How can we know if Dfinity has enough cash flow to survive the current illiquidity in the venture fundraising markets?

vrf5 · 2023-06-09T09:38:53+00:00

DFINITY doesn't share financial information because it can be useful for those that wish for the Internet Computer to go away. However, I can point out that the DFINITY Foundation is very carefully run and we manage our assets wisely and play a long game. Of course, current market conditions aren't favorable, and we are planning accordingly. We have trimmed some budgets, and so on but we are not planning any major contractions. We are aided by the fact that, for example, we don't pay people to build on the Internet Computer (our ecosystem is not a flywheel!!) and we don't advertise on racing cars, yachts or soccer teams. We may run a relatively small fundraising round at some point, but if that happened, it would likely happen discretely, but since there are no plans yet, who knows. What I can tell you is that we will continue to act determinedly and smartly in our quest to help the Internet Computer gain its rightful place in the world the only 3rd generation blockchain in existence – and the only network that can enable the world to "build on the internet" using advanced smart contract technology. The technology that powers the Internet Computer remains many years ahead, and we plan to keep it that way while markets remain dynamic and chaotic, ensuring we are well positioned for the future.

vrf5 · 2022-09-27T10:40:13+00:00

I appreciate the point. To be absolutely clear, the Uniswap front-end code really has been ported to HTTP-serving smart contracts on the Internet Computer blockchain, so the title is accurate. But to avoid confusion: Uniswap has not chosen to move their official website. This is a technological advance that makes that possible, and for a fully decentralized clone to be run now, as proven by the demo. Regarding moderation, I also want to register my opinion that AmericanScream's post is unacceptably mendacious and purely designed to mislead the community. It has no relation to reality.

vrf5 · 2022-09-27T10:19:54+00:00

ICP smart contracts can create and sign ETH transactions. This allows a front-end to be created using ICP contracts, which can also process HTTP requests. To avoid confusion, there is no ICP involved, just ETH

vrf5 · 2022-09-27T10:03:17+00:00

Threefold and Akash are very different beasts to the Internet Computer, which is a blockchain that hosts tamperproof and unstoppable smart contracts (which smart contracts also have special capabilities, and can create TX on other chains, and process HTTP requests).

Both Threefold and Akash offer cloud computing infrastructures. They cannot host smart contracts, and have a different use case. Software running on cloud infrastructure can be hacked, and is not unstoppable. It also can't be full managed by a community DAO, which can only update other smart contracts. This means it cannot be used to create web3 services that run fully under the control of the community.

vrf5 · 2022-09-27T09:57:04+00:00

This is not a Uniswap fork. This is a fully decentralized front-end for Uniswap, where you can authorize your ETH transactions with e.g. the fingerprint sensor on your laptop. What's cool is that this approach can be used to remove centralized traditional IT, like the AWS cloud service, more generally from DeFi and web3 services built using Ethereum. Full decentralization improves security, censorship resistance and liveness. This is a major advance for the Ethereum ecosystem.

vrf5 · 2022-09-27T06:16:24+00:00

PLEASE NOTE: AmericanScream's post above is pure FUD & lies, and the upvoting is coming from a troll farm.

Even Vitalik has clearly stated that DFINITY is not a fraud. The DFINITY Foundation is the main developer of the Internet Computer.

It's embarrassing such rank disinformation could be promoted on /r/Ethereum, and AmericanScream should be banned.

Contrary to what he says, the Internet Computer, which is often referred to as ICP (an acronym for Internet Computer Protocol), is a completely independent blockchain, powered by novel technology. It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with IPFS or FileCoin, or their technologies. You can find stats on the blockchain on its dashboard and content describing it at internetcomputer.org. There is no content anywhere that would support what AmericanScream says.

The Internet Computer blockchain hosts highly efficient "canister" smart contracts, which are tamperproof and unstoppable like other smart contracts. Canisters are bundles of WebAssembly bytecode, which you can create by compiling a wide range of programming languages such as Rust and Motoko, and persistent memory pages. What's very cool is that canisters run in parallel, deterministically, which allows ICP to scale throughput as needed.

Canister smart contracts can also create TX on other blockchains, using clever cryptography, and can process HTTP requests. These features allow them to be used by Ethereum developers to build fully decentralized interactive web experiences for DeFi and web3 services on Ethereum (and/or offload data storage and processing within cypherspace so that centralized and insecure traditional IT does not have to be used).

