Profile of vans163 in Optimism

Posts by vans163

• [DRAFT][GF: Phase 1 Proposal Cycle 7] GPUX by vans163 - No Role
  Posted on: Oct. 4, 2022, 12:12 a.m.
  Content: About: IPFS /+ Filecoin → its not usable for files larger than a jpg. Even serving video is not possible at scale, most AI models are as large as a 4 k HDR video file ( 4 - 5 GB). 1 Video file starts using 12 CPU cores at 100 % when serving it off the gateway. Chia → It does nothing useful ICP → No GPU support + you need to write code in a special language, not many people want to rewrite code. So your adoption plummets fast. Flux → They put the token first and made a complex system, where you need to like stake coins to become a host. Its way too complex and nonsensical, why do I need to buy your token to PROVIDE for your network, it should be the other way around. Buying the token should allow me to RECEIVE. Being a PROVIDEr should be free as I am reinforcing+decentralizing the network AKA giving FLUX more value. Very backwards. I reciprocate and love the huge interest, keeps me motivated to keep building! Yes, I saw that USDC is going to go native on OP, that is pretty big I think we will use that as we were waiting for a major stablecoin to appear+be fully maintained on OP. I am checking those papers out, Ofelimos I read already.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0
  Likers: thedoctor
  No replies yet.
• [DRAFT][GF: Phase 1 Proposal Cycle 7] GPUX by vans163 - No Role
  Posted on: Oct. 3, 2022, 8:12 p.m.
  Content: About: IPFS /+ Filecoin → its not usable for files larger than a jpg. Even serving video is not possible at scale, most AI models are as large as a 4 k HDR video file ( 4 - 5 GB). 1 Video file starts using 12 CPU cores at 100 % when serving it off the gateway. Chia → It does nothing useful ICP → No GPU support + you need to write code in a special language, not many people want to rewrite code. So your adoption plummets fast. Flux → They put the token first and made a complex system, where you need to like stake coins to become a host. Its way too complex and nonsensical, why do I need to buy your token to PROVIDE for your network, it should be the other way around. Buying the token should allow me to RECEIVE. Being a PROVIDEr should be free as I am reinforcing+decentralizing the network AKA giving FLUX more value. Very backwards. I reciprocate and love the huge interest, keeps me motivated to keep building! Yes, I saw that USDC is going to go native on OP, that is pretty big I think we will use that as we were waiting for a major stablecoin to appear+be fully maintained on OP. I am checking those papers out, Ofelimos I read already.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0
  Likers: TheDoctor
  No replies yet.
• [DRAFT][GF: Phase 1 Proposal Cycle 7] GPUX by vans163 - No Role
  Posted on: Oct. 3, 2022, 1:03 a.m.
  Content: The points of failure would be similar to IPFS, BGP can go down, DNS can go down, node operators network can go down, nodes will be unreachable in that case. When saying central point of failure I meant there is no central backend (openstack, kubes, proxmox, gcp, aws, etc) tied to all the nodes (that spins up/down nodes, calculates billing or does other things). About PoUW, I was not aware but I quickly read up a bit about it, as a first-timer hearing about it I would ask : (most important) How is work verified to be useful. If its validated somehow deterministically, decimal operations like AI weights+biases will not verify correctly in 100 % of cases depending on underlying hardware/software (and how it handles decimal ops). Our approach is to proof usefulness of work by reputation, similar to why you use AWS or Hetzner or NicheCompanyB, because you found their service very good or were recommended (or got 150 k$ credits and couldn’t say no :P). Cant we bring this reputation on-chain where community governs the node operators autonomously, advertise a RTX 3090 but train the model at the speed of a RTX 3060 , reputation goes down (or simply does not go up). There are multiple approaches to this and I have not read any relevant material tackling it yet (fisherpeople, arbiters, point scoring, etc). About the “central authority verifying the amount of computing power any node is contributing (at first)”, the BDFL path is the least pain so yes. There does need to be an authority issuing some kind of reputation at least /w possible certification ( 100 % renewable energy mix, Tier 4 DataCenter, etc). With a DAO running that can be the DAO but at the early BDFL stage of a project that would most likely be GPUX itself to bootstrap the ecosystem. (one approach, the scoring approach) The authority is not really verifying that your RTX 3090 does the work a RTX 3090 should do, its simply giving you reputation as you receive payments and potentially verifying your physical location Tier 4 DC or say carbon mix (example nodes hosted with hetzner will be certified 100 % renewable https://www.hetzner.com/assets/Uploads/Oomi-sertifikaatti-tuuli+vesi-Hetzner- 2022 -eng.pdf). We can enforce this by the organization hosting the nodes (mom-n-pop, basement lab, Hetzner, etc) signing their nodes with their pubkey, then we assign the certifications to the organization. Then its just a simply lookup to get the rep+assigned credentials. (another approach the fisher/arbiter) This approach would indeed perhaps have a team of crafty individuals running sneaky jobs that prop for caps of the host, if the host is not providing service as advertised they can start arbitration vs the host until the quality is returns to standard. For their work they get a slash of the hosts earnings for example. But this system would be much more complex.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 1
