[ANN] æternity blockchain ∞ AE TOKEN ∞ [PoW & PoS | Oracles | Smart Contracts]

[aeternity]

Is there any timeline when all existing exchanges will support the mainnet. I have new tokens but unable to trade them anywhere so if there is plan about this please share the details.

Hello,

There is no timeline since it's not up to us to decide when that would happen. We are open to provide technical support to any exchange willing to support the Mainnet AE token. Several new exchanges have supported the Mainnet token over the last week and we hope even more will come on board soon.

You can check all the exchanges that currently support the Mainnet token HERE. We update the list regularly.

Best regards,
The AE Team

[1715600365]

1715600365

[1715600365]

1715600365

[aeternity]

Hey everyone,

A while ago, æternity’s developer Nikita Fuchs gave an interview to tell the audience more about how extraordinary a project æternity really is 

Check it out below to learn more about decentralized oracles and current trends in the blockchain space in general!

Nikita also describes what challenges the team is facing and what potential use-cases we are exploring:

SCALING SMART CONTRACTS: INTERVIEW WITH AE DEVELOPER NIKITA FUCHS

Best regards,
The AE Team

[vdramaliev]

The BRI won't be spent on æpps, but on protocol development solely. We indicated that in the initial announcement blog post.

Best,
The AE Team

Oh great so there is no need for hurrying. You have money for years to come and later when project will be very mature and solid all the development should go through community approval process, not plebs but some authoritative participants. Via a series AeIP, long discussion and approval/funding process.

But we all know you are not that stupid to not understand it. All you need is more money.

Wow, sammy007 is active in all channels Thank you for all the FUD. There is really no point to go through all that trouble though - just sell your AE tokens and never look back. I really don't think that any arguments can change your opinion.

There is one final arbiter though - time.

So let's see how things develop.

Best,
Vlad

[sammy007]

Wow, sammy007 is active in all channels Thank you for all the FUD. There is really no point to go through all that trouble though - just sell your AE tokens and never look back. I really don't think that any arguments can change your opinion.

There is one final arbiter though - time.

So let's see how things develop.

Best,
Vlad

There is no FUD. There was a number of questions and you never answered a single one actually.
Hilarious how all the scammers in this space over the years have been calling every criticism a FUD.

The questions are simple:

- why you need money now?
- why you want a full control of it or become a trustee?

If you are going to introduce voting on how to spend money you are still a trustee. Nothing like this is acceptable.

I actually predicted your possible BS answers and here my arguments: craptocurrency is not an average opensource program where donation model does not work, when system will be widely used there will be direct interest among participants to keep it afloat and they will pay you or another party to continue development in order to protect investment.

As said, the current "poll" is an election of the dictator. Basically it's a money grab, but we kinda pretend here you are not just a bunch of scammers trying to rip off investors.

I call bullshit on all your narrative since launch, you said you introduced high inflation because you need a security, it's a bullshit because it's clear now that you made it only because you want a cut from block reward. You don't need that much security because you are on 2 and 1/2 fraudulent exchanges and the major exchange does not support mainnet so far. The security is determined by the proce of token * block reward. You actually made the opposite.

You did it only to secure your own business, to continue writing off hefty paycheques to yourselves.

[Sim-91]

Wow, sammy007 is active in all channels Thank you for all the FUD. There is really no point to go through all that trouble though - just sell your AE tokens and never look back. I really don't think that any arguments can change your opinion.

There is one final arbiter though - time.

So let's see how things develop.

Best,
Vlad

There is no FUD. There was a number of questions and you never answered a single one actually.
Hilarious how all the scammers in this space over the years have been calling every criticism a FUD.

The questions are simple:

- why you need money now?
- why you want a full control of it or become a trustee?

If you are going to introduce voting on how to spend money you are still a trustee. Nothing like this is acceptable.

I actually predicted your possible BS answers and here my arguments: craptocurrency is not an average opensource program where donation model does not work, when system will be widely used there will be direct interest among participants to keep it afloat and they will pay you or another party to continue development in order to protect investment.

As said, the current "poll" is an election of the dictator. Basically it's a money grab, but we kinda pretend here you are not just a bunch of scammers trying to rip off investors.

I call bullshit on all your narrative since launch, you said you introduced high inflation because you need a security, it's a bullshit because it's clear now that you made it only because you want a cut from block reward. You don't need that much security because you are on 2 and 1/2 fraudulent exchanges and the major exchange does not support mainnet so far. The security is determined by the proce of token * block reward. You actually made the opposite.

You did it only to secure your own business, to continue writing off hefty paycheques to yourselves.

