Have you priced google clicks? If you are wanting to minimize the earning power of SuperNET, then we should eliminate the advertising. In my projections, the advertising is actually the most likely to be the largest contributor to dividends.
As for multi-coin transfers, how much does this matter? To my mind, crypto users are looking for speed, reliability, security and, sometimes, anonymity from their currencies. How many coins already offer this? Will a more complicated wallet really increase the uptake of crypto? Wouldn't a new, well rounded coin make supernet unnecessary?
This is like saying country X has all the things any body would ever want, so lets abolish all other countries. Clearly no. SuperNET is not a new coin. It is connecting the existing coins and their communities. I dont do GUI, so if the wallet is too complicated we must complain to the GUI peoples
As for the transfers themselves, is there a supernet exchange or will multi-coin transactions require an outside exchange? If there is a "private" supernet exchange, then are we not a centralised currency? If it's a third party exchange, how can we be sure of covering price changes with a tiny transaction fee?
SuperNET is not centralized and it is not a currency, so I find it hard to understand how you can think it is a centralized currency. The InstantDEX is the primary form of exchange that I am expecting. This is decentralized like the NXT AE and users will directly trade with each other. There is no third party. Just you and the other person. Think of the SuperNET as the telephone. You call the other person on their phone number and you make a deal, then a fax comes through on the phone to complete the deal. The telephone network is not centralizing you any more than SuperNET is centralizing any coin.
I have a load more questions, but that seems more than enough for now.
Please don't take this as fud, my 5 BTC still sits there waiting for me to pull the trigger. I do like the ethos of the project, but it's such an alien concept in the crypto world that I find it hard to imagine.
I'm a miserable sod...... always looking for a downside.
I think these are great questions! Something like "All the questions I have about SuperNET but I was afraid to ask"
I am sure many are thanking you for asking them
If you imagine each crypto like a website before the internet, then I think it will make it easier to understand the SuperNET. It is connecting all the websites together, so now you can navigate from one website to another seamlessly. This ability then allows for advertising (tastefully done!) and aggregation of traffic like a search engine. The search engine page is not competing with the website, not at all, they both need each other and they both help each other.
James
easy money. lol 