|
BTCspace
|
 |
May 08, 2017, 08:39:58 AM |
|
|
running farm worldwide
|
|
|
|
mr.coinzy
|
|
May 08, 2017, 08:43:31 AM |
|
Making the launch before we even have a stable MVP with important working functionalities this project is aiming for is a HUGE mistake.
It does not have to be 100% perfect with all the future functionalities we wish to have for the system (perhaps that would be utopia), BUT, it needs to have enough meat to be worth something substantial when entering the market.
Elastic is not the first to reach the market (other projects are there before us), it has no deep pockets as some projects have after raising millions in the ico (we need to open a foundation and collect some donations for this), the ONLY thing that we can have as an advantage today is to release something that actually works (even if it has only some of the functions working at launch) - a lite wallet will completely miss this point.
And again, after we have such product to launch we need to have a ready website with minimal info (what we have is not even close to being good enough).
I understand that some of the people who invested want to join the boiling market to take a piece of that huge pie, but we need to stay patient enough to do this smart, otherwise we will be flushing this amazing project to the drains.
Give EK the credit he deserves - he delivered so much so far, let him take us to the point where we can launch it well with at least some of the needed features with a stable system - I can promise you all that this will draw much more positive attention also to future devs to join.
(side note: for those who prefer to make a fast launch of a coin with no functionality so they can buy cheap coins before the system can gain greater value - don't cripple this project for your own wishes for personal gains).
|
|
|
|
|
|
nightwishx
|
|
May 08, 2017, 08:46:18 AM |
|
There is a suggestion:
1, release Lite
2, released at this stage has been completed functional version
3, waiting time to release the most perfect version
Choose one of the options to vote
@chinadaye: link in your signature goes to elastic-project.com but that domain is not used anymore Will be updated over Forget to say, BTC is also imperfect also in accordance with the market constantly in the direction of adjustment, if you ignore this point to the present estimates will not be released, ETH is also a phased implementation plan, any encryption projects are constantly evolving, It is quite normal because of new requirements and technical adjustments at different stages of operation you have a good point, personally, i prefer people can change their hands and sell XEL. so we can go bigger later. need dump，I prepared it for 50 BTC lol |
|
|
|
|
|
mr.coinzy
|
|
May 08, 2017, 08:53:28 AM |
|
There is a suggestion:
1, release Lite
2, released at this stage has been completed functional version
3, waiting time to release the most perfect version
Choose one of the options to vote
@chinadaye: link in your signature goes to elastic-project.com but that domain is not used anymore Will be updated over Forget to say, BTC is also imperfect also in accordance with the market constantly in the direction of adjustment, if you ignore this point to the present estimates will not be released, ETH is also a phased implementation plan, any encryption projects are constantly evolving, It is quite normal because of new requirements and technical adjustments at different stages of operation you have a good point, personally, i prefer people can change their hands and sell XEL. so we can go bigger later. need dump，I prepared it for 50 BTC lol Your last words illustrate exactly what i meant... There are people here who wish for a premature lite client release so they can grab some cheap coins. It is obvious that a working system will give more value to the project and in such case they will need to buy these coins for more money. Sad this is even a consideration here. |
|
|
|
|
cyberhacker
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
|
|
May 08, 2017, 09:01:34 AM |
|
Probably more likely that he doesn't know the timeline much more than us. He probably has a to-do list he is working on. And for every item he checks off, one or two more gets added. Holding him to a timeline for a launch would be ridiculous.
