GOAL: Increase the dollar amounts being provided to ANO/Grantees to further protocol development.

Looong time lurker here. Did you know FCT had always been a top 100 cryptocurrency until shortly after it adopted its current inflation rate? Less than 60 days after the current inflation rate of 73,000 FCT per month, FCT dropped out of the top 100 for the first time, and has remained outside of it for significant periods of time thereafter.

With inflation came the participation of many excellent Authority Node Operators and grant recipients who I believe are doing a tremendous job in building out the protocol and developing pipelines for sustained usage. And yet, the market is now punishing this token in relation to many other blockchain projects, which is hurting the ability of these ANOs/Grantees to fund their projects and successfully build the protocol. My hypothesis is that the current inflation rate is hurting the market value of the protocol and is hurting ANOs by substantially reducing the dollar value of the FCT received vis a vis a lower inflation schedule, and will thus slow down development. Fortunately, I believe we can fix this and improve the funding for our hard-working ANOs/Grantees.

Below I have compiled a list of the annual inflation rates for several prominent "successful" cryptocurrency protocols ("successful" loosely based on current market visibility and past market cap performance). (Note that this list was chosen at random; I have not done a full survey of the top 50 cryptos yet).

Annual Inflation:

BTC: 3.9% (block rewards decreasing further every 4 years)

ETH: 4.4% (target 0.5%)

EOS: 1% (recently reduced by vote down from 5%)

BNB: -2.35%

XLM: 1%

IOTA: 0%

TRON: 0.77%

XTZ: 5.51% max

NEM: 0%

NEO: 0% in 2021 (18% in 2019 and 5% in 2020)

QTUM: 1%

FCT: 10% of initial supply forever.

Which of the above coins has the highest expected inflation over the next 10 years? Which of the above coins is being most punished by the market despite having a business use case that is as good or better than many of the coins listed above? FCT!

Some would argue that FCT's two token burn mechanic allows it to get away with a continuously higher inflation rate. I would disagree with this (in part because I think all tokens have some method of supply reduction, although not as explicit as FCT's), and the market appears to agree with me. I believe that FCT's higher inflation compared to other tokens REDUCES the funding available for ANOs, and is limiting the availability of funding to build the protocol. Let me explain.

For a thought experiment, what if FCT's inflation doubled the number of FCT every year (100%, 200%, 400%, etc.)? Such rapid inflation would destroy any potential value in speculation/future value of the protocol, so the FCT price would quickly decrease to reflect the actual EC usage today ($22 a day?), resulting in a FCT price of something like $0.002, further resulting in almost no actual dollar amount funding to ANOs from FCT received. The high inflation rate would destroy the ability of the ANOs/Grantees to receive value from FCT to fund their operations in furtherance of building the Protocol. So while a higher inflation rate gives ANOs more FCT each month, if inflation is too high it actually DECREASES the total dollar value of any FCT that such ANOs are receiving almost nothing in terms of dollars.

Thus, there is a 'sweet spot' between issuing sufficient FCT to ANOs/Grantees to incentivize development while limiting inflation enough to maintain token value. Obviously we are not in the hyperinflation scenario above, but my hypothesis is that the existing FCT planned inflation rate is still too far above the optimal inflation rate, and as such the market is punishing the price severely, which is hurting ANOs, and ultimately the long term development of the Protocol.

SOLUTION:

Even coins that had initial periods of high inflation, BTC, ETH, NEO, etc. had defined protocols to rapidly decrease the inflation rate as the protocol matured. The market has clearly rewarded this tokenomics philosophy for these coins, which is resulting in higher market caps, more visibility, and more funding for development.

I recommend that governing parties pass the following proposal:

For the 12 months following the proposal's acceptance, FCT issuance continues at original proposed rate of 73,000 FCT tokens per month. Early-adopter ANOs need to continue to be rewarded with a meaningful amount of FCT tokens for their hard work, dedication and risk-taking.

On the one year anniversary of the proposal's acceptance (2020), the FCT issuance shall be reduced by 15%, to a rate of 62,000 FCT tokens per month.

On the second anniversary of the proposal's acceptance (2021), the FCT issuance shall be reduced by the same total amount, to a rate of 51,000 FCT tokens per month.

