[ANN][XEL] Elastic Project - The Decentralized Supercomputer

[ImI]

I kinda like the idea that XEL (in comparison to other projects) enters the market and actually DELIVERS what other projects are still trying to accomplish. If we go to the markets just like any other coin/token we basically loose our advantage of being so far ahead and have only our disadvantages of not having as much superb PR etc than the other projects. So to state it more clearly we have only ONE entrance the markets and that happens with a BOOM if we have a working software. If we activate the actual network later we risk that no one will take notice. Maybe not "no one" but we wont have such a really nice "Bam here we are and we are accomplishing what others are trying."

So i am not in favor of launching a lite-version.

Edit: You see folks, no one knows Elastic at the moment. They havent heard about it, yes even in the slack channels of our competition most have no idea about Elastic. If we go to the markets with a working software the effect will be mindblowing. If not then expect us to trade WELL below iEx.ec and other stuff, cause we are just one out of lots of others.

We are in a sort of Catch 22 situation and it's good to see the arguments for and against launching being aired.

I would argue that by releasing a light version we could attract Devs, testers and PR people to join in the project and help EK and the community to realise the full potential of Elastic, by giving them the opportunity to have a financial stake in it.

Anyone that has been reading this thread can see the ridiculous hours that EK is having to put in.  

Is it right that we continue to expect him to carry this burden alone?  

Plus, with a bigger team of developers, it might be possible to come up with a timeline for release of a full version.

I think it's reasonable to at least put this to a vote within the community.

I can see your point.

[Alondre]

Gentlemen, I think we should wait until everything is as it should be. I would love to see tomorrow XEL worth 20 $ ... is surely one of the most Xel have and I have a very high interest that the project works well.
But I do not think it isnt  very intelligent, leaving a half-time job and not having XEL working at 100%.
If someone needs a pump, just go to poloniex and buy any coins ...

i don't think there will be a 100% working product in near future.

this is going to be feature plus feature long-term development.

EK needs more talented devs. a basic client will bring more momentum at this moment.

I can wait all the time that we need...

[dumple]

I kinda like the idea that XEL (in comparison to other projects) enters the market and actually DELIVERS what other projects are still trying to accomplish. If we go to the markets just like any other coin/token we basically loose our advantage of being so far ahead and have only our disadvantages of not having as much superb PR etc than the other projects. So to state it more clearly we have only ONE entrance the markets and that happens with a BOOM if we have a working software. If we activate the actual network later we risk that no one will take notice. Maybe not "no one" but we wont have such a really nice "Bam here we are and we are accomplishing what others are trying."

So i am not in favor of launching a lite-version.

Edit: You see folks, no one knows Elastic at the moment. They havent heard about it, yes even in the slack channels of our competition most have no idea about Elastic. If we go to the markets with a working software the effect will be mindblowing. If not then expect us to trade WELL below iEx.ec and other stuff, cause we are just one out of lots of others.

I agree. The only thing I worry about is that we are teetering on the edge of a crypto bubble. It would be nice to launch during the peak. If we launch during a crash, or a bleed off (which will likely last a while), then the price won't be anything impressive at all. But, that is a pretty self-interested perspective to take, and is probably not the correct one unless the project is short on funds.

Despite this concern, I'd vote no. I'm sick of seeing all the vaporware in crypto. Let's launch something real.

[clivemy]

I kinda like the idea that XEL (in comparison to other projects) enters the market and actually DELIVERS what other projects are still trying to accomplish. If we go to the markets just like any other coin/token we basically loose our advantage of being so far ahead and have only our disadvantages of not having as much superb PR etc than the other projects. So to state it more clearly we have only ONE entrance the markets and that happens with a BOOM if we have a working software. If we activate the actual network later we risk that no one will take notice. Maybe not "no one" but we wont have such a really nice "Bam here we are and we are accomplishing what others are trying."

So i am not in favor of launching a lite-version.

Edit: You see folks, no one knows Elastic at the moment. They havent heard about it, yes even in the slack channels of our competition most have no idea about Elastic. If we go to the markets with a working software the effect will be mindblowing. If not then expect us to trade WELL below iEx.ec and other stuff, cause we are just one out of lots of others.

We are in a sort of Catch 22 situation and it's good to see the arguments for and against launching being aired.

I would argue that by releasing a light version we could attract Devs, testers and PR people to join in the project and help EK and the community to realise the full potential of Elastic, by giving them the opportunity to have a financial stake in it.

Anyone that has been reading this thread can see the ridiculous hours that EK is having to put in.  

Is it right that we continue to expect him to carry this burden alone?  

Plus, with a bigger team of developers, it might be possible to come up with a timeline for release of a full version.

I think it's reasonable to at least put this to a vote within the community.

I can see your point.