This is my fear and why I am for getting getting something deployed. I believe the more we test, the more we realize better ways to provide more flexibility / value to xel job authors and it becomes a never ending cycle. Ideally, I think it would be best if a solid version that includes basic ElasticPL functionality is deployed...but even with that we now have a couple question...do we stick with the POW model we have?, EK identified some issues with the underlying memory model so we need to determine if changes are needed there, etc...and this was just in the last 24 hours. Hopefully, people won't make their decision based on the bubble crypto is currently in...not sure how much longer it will be but I've got to believe this bubbles going to crash and we'll be right in the middle of that...so you won't see the huge influx of buyers. I base what I recommended to do solely on what I feel may help us get more devs to pick up some of the more mundane code fixes while EK continues to explore new use-cases. But I could be completely wrong  Guys, you should listen to coralreefer (and provenceday - see his previous posts). coralreefer and EK know the major issues, so if the main problem for now is the POW, then we should ask them to focus on that, and then (if that's the only major issue) release the first version. That version should include basic wallet functionality + the first computing-related features. Forget about launching the finished product because it won't happen. There's no way EK is able to develop everything and then just launch finished product - it's always something that needs to be modified, so I think unvoid has the point that Elastic needs more market-oriented progress in order to get a critical mass for further development. Elastic is mature enough to be launched even as bare wallet, with all in-progress features scheduled for staggered deployment. That's common strategy and there's nothing wrong with it. I personally think that "it's-ready-when-it's-ready" approach is really bad idea. can't agree with you any more. so let's move to mainnet(lite,basic,pre-function one) launch vote. |
|
|
|
|
|
GTTIGER
|
|
May 08, 2017, 09:02:41 AM |
|
I agree, we should donate so that development can speed up.
|
|
|
|
|
cybterpunk
|
|
May 08, 2017, 09:05:50 AM |
|
Making the launch before we even have a stable MVP with important working functionalities this project is aiming for is a HUGE mistake.
It does not have to be 100% perfect with all the future functionalities we wish to have for the system (perhaps that would be utopia), BUT, it needs to have enough meat to be worth something substantial when entering the market.
Elastic is not the first to reach the market (other projects are there before us), it has no deep pockets as some projects have after raising millions in the ico (we need to open a foundation and collect some donations for this), the ONLY thing that we can have as an advantage today is to release something that actually works (even if it has only some of the functions working at launch) - a lite wallet will completely miss this point.
And again, after we have such product to launch we need to have a ready website with minimal info (what we have is not even close to being good enough).
I understand that some of the people who invested want to join the boiling market to take a piece of that huge pie, but we need to stay patient enough to do this smart, otherwise we will be flushing this amazing project to the drains.
Give EK the credit he deserves - he delivered so much so far, let him take us to the point where we can launch it well with at least some of the needed features with a stable system - I can promise you all that this will draw much more positive attention also to future devs to join.
(side note: for those who prefer to make a fast launch of a coin with no functionality so they can buy cheap coins before the system can gain greater value - don't cripple this project for your own wishes for personal gains).
let people vote for this? |
|
|
|
|
|
clivemy
|
|
May 08, 2017, 09:26:51 AM |
|
Making the launch before we even have a stable MVP with important working functionalities this project is aiming for is a HUGE mistake.
It does not have to be 100% perfect with all the future functionalities we wish to have for the system (perhaps that would be utopia), BUT, it needs to have enough meat to be worth something substantial when entering the market.
Elastic is not the first to reach the market (other projects are there before us), it has no deep pockets as some projects have after raising millions in the ico (we need to open a foundation and collect some donations for this), the ONLY thing that we can have as an advantage today is to release something that actually works (even if it has only some of the functions working at launch) - a lite wallet will completely miss this point.
And again, after we have such product to launch we need to have a ready website with minimal info (what we have is not even close to being good enough).
I understand that some of the people who invested want to join the boiling market to take a piece of that huge pie, but we need to stay patient enough to do this smart, otherwise we will be flushing this amazing project to the drains.
Give EK the credit he deserves - he delivered so much so far, let him take us to the point where we can launch it well with at least some of the needed features with a stable system - I can promise you all that this will draw much more positive attention also to future devs to join.
(side note: for those who prefer to make a fast launch of a coin with no functionality so they can buy cheap coins before the system can gain greater value - don't cripple this project for your own wishes for personal gains).
We need to take a vote on this as a community and all the pros and cons need to be fully outlined. |
|
|
|
|
|
vlight
|
|
May 08, 2017, 09:32:32 AM |
|
Releasing lite client doesn't make already implemented features disappear. It's not like majority of the people who buy XEL will just rush to develop apps for supercomputer. But having elastic name there in the wild will attract developers who may pick up what's already developed and go from there.
|
|
|
|
|
ghoom2
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 548
Merit: 265
My old account was "Ghoom" (hacked) u=199247
|
|
May 08, 2017, 09:50:54 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
tomkat
|
|
May 08, 2017, 09:53:24 AM |
|
Making the launch before we even have a stable MVP with important working functionalities this project is aiming for is a HUGE mistake.