  Likers: thedoctor
  Replies:

  • TheDoctor: vans163: hy you use AWS or Hetzner or Thank you so much for your explanation. I love this kind of idea, especially after the merge. In my opinion, there is no future in keeping wasting GPU mining in a non-relevant PoW chain. So I started to look into Proof of Useful work but is highly technical and I need more time to read. Anyway, as far as I understand it is more plausible a reputation approach, and this could be centralized at first, and eventually a DAO could take control. Apart from the PoUW holy grail, creating a decentralized storage network or cloud computing is not easy or trivial: IPFS is the most popular p2p solution, but it has some issues when you need an upgradable BBDD. Storage: Filecoin using IPFS (interesting but with limited use) or Chia creating a proof of space system (I didn’t like this approach) Cloud Computing and more similar to this project: https://internetcomputer.org/ → They sold a great number of tokens and investors felt scammed. https://fluxwhitepaper.app.runonflux.io/ → Need to learn more about it To sum up. I love this project, so much potential. Tech is complicated, but my main concern is how to create trust. We have already seen the problem of inventing a tokenomic giving ilusion of decentralisation and ending up as a piramide scam, I need to hear about a different aproach. I like that you are thinking in a stable con for payment, there’s no need for a token there and most projects mix concepts. I look forward to hearing from this poject and other community feedback Best wishes PD: Some papers about proof of useful work: PubMed Central (PMC) Coin.AI: A Proof-of-Useful-Work Scheme for Blockchain-Based Distributed Deep... One decade ago, Bitcoin was introduced, becoming the first cryptocurrency and establishing the concept of “blockchain” as a distributed ledger. As of today, there are many different implementations of cryptocurrencies working over a blockchain, ... https://iohk.io/en/blog/posts/2022/08/16/introducing-ofelimos-a-proof-of-useful-work-consensus-protocol/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2096720922000306
• [DRAFT][GF: Phase 1 Proposal Cycle 7] GPUX by vans163 - No Role
  Posted on: Oct. 2, 2022, 9:03 p.m.
  Content: The points of failure would be similar to IPFS, BGP can go down, DNS can go down, node operators network can go down, nodes will be unreachable in that case. When saying central point of failure I meant there is no central backend (openstack, kubes, proxmox, gcp, aws, etc) tied to all the nodes (that spins up/down nodes, calculates billing or does other things). About PoUW, I was not aware but I quickly read up a bit about it, as a first-timer hearing about it I would ask : (most important) How is work verified to be useful. If its validated somehow deterministically, decimal operations like AI weights+biases will not verify correctly in 100 % of cases depending on underlying hardware/software (and how it handles decimal ops). Our approach is to proof usefulness of work by reputation, similar to why you use AWS or Hetzner or NicheCompanyB, because you found their service very good or were recommended (or got 150 k$ credits and couldn’t say no :P). Cant we bring this reputation on-chain where community governs the node operators autonomously, advertise a RTX 3090 but train the model at the speed of a RTX 3060 , reputation goes down (or simply does not go up). There are multiple approaches to this and I have not read any relevant material tackling it yet (fisherpeople, arbiters, point scoring, etc). About the “central authority verifying the amount of computing power any node is contributing (at first)”, the BDFL path is the least pain so yes. There does need to be an authority issuing some kind of reputation at least /w possible certification ( 100 % renewable energy mix, Tier 4 DataCenter, etc). With a DAO running that can be the DAO but at the early BDFL stage of a project that would most likely be GPUX itself to bootstrap the ecosystem. (one approach, the scoring approach) The authority is not really verifying that your RTX 3090 does the work a RTX 3090 should do, its simply giving you reputation as you receive payments and potentially verifying your physical location Tier 4 DC or say carbon mix (example nodes hosted with hetzner will be certified 100 % renewable https://www.hetzner.com/assets/Uploads/Oomi-sertifikaatti-tuuli+vesi-Hetzner- 2022 -eng.pdf). We can enforce this by the organization hosting the nodes (mom-n-pop, basement lab, Hetzner, etc) signing their nodes with their pubkey, then we assign the certifications to the organization. Then its just a simply lookup to get the rep+assigned credentials. (another approach the fisher/arbiter) This approach would indeed perhaps have a team of crafty individuals running sneaky jobs that prop for caps of the host, if the host is not providing service as advertised they can start arbitration vs the host until the quality is returns to standard. For their work they get a slash of the hosts earnings for example. But this system would be much more complex.
