Buy crypto anonymously on the Incognito pDEX   

Reflections on the new App

#48

100% agree with what has been said by @SPAddict25 and @fredlee.

This is creating centralisation and disincentivizing community run Nodes (I fall into this category). I joined this project as I wanted to be part of a decentralised privacy network. I am not a technical person and I initially want to buy a few pNodes to support this project, but they stopped selling them at the time I joined.

So this lead me (with the help of many) to spin up my own vNode (I shared my learning here - Step-By-Step: How I built a Virtual Node on World's Smallest Mini PC )

This community has been super helpful and I have learnt a lot about Linux and run my own vNode. Receiving rewards for the effort of running has been great too. However, if I can just stake my PRV and earn 40% APY, I will be honest, that’s far easier, but if that mean it creates a more centralised privacy network - that I don’t like as it goes against why I joined this project in the first place.

To be honest I also fell in love with this project when they had the pNodes and were working on Node Tree - Need community help: find the right audience for the new Node Tree?

The pNode and Node Tree product would’ve been an amazing project differentiator as it would allow the common non-tech person a way to participate in blockchain tech from the comfort of their home. It would help grow the decentralised privacy network globally. I feel this would have given Incognito a superior edge over any other privacy network on the planet.

I had dreams of pNodes being plugged in to wall sockets all around the globe (even in remote countries) all contributing to upholding a core God-given human right to privacy. I know the project has long disbanded the idea of pNodes and Node Trees and I get that is for valid reasons and this rather longish comment is not harp on about it. But this topic does raise a very important question … How do we know if "decentralisation is still at the very core of this project? I feel we need more transparency around the deployment of these “Fixed Nodes”.

I questioned the the Fixed Nodes appraoch with @andrey back in July 2020 and here was his response back then…

Can you imagine if all the new “Fixed Nodes” are running out of a single public cloud provider (E.g. AWS ) and all of a sudden they decide to terminate the contract with Incognito Network? Would that cause the demise of this project?

@Jared, can you ask the core team whether they can provide some kind of map (like Theta Network’s - see below)

Theta-Network-Stats-2022-01-16
Theta-Network-Stats-2022-01-161235×807 102 KB

that shows rough locations all the: 1) Fixed Nodes, 2) pNodes and 3) vNodes that are located around the globe so we get a sense of centralisation/decentralisation of the incognito network?

I presume they’d have this already as they’d get location data from IP addresses from nodes.

5 Likes
#49

The map would be excellent addition indeed!

#50

Fixed node reduction is on the roadmap for February and May. This will significantly reduce the centralization aspect of the network.

We couldn’t agree more! The dev team originally created the pNode for this very reason. Unforentualy pNode ended up dying for two reasons. 1) Supply change issues caused by Covid. 2) Household internet and power are intermittent and can cause node downtime that users are not prepared to monitor or fix with a plug-n-play device.

pNode’s send diagnostic information (SSD used space, docker container status, etc.) but do not send personally identifiable information like an IP address. This map would have to be user-contributed and therefore would not show a full and accurate map.

1 Like
#51

Thanks for the answers @Jared you are an amazing community manager.

As for below… (feel free to spin this off to a new thread is you feel this is off topic)

How does the core team plan on doing this without compromising the security of the network?

Here’s a thought experiment. Let’s say in order to maintain the same level of security there must be the same number of nodes in operation (I am assuming there are 2 types of nodes: 1) Fixed, and 2) Non-Fixed (Community run vNodes + existing pNodes).

Hence, if the core team will be reducing the number of Fixed Nodes, hence if it’s a zero sum game, this means someone else will have to deploy more Non-Fixed “community” nodes, is that an correct assumption?

So, if that is the case, why don’t the Core Team provide more “Rewards” to existing Community Node operators, this will give them the ability to earn more PRV, hence reach the 1750 PRV minimum faster so they can be incentivised to deploy more vNodes sooner rather than later.

What would the core team think about this idea?

2 Likes
#52

I have a vested interest being a validator :rofl::rofl::rofl: increased rewards for community nodes, yes please.