It does not have to be 100% perfect with all the future functionalities we wish to have for the system (perhaps that would be utopia), BUT, it needs to have enough meat to be worth something substantial when entering the market.
Elastic is not the first to reach the market (other projects are there before us), it has no deep pockets as some projects have after raising millions in the ico (we need to open a foundation and collect some donations for this), the ONLY thing that we can have as an advantage today is to release something that actually works (even if it has only some of the functions working at launch) - a lite wallet will completely miss this point.
And again, after we have such product to launch we need to have a ready website with minimal info (what we have is not even close to being good enough).
I understand that some of the people who invested want to join the boiling market to take a piece of that huge pie, but we need to stay patient enough to do this smart, otherwise we will be flushing this amazing project to the drains.
Give EK the credit he deserves - he delivered so much so far, let him take us to the point where we can launch it well with at least some of the needed features with a stable system - I can promise you all that this will draw much more positive attention also to future devs to join.
(side note: for those who prefer to make a fast launch of a coin with no functionality so they can buy cheap coins before the system can gain greater value - don't cripple this project for your own wishes for personal gains).
We need to take a vote on this as a community and all the pros and cons need to be fully outlined. Pros: -market attention -people awareness -more developers attracted -funds for development can be collected in a dedicated pool -early dumpers will be out of the project -no more "when mainnet?" questions Cons: -waiting for your suggestions |
|
|
|
|
Mrboot
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1000
|
|
May 08, 2017, 09:56:03 AM |
|
Making the launch before we even have a stable MVP with important working functionalities this project is aiming for is a HUGE mistake.
It does not have to be 100% perfect with all the future functionalities we wish to have for the system (perhaps that would be utopia), BUT, it needs to have enough meat to be worth something substantial when entering the market.
Elastic is not the first to reach the market (other projects are there before us), it has no deep pockets as some projects have after raising millions in the ico (we need to open a foundation and collect some donations for this), the ONLY thing that we can have as an advantage today is to release something that actually works (even if it has only some of the functions working at launch) - a lite wallet will completely miss this point.
And again, after we have such product to launch we need to have a ready website with minimal info (what we have is not even close to being good enough).
I understand that some of the people who invested want to join the boiling market to take a piece of that huge pie, but we need to stay patient enough to do this smart, otherwise we will be flushing this amazing project to the drains.
Give EK the credit he deserves - he delivered so much so far, let him take us to the point where we can launch it well with at least some of the needed features with a stable system - I can promise you all that this will draw much more positive attention also to future devs to join.
(side note: for those who prefer to make a fast launch of a coin with no functionality so they can buy cheap coins before the system can gain greater value - don't cripple this project for your own wishes for personal gains).
We need to take a vote on this as a community and all the pros and cons need to be fully outlined. Pros: -market attention -people awareness -more developers attracted -funds for development can be collected in a dedicated pool -early dumpers will be out of the project -no more "when mainnet?" questions Cons: -waiting for your suggestions Also i think many will donate for developement if they see it will be online, so far i cant donate without anything online. So that will speed up progress. |
|
|
|
|
|
PGPpfKkx
|
|
May 08, 2017, 10:30:36 AM |
|
most senior members here agree for not launching a lite client I see and I agree  |
|
|
|
|
|
13Darko
|
|
May 08, 2017, 10:41:36 AM |
|
I will be speaking in terms of Elastic price. As someone said "people are more willing to pay for expectations", than for a ready product, because it gives an opportunity for future profits.
If we release a fully ready product, the initial price will be very high, which is, of course, very good for early donators, but is it good for newcomers?
So cons releasing just a Lite client at the moment:
- low price at the beginning (but constantly rising when new features are coming); //"Waves" is a good example. They had only a LiteClient for a ~year, so the price fell almost x2 times below ICO once. Now, when they released token creation, decentralized exchange, Leased PoS, - features expected as an MVP - the price rose x2,5 times the ICO.