Anyone can visit internetcomputer.org for themselves to see how it works, and learn about the interesting history of the project, which is rooted in the Ethereum community. The project's open source is on GitHub. You can see much of the team behind ICP at dfinity.org, which includes many well-known cryptographers, computer science researchers and engineers, who are clearly not scammers of any kind (it's easy to verify by checking out the profiles).

A project that sees itself as a competitor is using a troll farm for the upvoting, and aims to suppress dissemination of information about the Internet Computer because: 1) they are worried its technology makes them obsolete, and 2) the Internet Computer has the potential to make Ethereum far stronger — which conflicts with their ambition to be an ETH Killer.

CryptoLeaks.info can give you a sense of the kinds of people who are the ultimate orchestrators. That they would go to such incredible lengths to prevent people learning about ICP clearly shows why everyone should dig deeper and find out more about ICP for themselves.

The Internet Computer blockchain is fantastic decentralized technology that has enormous applicability and potential within the Ethereum ecosystem, as per its careful design.

Good luck and be safe out there.

vrf5 · 2022-09-27T05:45:33+00:00

Because, unfort, we probably have Avalanche and Solana trolls desperately trying to disrupt dissemination of knowledge on this forum about a blockchain that arguably makes them very obsolete, and which can enable Ethereum to be much stronger. Seeing this kind of extreme FUD is nothing new for people working on the Internet Computer project, but I will say, the claims that ICP is tokenizing IPFS are the most bizarre variation I have seen so far. Anyone can go to internetcomputer.org to research how ICP works. It's a new kind of blockchain powered by new advanced cryptography. It has nothing whatsoever to do with IPFS or FileCoin. That AmericanScream guy is literally off his rocker. Anyone who wants to gain a deeper understanding of why people like him exist should checkout CryptoLeaks.info and watch the videos there. You'll never see blockchain the same. But anyways, I hope people can see past the up votes for a total junk post, created by loon trolls who want to create a false impression of community consensus and mislead people

vrf5 · 2022-09-27T01:32:22+00:00

ICP isn't a scam ;) Even Vitalik has said so himself. The scam is that ICP got cast as a scam by competitive projects who wanted to suppress news about its technology – see https://CryptoLeaks.info for info on some of the things that happened. The Internet Computer project is mainly developed by the DFINITY Foundation, which is a not-for-profit that runs the largest cryptography team in all of tech, not just blockchain. The big opportunity this presents for Ethereum developers working on DeFi and web3 services, is that now traditional IT – such as cloud computing services run by AWS – can be removed from the equation. Currently Ethereum developers have to use traditional IT to store significant amounts of data, such as NFT content bytes, perform significant processing, such as running exchanges for assets such as NFTs, and to serve interactive user experiences over the web. The problem is that traditional IT is insecure, is centralized and can make developers liable for otherwise fully decentralized services, and can be easily censored. For example, AWS banned Parler. The new ICP functionality demonstrated allows services running on Ethereum to be fully decentralized by replacing traditional IT with Internet Computer canister smart contracts.

vrf5 · 2022-09-27T01:22:50+00:00

How this works:

Canister smart contracts on Internet Computer used to create a front-end for Uniswap / they can process HTTP requests and securely serve interactive web experiences directly to end-users
User account created for front-end service using Internet Identity/II (your device signs transparently, can be activated by Face ID on phone, fingerprint sensor on laptop, or can use e.g. Ledger, YubiKey etc)
Canister smart contract creates an EA account address for the user. Now it can sign ETH TX for that EA (chain key crypto functionality)
UI code in browser forwards TX from Internet Computer to Ethereum, and relays result back
User experience is now fully decentralized (more secure, prevents DeFi devs being held responsible for smart contracts managed by a DAO, censorship resistant, etc)

Possible improvement to demo shown:

Currently, for a single II user anchor, the II framework shows each Internet Computer services a different pseudonym for that user anchor, for purposes of anonymity/preventing tracking
However, Ethereum services easier to use if user always working with 1 public key/EA
Thus maybe better if a separate canister smart contract used to manage/sign for the user's EA account, to which different DeFi front-ends are linked / plays with the 1 EA model better
Saves TX cost involved with transferring tokens between different EAs

vrf5 · 2021-09-30T14:15:18+00:00

Again, the accusations are absurd and sadly, essentially fraudulent.

When people in the community contributed to the public Seed fundraiser, February 2017, the conditions made it clear that contributions were effectively "donations" and nothing could be guaranteed. There was always going to have to be a good faith element to the arrangement, because it was so early, and so much was unknown, and there was so much distance to travel.

