Topic: [PRE-ANN][ZEN][Pre-sale] Zennet: Decentralized Supercomputer - Official Thread - page 12. (Read 57056 times)

I "get" your point, but I neither agree nor disagree because your point doesn't even apply to the question, here.


Or BTC "could" crash back to $100 in which case spending btc now could save you in the long term.  My crystal ball is on the fritz, so I can't say for sure which of us is right on this point.

It doesn't matter, though....

Again, the USD value of BTC doesn't actually even factor into the consideration.  The concern is not what BTC does relative to USD, but what BTC and ZEN do relative to EACH OTHER.  Nothing more.

Fiat money only comes into the picture if our intended trade somehow involves an exchange of it.  Buying ZEN with BTC has nothing at all to do with USD or anything else at all but ZEN and BTC.

You didn't answer the question!  If fiat currency never existed at all does your reasoning still hold?

The price of milk in Ireland says nothing about the rationality of a decision to trade Btc for Zen.  By your logic if I think that the price of milk in Ireland is going to go down then spending BTC for ZEN could cost me in the long run, because the value of BTC relative to the value of milk in Ireland will go up.

This is obviously absurd.

Why should it be any less absurd if we replace "milk in Ireland" with USD?

I've explained it twice already.

You either get my point and agree, or get my point and disagree. The bottom line is if the btc gonna cost 1000$ next year then I could buy X3 times the amount of process power / service on Zennet than I am now with the same btc.

Of course no one stops you from investing your dollars and I didn't say it is a bad idea, what I said is that spending btc now could cost you in the long term..

"Believing" in bitcoin is not a legitimate reason for trading irrationally.

If you see a trade of zencoin for bitcoin (or vice versa) as having anything at all to do with dollars then you are missing the whole point of relative valuation to begin with, and no argument will be likely to convince you of your mistake.

Pretend USD and other fiat currencies never did exist.  Does your reasoning still hold?  There is no reason that it shouldn't, if it is sound.

So let me try and answer some of the problem I have presented here:

first and most important, we are redefining many economics basic assumptions: Introducing a token coin into the equation is like having an equation with two variables rather than one.
The value of the token is a product of both the demand for the service one get using the coin and the supply of both service and token, . This means that one can have piles of cash in their hands but no excess to the service unless having a token in their hands.
Assuming then, that I have all the dollars in the world, the price of the service will be set by the supply of tokens only while having a limited amount of both create a new relationship.

Now if, like in the case of most Altcoins, the coin itself was not a gateway to any service and I can use any other currency to get my product or service, then the value of the coin is driven only by community expectation to draw a user community which will use the currency as a medium of exchange and store of value.

 BTC for example did act as a token for a" none banking" wire  transaction. The value that bitcoin drew was due to it being a token for a service one could not get without it.
 Zennet coin is just like that, only that the service you get is computing, which you can get elsewhere but not sell ellsewhere.
 The service have many other qualities that makes it desirable. unless it get too expensive.
 But here again  the market mechanism is very direct and make  the coin price match demand.

Investors that choose to keep the token as store of value or for speculations can evaluate their investment in real terms as far as demand for service and supply of coins.

Now let me take you back to our pre-sell.
The tokens that we are buying are the  parts of that future supercomputer. It can not work without that essential component. Our coins are the actual part that operate that "machine", but unlike most essential parts of a machine, these you can transfer from one to the other. The tokens a a full representation for the value of the "machine" or rather that future computing  decentralized corporation.
But our tokens are even more than that' they are also the actual contract. some of the things that one day Ethereum will allow to do. are already here as zennet coins

We as first investors still may want to keep the crowd from coming, but our machine is not going to be that developed if the developers dont make enough profit. thus we as investors in a product wants to get as much money invested in the product development. And when I say two variables that is what I mean.

