[ANN][rICO]Antshares Blockchain Mainnet is ONLINE!

[yhlsqj]

3500BTC? Wow, much more than first ico, 2100 btc for 14M coins. The second phase will be much more expensive than the first ico. How will the market move? I don't know.

[enhu]

3500BTC? Wow, much more than first ico, 2100 btc for 14M coins. The second phase will be much more expensive than the first ico. How will the market move? I don't know.

The market always moves the way it knew. if a lot of users get to dump during its first week of released, then its market will also react the way it knew. The dev team will always play a bigger role in this.

It happened once with WAVES platform, i do think the ANT team now sees what could happen and i think they are already prepared for it.

[shapeshiftscam]

3500BTC? Wow, much more than first ico, 2100 btc for 14M coins. The second phase will be much more expensive than the first ico. How will the market move? I don't know.

The market always moves the way it knew. if a lot of users get to dump during its first week of released, then its market will also react the way it knew. The dev team will always play a bigger role in this.

It happened once with WAVES platform, i do think the ANT team now sees what could happen and i think they are already prepared for it.

Yeah, I think this coin could be better than waves, waves releases with a bad launch, I trust the Ant team, they are diligent like ants.

[LitcoinCollector]

Some latest updates:

Our progress related to marketing: Welcome Antshares Explorer - https://www.antshares.org/en-US/Blog/Details/27

The cooperation with Microsoft and Fadada: Legal chain press release pics
Related media articles are still in Chinese and will be translated shortly

Very interesting to see Antshares Blockchain is being used to implement digital registration. (WeLand)

[DomainMagnate]

3500BTC? Wow, much more than first ico, 2100 btc for 14M coins. The second phase will be much more expensive than the first ico. How will the market move? I don't know.

The market always moves the way it knew. if a lot of users get to dump during its first week of released, then its market will also react the way it knew. The dev team will always play a bigger role in this.

It happened once with WAVES platform, i do think the ANT team now sees what could happen and i think they are already prepared for it.

Yeah, I think this coin could be better than waves, waves releases with a bad launch, I trust the Ant team, they are diligent like ants.

Success also depends on trust of individual investors and not just dev's diligence.Take bitcoin for example

[tempus]

I already have some more questions while thinking about ANS and ANC and fees and the nodes.

In the whitepaper is said:

"ANC are used for

Accounting Charge payment
Extra Service Charge payment
Bookkeeper Nominee Deposit as collateral"

....and:

"ANC will be written into the corresponding ANS addresses proportionally. ANS holders could claim these ANC to their ANS address anytime they wish to. For example, a shareholder who has 1% of all the ANS could acquire 8*0.01=0.08 ANC in every block of the 1st year, meaning 460.8 ANC everyday."


...and:

"To write a transaction onchain, a certain number of AntCoins will be charged as accounting fees, which goes to the bookkeepers to compensate their expenditures in storage, connection and computing resources. (...) As long as more than 2/3 of the bookkeepers are willing to, a transaction can be free of charge when writing into the Antshares Blockchain. Thus, organizations using Antshares in bulk could pay the bookkeeper offchain with fiat currency without further the hassle of paying AntCoins onchain."

Bookkeeper = nodes? There is said "could pay the bookkeeper offchain" - singular? Or is that just a typo/error?



There will be 8 ANC per Block and those new created ANC will be distributed to 100% to the shareholders, right?

And those who will run the nodes will be paid with fees whenever the system is used or if 2/3 of the bookkeepers agree in fiat.


I try to think about possible price-scenarios of ANC. Thing is: If those who will run the servers could agree to take no fee but Fiat off-chain, there would be not that much incentive to care about the price of ANC or am I wrong? It's a very theoretical scenario, because it can be expected that those who will run the nodes will also hold shares and get payouts in ANC and some fees in ANC but what I try to find out in short words: Will the price of ANS and the price of ANC be connected in a predictable way or will it be more kind of surprise?  ;-)


And when it comes to the question of immutability and decentralization: What could prevent a centralized scenario if, for example, a big company would hold so many shares that they could vote that many own servers as bookkeepers to get the whole system under centralized control? 