So long as we can word the pros and cons succinctly and fully for launching a lite version, so that the community can look at both sides of the argument, I think a vote would be good for the community.

@Unvoid - so do you fancy running another vote, besides the logo one?

[palawan]

....
So i am not in favor of launching a lite-version.
....

We are in a sort of Catch 22 situation and it's good to see the arguments for and against launching being aired.

I would argue that by releasing a light version we could attract Devs, testers and PR people to join in the project and help EK and the community to realise the full potential of Elastic, by giving them the opportunity to have a financial stake in it.

Anyone that has been reading this thread can see the ridiculous hours that EK is having to put in.  

Is it right that we continue to expect him to carry this burden alone?  

Plus, with a bigger team of developers, it might be possible to come up with a timeline for release of a full version.

I think it's reasonable to at least put this to a vote within the community.

I can see your point.

There's another coin (Monero XMR) that I hold and it has a scheduled hard-fork periodically.  The development of features (mini-projects) are funded through FFS community efforts using xmr as the currency of payment so there's a built-in share in stake for the success of xel.  It's a nice setup and it works as Monero has a lot of features that are being planned and everyone can see what's coming and the funding needed.

Some of the projects got funded when xmr was very low USD price, so looking back now, the developers got a nice chunk of value $ but that is part of the appeal of FFS development ($33/xmr atm).

We can follow the same path?  Have an XEL development fund where people contribute on features to be implemented in the future and all other things that need development (i.e. software gui wallet, mobile wallet, website, etc).

I think it's only possible if xel is launched to attract outside developers.  The exchanges will support the periodic scheduled hard-forks if there's good volume for the coin (as it brings them lots of profits from trading fees).  Hope we can be half as popular as golem...

[ImI]

I can see the point in voting about something like that, but want to point out that it obv won't make any sense to vote for the logo, vote for the lite-version, launch the lite-version and one week later we have the full version.

Whereas it could make sense if we vote for the logo, vote for the lite-version, launch the lite-version and the development of the full-version need much more time.

So it's a question of the general timeline of Elastic.

[clivemy]

I can see the point in voting about something like that, but want to point out that it obv won't make any sense to vote for the logo, vote for the lite-version, launch the lite-version and one week later we have the full version.

Whereas it could make sense if we vote for the logo, vote for the lite-version, launch the lite-version and the development of the full-version need much more time.

So it's a question of the general timeline of Elastic.

This is where we need the input of EK and does he want to be pinned down to a specific time for delivery of a full version?

It may well be that a shortage of testers and time to fix the bugs that are found means that EK is not able to give a timeline for a full version.

[dumple]

I can see the point in voting about something like that, but want to point out that it obv won't make any sense to vote for the logo, vote for the lite-version, launch the lite-version and one week later we have the full version.

Whereas it could make sense if we vote for the logo, vote for the lite-version, launch the lite-version and the development of the full-version need much more time.

So it's a question of the general timeline of Elastic.

This is where we need the input of EK and does he want to be pinned down to a specific time for delivery of a full version?

It may well be that a shortage of testers and time to fix the bugs that are found means that EK is not able to give a timeline for a full version.

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.

[lda1000]

How to accomplish going from Lite -> Full Version? We would need a HF right?

Either a HF, or we could use the new soft fork voting mechanism where the other features become "locked in" if enough block generators set the proper flag in their configuration. Either way ... a software update will be mandatory! This also means, that some "less freqeuently online people" will end up with a non-functioning wallet. But if we use the new soft fork voting, they will at least not end up on a fork, their client just stops working when the "feature" gets locked in.

Both to me sound ok. We are in a stage of rapid development, and it is normal to assume that all participants need to keep up with updating to the   newest software.

Later when project matures and is used by users (people actually using the super computer ), only then we should avoid frequent hard forks.

[coralreefer]

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  

[dumple]

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  

There's been a lot of price speculation based around bubble prices. It's hard not to fantasize about it. Still, we shouldn't let avarice be our guide.

[lda1000]

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  

"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."

This has been my fear too... and it is exactly why I also think we should release first version of the main net that allows sending.
Then keep it incremental, just add more things as we go.

[dumple]

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  

"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."

This has been my fear too... and it is exactly why I also think we should release first version of the main net that allows sending.
Then keep it incremental, just add more things as we go.

Yes, we should launch when there is a Minimum Viable Product. I don't think we are there yet though?

[techwriterjoe]

Why do we
need a Lite-version at all, if you could do this stuff you showed on the testnet?

I never said, that we need a lite wallet. The community just showed interest in a lite wallet because the "full features" are partly unstable, not tested well enough, and things would still need some time. But who am I to decide, my vote (and I hope this is this way because we are a democratic project) is only worth a fraction - exactly as much as my XEL holdings weigh in a vote.

So if someone starts a vote, I will vote for no. But if yes wins, I can assist with coding (not launching).