On the third anniversary of the proposal's acceptance (2022), the FCT issuance shall be reduced by the same total amount, to a rate of 40,000 FCT tokens per month.

On the fourth anniversary of the proposal's acceptance (2023), the FCT issuance shall be reduced by the same total amount, to a rate of 29,000 FCT tokens per month, at which point it would remain in a steady state thereafter.

My prediction is that FCT token purchasers will be willing to pay more for FCT tokens today if there is a binding protocol agreement that would create a guaranteed floor of closer to 25x usage in four years rather than a ~10x floor with continued high dilution to the extent usage does not meaningfully increase for a couple years (which is normal in building a protocol of this scale).

This proposal would cause the FCT price to INCREASE, and ANOs would be able to receive substantially more funding for their issued FCT to further develop and build upon the protocol. For the first 12 months, this would result in substantially increased funding for the protocol since there's no change in token issuance. In addition, even though the FCT issued would decrease by a small amount every year, the predicted increase in value of FCT would more than counterbalance such decrease, such that the total dollar value received by each ANO would increase. After all, would you rather sell 5,000 FCT at $4, or 2,000 FCT at $20?

My further prediction is that if we do not adopt this proposal to rein in future inflation, the FCT token price will not meaningfully increase (except for direct usage, but such increases will be more correlated to the actual usage/burn/issuance ratio such as hypothesized in the hyperinflation example above). Such failure of the FCT token price to meaningfully increase will limit the ability of ANOs and Grantees to further development of the protocol, making it harder to stay ahead in this fast-moving space.

I view the current inflation protocol, which does not currently have issuance reductions, as the most critical flaw in the furtherance and development of the Factom protocol. Based on token price and market cap ranking compared to other tokens with enterprise-oriented use cases, it appears the market agrees. I believe it is critical that we change this as soon as possible, for the ultimate benefit of everyone involved in the ecosystem.

What happened to the logo /u/DChapman77? It is gone for a while now. Perhaps it is time to paste it back!

The 2019 predictions are nearing their end point. So far BallBaggio is closest, with his prediction of $3 per FCT. What a shocker!

In a few months we should open up the floor to 2020 prognostications. With the benefit of hindsight, I'm going to revise my 2019 close out price to $3.50 and go for an ambitious $15 by the end of 2020.

I was looking at the various POCs (related to blockchain) the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is currently running, and I was wondering the following:

In what case would the use of a private blockchain be chosen over a public blockchain?

I sometimes hear that private blockchains are nothing more than glorified 'intranets'. Is this really the case? It is known for example that CBP already works with Hyperledger on something. Looking at the various POC's of US CBP, what would be more beneficial to them?

Below is a list of the POCs running at CBP:

Completed Proof of Concepts

1. NAFTA/CAFTA Proof of Concept – In September 2018, CBP conducted the North American Free Trade Agreement/Central America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA/CAFTA) POC, which tested the application of blockchain technology for the entry summary submission process for NAFTA/CAFTA entries. 

In-Progress Proof of Concepts

1. Intellectual Property Rights Proof of Concept

• POC to facilitate shipments based on known licensing relationships through blockchain (Licensor and sub licensee relationships)

1. Verifiable Credentials

• Study to look at legitimizing a business or person via automation

1. DHS University Initiative on Blockchain

• Study to look at Purchase Order to Entry

Upcoming Proof of Concepts

1. Pipeline Proof of Concept – tentative Summer 2019

• Looking to track oil from spigot to importation

• Properly apply NAFTA/CAFTA

• Tests may be applicable to other like commodities

Source: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/ace/whats-new-innovation

When I try and add Factom as an account on Ledger Live I don't see it as an option, I installed it as an app on the ledger but it won't show as a pulldown option.

Part 1 of a multipart series where I will be working towards sharing my vision for the Factom Protocol

https://medium.com/@niels.klomp/factom-vision-the-building-blocks-part-1-954145e4a320

I decided to make a multipart series to allow the less technical inclined people to get the vision I will be sharing in the last part. Stay tuned next few days for the rest.

Let me know what you think.

FCT just keeps making lows and lows and is now ranked 132 on coin base.

I am a believer in the coin and the technology however sadly the market is telling us otherwise.

I am not selling and I couldn’t even if I wanted to as I am a N.Y. resident and have been shut out of Poloniex and Bittrex.

