[ANN] HEAT: 3.0 crypto*multisig fiat*a2a hft*1000tps*DSA*PoS+PoP*e2ee chat*

[TrueAnon]

1000 TPS?  LOLOLOLOL

[1714848243]

1714848243

[1714848243]

1714848243

[1714848243]

1714848243

[1714848243]

1714848243

[1714848243]

1714848243

[1714848243]

1714848243

[Eliphaz Fimk]

will it start trading on ccex soons  ICO is done?

Should be. Withdrawals of course not available until HEAT livenet client is out.

will there be buy wall in place ?

The HEAT team is not planning to engage in such market manipulations.

The ICO is round 1 funding for a Fintech startup company. Quickly after round 1 there'll be round 2, which will be paid fully in EUR (and in options received by round 1 investors). Round 2 distributes stock capital to external shareholders, who will seek profitable exit through trade on HEAT's own trading platform, or funding round 3 arranged in 2017.

Different from your usual ICO, the cryptocurrency funding phase in all is just the beginning of the fintech startup company. The HEAT token will form the core feature of the company's service suite, with projected value appreciation on par with the company shares.

[geotom]

Ok, thank you. So sending BTC from a Trezor should work just fine, correct?

Yes if it has static bitcoin address.

Hi, I wish to send from a Jaxx wallet but Jaxx is an HD (hierarchical deterministic) wallet for BTC which means it generates a new address every time i send or recieve funds.

However the Dev says that you can use any of the previous addresses to receive funds.

Will I be able to use Jaxx to participate?

[grajson]

PMed @Eliphaz Fimk offering Polish translation earlier today.

Very interesting project!

[Soul_eater_123]

Ok, thank you. So sending BTC from a Trezor should work just fine, correct?

Yes if it has static bitcoin address.

Hi, I wish to send from a Jaxx wallet but Jaxx is an HD (hierarchical deterministic) wallet for BTC which means it generates a new address every time i send or recieve funds.

However the Dev says that you can use any of the previous addresses to receive funds.

Will I be able to use Jaxx to participate?

No you can't.  You basically answered your own question so not sure why you are asking.

[tempus]

And those priorities are obviously the ICO-money because it doesn't need money to give informations and to write a Whitepaper.

(All that is correct. Obviously, our priority is to get funding for the startup company. If writing whitepaper and giving out information could be done with money, it'd be less of a problem. What they require instead, is time, scarce commodity we don't have to do things in the order we'd prefer to.)

Now to the token, which was another excellent subject not described sufficiently earlier.

design gives the token a real value, and the market cap will reflect the value of the system, because the more the system is used the more Factoids are burned.

That's one mechanism of attempting to provide value. And a clever one. Unfortunately, usually the best mechanisms won't win the world based on capitalism.  

This doesn't make much sense. The Factom-design is capitalistic. They provide incentives to get professionals running the federated servers. And they wouldn't even need speculation for that because of a natural demand if Factom is used. You are right with "attempting" because if Factom should not be used the token won't have any value. But I think to have partnerships about Smart Cities in China and negotiations about land title registry in Honduras and even DHS-money for Internet of Things Systems Security - it's kind of impressing what they do. Also that they are still under the radar in the Crypto-World.

But back to Heat: It's weak to say it's about capitalism as if quality wouldn't count. Just an argument like that would be enough for me not to invest. It's like "give us money, it's about capitalism. Later we will find out if we can provide something that could have value."

And just by the way: Value is always about function and function is always about quality. Sometimes people prefer "Hype" over technical quality, but for them exactly that has function - a Hype-product for example, while there are better ones in a technical way. At least there always should be the approach to deliver quality.

 

Is there something similar in Heat? At the moment it seems to me as if it will be possible to use Heat as Crypto-exchange for let's say a "BTC - ETH - pair" without a need for the token?

Yes there will be. To exchange crypto pairs directly, you need to fund the trading fees in HEAT tokens. That will happen invisibly through at either of the 2 ways:

- system charges eg. BTC from your account and auto-converts it to HEAT (by purchasing HEAT from the built-in market, which further increases demand in real time)
- gateway operator - which can be numerous as they integrate their replicated nodes communication to the HEAT middleware through approval of the central HEAT client admins - pays the fees (in HEAT) and charges your wallet account whatever they've agreed with you.

Other avenues for HEAT demand are:

- asset listing and other asset operation fees (private assets, colored accounts)
- asset trading & order setting fees
- Replication binary messages that corporate node operators use, require HEAT fees with every replication message (create update, insert etc.). Thus running the replication for eg. fast trading applications in the HEAT blockchain requires constant - although low - supply of HEAT from the operator. Combined these will form a significant flow in the form of tx fees paid out in block rewards
- Distributed Services Architecture. The distributed services economy that will come alive once this mechanism is enabled will take in some of its payments in HEAT. The usage level of these services is much broader and higher than for instance smart contracts, they're meant to be used by anyone and served to users from any custom website (Thanks to Dennis for that DSA elevator pitch!)