Pros:
- good chance to come in for new investors, developers, exchanges; //This is important. If a big exchange like Poloniex will have a chance to buy a stake early for a low price, Elastic will be listed on it for sure
- great trade volume // This will also attract big exchanges
- ability to create a foundation and attract more devs, bug hunters (like HunterMinerCrafter).
Releasing an MVP will give a higher price and won't be so attractive for newcomers as releasing a LiteClient, IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
mr.coinzy
|
|
May 08, 2017, 10:54:58 AM |
|
I will be speaking in terms of Elastic price. As someone said "people are more willing to pay for expectations", than for a ready product, because it gives an opportunity for future profits.
If we release a fully ready product, the initial price will be very high, which is, of course, very good for early donators, but is it good for newcomers?
So cons releasing just a Lite client at the moment:
- low price at the beginning (but constantly rising when new features are coming); //"Waves" is a good example. They had only a LiteClient for a ~year, so the price fell almost x2 times below ICO once. Now, when they released token creation, decentralized exchange, Leased PoS, - features expected as an MVP - the price rose x2,5 times the ICO.
Pros:
- good chance to come in for new investors, developers, exchanges; //This is important. If big exchanges like Bittrex or Poloniex will have a chance to buy a stake early for a low price, Elastic will be most probably listed on them
- great trade volume // This will also attract big exchanges
- ability to create a foundation and attract more devs, bug hunters (like HunterMinerCrafter).
Releasing an MVP will give a higher price and won't be so attractive for newcomers as releasing a LiteClient, IMO.
An MVP as the name implies means that there will be more features and functionalities released later on to give a fully featured working product - I believe that this should be the minimal starting position for xel when launched. In regard to attracting more people to the project, I have no doubt that many will join especially if we show that we have a working product with more innovation and features to come instead of being just another coin with no viable substance. Regarding people not joining if the price of the market of xel is high - i think this is complete nonsense, this project will attract 1000 times more attention if we launch with some meaningful meat on the bone and not just a promise. Investors will invest (especially if we show we already deliver something but aim to deliver even more) and devs seeing the potential and wanting to join will flock. |
|
|
|
|
|
tomkat
|
|
May 08, 2017, 11:13:13 AM |
|
I will be speaking in terms of Elastic price. As someone said "people are more willing to pay for expectations", than for a ready product, because it gives an opportunity for future profits.
If we release a fully ready product, the initial price will be very high, which is, of course, very good for early donators, but is it good for newcomers?
So cons releasing just a Lite client at the moment:
- low price at the beginning (but constantly rising when new features are coming); //"Waves" is a good example. They had only a LiteClient for a ~year, so the price fell almost x2 times below ICO once. Now, when they released token creation, decentralized exchange, Leased PoS, - features expected as an MVP - the price rose x2,5 times the ICO.
Pros:
- good chance to come in for new investors, developers, exchanges; //This is important. If big exchanges like Bittrex or Poloniex will have a chance to buy a stake early for a low price, Elastic will be most probably listed on them
- great trade volume // This will also attract big exchanges
- ability to create a foundation and attract more devs, bug hunters (like HunterMinerCrafter).
Releasing an MVP will give a higher price and won't be so attractive for newcomers as releasing a LiteClient, IMO.
An MVP as the name implies means that there will be more features and functionalities released later on to give a fully featured working product - I believe that this should be the minimal starting position for xel when launched. In regard to attracting more people to the project, I have no doubt that many will join especially if we show that we have a working product with more innovation and features to come instead of being just another coin with no viable substance. Regarding people not joining if the price of the market of xel is high - i think this is complete nonsense, this project will attract 1000 times more attention if we launch with some meaningful meat on the bone and not just a promise. Investors will invest (especially if we show we already deliver something but aim to deliver even more) and devs seeing the potential and wanting to join will flock. Well, this is all fine and you seem to be right BUT please try to answer the following: -what do you consider "fully featured working product" ? -what is "some meaningful meat on the bone" ? -when do you think the "meat" will be ready for the launch - weeks, months, years? I really don't get your idealistic and actually utopian approach. For me, coralreefer is right I believe the more we test, the more we realize better ways to provide more flexibility / value to xel job authors and it becomes a never ending cycle. Ideally, I think it would be best if a solid version that includes basic ElasticPL functionality is deployed...but even with that we now have a couple question...do we stick with the POW model we have?, EK identified some issues with the underlying memory model so we need to determine if changes are needed there, etc...and this was just in the last 24 hours. What's wrong with such approach? Why not launch with solid base version now? No one in this world is waiting for fully featured products - what if Zuckerberg was waiting with FB launch until it's perfect? FB wouldn't be launched even now... Let's agree what is required for stable base version, and try to launch it finally. |
|
|
|
|
|
mr.coinzy
|
|
May 08, 2017, 11:32:59 AM |
|
I will be speaking in terms of Elastic price. As someone said "people are more willing to pay for expectations", than for a ready product, because it gives an opportunity for future profits.