My questions are really not meant critical in any way because in my opinion it's the most interesting economical design since Factom - but more complex and really not easy to understand. ;-)

Ah yes, it should be bookkeepers!
Yes, all new ANC will be distributed 100% to ANS holders. And yes for the bookkeeping fees.
For the ANC consumption, bookkeeping fees could use fiat directly but other activities such as asset registration requires ANC consumption and those consumed ANC is back to the system awaiting ANS holders to initiate a claim transaction.
Price of ANS is the present value of a serial of ANC payments. It's like a bond.
As for this ICO we are mainly distributing ANS to individual investors. In the future there might be a big company trying to buy Antshares. But as you may see from historical merger & acquisition cases, hostile takeover will definitely cost a lot. We believe the ANS price will be around the fair value normally so if hostile takeover happens, the acquiring firm will have to pay a lot more than what the system values. That will decrease the possibility of centralized control.
Thanks!

Thank you very much for your answers!

You say "(...) but other activities such as asset registration requires ANC consumption and those consumed ANC is back to the system awaiting ANS holders to initiate a claim transaction."

Does that mean not just new created ANC will be distributed to ANS-Holders but also fees? Because I thought that would also be bookkeeper-payments?

And what I don't understand is how bookkeepers will be elected. Could potentially everybody be a bookkeeper and/or is there a limited number like the federated server design in Factom?

In Factom it's about 32 federated server and additionally 32 audit server, also with an election mechanism. The voting will happen with Entry-Credits (I saw that dahongfei referred to Factom in the other thread) while it's about voting-power in relation to the shares in this project.

There is one point that I think is a little bit concerning. It's not meant critical, but if I understand it correctly: Those who hold a lot of shares will most likely also have the power to vote themselves (or guys they know) as bookkeepers in, to be paid by fees. And additionally they will claim, like all shareholders, ANC in relation to their shares. In Factom there are costs to vote (FCT must be converted to EC to vote - both is consumed/"burned" after that process).

The question of centralization vs decentralization is highly dependent on the eco-system and that's what I see as critical point at the moment. Because it seems like DPoS plus PoS. Big shareholders could vote themselves as bookkeepers in (DPoS) plus claim ANC in relation to their shares (PoS). And it's not meant personally, but the 50% of shares held by the team, at least for one year, also means voting power plus 50% of all new created ANC for one year, and 8% of the future total supply. I mean, you guys will do all the work and I have no problem regarding the money side. The ANC could be seen as another founding round and Factom for example also made an ICO plus VC-founding rounds. But how can you ensure that this will be a decentralized system, at least decentralize over time?

[ecawyna]

3200 BTC is way too much. I'm sure the the team use some fund from the first ICO to buy in this 2nd ICO. The point is for what?

[tempus]

3200 BTC is way too much. I'm sure the the team use some fund from the first ICO to buy in this 2nd ICO. The point is for what?

No, they are pretty transparent regarding the first ICO:

The "ICO Phase I" was done on WeAngel (https://weangel.com/antshares) in October 2015. It's our side-project to demonstrate how crowdfunding can work with blockchain.

In about 10 days we got 2100 BTC and hit the up-limit. ICO Phase I was finished 20 days earlier.

The links below are the TXIDs of which we sent 1000 +1000 +100 BTC to huobi.com to sell immediately after the ICO.

https://blockchain.info/tx/f0e9b08c9ca488f72fe3c2ee0ea60458357a794714a945f9ca8ac114f137f317
https://blockchain.info/tx/34e169a82f7f801335dd53519b1407a2ebafdf15fe262147fbb903cc0260395c
https://blockchain.info/tx/6a0c372c51a9f4ad3715f30308be81c7c6785b3592c2858fe77b0b711bcd0a73

[LitcoinCollector]

Created a SteemIt post about Antshares Ico.