I think SAmmy lost quite some dollars speculating in crypto and now is frustrated... Buy high sell low Sammy 

[sammy007]

It also worth to mention that whole their voting math is a total fraud, here is why:

Acceptance example with 100 AE tokens in total:
30 AE tokens vote 0%
20 AE tokens vote 5%
30 AE tokens vote 10%
20 AE tokens vote 15%

Considering the above numbers, 30% of all voting AE tokens rejected the BRI vote while 70% accepted it. The outcome of the vote is positive and the percent of the block reward that will go to the foundation for development support will be 10%.

[(20 AE x 5%)+(30 AE x 10%)+(20 AE x 15%) / 70 AE= 10%]

So according to bullshit they wrote in a blog post they simply will reject those who vote "0". The magic is:

((20 * 0.05) + (30 * 0.1) + (20 * 0.15)) / 70 = 10%

Because if they normally count those who don't want to give them a cut (against their interests) it turns out they are getting less:

((30 * 0) + (20 * 0.05) + (30 * 0.1) + (20 * 0.15)) / 100 = 7%


https://blog.aeternity.com/aeternity-first-on-chain-governance-vote-decentralization-2-0-5e0c8a01891a

The people who constructed this fraudulent "governance" scheme want you to make them a trustee of up to 20% of the supply. They give you nothing but a word. They already own almost 20% of supply and want more, it all.

Scammers removed this post from reddit.

[aeternity]

Hello everyone,

Join us today at 12 PM CEST to hear the latest news from all Product Coordinators within æternity!

Don’t hesitate to ask questions here and we’ll make sure they’ll get answered during the call!

This is the link to the call (it may be changed due to technical reasons): https://meet.google.com/gto-xxbp-ont

Talk to you later 
The AE Team

[aeternity]

It also worth to mention that whole their voting math is a total fraud, here is why:

Acceptance example with 100 AE tokens in total:
30 AE tokens vote 0%
20 AE tokens vote 5%
30 AE tokens vote 10%
20 AE tokens vote 15%

Considering the above numbers, 30% of all voting AE tokens rejected the BRI vote while 70% accepted it. The outcome of the vote is positive and the percent of the block reward that will go to the foundation for development support will be 10%.

[(20 AE x 5%)+(30 AE x 10%)+(20 AE x 15%) / 70 AE= 10%]

So according to bullshit they wrote in a blog post they simply will reject those who vote "0". The magic is:

((20 * 0.05) + (30 * 0.1) + (20 * 0.15)) / 70 = 10%

Because if they normally count those who don't want to give them a cut (against their interests) it turns out they are getting less:

((30 * 0) + (20 * 0.05) + (30 * 0.1) + (20 * 0.15)) / 100 = 7%


https://blog.aeternity.com/aeternity-first-on-chain-governance-vote-decentralization-2-0-5e0c8a01891a

The people who constructed this fraudulent "governance" scheme want you to make them a trustee of up to 20% of the supply. They give you nothing but a word. They already own almost 20% of supply and want more, it all.

Scammers removed this post from reddit.

Hey,

We've answered you in the Forum:

The rules are simple:

0% - is an effective “No” vote
1%-20% is an effective “Yes” vote

The BRI percent is determined only by the positive votes. This is not a trick. This is logic.

If 51% of token holders voted 0%, there will be NO BRI, irrespective of the fact that 49% of token holders voted something else.

Best regards,
The AE Team

[vdramaliev]

I will call all of it FUD, because it is FUD.

All of your questions have been answered. Read the blog post. It has all the answers you need.

But I am pretty sure you don't need any answers, you simply don't want the BRI to happen. But it is happening, and you can vote on it if you want to, not vote, or sell all your AE. Simple. No need to waste any of your nevers on this.

Best,
Vlad

[sammy007]

It also worth to mention that whole their voting math is a total fraud, here is why:

Acceptance example with 100 AE tokens in total:
30 AE tokens vote 0%
20 AE tokens vote 5%
30 AE tokens vote 10%
20 AE tokens vote 15%

Considering the above numbers, 30% of all voting AE tokens rejected the BRI vote while 70% accepted it. The outcome of the vote is positive and the percent of the block reward that will go to the foundation for development support will be 10%.

[(20 AE x 5%)+(30 AE x 10%)+(20 AE x 15%) / 70 AE= 10%]

So according to bullshit they wrote in a blog post they simply will reject those who vote "0". The magic is:

((20 * 0.05) + (30 * 0.1) + (20 * 0.15)) / 70 = 10%

Because if they normally count those who don't want to give them a cut (against their interests) it turns out they are getting less:

((30 * 0) + (20 * 0.05) + (30 * 0.1) + (20 * 0.15)) / 100 = 7%


https://blog.aeternity.com/aeternity-first-on-chain-governance-vote-decentralization-2-0-5e0c8a01891a

The people who constructed this fraudulent "governance" scheme want you to make them a trustee of up to 20% of the supply. They give you nothing but a word. They already own almost 20% of supply and want more, it all.