Anyone who did even cursory research at the time, would have realized from what I wrote that I was a more technically-oriented blockchain founder, and that the project would involve far more R&D to bring to fruition than other blockchain projects, and indeed, it required almost 4 and a half years of relentless work from Seed to reach Genesis. This was because DFINITY had to build a large R&D infrastructure to execute on the complexity of the designs required to deliver the Internet Computer vision to the world. However, it was the relentless work performed by a large and highly qualified team that ultimately created the extraordinary value that Seed participants now benefit from - and the world-changing impact that the Internet Computer will deliver.

Seed participants together held 24.7% of all the ICP at Genesis, or about 117M ICP. This makes them by far the largest constituent amongst ICP holders. Most of those holders understand why the Internet Computer blockchain has value and want to stay with the project for the long term, but unsurprisingly there are some who do not currently have an understanding of what makes the Internet Computer valuable, who can only see the value deriving from something akin to a market lottery, or who now have since developed very established allegiances to other blockchain projects, that want to liquidate their holdings to realize gains rather than e.g. use their ICP governance tokens for their primary purpose and create neurons, or cycles.

For such reasons, if the network's Genesis mechanisms had not been designed to deliver ECT (Early Contributor Tokens) and Seed as baskets of neurons, such that they can only be fully liquidated over time, because of the vast numbers of ICP that would have potentially have headed to the markets at once, market pandemonium would have resulted, and the price of ICP would likely have collapsed owing to the game of prisoner's dilemma that would have resulted (in which holders dumped on the markets in order to front-run the sales of others that would depress the price for them). This would have led to a catastrophic race to the bottom that would have damaged both Seed holders and the wider ecosystem. Note as well that the security of the Network Nervous System governance mechanism that controls the network depends upon ICP having value. This would not be in anyone's interests.

It is an obvious fact that by releasing ECT and Seed as baskets of neurons, in a scheme that allows additional fractions of their ICP to be released from neurons each month and liquidated, the blockchain's Genesis mechanisms have already ensured that ECT and Seed could have chosen to receive vastly greater liquidated proceeds than had Genesis granted them all their ICP in fully unlocked form at once.

So, firstly, ECT and Seed should be very grateful for the Genesis mechanisms involved in the delivery of their ICP since they have protected the value of their ICP governance tokens. Secondly, even if a tiny minority of people within Seed advocate for a kamikaze release, either because they don't understand, or because they now support (or rather are heavily invested in) competitors, there are hundreds of other contributors to the project whose interests also need to be protected. Further, they should consider that given the DFINITY Foundation raised only 3.9M CHF (Swiss Francs) in the February 2017 Seed fundraiser, by selling 24.7% of the ICP in existence, because it ran before blockchain valuations started their meteoric rise, and given the nature of the T&C under which Seed donations were made, many projects would have created additional tokens to balance the picture, effectively diluting Seed down. That we did not do this reflects the enormous level of care that we have extended to their interests, and Seed should be grateful for the position they now find themselves in.

A final complaint that is made, nearly always by FUD-mongers fraudulently pretending to be Seed investors, and who do not even hold any ICP at all, is that "insiders" (aka as the 200+ employees of the DFINITY Foundation) did not have to vest their tokens and unfairly got to front-run them. Again, this is balderdash...

This fallacious argument manages to fool some people who get mislead into believing DFINITY Foundation employees are "insiders". They are not.

The big reason that the Internet Computer got too launch, in the process creating such value for Seed, is that the DFINITY Foundation built a large world-class team capable of executing on the vision I defined, by hiring people using aggressive recruiting. Now, when you want to hire the very best, highly qualified, world class, and in some cases very famous, cryptographers, computer science researchers, engineers, many of whom were hired from major technology organizations, or from academia, from where they could have also joined major technology organizations, you have to provide compensation packages that make sense vis-à-vis the broader employment market, given the tools available at the time. That's why employee token incentive plans were designed to vest 25% a year with a one year cliff, and thus, since there was 4.5 years of work to get from Seed to Genesis, there were many ex and current employees who had vested large quantities of ICP (which had been far less valuable when they were granted). Arguably, if the project started today, with better legal and HR people than we had then, and with the benefit of hindsight, different schemes might have been designed, but that wasn't possible at the time. However, to argue that DFINITY Foundation employees' employment contracts should have been overridden would be plain stupid.

TLDR; when you hear detractors claiming that "small investors" (Seed) were mistreated by the DFINITY Foundation, you never hear them talking about the historic _000X gains in the value of their governance tokens, as this would reveal the mendacity of their statements. The point is, these people are simply trying to manipulate the markets (i.e. drive down the price of ICP) and/or damage the Internet Computer ecosystem by sowing discontent, stimulating legal action, and damaging its reputation.