@Jared my understanding was that the fixed nodes aren’t being reduced, merely community slots are increasing which is not the same thing. Can’t remember where it was stated but @alias mentioned that. I think the quote was something about either reducing fixed nodes by 7 or increasing community slots by 18. @fredlee will be able to correct me.

2 Likes
#53

Unfortunately, we can’t increase the node rewards as this has already been predetermined to make PRV fully mined after 40 years.

Regarding fixed nodes, fixed node reduction, community slot increasing please reference this post and thread:

3 Likes
#54

Yeah @SPAddict25 you’re correct. I’ve asked about it here but either the @Support team is fed up with me or I’m asking too hard questions cause I’m not getting any answers anymore. :sweat_smile:

The post you’re referring to mentions that at year 1 the block reward is distributed 10% DAO and 90% validators. Are we still waiting for year 1? :wink: For the past couple of years the Incognito team have collected at a minimum 66% of all block rewards. According to the original plan and block reward halving, we’re now on year 3, where the DAO should only collect 8%.

Doing some rough calculations, the Incognito team over the first two years collected a total of 5M + (8.7M + 7.9M) * 2/3 = 16M PRV. Out of transparency and for the sake of community trust, is there a public ledger where we can see exactly how much is held and what the rest has been used for?

2 Likes
#55

I’m still confused on the fixed nodes and the increase in slots.

Hence a couple queries.

The fixed nodes, do they both propose blocks and validate as it currently stands?

“When the 22 fixed nodes don’t hold 2/3 slots in a committee, they play a role as block proposers. They propose blocks and community nodes validate. This reduces the need for a large number of fixed nodes to guarantee fault tolerance for the block proposing process, and block validation duties can be released to the community.”

Does the increase in community slots also increase the proportion of rewards to community nodes (thereby increasing yield) because the fixed nodes move to being only a block proposal role?

1 Like
#56

hey we saw your posts. currently collecting your questions and putting together some concrete details so we can address them better. sorry, it’s been a particularly busy last couple of days!

2 Likes
#57

Ok, well here’s another thought experiment …
If the ultimate aim is more de-centralisation, this would mean more community run non-fixed nodes, right?

If that’s the case, would the core team be open to halving the amount required to be locked away to run a vNode from 1,750 to 875 PRV?

By doing so, this would lower the bar of entry for new folks to the project and would also allow existing node operators to run twice as many nodes for the same locked capital. It wouldn’t have to be a permanent change, you could run it as a limit time marketing campaign for 3 months then revert back to 1,750 PRV.

Btw, I’d like to understand what is the rationale behind setting the locked amount to 1,750 PRV for running a vNode?

Thoughts anyone?

1 Like
#58

It really depends on if you think 1750 prv is really that much of a hurdle to begin with.

Maybe a side point but my thoughts are is that the biggest thing right now that will drive value is building as many bridges as they can and attracting as much liquidity as possible. Especially because the pdex has only just been revised. Having circa 2.5m liquidity within the app is start up phase. Got to expand that significantly.

Validating already is very profitable as it stands and with a way lower barrier than it was only 6 to 8 months ago. Just a lot people aren’t aware of of how good being a validator is outside those that follow the project closely, especially after the pnode production ceased. Finally validators may elect to reinvest in nodes while the yield is very high. Doing so doesn’t necessarily drive trading activity and usage of the app.

I know the original topic was more centred on decentralization and privacy infrastructure can be marketed to get people drawn into the ecosystem.

I guess I’m pointing out that value creation i.e growth may be a more important issue to tackle.

More generally decentralization is important but growth can be the mechanism that gets the project there. Decentralization relies on a thriving community with several contributors. It’s currently too small IMO to really be self sustaining. A bit of a side track, my son is depriving me of some much needed zzz

3 Likes
#59

Not a bad idea to lower the threshold as a kind of promotional, limited time offer kind of thing to get node ownership up.
Half might be extreme. But even down to 1,250 would be significant and drive ownership up.

#60

Yikes! In my personal opinion, the only way to do that would be to go through a “hard fork” like situation. The 1750 PRV was something set in stone from the beginning of Incognito’s creation. To change that now (even for a short duration for promotion reasons) would be like the team saying instead of the originally decided hard cap of 100M PRV we decided to raise that to 150M PRV. This would devalue PRV and have everlasting negative impacts on Incognito as a whole.