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@scrypt/altshares

[antshares]

Created a SteemIt post about Antshares Ico.

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@scrypt/altshares

cool! Thanks

[ronin07]

Chinese forks have not yet seen, see what happens.

[lxxtikk]

Created a SteemIt post about Antshares Ico.

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@scrypt/altshares

thats cool  , so people will know more about Antshares and ico_ hope to see poloniex

[moppang]

3200 BTC is way too much. I'm sure the the team use some fund from the first ICO to buy in this 2nd ICO. The point is for what?

What do you mean the team buy in the ico?
I'm not sure it is true, cause the ico for everyone and feel free to participated in the ico.

[_Django05_]

Subscribed and will be watching this.

[mtnsaa]

Spanish translation finished: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1589783.0

[cyberspacemonkey]

Over 3k BTC first week, how do we know these are not the same Devs recycling the BTC to hype it up? Not trying to FUD.

Let them post their btc addresses used in the past. It may confirm whethere they have used to recycle or not. Most probably, they don't recycle to attract more people.

I'm pretty sure that is the case, I mean not even Lisk or WAVES collected that much and specially not in their first week.

[btvGainer]

Over 3k BTC first week, how do we know these are not the same Devs recycling the BTC to hype it up? Not trying to FUD.

Let them post their btc addresses used in the past. It may confirm whethere they have used to recycle or not. Most probably, they don't recycle to attract more people.

I'm pretty sure that is the case, I mean not even Lisk or WAVES collected that much and specially not in their first week.

Lisk and waves were not promoted by Chinese but antshares is dev and promoted by them.No wonder Chinese people are investing like hell and given their interest in bitcoin its not a something new to them

[AleScamHole]

Over 3k BTC first week, how do we know these are not the same Devs recycling the BTC to hype it up? Not trying to FUD.

Let them post their btc addresses used in the past. It may confirm whethere they have used to recycle or not. Most probably, they don't recycle to attract more people.

I'm pretty sure that is the case, I mean not even Lisk or WAVES collected that much and specially not in their first week.

right. 


remember one thing guys. the Chinese invest in ONLY one thing.  taking people's money and making it their own.

i wont touch this with a 10 foot pole, same reason i called waves a scam from the beginning.

btw, has eric from haobtc a supposed escrow even popped his head in here yet?  the guys active usually in other threads? hmmmmm

whats with all these come from nowhere chinese coins all a sudden?

[mtnsaa]

Over 3k BTC first week, how do we know these are not the same Devs recycling the BTC to hype it up? Not trying to FUD.

Let them post their btc addresses used in the past. It may confirm whethere they have used to recycle or not. Most probably, they don't recycle to attract more people.

I'm pretty sure that is the case, I mean not even Lisk or WAVES collected that much and specially not in their first week.

right. 


remember one thing guys. the Chinese invest in ONLY one thing.  taking people's money and making it their own.

i wont touch this with a 10 foot pole, same reason i called waves a scam from the beginning.

btw, has eric from haobtc a supposed escrow even popped his head in here yet?  the guys active usually in other threads? hmmmmm

whats with all these come from nowhere chinese coins all a sudden?

Dude, not everything is a scam if you don't double your investment after launch. I didn't invest in Waves ICO and I saw that it underperformed because of delays and other issues but just the Mycellium deal should be enough to tell you that the project is "real" and that's it.

There are hundreds of startups failing everyday, that's how this goes, some will survive, others won't but give it some time at least.

[Wapinter]

Over 3k BTC first week, how do we know these are not the same Devs recycling the BTC to hype it up? Not trying to FUD.

Let them post their btc addresses used in the past. It may confirm whethere they have used to recycle or not. Most probably, they don't recycle to attract more people.

I'm pretty sure that is the case, I mean not even Lisk or WAVES collected that much and specially not in their first week.

Yes for transperancy and gaining trust from investors,antshares must share these addresses