Let's make sure we know what we would be voting on and if it is even feasible?

Yes Vote:
1) I assume a lite-version would entail a nearly as-is version, with small updates to make it launch ready?

2) Even if we had such a version, what does "launching it" entail? Connecting to Exchanges? Is anyone working on that? Know how to do it? What else would be needed to launch? Anyone with expertise in these steps? I mean we will need that info eventually anyway.

No Vote:
Means development continues as is and we get publicity, funding, and PR through other routes. Probably a creation of a foundation and people jumping to help unvoid and all with the creation of more content and web/SM presence.


The only reason I am/could be for it, is to attract more talent and attention. I think we are at an impressive place and anyone watching the latest videos will be impressed.

I'm against a lite-version if it seems unfeasible or a full-version has only a short to-do list.

Either way, the project is awesome. I really get happy to check the different threads. Very interesting.

[techwriterjoe]

Why do we
need a Lite-version at all, if you could do this stuff you showed on the testnet?

I never said, that we need a lite wallet. The community just showed interest in a lite wallet because the "full features" are partly unstable, not tested well enough, and things would still need some time. But who am I to decide, my vote (and I hope this is this way because we are a democratic project) is only worth a fraction - exactly as much as my XEL holdings weigh in a vote.

So if someone starts a vote, I will vote for no. But if yes wins, I can assist with coding (not launching).

Let's make sure we know what we would be voting on and if it is even feasible?

Yes Vote:
1) I assume a lite-version would entail a nearly as-is version, with small updates to make it launch ready?

2) Even if we had such a version, what does "launching it" entail? Connecting to Exchanges? Is anyone working on that? Know how to do it? What else would be needed to launch? Anyone with expertise in these steps? I mean we will need that info eventually anyway.

No Vote:
Means development continues as is and we get publicity, funding, and PR through other routes. Probably a creation of a foundation and people jumping to help unvoid and all with the creation of more content and web/SM presence.


The only reason I am/could be for it, is to attract more talent and attention. I think we are at an impressive place and anyone watching the latest videos will be impressed.

I'm against a lite-version if it seems unfeasible or a full-version has only a short to-do list.

Either way, the project is awesome. I really get happy to check the different threads. Very interesting.

Honestly, the steady progress is awesome and that is all that I care about.

[Bgjjj2016]

I can see the point in voting about something like that, but want to point out that it obv won't make any sense to vote for the logo, vote for the lite-version, launch the lite-version and one week later we have the full version.

Whereas it could make sense if we vote for the logo, vote for the lite-version, launch the lite-version and the development of the full-version need much more time.

So it's a question of the general timeline of Elastic.

IMI, I think you stated the situation the best. As awesomely as EK working, it is human nature to have an estimated timeline for everything. Not knowing when the project is ready while seeing so many inferior super computer wannabes on spotlights makes anyone wonder .
Elastic has never ending potentials seeing EK on his video and if we wait for each and every potential to bear fruit, I for one will become a very old man  

[Bgjjj2016]

Why do we
need a Lite-version at all, if you could do this stuff you showed on the testnet?

I never said, that we need a lite wallet. The community just showed interest in a lite wallet because the "full features" are partly unstable, not tested well enough, and things would still need some time. But who am I to decide, my vote (and I hope this is this way because we are a democratic project) is only worth a fraction - exactly as much as my XEL holdings weigh in a vote.

So if someone starts a vote, I will vote for no. But if yes wins, I can assist with coding (not launching).

EK , emotions are high at this time, but we don't want to make a decision based on frustration. The stability of the system is crucial, enough testing is important. You mentioned " would still need some time", could you please tell us if we're to wait couple weeks, months...... I'm sorry I put you on this spot, but only you, at this time, will have a logical judgement.

[mladen00]

i'm 4 ''lite wallet'' option but only if we (community) can set up fundation (for developers) with min. 10.000.000 XEL (10%).

maybe first light version with only fundation donation button
(you can only send XEL to fundation address)

[provenceday]

Well, I am not launching (and will never be launching) anything but if the majority wants a light client launched with just the basic coin transfer functions armed, I would offer my assistance in implementing such functionality for whoever feels empowered to get the ball rolling. Maybe a democratic vote would be the right thing here?

as an old guy in crypto, i will say yes.


let's release a light client first.
do not argue with me, just vote for it.  

i think we should try to setup a voting for this.


1  light client first
2  no need for light client, just wait for full client.

can you set it up unvoid   ?

thank you very much.

[provenceday]

i'm 4 ''lite wallet'' option but only if we (community) can set up fundation (for developers) with min. 10.000.000 XEL (10%).

maybe first light version with only fundation donation button
(you can only send XEL to fundation address)

no need do this, people have their free will.

i think some people will donate for sure.