Dear Ambrosus community,
The Ambrosus Team has gathered all questions posed on the Reddit thread into this overview. Thank you for your submissions and enjoy the read.
Question(s) submitted by: /u/RichDingo3654
▹Question 1: Please tell us about today’s challenges in the medium- to long-term plan for Ambrosus. I’m also interested in the technical part, but I would like to know more about business marketing. It is hard to say that it remains in shape compared to the technical aspect.
Contrary to popular belief, the adoption of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology moves slower than initially expected. As this is a shared challenge across the board at large, not only Ambrosus is experiencing this: it affects most crypto businesses.
At this point, Ambrosus has grown to become a reliable decentralized blockchain with a working crypto economy. That is really important for a number of reasons, but most notably: 1) The core technology underlying AMB-NET is sound. Native Amber can operate on the network, sidechains (being built) can work on top of AMB-NET, and the SDK’s, Hermes, and front-end apps can easily connect and communicate with the network.
On the level of business marketing the team has had to pivot multiple times based on market feedback: Enterprises — especially very large ones — are extremely slow when it comes to investing in new technologies. Many are watching and waiting to see where they can source as much value as possible for as little risk.
The main pivot the Ambrosus business development team has made, is to focus more on growing the Ecosystem, by trying to develop new protocols and use-cases on top of AMB-NET — for other founders, entrepreneurs and developers — that have the potential to offer a wider range of blockchain-based services. This is evident right now, in the plans for Emerald Circuit, but also refers to 3 different Ecosystem projects that the team has been working on, on top of normal NDA based PoC’s and client demos.
▹Question 2: Are you thinking about returns for long-term holders? Ambrosus is a great project, but the market doesn’t appreciate it. It’s shown by the price, and it’s the node holders that are strongly affected. There is no need to set up a node based on the current reward base. AMB per bundle will increase, but it will not be in balance with holding risk. At the moment, the benefits of onboarding the node are completely zero, leaving only the risk. Is the team planning a return to the patient people who are at risk of keeping the node at risk? Will Ambrosus move forward without benefiting the owners who helped maintain the network? When there was a change from seniority onboard to permissions, we welcomed it. That’s because I believed in the need for network expansion. But the reality is that the bundle isn’t coming and the team is looking for more expansion for the unexpanded network.
Throughout the years, the Ambrosus crypto economy has been iterated upon and reassessed: one has to be able to adapt to the future’s uncertainties, which is exactly what had been taken into account upon the first drafts of the unique economics. This is and has always been a major strength of Ambrosus, and validators of the network have been taken into account in this very process.
Clearly, the Ambrosus crypto economy and its iterations have been designed with the node operators in mind. Right now, the goal is to foster sustainable development that will not only lead to activity on the network (and thus work for validators) but also long-term consistent growth that will increase over time.
Currently this is a challenging environment, but it should be very clear that from the Ambrosus team the focus and ultimate goal of development on AMB-NET is to create a robust, healthy, and lasting network owned and managed in a decentralized fashion. The most important advantage AMB-NET has right now, is that the network and the technological components involved in it (Hermes, SDK’s, AMB.to) are all fully functional and — compared to the costs of other networks — quite affordable as well. Now it is more a matter of recruiting talent, and innovative minds that can use this technology to create real world value — and while this is a process — there are 4 large scale projects ongoing that hold serious promise.
▹Question 3: Can I update past POC information? The team did a great continuation and said all POCs were in progress. However, current team activity is inferior to student dissertations when judged solely by publicly available information. Unapproved patents. Details of a medium- to long-term plan that existed in the past but no longer exist. And the team will not reveal how far the POC has progressed overall. From an objective point of view, all of the POCs that have been used up until now are frozen, and it seems desperate to find a new company. If it is ongoing, please publish your progress compared to the past. Everyone has doubts about the team about not having been updated for two years.
The hype cycle that happened in 2017–2018 has evidently come to an end: crypto projects across the board have adjusted their strategies and target markets. At the same time, partnering companies to this day remain very cautious, announcing even the slightest piece of information about their PoC’s. For most crypto companies, including Ambrosus, this effectively means PR initiatives can’t be launched, or blog posts end up collecting digital dust for waiting until a PoC has been successfully launched, executed and ended.
Very often NDA’s have been signed, projects initiated, and then simply delayed or buried by the partner company due to a lack of clear funding, or sense of urgency. In other circumstances, companies make it conditional that they require no mention of a proof of concept before even beginning the project.
If the Ambrosus community would like the team to violate an NDA, and then show how it leads to a dead end — the team is at this point willing to do so if it is for the reassurance and overall interest in the community: The tradeoff of doing this is that the specific project will most likely die in its place to the possible detriment of the Network.