  Likes: 1 Replies: 1
  Likers: TheDoctor
  Replies:

  • TheDoctor: vans163: hy you use AWS or Hetzner or Thank you so much for your explanation. I love this kind of idea, especially after the merge. In my opinion, there is no future in keeping wasting GPU mining in a non-relevant PoW chain. So I started to look into Proof of Useful work but is highly technical and I need more time to read. Anyway, as far as I understand it is more plausible a reputation approach, and this could be centralized at first, and eventually a DAO could take control. Apart from the PoUW holy grail, creating a decentralized storage network or cloud computing is not easy or trivial: IPFS is the most popular p2p solution, but it has some issues when you need an upgradable BBDD. Storage: Filecoin using IPFS (interesting but with limited use) or Chia creating a proof of space system (I didn’t like this approach) Cloud Computing and more similar to this project: https://internetcomputer.org/ → They sold a great number of tokens and investors felt scammed. https://fluxwhitepaper.app.runonflux.io/ → Need to learn more about it To sum up. I love this project, so much potential. Tech is complicated, but my main concern is how to create trust. We have already seen the problem of inventing a tokenomic giving ilusion of decentralisation and ending up as a piramide scam, I need to hear about a different aproach. I like that you are thinking in a stable con for payment, there’s no need for a token there and most projects mix concepts. I look forward to hearing from this poject and other community feedback Best wishes PD: Some papers about proof of useful work: PubMed Central (PMC) Coin.AI: A Proof-of-Useful-Work Scheme for Blockchain-Based Distributed Deep... One decade ago, Bitcoin was introduced, becoming the first cryptocurrency and establishing the concept of “blockchain” as a distributed ledger. As of today, there are many different implementations of cryptocurrencies working over a blockchain, ... https://iohk.io/en/blog/posts/2022/08/16/introducing-ofelimos-a-proof-of-useful-work-consensus-protocol/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2096720922000306
• [DRAFT][GF: Phase 1 Proposal Cycle 7] GPUX by vans163 - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 29, 2022, 8:26 p.m.
  Content: Proposal is up as a thread in #gov-temp-check!
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• [DRAFT][GF: Phase 1 Proposal Cycle 7] GPUX by vans163 - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 29, 2022, 4:26 p.m.
  Content: Proposal is up as a thread in #gov-temp-check!
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• [DRAFT][GF: Phase 1 Proposal Cycle 7] GPUX by vans163 - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 21, 2022, 9:02 p.m.
  Content: Got it, should I start looking for the 0 . 5 % voting power to move out of “Review” now?
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• [DRAFT][GF: Phase 1 Proposal Cycle 7] GPUX by vans163 - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 21, 2022, 8:23 p.m.
  Content: I have updated this proposal to the new template. Is there anything else I need to do to be considered for voting in the next cycle? I think there might be a need to put up the proposal for voting?
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• [DRAFT][GF: Phase 1 Proposal Cycle 7] GPUX by vans163 - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 21, 2022, 5:02 p.m.
  Content: Got it, should I start looking for the 0 . 5 % voting power to move out of “Review” now?
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• [DRAFT][GF: Phase 1 Proposal Cycle 7] GPUX by vans163 - No Role
  Posted on: Sept. 21, 2022, 4:23 p.m.
  Content: I have updated this proposal to the new template. Is there anything else I need to do to be considered for voting in the next cycle? I think there might be a need to put up the proposal for voting?
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.