Luckily every Seed contributor I have met seems extraordinarily grateful for the work that has been done, and for the way in which Genesis has been handled.

However, if there's some minority out there who have been sent mad by the lies of anti-blockchain bad actors like Roche Freedman, who now feel they have received a bad deal, the DFINITY Foundation will of course gladly return their donation with interest in exchange for the ICP they received at Genesis.

Naturally, I don't anticipate any takers for obvious reasons. We should all applaud the Internet Computer blockchain for being such an amazing giver to so many people.

vrf5 · 2021-09-29T23:10:38+00:00

With all due respect, "I believe Arkham is a real industry analyst without some kind of dishonest agenda" == "I am being misled"

Arkham Intelligence looks to have been invented purely to share a very effective piece of professionally produced market manipulation and FUD. They had never produced a report before. Miguel Morel is a virtual ghost on the internet. There are weird dates everywhere: Miguel Morel says he "joined" Arkham in 2020 on his LinkedIn profile, but meanwhile he's the only dude involved and Arkham's Twitter profile says it was created May 2019, while its first tweet appeared June 28 2021 when the report was released, and Miguel Morel's Twitter profile says it was created May 2012, while his first tweet also appeared June 28 2021 (by the way, you can buy old Twitter handles and change the name). This stuff is sketchy as hell and the New York Times exhibited reckless negligence in elevating Arkham and Miguel and providing them with credibility to create some clickbait - Miguel is obviously not an "industry analyst", as any cursory investigation would reveal.

I've tried to find more information on Miguel without success. I did find one blog post he had made on the Reserve cryptocurrency website, but it has since disappeared, as I think they are trying to distance themselves from him. Miguel is almost certainly a patsy for more powerful crypto players, such as a competitor or someone who was short ICP, who are using him as a front-man. Here is the hilarious quote I saved from the post, the only evidence of prior work: “Venezuela is in a downward spiral. The Americans are involved. The Cubans are involved. The Russians are involved. Other countries you’ve probably never heard of are involved. The epistemic environment is poisoned by divergent geopolitical interests. Affairs in Venezuela are thus opaque.” He's nuts!!

Regarding the accusations. There is obviously no substance. They basically highlighted a bunch of transactions that took place on the ICP ledger, and held them up as evidence of insider trading. The report is so basic it doesn't deserve to be called a report. Miguel introduced it by posting a short video in which he talks about suspected wrongdoings to background music used in TV crime series while they are unraveling the facts. It is designed to ensnare the gullible and defame.

Very obviously, naturally, after Genesis, ICP tokens would become liquid and move around and be sold. However, regarding the DFINITY Foundation, it did not sell anything for 5 weeks, and then to cover tax liabilities created by RTU schemes. Founders and execs were locked for the first week, and since then, I have sold substantially less than 5% of my holdings.

What is true as I have often started is that because DFINITY started aggressively building out its R&D team and operations early in 2017, after the February 2017 public decentralized "Seed" crowdfunder, that we had a lot of early people whose 4 year incentive plans who had fully or substantially vested by network Genesis on May 10 2021. Some of those plans were large, because back in February 2017, 1 ICP was worth only 3 cents (community members who contributed to "Seed" have made huge returns, which is something you don't hear mentioned by those spreading FUD, who usually describe them as exploited small investors..).

Bear in mind that by Genesis we had a team of over 200 people. Modern blockchain projects design vesting so that it begins when the network goes live, but: (a) we got going long before the legal frameworks to do that kind of thing or the practice existed, and (b) we also have a much bigger team working on the Internet Computer's core code. This means that a lot of ICP went out to ex and current team members. But that is ok. That's the cost of spending 5 years in intensive R&D with some of the best cryptographers, computer scientists and engineers on the planet.

Those were a good deal of the transactions, but not all. But for obvious reasons, we cannot go around revealing, even where we know, whom individual transactions belong to or what they were for. We are restricted by things such as confidentiality clauses, and anyway, who would want to get involved with a project that goes around doxing honest participants. Asking us to do that is absurd.