The top 10 “masternodes” or nodes by price are all well above the 1750 PRV amount (cost to run 1 node on right-hand column):

2022-01-18 15_39_26-MasterNodes.Online - Brave
Side note - Looks like Incognito is not listed on that site. Going to have the growth team work on getting Incognito listed there.

If we sort the list based on the number of nodes, then Incognito’s network is actually #18 on the list. In my opinion, we are doing very well with how many nodes we currently have in our network.

I agree. Lowering the amount of PRV needed to run a node (even for a small-time period) would hurt all the node operators who required 1750 PRV to stake due to having to compete with more nodes for earnings.

This would cause a horrible “run on the bank”. Users would be un-staking in mass to re-stake more nodes.

3 Likes
#61

Good points raised.

I think perhaps maybe one of the bigger considerations as part of the Growth plan is revitalising the marketing of the validator function under the pillar of Privacy Infrastructure. People outside of the forum really don’t understand how easy it is to become a validator and the support offered to run your own vnode. I can attest to this as I am a complete noob - I didn’t know what docker even was let alone never ever had to run powershell on a windows comp for anything.

If you say to people hey you can get an awesome yield of X by being one, the feedback tends to be one of immediate cynicism without understanding what drives profitability are driven by the emission curve, no. of active nodes, prv price, server costs etc.

2 Likes
#62

@SPAddict25,

That is a good idea. We recently made it possible to set-up a vNode in 1 line of code. This significantly lowers the bar of entry for new users.

I can tweet about the eaze of setting up and running an Incognito node and the expected ROI.

3 Likes
#63

Haha, when I read this I can totally relate to it :smiley:

I was in a similar position and never installed Ubuntu until delving into this project. Without the help of many in this community forum I would not have been able to do the following: Step-By-Step: How I built a Virtual Node on World's Smallest Mini PC

@Jared - I think it would be awesome if you can Tweet out just how easy it is to setup and run a vNode and also show the potential returns. I’m not on Twitter or Facebook so I can’t really assist in spreading the word. However, I do try to promote my post showcasing how a Linux newbie (like me) can run a vNode by sharing my post (see link above) on this forum wherever I can in the hope it gets the attention of new visitors to the forum.

I strongly feel that we need more growth in vNodes to improve decentralization.

4 Likes
#64

Some feedback on the New App for the Dev Team.

  1. Please allows us to manually “Check for Updates” from within the app.
    When I leave the app open on my phone, I’m not always sure I’m running the latest version. It’s only when things stop working or my wallet screen times out, then I shut down the app and re-open it to see the “Updating app” message appear.
    Suggestion: Under the “More” --> “Settings” area in the app, have a button above the “Version Number” right at the bottom that allows us to “Check for updates”.

  2. Provide an easy way to submit Feedback / Bugs inside the app
    Suggestion: Under the “More” section in the app, provide an icon option for “Provide Feedback / Bugs” that links to a very simple form within the app that allow users to submit feedback and bugs. this information is emailed to the Incognito Core Dev/UX team.

4 Likes
#65

Your post was actually an inspiration for me when I started, thank you for that.

My first node was setup on a virtual server, but after reading your post, I decided to throw it away and put vNodes on an old Mac mini I had. Funny thing is that many many nodes later, second hand Mac mini from 2012 is still my choice of hardware. :relaxed:

3 Likes
#66

Hey @SPAddict25, @Linnovations and anybody else who were curious about Benefits of increasing committee size, please have a look at the topic, we collected questions along with their answers in a topic for easier reference, thanks.

@Mike_Despo wallet name’s font size was decreased to see more characters, it’s not perfect but easier to see now. Texts for bottom tabs also showed. We are still working app performance, FYI.

7 Likes
#67

The text for the bottom tabs looks great. Way easier to navigate now, especially for new guys. There’s also enough characters now in the wallet names that I can differentiate between each of my wallets when opened.

Thanks for the changes!

3 Likes