▹Question 4: How was the impact of the new virus COVID-19? Generally, I think this is a problem that can cause fatal damage to companies. How were Ambrosus and ZIMT affected? And does it affect the progress of the project?
Generally speaking one could say COV-19 has slowed down progress. Meetings with potential clients happen mostly through calls. There has been no measurable effect on Ambrosus or Zimt — especially since the Ambrosus Team expanded business outreach during these COVID-19 times. In addition the Ambrosus team has spent a good amount of the ‘slowed’ schedule to start preparing the next layer of projects in the ecosystem — 4 of which are expected to launch in 2021.
▹Question 5: For the last 6 months or more, the bundle has fixed 96 almost. Please tell me the reason why this number is adopted. Currently 150 POCs are generating bundles as needed. The reason it doesn’t grow from the 96 bundle is that it doesn’t have more than 96 demand on the POC? The team said the number of bundles will change as AMB-NET grows. It is synonymous with AMB-NET’s not growing for a year when it makes an objective decision. It has not always been an approach to secure new holders, not just node holders. Updating the pilot project is great, but I think the main part of the evaluation is the number of bundles. Increasing heartbeats Are there any prospects for mass production after the completion of the pilot project? I want to know the timetable, not the ambiguous words that I said immediately. Or is it all stagnant?
The current bundle number consists mostly of heartbeat bundles as initially was communicated. Additionally, you may encounter other bundles from partners such as ZIMT and the recently announced coffee roaster/vendor, and QSS Global SA.
PoC’s eventually come to an end as they are set up for a certain amount of time, or are endresult-based, as is usually the case with Proof of Concept-based projects. There have been prospects for continuation after completion of the pilot project, however there are no guarantees and it makes little sense to plan these out.
▹Question 6: When will the environment of AMB Net be prepared? AMB Net was implemented in 2019 and has been followed by great updates. However, it still seems that many features are lacking for clients to use. For example, rolling back data loss planned for 2020 would be essential for use. I know that the Ambrosus team has excellent members and is constantly updating. I want to know at what stage the commercial environment for the client is ready.
To date, the Ambrosus Network has grown into a robust and decentralized blockchain network. The technical roadmap from July 2020 bridged technical gaps and further smoothened the network, alongside with help from several community members reporting bugs and suggesting UI/UX improvements which we are really grateful for. The planned “rolling back data loss” which is a bundle restore function, was delivered just a few days ago. Furthermore, the Hermes node has been carefully constructed to provide a fundamental base for businesses and entrepreneurs to leverage their business needs, or build a new business model around it as it is interoperable with current day ERP-systems. In essence, the point is that Ambrosus and AMB-NET have all the tools and infrastructure provided for anyone to get started with storing data in a decentralized cloud environment.
▹Question 7: Please show the rationale for network expansion. The team said it would issue tokens by the IEO to expand the network. I am glad that Ambrosus is needed. However, it is doubtful that the current bundle is not available and the need for expansion is justified. If so, can you state the rationale and why the issuing token should be that amount? As I said above, the issuance of additional tokens without foundation is unbearable for the members who have contributed to maintaining the network. More than onboard seniority it attacks and afflicts contributors.
Emerald Circuit and its token economics are currently in a first draft version, and would be issued as a sidechain on top of AMB-NET. With the design of such a system, the decentralized network of Ambrosus and its stakeholders are being taken into account.
Something important to also remember is that new protocols or solutions also offer new or additional services that are more specified than the general architecture of AMB-NET: Emerald Circuit, as an example, has been specifically created, to offer IoT solutions on AMB-NET with end-to-end encrypted security. It is best to create that protocol as a Layer 2 solution separate from the foundational layer 1 AMB-NET for token management and independence purposes. This is similar to how Ambrosus originally started as an ERC20 on top of Ethereum before migrating off the chain: Ambrosus did not build on Ethereum using Ether, because it was more specified in required its own protocol network (that it eventually went native with).
In general, we would advise to not jump to conclusions, at least not before things have been carefully and officially communicated / published.
▹Question 8: Origin Foods is a partnership where Ambrosus emphasizes the relationship. Ambrosus says they are walking with them, but Origin Food gave a different answer. Their representatives said they are currently building their own system on Ethereum. This is an objectively broken relationship and cannot be called a partnership. Isn’t the same thing happening with other projects as well as origin foods? If Ambrosus intends to have a unilateral partnership, this is proof that the bundles aren’t growing. And the fact is that the bundle is not increasing.
The Ambrosus Team is still very much in contact with Originfood, and together are even building new means to further strengthen the relationship. Originfood’s value proposition is that they can get any client set up on any network quickly and efficiently.