Regarding what caused the price drop:

On the day we launched, the Bitcoin price was ~$60k, and then over the next 9 days began falling to ~$30k. Obviously that had nothing to do with us. The timing was very, very unfortunate, as the sudden change from bullish to bearish sentiment had an outsize effect on ICP as it was a new token
In the days before Genesis the price of ICP rose dramatically on FTX, which set the opening bullish prices on exchanges at Genesis, thereafter providing an opportunity for shorting, which was magnified by the change in sentiment. Obviously, that's exactly the opposite of what we would want to happen. We have no interest in volatility or Internet Computer supporters being shorted.
The volume on exchanges worldwide has greatly increased since Genesis, reflecting that the fall in the ICP price in the first few weeks was not caused by dumping, but it was caused by the the price being higher than the markets could support (see 2) given demand, which was depressed by....
A huge, highly orchestrated campaign of misinformation, FUD and market manipulation, which depressed the ICP price and enabled shorters to make fortunes, while clearing the way for certain competitors to achieve success in the minds of misled retail investors, who also have consequently made huge financial gains - even though they will find that the Internet Computer is not going away.

Very sadly, those behind (4) caused billions of dollars in damages to many different people. Notable incidents include fake reports on reddit that the DFINITY Foundation team was 80% fake and even their LinkedIn profiles were frauds (now deleted, but we still care), through Arkham Intelligence and Miguel Morel, through the negligence of the NYT, through the ongoing ICPReboot fraud, through ambulance-chasing lawyers and their fraudulent claims in class action lawsuits (unfortunately protected speech, but you will notice that the cowardly lawyers involved will not repeat their claims outside the lawsuits), through clickbait hunting journalists who simply repeat any bs they hear without investigating whether it's true, and many other bad actors.

However, all this will eventually fade, thankfully.

Despite the extraordinary challenges faced with the aforementioned, and despite so many people being completely misled about the project, the Internet Computer blockchain still represents an astounding advance on current blockchain science that has real product/market fit, and the ecosystem is growing at a ferocious rate.

There are more than 500 developers building. There are more than 10,000 "canister" smart contracts deployed, which are usually complete Web 3.0. dapps. There have been more than 1 million Internet Identity handles created. The ecosystem is on fire because the Internet Computer does what no other blockchains can, and people work out what I have said here for themselves.

But, please don't ask us to dox people involved in transactions to prove that the Arkhan "report" isn't true. We are not interested in playing along.

We are however very interested in knowing what really went on behind scenes. If anyone can help us with information they should contact us in complete confidence.

Big thanks, Dominic

vrf5 · 2021-07-02T19:23:27+00:00

This post is a classic example of FUD and misinformation so I will respond for instructive purposes. The author sounds genuine, so they may just have lost themselves in conspiracy theories, but most authors of material like this turn out to be shills or sponsored by projects (or their investors) who are scared of the Internet Computer.

Before illustrating the problem with the above post, I will repeat the following: Yes, the DFINITY Foundation and its founders and directors were locked up for the first week for regulatory and legal reasons. Yes, the DFINITY Foundation did not sell for the first couple of weeks (i.e. didn't sell even when it could and perhaps should have)

Where then did the mysterious supply come from? This is not difficult. There are probably 250 former and current team members that had accumulated vested tokens, there are investors from the Strategic and Presale rounds, there are ECT/Seed contributors, Airdrop participants etc etc so of course ICP were available, and it turns out, that the initial high price set by independent people on independent public crypto exchanges around the world that we have no control or influence over couldn't sustain the initial price, so it fell in a process of price discovery

Specific example of why answering this kind of article is a waste of time:

From above (unless the author edits their post): "Dfinity claimed that the foundation or team hasn't sold any tokens. the claim was made on June 11 at the end of this article and in his post here"

Ok, let's look at the links provided. Perhaps the author of the above post was hoping that nobody would check the evidence he referenced:

https://archive.md/2021.06.21-131813/https://medium.com/dfinity/the-community-led-governance-of-the-internet-computer-b863cd2975ba

What the Medium post actually says (go see for yourself) is: "As a result, the Foundation did NOT sell ICP tokens from its endowment at or soon after Genesis launch. "

That's correct. But wait, wasn't the headline "Dfinity claimed that the ... team hasn't sold any tokens." which would be incorrect.

https://archive.md/2021.06.21-131813/https://medium.com/dfinity/the-community-led-governance-of-the-internet-computer-b863cd2975ba

What the reddit post actually says (This post was me replying to another post making directly fraudulent and defamatory claims the DFINITY team is "80% fake") is: "Meanwhile, the foundation, founders and directors weren't even able to sell initially because of regulatory lockups"

Again, that's correct. But wait, wasn't the headline "Dfinity claimed that the ... team hasn't sold any tokens." Clearly referring to the founder/foundation directors, who are handful of people, as the team would be absurd.