If we release a fully ready product, the initial price will be very high, which is, of course, very good for early donators, but is it good for newcomers?
So cons releasing just a Lite client at the moment:
- low price at the beginning (but constantly rising when new features are coming); //"Waves" is a good example. They had only a LiteClient for a ~year, so the price fell almost x2 times below ICO once. Now, when they released token creation, decentralized exchange, Leased PoS, - features expected as an MVP - the price rose x2,5 times the ICO.
Pros:
- good chance to come in for new investors, developers, exchanges; //This is important. If big exchanges like Bittrex or Poloniex will have a chance to buy a stake early for a low price, Elastic will be most probably listed on them
- great trade volume // This will also attract big exchanges
- ability to create a foundation and attract more devs, bug hunters (like HunterMinerCrafter).
Releasing an MVP will give a higher price and won't be so attractive for newcomers as releasing a LiteClient, IMO.
An MVP as the name implies means that there will be more features and functionalities released later on to give a fully featured working product - I believe that this should be the minimal starting position for xel when launched. In regard to attracting more people to the project, I have no doubt that many will join especially if we show that we have a working product with more innovation and features to come instead of being just another coin with no viable substance. Regarding people not joining if the price of the market of xel is high - i think this is complete nonsense, this project will attract 1000 times more attention if we launch with some meaningful meat on the bone and not just a promise. Investors will invest (especially if we show we already deliver something but aim to deliver even more) and devs seeing the potential and wanting to join will flock. Well, this is all fine and you seem to be right BUT please try to answer the following: -what do you consider "fully featured working product" ? -what is "some meaningful meat on the bone" ? -when do you think the "meat" will be ready for the launch - weeks, months, years? I really don't get your idealistic and actually utopian approach. For me, coralreefer is right I believe the more we test, the more we realize better ways to provide more flexibility / value to xel job authors and it becomes a never ending cycle. Ideally, I think it would be best if a solid version that includes basic ElasticPL functionality is deployed...but even with that we now have a couple question...do we stick with the POW model we have?, EK identified some issues with the underlying memory model so we need to determine if changes are needed there, etc...and this was just in the last 24 hours. What's wrong with such approach? Why not launch with solid base version now? No one in this world is waiting for fully featured products - what if Zuckerberg was waiting with FB launch until it's perfect? FB wouldn't be launched even now... Let's agree what is required for stable base version, and try to launch it finally. I definitely do think that we do need to reach an agreement on what is required for stable base version and what we should strive to supply in the future as a fully viable system, and I think that the most eligible person to give insights to this matter is EK. EK can you please give us your opinion on these important issues? |
|
|
|
|
Bgjjj2016
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
Ben2016
|
|
May 08, 2017, 11:47:28 AM |
|
Unvoid, could you please set up the voting for the Lite wallet ?
|
My " I want that Old Toyota Camry very bad" BTC Fund :1DQU4oqmZRcKSzg7MjPLMuHrMwnbDdjQRM |
|
|
|
lda1000
|
|
May 08, 2017, 11:47:49 AM |
|
most senior members here agree for not launching a lite client I see and I agree +1 That's a speculation. Lets vote o elasticracy. |
|
|
|
|
clivemy
|
|
May 08, 2017, 11:50:02 AM |
|
most senior members here agree for not launching a lite client I see and I agree +1 That's a speculation. Lets vote o elasticracy. Senior members do not necessarily equate to investors. Let's vote and do this democratically. |
|
|
|
|
|