While users pay minimum tx fees to activate services, the services work in such a way that most have to answer back to the user. This will effectually work like a non-registered subscription fee based on service usage volume, again requiring service operators to purchase HEAT from the market. For small service providers the cost is negligible (for instance 0.01 HEAT fee for 1st time activation). For large providers keeping the service running requires consistent replenishing of HEAT tokens on their service accounts.

Burning of HEAT is something we haven't decided yet. Probably no, but maybe something when finalizing system design comes up in the last minute that warrants burning.

We're fully aware that providing token for just "crypto payments", shopping and even asset exchange won't cut it these days. So the mechanism for HEAT token demand distribution has been, and while work in progress, will be designed accordingly.
 

A fee-system is good. Nothing wrong about it and I already believed that it's about fees. But in combination with pure PoS and a high inflation for the first 4 years and a hard cut after that - rich get richer very fast and it will lead into economically centralization which means technical centralization if it's pure PoS. And you want to be a company...

Imagine this: It's about a limited number of servers, like it is in Factom for example, but also could be more (like Lisk maybe). And it's not PoS, it's more DPoS with an election mechanism for those servers - the best will be elected and bad players will be thrown out. Honest professionals will win and the result would be a stable system - if the system/the code has quality of course. They will be paid with the token for their service. But what is a fee now would be a burning rate - consumption. That would give intrinsic value to the token if the system would be used and the price would rise naturally if that usage increases.

That's kind of a translation of the Factom-economy into a system like this. It would be much more elegant in my opinion and a higher incentive to run the base-protocol and a higher incentive to buy the token while it wouldn't even be needed to buy the token from the exchange to use the system - because of what you say: there would be an internal conversion.

What I see here is kind of missed chances. Because if it would be like that (or even better, I'm not a specialist) and if there would be a white-paper that points out the details of all what's planned - it could be a strong buy. And if you would start an ICO in that way you could answer on questions about that and the more people would understand that it's really thoughtful - funding would be safe and Investors would feel safe. Instead of that you give incentives like "*multisig fiat*" and claims like "If you want to be invest in a crypto startup, the odds are you won't find a better setup anywhere in the Western world." and kind of weird things like "Unfortunately, usually the best mechanisms won't win the world based on capitalism."

Not enough for capitalists. But most likely enough for Crypto-gamblers.

[idolacchacked]

will it start trading on ccex soons  ICO is done?

Should be. Withdrawals of course not available until HEAT livenet client is out.

will there be buy wall in place ?

The HEAT team is not planning to engage in such market manipulations.

The ICO is round 1 funding for a Fintech startup company. Quickly after round 1 there'll be round 2, which will be paid fully in EUR (and in options received by round 1 investors). Round 2 distributes stock capital to external shareholders, who will seek profitable exit through trade on HEAT's own trading platform, or funding round 3 arranged in 2017.

Different from your usual ICO, the cryptocurrency funding phase in all is just the beginning of the fintech startup company. The HEAT token will form the core feature of the company's service suite, with projected value appreciation on par with the company shares.

this is getting more complicated with every question asked..

can you give a simpler expansion 

[Rkana]

Looks like a nice project, will be watching.

[Soul_eater_123]

I think tempus has raised some important questions here.  I look forward to seeing some proper responses.  So far they seem poorly thought out.

[Eliphaz Fimk]

I think tempus has raised some important questions here.  I look forward to seeing some proper responses.  So far they seem poorly thought out.

Could you rephrase a question whose answer you consider poorly thought out?

[verymuchso]

1000 TPS?  LOLOLOLOL

That is considered a minimum.
Local tests have shown peaks of 150.000 transactions per second, and this was on a relatively old linux desktop with spinning disks, SSD will have much higher throughput.

And these are atomic writes which means that you can pull the plug at any time and the system will recover back to when it was you when you started the write transaction.
I had the same reaction btw when we started measuring things and it turned out to be that fast.

To achieve this we have built custom storage solutions for blocks and transactions and tailored solutions to store balances and such.
Scanning of the blockchain happens at an even higher rate, at around 300k/s. Edit: this is wrong actually, cant remember exactly will try again when time (its higher).

We advertise 1000tps since it also has to run in a decentralized enviroment and we need to handle unconfirmed-txn pooling and blockchain reorgs, max 720 blocks reorg.
I'm still writing the unconfirmed transaction storage which had to be done over, this was a key/value type of structure very much like balance storage but this did not scale.
Now its a combined key/value for index storage and a plain binary file loaded through MMAP for actual txn storage.

LOL indeed  

[verymuchso]

The thing with basically every crypto-currency out there is that they are not designed to do just the things needed by the consensus protocol.

They do too much.

While completely understandable, the choice for instance to have an embedded database in the first place (Bitcoin, Ethereum) is far from optimal.
Key/value structure (ETH + BTC) or full on indexed SQL (NXT) is ok for storage of balances (albeit a custom solution is much more efficient) but much too slow for block/transaction storage.

Since those, when designed right in the first place, are only ever needed to be accessed sequentially.

NXT makes this impossible by design, this is through their referenced transaction feature (one transaction depends on the existence of another transaction) if this is possible it means the consensus part has to have access to all transactions since forever.