As a pre-sale investor I would solve that paradocs by asking the developers to keep more coins in their possession so they can capitalize on it after the "machine" is in the market and so are the coins. Even if they eventually dump some coins they are going to loose future profit from the product they have created,

O.K. let me try to put it in simple numbers for simple people like myself

1. how many coins are 100% ?
so far there is no number and some say it is not really important, which I think is a true statement


2. If I buy coins for 1000$ in the pre-sale, I will not know how many coins I have bought until after the sale, even if by then the total number has been set which it will to my understandings

3. So lets say that the total coin number is 10,000,000. 1M is going for pre-sale , the sell ended up with 5,000,000$ in the vault. this means that each coin price has been set on 5/1 that is 5$ each which means that I am entitled for 1000/5 = 200 coins. If however there are only few interested investors and only 1000$ have been invested then I can got with my 100$ 10% of the coins. (less the percentage to developers and such). these coins worth much less but as an early investor I actually had a great deal. So I would actually try to keep people off the sell, but this will hurt the developers and thus the product I am investing in. This is a dilemma pre-sale buyers would have to deal with. should I try to get as many people on now or not.

4. Now that the price has been set. is it good for me as an investor, that it is high, or is it better that it is low? For a speculation it is better low until it hits the markets and can be sold by early investors. So once again I am better off having the price of the coin stay low.

This all together is a problem for the developers who need to get the coins sell for the highest price possible in order to have the funds for further development .

So is this how it is or am totally wrong?

Great to see you here


Sounds absolutly possible


This topic was well-discussed here. There are many mechanisms for controlling the risk. There is also R&D towards verifiable computing. Just pick an arbitrary comment on this thread, and at least 30% chance it's dealing with those concerns

Storj core dev here.

From what I've read so far about Zennet, it's possible you could run DriveShare farming software inside a container (e.g. instead of a traditional VPS) if you wanted to run an instance remotely instead of on your own computer. I'm also working on an autonomous agents system now that could plug into Zennet's distributed infrastructure nicely too. Can reach out when that whitepaper is done.

One question I have though, how would you be able to prevent someone from tampering with the VM on the host machine, or tweaking it so it feeds you back bad data? It would be nice if there were a system in place so everything inside the container is completely opaque to the host and the communication back-and-forth was entirely encrypted. You could even send some 'tests' once in a while to ensure the host isn't messing with the VM.

Zennet seems like one of the most innovative projects in the crypto sphere

watching

Roughly:

Computational resources are many: CPU, RAM, Disk, Network....
Storj distributes the Disk part.
Zennet distributes them all.

What is the difference between Storj and zennet?

As an investor you should also be happy (at least partially) if they sell for much more than a limit sum as you suggest (and a limit of 100 btc total is ridiculously low anyway for a project in this scope...) because more money will mean more available resources for development and growth in your investment (facilitating your initial agenda).  

It should be a limit for that 10%.

Anything higher than 100 btc invested will be really risky to all investors.

I'm not going to invest in the coini if there is not a limit. Becauseif you invest without a limit you don't know at what price you are buying, thats not really fair for early investors.

Good luck. I will be backing you at 11/11.

I'll go back and re-read the irc logs related to this and respond in more detail later.

Regardless of the implementation detail the core philosophy remains the same, identity needs to be scarce/difficult enough to discourage new identity attacks, and yet available enough not to frustrate legitimate new users.  IIRC I concluded that any scheme can work as long as these two (conflicting) concerns are well addressed, but I'll need to review the particulars.

Well that's a master in Gems theory we're talking about

I love these Gems.

I'm not sure I understood you. If you meant trusting someone else to keep on the BTC of the sale, it's problematic. If it's regarding the Zencoins themselves, they won't come into existence until the network is ready, and at that moment they'll be distributed to their owners.
Add to that the fact that many constrains are arised from legal point of view. Zennet will function as a regular company, offering to buy its products in presale (in ridiculus prices of course), while obligating to supply those products.
Of course, no one (including me nor the company) have any kind of control or income from Zennet after releasing it.

Thanks!