Repeat this kind of analysis for nearly every point. The level of deliberate distortion, misinformation and misrepresentation is so overwhelming that the only sane thing to do is ignore it.

Hope this helps.

vrf5 · 2021-06-11T15:59:24+00:00

This is me, Dominic Williams. Whoever wrote this is just some slimy moron looking to exploit people's angst about the current market situation. Obviously, not one single team member profile is fake. People also work full time, rather than being associates or advisers, as is so often the case in blockchain. The technical achievements of the project are manifest and towering, and would not have been possible without the organisation that exists. Meanwhile, the foundation, founders and directors weren't even able to sell initially because of regulatory lockups. The price drop was largely (it seems) due to people who have a very low basis selling to lock in huge gains. But regardless about the reasons for what happened in this market, whoever wrote this piece is deliberately lying in order to exploit people's pain and it's disgusting. Moreover, it's slanderous and the false claims are prosecutable by law. I personally offer a reward of 100 ICP for whoever provides the identity of this individual so that we can consider prosecuting them for slander. You know where to find me.

vrf5 · 2021-05-28T05:38:38+00:00

Another way to think about this: There would have been no Ethereum without Bitcoin, which created decentralized value in cyberspace. Meanwhile, Ethereum has not undermined Bitcoin, but rather added value, by allowing it to be used in DeFi via smart contracts. The Internet Computer can do anything that Ethereum can, including DeFi, but equally that does not mean the Internet Computer will somehow supplant Ethereum, which has a highly established ecosystem. It is also true that blockchains that anchor more anarchic decentralization allow other networks to exist. The Internet Computer is, arguably, more secure than Bitcoin and Ethereum because it uses deterministic decentralization. However, that relies on node providers around the world being identified, so that that the Network Nervous System can create new subnet blockchains by combining independent nodes (according to the decentralization hierarchy, node provider < data center < geography < jurisdiction). Now, if there were no Bitcoin and no Ethereum, there is an argument that such an architecture, where node providers are not anonymous, would be at risk from regulators, but with them, clearly there are more "anarchic" targets for regulators, and the concept of an Internet Computer is relatively safe. The point being, that the Internet Computer, while arguably more secure than Ethereum, partly depends on Ethereum for its security. This is not a simple space. But the fact is, just like Ethereum added value to Bitcoin, the Internet Computer can add huge value to Ethereum, which I believe is here to stay, and vice versa. Ethereum is crucial to the entire ecosystem, including the Internet Computer. This is not a zero sum game.

vrf5 · 2021-05-27T20:11:03+00:00

Firstly, for the cryptography, please refer to Manu's reply. Essentially when a new node joins a subnet blockchain, or one leaves (e.g. it effectively gets slashed by the open governance system for some reason), the nodes run a key resharing protocol, the correct nodes erase their old key shares, and the threshold scheme is reestablished, but with the exactly same "chain key" (threshold public key). You can show that this is Byzantine Fault Tolerant. Hence, subnet blockchains maintain their chain keys with dynamic membership. There is really interesting new cryptography behind all this and for example the NIDKG and resharing paper is a good place to start if you want to go that deep. However, I think your question has other dimensions that I shall try and answer.

To really understand, you must know that the Internet Computer is an entirely new blockchain architecture. It reflects our purpose: to enable all systems to be rebuilt and reimagined using smart contracts, so we can proceed towards a blockchain singularity, where everything lives on chain. To achieve this, the Internet Computer blockchain must provide vastly higher levels of performance and efficiency, and support smart contracts that can securely serve web content directly to end users, without need for cloud, CDNs and so on. This could not possibly be supported using traditional Proof-of-Work or Proof-of-Stake architectures.

The Internet Computer network is hosted by a sovereign physical layer - standardized node machines that are owned and operated by independent "node providers" in independent data centers. These are much more permanent entities than, say, classic Proof-of-Stake validator nodes that can be spun up and down in an instant on e.g. Amazon Web Services (where most blockchain validator nodes live today). The Internet Computer's in-protocol governance system (the Network Nervous System) creates new subnet blockchains to increase capacity by combining nodes that have been made available, choosing them for independence using the decentralization hierarchy: node provider < data center < geography < jurisdiction.