Thats why HEAT doesnt have that particular feature.
In HEAT the consensus plane only ever needs to know about balances and public keys, which is, by design.

[geotom]

Ok, thank you. So sending BTC from a Trezor should work just fine, correct?

Yes if it has static bitcoin address.

Hi, I wish to send from a Jaxx wallet but Jaxx is an HD (hierarchical deterministic) wallet for BTC which means it generates a new address every time i send or recieve funds.

However the Dev says that you can use any of the previous addresses to receive funds.

Will I be able to use Jaxx to participate?

No you can't.  You basically answered your own question so not sure why you are asking.

Can I have someone from the project to answer my question rather than the local sarcastic wanker?

[nob0dy]

hmmm ...second ico from these guys in 2 years. i dont think the investors of FIMK like that kind of roadmap...

As an early investor of FIMK, I disagree.  The reservation rate of FIMK to HEAT was designed to be favorable to FIMK investors.  IMHO this shows great character, as the investors in their “first ICO” of FIMK were offered a chance to reinvest for a “no-loss proposition”
....

will HEAT ever be 'succesfull' as FIMK? & who wants to use old version coin CLONES if the newer, better is available for free.
who will be the biggest stakeholder in FIMK after the ICO? whats the future of FIMK then?

why dont they import the old FIMK blockchain to the new FIMK coin called HEAT? that would be fair. not plain money making. showing real skills.

from my personal subjectiv pov as fimk ico investor its like paying for an expensive untested update. what will be the next update. how much will it be that time? ...

informations or updates in FIMK habe been very are about that time. look at the forum. not more than promises about news over months. lately a short info to the fimk investors about HEAT forum.fimk.fi

There is some truth here.  I sometimes wonder whether these promises actually harmed the adoption of FIMK.  For large portions of time, it seemed the FIMK community was just sitting and waiting for magic to happen and did not get involved.  From what I can tell, the biggest reasons promises went unfulfilled had to do with the non-profit nature of FIMK.

yeahhhh. i can hear the word "fiat" in my ear like it will be the first and coming days of FIMK & their ICO
(but nothing happend so far...)

[Soul_eater_123]

Can I have someone from the project to answer my question rather than the local sarcastic wanker?

You really are a moron.  You don't understand the meaning of sarcasm and you don't understand that your own statement proves that you can't use a Jaxx wallet.  Get a brain before you invest in anything and maybe a dictionary so you know what sarcasm is too.

[Eliphaz Fimk]

Will I be able to use Jaxx to participate?

You'll likely need to be able to make a new transaction from the address you sent funds from. So the answer is likely no. Best to use a wallet which stores your static address.

[verymuchso]

After having seen 150.000 transactions a second fly by on my monitor.
And considering you could fit many billions of balances on just a single SSD disk.

I can now totally imagine Mastercard and Visa running on a crypto-backend in the future. 
Didn't think it was possible before.

[Soul_eater_123]

 

I think tempus has raised some important questions here.  I look forward to seeing some proper responses.  So far they seem poorly thought out.

Could you rephrase a question whose answer you consider poorly thought out?

I think that was a poor choice of words on my behalf.  What I meant was that some of the responses lack specific details, however, it may be that you have already posted answers that I have missed or that some things have not been finalised yet.

The thing that I would really like more clarity on is why you think KYC/AML is not required for the HEAT tokens given the presence of fiat gateways?  Have you had any legal advice on this matter?  I think the fact that you will have conventional fiat funding rounds/shares is likely to make this project stand out even more to the financial authorities.  Like I said some more details on the reasoning here would be useful for investors.

[Kazadar]

I think tempus has raised some important questions here.  I look forward to seeing some proper responses.  So far they seem poorly thought out.

Could you rephrase a question whose answer you consider poorly thought out?

I think that was a poor choice of words on my behalf.  What I meant was that some of the responses lack specific details, however, it may be that you have already posted answers that I have missed or that some things have not been finalised yet.

The thing that I would really like more clarity on is why you think KYC/AML is not required for the HEAT tokens given the presence of fiat gateways?  Have you had any legal advice on this matter?  I think the fact that you will have conventional fiat funding rounds/shares is likely to make this project stand out even more to the financial authorities.  Like I said some more details on the reasoning here would be useful for investors.

As I understand it he was refering only to the token it self which isnt any different from owning any other crypto token/currency. HEAT tokens doesnt grant you ownership of the company so they dont have anything to do with the IPO.
I think the fiat gateways would be handled by another company but integrated in the HEAT software.
For the IPO I am sure the terms will be a lot different and not anonymous.

Ofc this is only how I read the answers and it might be wrong.

[Eliphaz Fimk]

As I understand it he was refering only to the token it self which isnt any different from owning any other crypto token/currency. HEAT tokens doesnt grant you ownership of the company so they dont have anything to do with the IPO.
I think the fiat gateways would be handled by another company but integrated in the HEAT software.
For the IPO I am sure the terms will be a lot different and not anonymous.

That's spot on! Thanks!