Welcome to the community Karkoor…as to your question I do not believe it can be done at this time due to the fact that implementation or integration of hard wallet such as ledger has not been attained with Incognito app yet… 
Provide
6 Likes
Hi @Karkoor, Tempestblack is correct. We are planning to do it next year. You can have a look at this roadmap: Privacy - Integration with hardware wallets
5 Likes
Thank you. Hopefully soon users will be able to take their crypto off exchanges privately then trade on uniswap.
4 Likes
Why am I quoted here. I wasn’t saying the Provide system is centralized operationally. I was referring to network (de)centralization.
2 Likes
There is no operational explanation for how the automation works in provide available I believe (if so please link me to the source code on a github)… and when withdraws take manual intervention sometimes (ive had this happen to me after waiting 4 days, I was told it needed manual intervention because it was a large size) i’d say that is centralized.
4 Likes
@Matt6412 it is briefly highlighted here Liquidity v.2) pretty sure @henry knows it as well 
@Karkoor you can do it, but the best way to anonymize your BTC is keep it on Incognito and as @Peter mentioned weathered work on native integration with Ledger.
5 Likes
@Jamie i did not post a screen shot
@andrey yes I have seen the graphic made that shows the mechanics but was looking for source code thats all. Code is law and info graphics do not prove anything. (Not saying that isn’t what is happening but this is an open source project so I’d think aspects that involve user funds should be open sourced)
3 Likes
clicked the wrong reply button, my bad
2 Likes
You are using my words to “prove” it is centralized, which seems to place my words out of context. Can you remove the screenshot? Thanks.
2 Likes
I’m sorry, I deleted it already. But in any case, your words were really interesting. I’ve never thought about the implication that provide has to the decentralization of the network.
5 Likes
Hopefully we’ll have the ledger compatible incognito wallet soon, but until then I’m worried about keeping my crypto on hot wallets for long periods.
Now will trades be private if someone sends Eth from a ledger to the incognito wallet, then uses the eth to trade privately on incognito uniswap, then transfers the tokens that were traded on there to a newly made ledger ethereum account (not the same ledger ethereum account address that was used to send the initial Eth to the incognito wallet)?
3 Likes
I find it interesting to see that people (in general) emphasize on the need for every aspect of the project to be decentralized and at the same time unstake their nodes to profit from the Provide feature which increases centralization.
That also goes for non team related people who run multiple nodes btw. Too many nodes in one pair of hands just doesn’t spell decentralized.
Don’t get me wrong, I want the system to be as decentralized as possible too, but all in good time. It is better to build a stable system in a slow way, than to move quickly and realize things get out of sync. Incognito is a long term project.
For those who think it is too risky to participate, follow along and jump in when your requirements are met. For those who have faith, enjoy the ride.
13 Likes
I would go even further and say to many coins in one hand are a huge problem for real decentralization. This is why I still think that the way we deal with the pNodes is terrible. Having nodes in different locations owned by different people, is great in a proof-of-work system but not in case in proof-of-stake. Who ever controls the coins controls the network. So right now people who run pNodes with funded stake are not true independent validators as the core team controls the funds and can change the rules for the funding whenever they want.
Moreover this keeps the price for PRV down, which on long term might lead to investors leaving for projects with higher returns. Which is a real problem, because a healthy network needs unfortunately money as well.
I totally agree with you, but I also see huge risk by upcoming laws. Especially no in 2021. So we should becomes truly decentralized as fast as possible otherwise the whole project might be in trouble.
8 Likes
I agree with both of you, but the reasoning behind people choosing “provide” with a 28% APY is simple as they earn nearly the same throughout one year as by running a node. But they earn it regularly and don’t have to invest in hardware or a vps plus the maintenance that comes with it. Let’s face it, for a difference of <5% you can earn more by running a node there is hardly any motivation for many people to do so.
