Topic: Quant Network $QNT (Overledger) - Internet-scale Interoperability Protocol - page 5. (Read 1854 times)

Why is this so under the radar thus far? Top tier CEO and Tech team with so much already achieved and several many clients in the works with unlimited potential. Yet so little liquidity and low marketcap. What's the reason?

I'm a big believer in Quant. Its about to be known by everyone soon. Dyor

GoVerify was a tool being used prior to the implementation of Overledger. The team is now migrating GoVerify onto the Overledger infrastructure. With regards to clients/interest, I will share some quotes from Gilbert in the Telegram.

"We are in discussions with other Government departments exploring Overledger and GoVerify. One of them being HMRC, the UK's Tax Authority."

"Hi All, just to clarify, GoVerify will be migrated to Overledger as a MApp. One of the first clients will be Lloyds who we've presented to 2 weeks ago at their offices. We're waiting to hear back on the next steps and potential client opportunity."

"We're doing a big push to clients to help tackle the source of fraud: GoVerify protects people from impersonation and deception fraud by validating the correspondence received from a trusted organisation is genuine without have to disclose any personal information."

"The team have been working flat out on client work, we're progressing a very large client to potentially use GoVerify covering all of the UK."

"GoVerify has a lot of use cases we're finding from client discussions. It's application is to very the sender of any communication to the receiver. It definitely can be used for the cryptospace!"

There is a great comparison in the Quant Whitepaper. Compares each aspect of Interoperability/performance and covers all the current Crypto Interop. Projects. I recommend checking that out.

Cosmos is receiving a lot of hype and getting fired up after their massive launch. In reality, their Interop. solution isn't out of testing yet.

They have a similar inter-chain/zone hub solution, as do a lot of other Interoperability projects. These middleman Blockchains make integration and overhead complexity much more of an issue.

This article here, written by the Quant team helps to outline some of the fundamental differences: https://medium.com/@gverdian/how-overledger-differs-from-interoperability-blockchains-97fff3094ff8

A Telegram member (Seq) recently had a discussion about Cosmos in the Quant Telegram. I will quote his explanations. Insightful.

"Cosmos are a long way away from getting any interoperability, all thats been released as main net is the cosmos hub and staking, you can't connect any zones to it as their interoperability protocol IBC is still in research / prototype phase. One of the main differences between cosmos and polkadot is that cosmos wants every App to have their own blockchain, which stores the state of the app and the security is up to the App. So they have to get a load of people to deploy nodes for every single app made. Whereas Polkadot uses shared security from the hub validators and uses a small randomly selected validators of the token hub. The problem for Cosmos imo is that how secure all these chains going to be? Just look at the amount of useless coins there are now and your supposed to get 100's of people running nodes for the app. Ultimately its going to result in the hub being very secure and the zones that connect to the hub not being very secure and centralised and easy to take control with POS. Now many think that it won't matter because the hub is what connects them so doesn't matter about the security of the other chains, but thats not the case. The hub doesn't keep track of the state of each of the App blockchains. The hub only keeps track of transfers between blockchains. To prevent double spending (swapping them in one chain and then swapping the same tokens in another chain etc). The problem is though it means you have to trust the app blockchain to trade with it. As you don't know whether there has been some bug and someone has stolen a load of tokens, or the chain has been compromised before you exchange some of your tokens for theirs. So all its going to result in, is exactly the same as the Internet now, where you don't trust the majority of apps, but the large big vendors with lots of validators like BTC / ETH etc you do trust. And from an investment point of view. The ATOM token is only used for staking for nodes within the Cosmos hub only. There will be many hubs and they will each have their own token (to try and incentivise people to run nodes). The ATOM token is designed to be hyperinflationary so the price falls over time per token as they have a minimum inflation rate of 7% and a maximum of 20%. Meaning that they will keep releasing tokens. They don't want ATOM to be used for trading, they want it to be used for staking. The incentivisation isn't from the price of ATOM increasing but the fact that for each transaction that goes through the hub you receive a % of the transaction fee. The transaction fee can be paid in a variety of currencies - BTC, ETH, Dash and many many more. The other problem that Cosmos and Polkadot have is being able to connect to chains that aren't finite with their consensus, so for chains like BTC aren't compatible at all with Polkadot without btc forking - from the Polkadot FAQ on their website:

Can Polkadot connect any blockchain?
Polkadot can connect any previously existing blockchain if it matches two criteria:

It must have the ability to form compact and fast light-client proofs over the finality and validity of its blocks and state change information (this would include new UTXOs in a Bitcoin-like chain or logs in an Ethereum-like chain).
There must be a means by which a large set of independent authorities (perhaps up to one thousand) can authorise a transaction. This could include recognition of threshold signatures, such as the Schnorr scheme, or a smart contract able to structure logic against a multi-signature condition.
Bitcoin and Bitcoin-like chains fall short on these characteristics. To address the first criteria, Polkadot validators can simply run a full Bitcoin node. To address the second criteria, either a soft-fork allowing extra-protocol controls over funds or a hard-fork enabling a threshold-signature-friendly signing scheme such as Schnorr is needed. Neither are impossible goals, however a significant degree coordination would be required to achieve them.