Scammers removed this post from reddit.

Hey,

We've answered you in the Forum:

The rules are simple:

0% - is an effective “No” vote
1%-20% is an effective “Yes” vote

The BRI percent is determined only by the positive votes. This is not a trick. This is logic.

If 51% of token holders voted 0%, there will be NO BRI, irrespective of the fact that 49% of token holders voted something else.

Best regards,
The AE Team

This logic is a scam. By this "logic" you are removing up to 50% of voters and in that case getting even more. Seriously who you think people are? Complete fools? In that case you force people to vote for at least 1% instead of "0" if they want they voice to be heard.

[sammy007]

I will call all of it FUD, because it is FUD.

All of your questions have been answered. Read the blog post. It has all the answers you need.

But I am pretty sure you don't need any answers, you simply don't want the BRI to happen. But it is happening, and you can vote on it if you want to, not vote, or sell all your AE. Simple. No need to waste any of your nevers on this.

Best,
Vlad

I assume you mature enough to differentiate valid concerns and FUD. There is all the evidence to call your firm members scammers and "official" response that you treat removal of up to 50% of voters from results as "logic" is a pretty much proof of that. Who are you? 4 years old?

[smooth]

Simple question.

What should I vote if I want to minimize the amount of the BRI?

The answer is either 0% or 1%, depending on what I expect the outcome of the vote to be. Since no can really know this, your voting rules force voters holding such a preference to guess and essentially split their votes. The effect is similar to a 'spoiler' candidate in a plurality election, which can result in the least-preferred candidate winning.

I don't know if I agree with the word 'scam' here, but if one is to instead assume good faith, your election was incompetently designed and not efficient in assessing the actual preferences of the voters.

[aeternity]

Hey,

We've answered you in the Forum:

The rules are simple:

0% - is an effective “No” vote
1%-20% is an effective “Yes” vote

The BRI percent is determined only by the positive votes. This is not a trick. This is logic.

If 51% of token holders voted 0%, there will be NO BRI, irrespective of the fact that 49% of token holders voted something else.

Best regards,
The AE Team

This logic is a scam. By this "logic" you are removing up to 50% of voters and in that case getting even more. Seriously who you think people are? Complete fools? In that case you force people to vote for at least 1% instead of "0" if they want they voice to be heard.

In every election process, people who vote for the losing candidate remain unrepresented. If you are against the BRI you can express that by voting with 0%. Think about that - if all votes count as you suggest, there is no way to reject the BRI altogether, because there would still be someone who voted for it (i.e. 1%-20%) and that would result in some small percentage of block reward going to the foundation.

Best,
The AE Team

[aeternity]

Simple question.

What should I vote if I want to minimize the amount of the BRI?

The answer is either 0% or 1%, depending on what I expect the outcome of the vote to be. Since no can really know this, your voting rules force voters holding such a preference to guess and essentially split their votes. The effect is similar to a 'spoiler' candidate in a plurality election, which can result in the least-preferred candidate winning.

I don't know if I agree with the word 'scam' here, but if one is to instead assume good faith, your election was incompetently designed and not efficient in assessing the actual preferences of the voters.

We couldn't really know what the actual preferences of the voters were, and respectively, we couldn't use them to design the election. This is the first-ever vote on the æternity blockchain. It is not perfect, but it should be implemented so we can learn how to do the next one better. All the feedback we are getting as part of the BRI is appreciated and will be considered in the future votes.

Best,
The AE Team

[aeternity]

Hello everyone,

We are happy to announce that the project Aeknow.org has been awarded a grant by the æternity crypto Foundation 

Mr. Liu Yang, the creator of aeknow.org and a long-time æternity supporter walked us through the application process! Learn how he will use the donation:

ANNOUNCING A DONATION TO THE AEKNOW.ORG PROJECT

If you are interested in applying for a grant yourself, get all the details in the link above.

Best regards,
The AE Team

[sammy007]

We couldn't really know what the actual preferences of the voters were, and respectively, we couldn't use them to design the election. This is the first-ever vote on the æternity blockchain. It is not perfect, but it should be implemented so we can learn how to do the next one better. All the feedback we are getting as part of the BRI is appreciated and will be considered in the future votes.