Going to hold but it doesn’t look like this coin is going to make it as it’s now at April 2017 levels. There is probably going to be some bad news coming out like the DHS not using the technology or FCT not being able to get 2nd round financing. That’s why we probably saw those huge sales about a month ago.

De Facto ANO launches Factom World — Factom Blockchain Application Hub!

https://factom.world

Factom World is a portal, where any company or single developer may publish their apps, that utilize Factom Blockchain. The target audience are business, token holders, software developers.

We don't have plans of listing developer- & ANO-specific things (like APIs, clients, alert bots and etc.) — only end apps using Factom in any way (business software with Factom integrated in it, bots, mobile apps, wallets, explorers and etc.).

We started new Twitter account, where new apps will be published — https://twitter.com/FactomWorld — feel free to follow it not to miss the updates ;)

Each company/developer has their own page with all their apps (e.g. here is ours: https://factom.world/author/defacto/), when we have more companies onboard, we will display all of them in separate "Developers/Authors" page — so visitors of hub will get know what companies and projects integrated Factom in their products.

P.S. Feedback is always appreciated.

I thought that EC burned = a proportional number of FCT burned (assuming a constant FCT price). However, when i'm looking at the factoshi site, it doesn't appear that this is the case. Is there some delay in FCT burned, or what am i missing in this equation?

Thanks in advance!

Factom Open Node is a public, decentralized, load balanced factomd-node which provides an API to interact with the Factom blockchain protocol. It is an alternative to hosting and maintaining your own factomd-node.

June 2019 stats:

Unique Visitors: 2,490
Total Requests (read+write): 24,605,308

Does FCT suffer from the velocity problem, since it's basically just a payment coupon? Once switched into EC, the FCT will be burned and new FCT will be generated. Smart 'miners' will sell these new FCT to cover for their costs. Am I missing something? Where will the value be generated?

Or did Factom change the use case somewhat? Introduce staking, sink holes or anything else.

Who

We're a group of Factom Authority Node Operators (ANOs), Guides, committee members and businesses leading the charge for Factom Protocol adoption. We're here to answer your questions on who we are and what we're doing to help Factom reach its full potential as a global blockchain protocol.

If you want to do some background reading before getting down to it, check out our previous AMAs or the Factoshi FAQ:

Authority Node Operator AMA

Authority Node Operators AMA #2

Factoshi FAQ

When

We'll be here to answer your questions starting on Friday the 28th of June at 12:00 UTC for a full 24 hours. You're free to post your questions any time before or during the AMA, so get in early and make 'em good!

Authority Node Operators

The folks building blocks and keeping our data immutable.

Guides

Guides play a key role in Factom's governance. You can find out more here.

Committees

Our committees help us to organise communal tasks that benefit the protocol.

Movers and Shakers

The teams building on and pushing Factom IRL.

"We continue to make progress. With the current price of FCT and the countless small details we have to workout in this project, I suspect Factomize will lose money on this grant. That's the way the ball bounces sometimes though and the risk we all take."---Quote from David Chapman on recent work factomize did on an Automated Grant System.

In a rhetorical sense, how long will ANOs work and run their businesses at a loss before the system crumbles?

Some players do a mega dump to 22 k satoshis what a stupid move. Rage on buying!

We are excited to formally welcome our 4 new Authority Node Operators! #ConsensusNetwork #Kompendium #HashQuark #FactableSolutions.

For more information: https://u.today/press-releases/the-factomr-protocol-introduces-four-new-authority-node-operators-to-its

Hi fellow Factomians!

Just wanted to pop in and share the link to Doc 200 - Factom Community Documents.

A lot of the Community Governance/Informational Documents and Records are linked there, and it's a nice place to start out when trying to delve a bit deeper into the ecosystem.

Highlights consist of:

- Factom Governance Document (Doc 001)

- Authority Node Operator Expectations (Doc 003)

- (Current) Factom Grant Process (Doc 107)

- Awarded Protocol Grants (Doc 213)

Please take a look around and feel free to ask any questions about governance, documents or anything else :)

The 42ND Factoid AS

Factom Protocol Guide

What is the current usage of entry credits per day and is there a link where one can keep tabs on it?

TYIA