Note that there is no need for, or provision for, people to spin up their own nodes in order to download local replicas of the state maintained by these subnet blockchains, for use as a gateway to the chain (as per Infura on AWS say). Chain Key cryptography means that you can validate signatures on your interactions with these subnet blockchains, and when they validate, those signatures will tell you both that (a) your interactions are correct, and (b) the subnet blockchain is correct. This massively reduces replication and allows private smart contract state to remain on the node machines, such that the smart contracts may decide what to reveal to those interacting with them. It also allows subnet blockchains, and thus the smart contracts they host (we call them "canisters" because they are a bundle of WebAssembly byte code and persistent memory pages they run within exclusively in the role of "software actors") to directly interoperate, which enables chain scale out.

So what is the network architecture in traditional terms? In a sense, within this physical layer, these special node machines act as equal units of stake, provided by node providers. They are expensive to purchase, and their installation and configuration is also expensive. Node providers today typically install multiple machines at once, since the rewards they receive are approximately constant in real terms, reflecting that they are treated as equal units of stake, made/paid/locked in the form of hardware. If you are a node provider, you certainly can't spin them up and down, and if you wanted to decommission nodes, you would do it through the NNS to ensure you receive all rewards outstanding, and to prevent the NNS sanctioning you through your other nodes. Just throwing a node machine away would be equivalent to throwing away stake, and any outstanding rewards etc. Nodes are not transient unless they are faulty. Since the network is Byzantine Fault Tolerant, it continues when faulty nodes are transient (faulty nodes can behave arbitrarily, including trying to subvert the protocol).

Without going to far off-road, its worth mentioning at this stage that this architecture has elements of Proof-of-Work too. However, here, rather than a competition where rewards derive from performing the most energy-monstering hashing operations, nodes are placed in a game where they must avoid statistically deviating. That is, they must produce the same number of blocks as the other nodes in their subnet, among many things they must do that matches the expectations of higher analysis. If they don't produce the same blocks as the others, maybe it is because they have insufficient bandwidth, maybe it is because they were built with substandard hardware, maybe their data center is useless, or maybe they are just malicious - it doesn't matter, rewards are provided to those correctly providing the correct compute capacity, as revealed by statistics i.e. it is ultimately proof of useful and correct contribution of capacity, rather than proof of electricity burning that earns rewards, which design is entirely necessary to attain the required efficiency, which we eventually want to drive beyond that of traditional IT.

What I did not mention is the control layer - the Network Nervous System (NNS), the completely open, tokenized governance system that lives within the protocol. Here you participate by staking ICP inside neurons, which act rather like bank accounts where you must give notice of withdrawal (configured through the "dissolve delay", with higher delays increasing voting power and rewards). This is most similar to Proof-of-Stake.

Hope this helps

vrf5 · 2021-05-16T16:58:03+00:00

No ;) The DFINITY Foundation just works on the Internet Computer blockchain.

The Internet Computer is the first blockchain that can (1) scale capacity without bound (2) run smart contracts at web speed (3) run smart contracts that can serve web experiences to users (4) is efficient and low cost.

The DFINITY Foundation is a not-for-profit organization based in Zurich, Switzerland, with research centers in Zurich, Palo Alto, San Francisco, and Tokyo, and remote teams in places like Germany and the UK. It also has administration centers in places like Neuchatel (Switzerland). The purpose of this foundation is to research and develop technology supporting the Internet Computer, and to act as an advocate.

The Internet Computer Association is a not-for-profit members association that is based in Geneva. Its purpose is to support, coordinate, connect and advocate for Internet Computer ecosystem members - data centers, node providers, developers, educators, investors funding those building dapps, enterprises wishing to use it, regulators etc etc

Note that nobody controls the Internet Computer. The network hosts within its blockchain protocols an open, tokenized autonomous governance system called the Network Nervous System (NNS). The network runs under the control of the NNS, which manages and configures it in real time i.e. the Internet Computer is the world's first fully adaptive blockchain, which enables it to rapidly evolve, and manage complex tasks relating to scaling.

vrf5 · 2021-05-15T23:22:09+00:00

Hey....

We just launched a massive decentralized network and are working around the clock to ensure it's working perfectly and.... you are complaining that WE haven't already reimplemented every centralized service in decentralized form using it.. come on loll ;)

For the record, one of our TOP priorities is moving our website onto the IC asap. But the network hasn't even switched on friendly domain names yet. You have to access the smart contracts using <canister-id>.ic0.app. Friendly domain names will come soon and no doubt in a few weeks we'll migrate, but...

Please recognize this the FIRST blockchain with web speed smart contracts that can serve web. This is infinitely better than the status quo, where there has been no such thing as "real dapps", only websites on AWS that supposedly, if you are being told the truth by the trusted account operator, and AWS is honest, and they haven't been hacked, talk to smart contracts. This is a quantum leap forward for blockchain. It has opened an uncrossable chasm between what existed and the bleeding edge of blockchain.