Best,
The AE Team

Surprisingly the first "pilot vote" is the most necessary and damaging one in case of poor design. And it's obvious this design is broken.
Make 2 votes first to determine if the 2nd is needed and 2nd to count all votes. The correct way to calculate average in this situation.
You never really tried to hear a public opinion before you come up with such trash.

[dermike]

Wow, sammy007 is active in all channels Thank you for all the FUD. There is really no point to go through all that trouble though - just sell your AE tokens and never look back. I really don't think that any arguments can change your opinion.

There is one final arbiter though - time.

So let's see how things develop.

Best,
Vlad

There is no FUD. There was a number of questions and you never answered a single one actually.
Hilarious how all the scammers in this space over the years have been calling every criticism a FUD.

The questions are simple:

- why you need money now?
- why you want a full control of it or become a trustee?

If you are going to introduce voting on how to spend money you are still a trustee. Nothing like this is acceptable.

I actually predicted your possible BS answers and here my arguments: craptocurrency is not an average opensource program where donation model does not work, when system will be widely used there will be direct interest among participants to keep it afloat and they will pay you or another party to continue development in order to protect investment.

As said, the current "poll" is an election of the dictator. Basically it's a money grab, but we kinda pretend here you are not just a bunch of scammers trying to rip off investors.

I call bullshit on all your narrative since launch, you said you introduced high inflation because you need a security, it's a bullshit because it's clear now that you made it only because you want a cut from block reward. You don't need that much security because you are on 2 and 1/2 fraudulent exchanges and the major exchange does not support mainnet so far. The security is determined by the proce of token * block reward. You actually made the opposite.

You did it only to secure your own business, to continue writing off hefty paycheques to yourselves.

boscoin did a similar shonky thing....once initial cash is sponged they start looking for creative ways to steer the plebs...boscoin which was supposed to have 40k bos nodes...and each person was to get one vote with how the pool of boscoin was to be allocated....THEN ...they cancelled nodes...reduced voting to holding 10k bos....so someone with 10000 x 1 cent had the same voting power as the ICO holder who had millions....all these dodgy 10k accounts appear....then they create a homeocryptic voting system where nobody can see who was voting....you dont want to know name but want to see holding and started to bodge up votes....now they want to vote the fund board out...and have name a pre board to take control...oh forget it...they are pretending the fund stole the fund...and they the developers want to steal the rest of the unallocated bos....to scam...with companies they are creating with the power of the vote to determine who gets the boscoin....what a racket....i looked at what AE presented and its bogus....

[smooth]

It is not perfect, but it should be implemented so we can learn how to do the next one better. All the feedback we are getting as part of the BRI is appreciated and will be considered in the future votes.

Best,
The AE Team

You don't do a vote on as critically important decision as how the money supply is distributed if by your own admission you having yet figured out how votes should work. Maybe you vote on something like whether the color of the logo should be changed.

This vote was a botch job and should be rerun with a structure that don't bias the outcome in one direction and selectively disenfranchise (via forced vote-splitting) one point of view.

[aeternity]

boscoin did a similar shonky thing....once initial cash is sponged they start looking for creative ways to steer the plebs...boscoin which was supposed to have 40k bos nodes...and each person was to get one vote with how the pool of boscoin was to be allocated....THEN ...they cancelled nodes...reduced voting to holding 10k bos....so someone with 10000 x 1 cent had the same voting power as the ICO holder who had millions....all these dodgy 10k accounts appear....then they create a homeocryptic voting system where nobody can see who was voting....you dont want to know name but want to see holding and started to bodge up votes....now they want to vote the fund board out...and have name a pre board to take control...oh forget it...they are pretending the fund stole the fund...and they the developers want to steal the rest of the unallocated bos....to scam...with companies they are creating with the power of the vote to determine who gets the boscoin....what a racket....i looked at what AE presented and its bogus....

That has nothing to do with æternity - you can follow the voting in real-time HERE and you can even change your vote before the deadline in accordance with the results.

Best,
The AE Team

[aeternity]

It is not perfect, but it should be implemented so we can learn how to do the next one better. All the feedback we are getting as part of the BRI is appreciated and will be considered in the future votes.

Best,
The AE Team

You don't do a vote on as critically important decision as how the money supply is distributed if by your own admission you having yet figured out how votes should work. Maybe you vote on something like whether the color of the logo should be changed.

This vote was a botch job and should be rerun with a structure that don't bias the outcome in one direction and selectively disenfranchise (via forced vote-splitting) one point of view.

How the votes work has been figured out fine and we stand by this decision. We just said that some things could have been different in terms of timeframe for instance and that would be taken into account next time. You too can change your vote before the deadline if you want.

Best,
The AE Team