Both Cosmos and Polkadot use Peg Zones for other chains like ETH which involves adding another blockchain where each of the validators of the pegzone also have to run a ETH node. It then involves signing the transaction and trying to make it compatible witht he other chain. Basically its really difficult to do, they have to have a separate Pegzone for every External chain (like any other blockchain you know of now) adding more overhead, transaction fees, restrictions in being able to connect to certain blockchains."

Their GoVerify MApp seems to be solving a very common problem faced by every organization in the world. Did anyone approach Quant Network for using GoVerify?

Can someone shed some light on it?

Excellent. The fact that Overledger is not adding an additional chain unlike those competitors to connect these is a massive plus which reduces the overhead

Thanks for this. Was looking for a comparison of current interoperability project and I must confess, was afraid this will turn into another shilling chart ticking off what made this product so awesome compared to the others. This is one of the most objective comparison table I've seen

https://imgur.com/S55dVXE

Comparison of Overledger to other interoperability projects.

I see Cosmos was launched today. How does that Quant compete with that?

Ah perfect! My bad, missed the most important lol!

Yes, these videos are great. Thanks mate

I would recommend QuantX videos as well

https://youtu.be/pi7Tr94XgjQ

https://youtu.be/K6j9vDSt0EM

There are a few great video sources, including interviews from YouTube that I will link.

Official Intro Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96PnIxkoU4I&

Crypto Zombie's Overview (Shortest/Sharpest): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuZ2RlOYzVA

Blockchain Brad Interview - Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5sNBxbFa1U

Blockchain Brad Interview - Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKwStvLOuQE

Blockchain Brad Interview - Part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfHYp4qK4nE

Discussion Series: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAeOENccqZxUna33gSVY1E7lG2Rk4av_-

Is there any single video/podcast/interview which explains everything about Quant ?

Hey all Community admin from Quant here.


Currently it's Bitcoin, Ethereum and Ripple with JP Morgan's Quorum and IOTA in their Quality Assurance department. We've also had hints from the team that interconnects for Alastria, Corda and Red Belly are on the short-term horizon too.

The team intends to release a Standard to allow the community to create a Blockchain Programmer Interface for their favourite projects too.


The filtering and ordering layers ensure Overledger stays in sync with the underlying blockchains, in the case of a fork or an attempt to double-spend it would roll-back and revert the transaction. In the demo at QuantX the team demonstrated a java "mApp" (multi-chain app) that utilities 3 blockchains, to simulate a world where three separate entities (government, insurer and seller) prefer a particular chain.


Yes :-) Anyone can develop a mApp on "permissionless" blockchains (like BTC, Ethereum etc), however only Enterprises can build on private / consortium chains. At the moment the team is incentivising enterprise with a 3 month free license and support to get started with proof of concepts. Enterprise customers would need to pay for the service using Fiat, for which the Treasury purchases the corresponding amount of QNT.


Yes, developers can be public or private. Not everything has to be made externally available.

Finally a proper ANN for one of the most anticipated developments in blockchain tech. Been following the project for quite a while and its chart movement was one of the highlights of last year. This year promises bigger and better things in store

Hello,
Long time Quant supporter and community admin here -

The mApp store will be open to the public AND there would be mApps for enterprise used internally (not available to public).

Is the development of MApps using Overledger open to public like DApps on Ethereum? or is it closed only to Quant Dev team?

You got me excited with that Qoogle link. So data from all the chains that are connected to Overledger can be accessed from one single source.. that's cool and reminds me of how Google started it's web search back in the day.

The Overledger platform has two versions. An Enterprise version and a Public version.

Over the past few months, the team have previewed a few demo Mapps for us. They plan on producing their own Mapps for Enterprise solutions as part of their roadmap.

Multi-Chain Voting Mapp: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6j9vDSt0EM

GoVerify (Fraud Prevention): https://www.goverify.com/

Qoogle (Multi-Chain Explorer): https://search.quant.network/

Amazon Demo Store Front: https://www.reddit.com/r/QuantNetwork/comments/9lmsoh/quant_created_a_decentralized_amazon_running/

I'm curious to see how the Mapp works in real-time. Are there any implementations done? At least any demo Mapps?