We would love to have you participate at our Public AMA Call about the Iris Hard Fork Vote with the æternity team (@uwiger, @dimitar.chain, @gorbak25, @radrow.chain, …). The developers will be there to resolve all your technical questions about the proposed protocol upgrade as well as briefly explain what the Iris Hard Fork is about and why the upgrade is absolutely necessary.
Please post all your questions here or on Telegram. We will collect them and answer each of them in the open Q&A session where all of you are very welcome to participate! Just write your questions in the chat of the meeting room and the moderator will pose them for you.
Please make sure to be there and raise your voice about the Iris Hard Fork!
A new public transparency calls initiative has been raised for constructive community feedback and debates about new movements & updates in the æternity æcosystem. This Public Iris AMA will be the first one. You are all invited to suggest topics for discussions. A community vote on topics will be used in order to choose the topic covered in the next episode. Also general development updates from the æternity team will be covered in the call series. All calls can be joined by the public. We will announce more details about the upcoming community hangouts, so stay tuned for more!
Thank you @crypto_user for pointing to the error message. The link is working when the call session has started. Unfortunately it is not showing the correct information instead of error code.
As I am still struggling with the topic of the AENS pointers => is it possible (and desired) to have pointers with arbitrary keys or should it only be possible to set pointers for the known objects (accounts, channels, contracts, oracles)?
What do you think are the most impactful changes in Iris and why?
With ZK capabalities becoming reality do you think state channels will still be a relevant feature? Especially as we haven’t adoption yet and state channels don’t seem to be usable on mobile devices (yet). Many Ethereum devs bet on ZK Rollups to solve scalability issues.
Personally I love to see the PayingForTx becoming ready to use
From a long-term perspective, I personally suggest not to learn Ethereum, it is best to keep only the POS blockchain and give up POW.
Please note that the point I emphasize here is that the team should focus on the POS blockchain after the transfer of pos, in order to force the exchange to replace the POW tokens with pos tokens. Instead of going and relisting the pos token as a new token.
Simply put, the team must stop supporting the POW blockchain before the exchange completes the token replacement to achieve the purpose of mandatory token replacement. Unless the team has the ability to allow all exchanges to support the new token.
As long as this is completed, whether the pow blockchain will continue to exist because of one or two miners is not important.
What needs to be explained is that retaining the POW blockchain is a community behavior, and no one can stop it. Only if the mining machine supports it, it will live forever.
Note that hyperchains are not just PoS. Let’s call them by their name then.
But beside that I also see no point in maintaining old PoW after HCs kick in. Of course, we won’t prevent people from mining the old chain – this is blockchain, if they want to have aeternity classic, they shall have it. But with that approach their will lack focus of the core development team whose are the brain of the whole system – therefore I foresight a bad future for such movements.
HCs are much better option in the current situation. They solve the primary problem of not-so-popular chains – low mining power. Bonus points are that they also provide protection from classic attacks on PoS, so they are more reliable.
I actually think about this. If we want to make separate chain for Aeternity classic with PoW, then the new hyperchain need a new token block reward. How does foundation going to approach that problem?
Perhaps one to one token issuance to hyperchain or snapshot at specific height like when BCH fork from BTC. I’m not sure whether investors going to agree with this.
This is what I worry about. Investors will support it because they have an extra token. What I worry about is that the exchange does not support it, because the team never pays the exchange.