The solution imho is that the Incognito team massively reduces the amount of nodes the run. I mean are 176 fixed validators really necessary when there are also the nodes they run through “provide” and the pNodes that are, at least initially, funded by them. I haven’t deep dived into the technical aspects of the project but that’s for sure something we would need to discuss if you really want to increase decentralization. This would give a higher return on invest for the node owners and shift the focus from provide to running a node. Or the other way around and reduce the AYR for providing PRV to e.g. 10% to make it less interesting.
Don’t get me wrong I am doing both myself (vNode + provide) but the later only until I got enough for the next vNode.
4 Likes
The spots hold by Incognito Nodes on the shards, and Nodes that are run by the team in relation to the Provide feature are different things. Not related.
2 Likes
I wonder if that is true, my pNodes are staked with own stake, and from what I read here and on Telegram that is the scenario most people are going for. Start with funded stake, switch to own stake as soon as possible.
The funding of pNodes fits perfectly in the scenario the pNode was developed for. If you want to get non-tech savvy, non-crypto people on board, you need to make it simple and affordable.
Having a pNode in every home around the world would be a dream come true.
7 Likes
Might be that people writing this on Telegram etc. but the economical incentive will pull the people in another direction.
Scenario: Node Tree has launched a new user sees it and comes to our website. He wants to invest 3.500 USD in Incognito. He does a little bit of research and finally wants to use a vNode or a pNode with funded stake. He does some basic math.
Option 1 = Invest 3500 USD in vNode
PRV Price = 2 USD
1750 PRV = For Each Node Needed
3500 USD = Costs to start one vNode
15 PRV = Average Earning per Week / per Node
-> Monthly earnings in average 64,8 PRV / 129,6 USD
Option 2 = Invest 3500 USD in pNode(s)*
399 USD = Price for one pNode
49 USD = Shipping costs for one pNode
448 USD = Costs for 1 pNode incl. shipping
3500 / 448 = I get theoretically 7.81 pNodes
15 PRV = Average Earning per Week / per Node
15 PRV * 7,81 = 117.15 Average earnings for his investment
-> Monthly total earnings in average 506,08 PRV / 1012,16 USD
-> Monthly earning in average for incognito core team (65% of total) 328,95 PRV / 657,90 USD
-> Monthly earnings in average for investor (35% of total) 177,13 PRV / 354,26 USD
For me personally its quite clear what people will do once they realize this difference. And the Node Tree, will make it appeal even more sexy 
Result? In My Opinion, if we do not change the general incentives for running a non self funded node it will cause a lot of selling pressure for PRV as it will attract people who only see pNodes as money printing machines without feeling connected to the project in general as they do not have any incentive to stake PRV. Instead the best they can do is sell the PRVs they earn immediately in order to buy more pNodes. Which leads to vicious circle of more and more PRV selling pressure.
How would I solve it? I think the idea of having pNodes with funded staking to enable everyone to join the network is great with the right tokenomics and approach for decentralization. Thus I think we need an approach like stkr.io where the funds for the funded stake comes from a decentralized pool and where everyone can use his own computer if he does not want to buy a pNode from Incognito and connect himself as a provider with access to the public available funds. Market principles in this case will make sure, that staking your own node is more profitable than using funded staking. In order to let the market work, we would have to shut down 28% provide “feature” as well.
Let me know what you think guys?
7 Likes
But you are ignoring the fact that in option 1 you own 3500$ worth of PRV from the beginning. While for option 2 those 3500$ are spent on hardware with limited resell value. So it takes around 15 months to break even to break even on the initial purchase…
4 Likes
Yes, I have seen you make these calculations before. I also agree with @scooter the fact that you still own your stake in calculation 1.
The current state of the project is not the final state. For now the pNodes are handled makes sense. I am pretty sure Provide will change a lot in the future and maybe even disappear.
4 Likes
Would be more or less 10 months and if PRV price goes up even quicker. But on the long term in my opinion this is a force which will bring the PRV down. Because it is a fundamental force as higher the PRV gets the more rewarding would it be to just sell PRV and buy pNodes instead of hodling PRV. Moreover if everyone uses only pNodes, 65% of all new minted coins will go to the core team, which will make a true decentralization impossible.
3 Likes