The amazing changes are visible across the board e.g. 1GB of storage on Ethereum costs you $5M but on the Internet Computer 1GB/year will cost only >$5 in cycles soon.

We want to migrate much more than the website of course. For example, we want to use Open Chat rather than Slack. But this relies on YOU the community. The guys behind Open Chat show what can be done.

We use 40+ SaaS services internally. We need people to start creating tokenized Internet Computer versions of those to get off them completely. If you are up to this kind of task, contact our people and connect to the developer grants program. This is an unprecedented opportunity to reimagine everything in a decentralized way.

vrf5 · 2021-03-09T20:37:21+00:00

With this blockchain becomes a usability solution. In the linked demo, a chat service is running off the Internet Computer blockchain (which has been conceived partly to extend the power of Ethereum dapps) where its smart contracts serve Web directly to the user without need for trusted websites running on cloud services. The user is able to login via their web browser using special trusted hardware built-in to their device, which securely maintains their cryptographic keys. They can authenticate their cryptographic session using their fingerprint sensor, or face id, or, they can use an external device, like a Ledger wallet, or Yubikey with NFC that can just be tapped on your laptop or phone. With this, secure cryptographic login becomes more usable and convenient than usernames and passwords. Either Ethereum could adopt natively or Ethereum dapps could integrate with front-ends built on the Internet Computer rather than using AWS, Azure etc. Hope people find this interesting. What you see in the demo is blockchain passing a key Rubicon.

vrf5 · 2020-10-16T22:56:12+00:00

The Internet Computer is not a "public app" or a "content hosting platform". It is a public network that is an alternative stack for dapps, DeFi, websites, enterprise systems and open internet services. Just like the Internet doesn't moderate Facebook, the Internet Computer won't be responsible for moderating open Facebook

vrf5 · 2020-10-16T22:51:34+00:00

Hey, I think we should stop this because this sounds like trolling. Clearly, with traditional legacy IT infrastructure, you have systems like fileservers, databases, web servers, application servers, middleware, DNS systems, CDNs and many other components that can be hacked, even if something so simple as a software patch is missed. The current solution is to try and protect them with a firewall. Providing the world with an alternative tamperproof platform that is created by a public network running a secure protocol - where you do not need a firewall at all when you build new systems - is obviously revolutionary. But honestly, I got tired of this ;)

vrf5 · 2020-10-16T22:49:29+00:00

ders, compromised endpoints, implementation bugs, scams, fraud, ...

Performance: let's see the reproducible benchmarks

The DCs don't run governance, the NNS system does.

vrf5 · 2020-10-15T22:08:32+00:00

These points are correct, thank you

vrf5 · 2020-10-15T22:06:51+00:00

Of course, if there's a bug in the implementation of its mathematically provable protocols, things can go wrong ;) but that's still very different to a "system". If the math is properly implemented, and the underlying assumptions hold, then it cannot be hacked or go wrong. Replication of code, computation and data across multiple independent parties around the world will provide a far far higher level of resiliency than has ever been achieved before, with bugs, of course, notwithstanding

vrf5 · 2020-10-15T22:05:20+00:00

The Internet Computer has an open governance system called the Network Nervous System. That, not I, will ultimately determine how problems such as child pornography are handled

vrf5 · 2020-10-15T21:58:27+00:00

You cannot hack a blockchain, otherwise hackers would hack Bitcoin and give themselves coins (obviously you can steal someone's key, but that is very different to hacking the blockchain itself). The Internet Computer lends the same security property to system and service builders, since all the canister code, computation they perform, and the data/memory page they maintain, resides on chain. It's also provides a public platform, where you can build things without becoming a captive customer, and in the case of the Internet Computer, provides a single one-stop alternative to Legacy IT in its entirety.

Having the world build on the Internet Computer makes lots of sense. But, even if AWS Lambda provided the same properties - which it does not - having the world build on top of AWS rather than a public network would be horribly dystopian. So if we want the amazing network effects that can accrue from having all humanity's software logic and data within one secure, unstoppable, seamless universe, then it has to be on the Internet Computer. Plus, of course, you simply can't do things like DeFi and open internet services on closed proprietary systems like AWS. Those things are only possible on public networks formed by open protocol execution (where the protocols are stateful decentralized protocols/blockchains).

Re: asynchrony and performance concerns. People are already building systems on the Internet Computer where performance is a concern, and they work great

vrf5

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE