icpp_pro

2.1K posts

icpp_pro banner
icpp_pro

icpp_pro

@icpp_pro

Co-founder & CTO @onicaiHQ --- On a mission towards Decentralized AI

USA Katılım Mayıs 2023
756 Takip Edilen1.2K Takipçiler
Kodai
Kodai@pedre_ray·
@bitcoinr3negade Never mind I voted yes. I shifted the odds in yes favour by 0.013% lmao
English
2
0
2
7
bitcoinr3negade
bitcoinr3negade@bitcoinr3negade·
OMG this is so close I've never seen such a passionate community before. We have 8yg that is standing up for their right to vote no 🛑 While others are following the path to the future and supply shock 😲 Who will come out the other side victorious... Only time will tell #ICP
bitcoinr3negade tweet media
English
15
7
67
2.6K
icpp_pro retweetledi
onicai
onicai@onicaiHQ·
llama_cpp_canister v0.9.0 was released. We upgraded the model upload scripts from ic-py to the latest icp-py-core 2.3.0. 🔗 github.com/onicai/llama_c…
English
1
11
26
620
icpp_pro retweetledi
DFINITY Foundation
DFINITY Foundation@dfinity·
Check out the latest proposal for Mission70. This motion recommends implementing Mission70 to position the Internet Computer network, its ecosystem, and its stakeholders for long term success. In this proposal: 1 - Demand acceleration 2 - Voting rewards 3 - Node rewards Find the full proposal here ↓ dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/140888
English
11
35
166
11.5K
afaio ∞
afaio ∞@afaiocc·
Hey #ICP! Now that @ICPTokens is down, what will we be using to follow the charts of our dear projects? 🤔
afaio ∞ tweet media
English
10
0
14
1.2K
icpp_pro
icpp_pro@icpp_pro·
Just swapped 129.66303 $ICP for 16.34K $FUNNAI on @ICPSwap — smooth as ever, and zero gas! ⚡️🚀 Swap yours now 👉 app.icpswap.com/swap
English
4
1
26
364
JACK ICP ∞
JACK ICP ∞@itsjack006·
Why do you always ignore my posts @onicaiHQ? You ignored me when I was raising my concern for $onicai SNS in the OpenChat community. @icpp_pro
English
1
0
1
57
JACK ICP ∞
JACK ICP ∞@itsjack006·
Hey team @onicaiHQ, can you describe your plans now? Will you continue $funnai or will you try SNS again? Just after $onicai SNS failed, $funnai started bouncing back, so there is huge potential in $funnai. MAiners' prices dropped drastically in the marketplace because of Onicai SNS. We want clarity. Can you please let us know your plans? $funnai on $icp is literally so undervalued.
English
2
0
3
312
icpp_pro
icpp_pro@icpp_pro·
@SnassyIcp @radudeicp @PierreSamaties Was the option of charged query calls discussed, with a higher instruction limit? That would also go a long way in enabling high compute apps to stay on ICP.
English
1
0
7
236
Snassy.icp
Snassy.icp@SnassyIcp·
This morning, Xander (from the dev forum open letter) and I had a great conversation with @radudeicp , Björn Tackmann and @PierreSamaties about Mission 70 and its impact on operations for projects such as our SNS DAO called Sneed. Bottom line: we understand, on one hand, that 13 node subnets are costly and should not be subsidized long term. We also think, on the other hand, that raising costs on 13 node subnets should go hand in hand with introducing options to run parts of applications on lower-consensus (fewer nodes) subnets. Paying high 13 node costs for the part of the application that needs it makes sense. Paying lower costs for parts of the application that don't need such high security guarantees also makes sense. I believe we found common ground and a shared understanding with this perspective, and I came away feeling very positive about Dfinity's plans to address these concerns. I think all the right items are on the road map, in reasonable time frames, and I have high confidence that the necessary tools for devs to adapt to the updated mission 70 cost landscape will be made available in time. There were some more good news in the imminent pipeline for SNSes, with a very solid plan for efficiency improvements (that are possible now once the platform has considerably matured compared to when SNS-1 was launched). The plan will roll out in stages, but already the first step - apparently ready for deployment very soon - will have a huge impact on SNS Infrastructure cycle costs. This will make the life of every SNS easier and extend runways, so this is just one-sided great news! I thought it fair to report this since I have made a bit of noise about my concerns with mission 70, particularly the gas hikes. After this meeting, I feel that Dfinity recognizes the challenges I and others have raised, and are taking practical, sensible steps to address them. The road ahead might be a bit bumpy while it all gets sorted out, but nobody promised or expected just plain sailing on the cutting edge. Dfinity, in my opinion, sees these cost hikes as necessary and unavoidable, but does understand and respect the impact it may have on builders and are taking the right steps to alleviate the impact by building the right stack for letting developers control costs far more precisely. Metaphor time! It is like Dfinity sold safes, and only had a very very secure "13 lock" safe on the market. App developers (let's pretend app developers need safes to make this metaphor work) love Dfinity's safes, but in truth what they usually need for their app is one 13-lock safe, and then 9 more safes that don't have to be quite so "Fort Knox" secure. Devs would love to buy all 10 safes for their app from Dfinity, because they really do make great safes, but unfortunately Dfinity has only had the 13-lock safe to offer. So, to make that viable for devs, Dfinity said "hey, let's meet in the middle: we sell you these 13-lock safes cheaper than we should - at loss even - so you can indeed build your whole application with only our safes (100% on-chain) using our 13-lock safes even for those cases where you could go with lower security. The problem is that this at-loss offer can't go on. So the solution, in a nutshell, is for Dfinity to introduce less expensive 7-lock safes, perhaps even 3-lock safes and 1-lock safes. Then devs can pay for only what they actually need - and be happy to pay for the ultra-safe 13-lock safes in those cases where they actually need them! We can continue buying all our "safes" (secure application platform infrastructure) from Dfinity, without breaking bank by overpaying for security we don't need, and without Dfinity (and investors) making a loss on practically giving away 13-lock safes to devs for use cases where 7-lock or 3-lock safes would do. As far as I could understand, everyone in the meeting was on the same page on this, and the road map will reflect this, so at this point I am no longer worried about mission 70 derailing long term adoptability of ICP as a World Computer and full-stack application platform. Thanks to Pierre, Björn, Radu and Xander for a wonderfully productive and engaging meeting!
English
18
34
135
3.7K
icpp_pro
icpp_pro@icpp_pro·
Love this🔥 "Crypto is about *capturing* REAL value, that exists before the crypto, and encapsulating it with math like cryptography and game theory, to make it first and foremost safe and durable, and secondly more useful as it can be transacted online."
Snassy.icp@SnassyIcp

First, there was Bitcoin. And BTC was the real deal; it was good, and it grew. But many misunderstood BTC. They thought that dumb people were just pretending and fooling one another to think that a currency made up from thin air could be valuable. To their minds, BTC was just someone grabbing the paper bills from their Monopoly game and going “hey everyone, let’s treat this as real money”, with enough suckers falling for it. This post is not about explaining why they are wrong. It’s about the consequences of so many people thinking this - and people who don’t think it, but take advantage of those who do. And to some extent, those who don’t believe in made up money (they think “crypto is a scam”) but want to take advantage of others who do…but are instead themselves taken advantage of by even less scrupulous players. The core mistake is thinking BTC demonstrates that money can be made from nothing. BTC doesn’t do that. But nearly every other “cryptocurrency” tries to. Even those that don’t are effectively plagued by the expectation that they should, because “that’s how crypto works”. The problem, in a nutshell, is that crypto has turned into a casino entirely based on “greater fool theory”. The game is simple. Someone launches YACT (Yet Another Crypto Token). You know, of course, that it is going to be worthless, but that’s not what you evaluate. You evaluate if it can attract dumb people who fall for the token’s sales pitch, and enough other gamblers to play the pump and dump game with it. Your plan, obviously, is to get in on the pump and exit before the dump. You never even consider holding. To you, this is not an “investment” but a casino bet. And it relies entirely on finding an asset that greater fools than you will fall for. At least it used to rely on that. But games like this quickly start stepping up their meta levels. After a while, and after enough pump and dumps, it was clear to most that actually *nobody* really believes in all these new tokens anymore, with everyone just hanging around waiting for suckers. So the game evolved. Lacking true suckers, players just kept playing their PvP Pump and Dump games while increasingly aware they were only playing against other people like themselves, and the game had been reduced to truly just being a game of chicken between grifters - in summary the rules were now: who would rug first? But the game never stops evolving and soon enough bigger players realized these “cynics” playing pump and dump on each other were nice targets. So suddenly the cunning, seasoned, cynical players were the marks, being as we say “max extracted upon”. So, first retail had enough and exited. Then increasingly the somewhat more experienced trader base got rekt and exited. And that is the long and short of it. Everyone thinking they would be smart by taking advantage of dumb folks who believe in made up money have gotten rekt. Thing is…crypto was never about making up value from thin air. Crypto is about *capturing* REAL value, that exists before the crypto, and encapsulating it with math like cryptography and game theory, to make it first and foremost safe and durable, and secondly more useful as it can be transacted online. By now it seems most people have forgotten, after years of the deafening noise from the crypto casino, that crypto actually has a real value. But the crypto casinos are finally dying, much like online poker died after having had a boom of mainstream popularity with an initial bonanza where good and decent players could feast on the bad, then good players mostly pvp-ing each other, only to finally become max extracted upon by a few very refined players with advanced bots. I don’t think we will see retail coming back to the crypto casino. I don’t even think we’ll see the dwindling crypto X return to the crypto casino. Crypto is dead. Which means that finally, crypto has a chance. The crypto casino was tremendously detrimental to any serious crypto projects working to capture and build on real value - the kind that almost anyone actually putting money in crypto scoffed at as delusional, as missing the whole point of the game. All the investments were going into the casino and serious builders were seen as “suspect” for not being more open about obviously being scams (“it’s ok, wink wink, you can tell us - we’re in on it!”). Any more serious investor taking one glance at all this realized immediately that this was not a market to get involved in. But maybe that can charge now, that the Big Tent of the crypto casino tent is on fire and few seem tempted to try to get back in. It’s very similar to the dotcom boom. It too was a circus that played out much the same way - imagine a whole economy based on everyone realizing that a web based book shop won’t change the world, but everyone speculating on thinking everyone else could be thinking it might. They were all rekt, of course. And, of course, the online book shop went on to change the world. This is, finally, the time in crypto to figure out not what dumber people will go for next, but what smart investors are eyeing. The age of real crypto is just beginning. Sneed.

English
0
1
23
579
Cade O'Neill
Cade O'Neill@CadeONeill·
Which #AI altcoin should I break down next? 👀 Is it $ICP, $TAO, $NEAR, $QUBIC, or $RNDR? Let’s see which community shows up the strongest!
English
126
14
117
10.5K
icpp_pro retweetledi
onicai
onicai@onicaiHQ·
Thank you to everyone who participated in the onicai SNS decentralization sale and who supported it throughout the process🙏 Any ICP you participated with will be sent back to your account automatically by the SNS framework. Of course, the funnAI protocol and all other onicai applications will keep running normally as before👍
English
12
12
67
1.7K
icpp_pro retweetledi
onicai
onicai@onicaiHQ·
Last 24 hours - that's where we are headed now Participate in the sale here: nns.ic0.app/project/?proje… The final spurt for the onicai SNS decentralization sale We have hit 18% of the minimum requirement for SNS to set up. We are still hopeful because we know magic exists. Let's see what the last 24 hours hold for onicai's future Total participants: 151 Total ICP raised: 14,772 ICP Minimum requirement: 80,000 ICP Target 300,000 ICP Let's do it, community. Let's build DeAI together
English
24
29
59
1.2K
2xnmore
2xnmore@2xnmore·
If you had 1 BTC to invest in an AI coin, which one would it be? • $ICP • $FET • $TAO • $NEAR • $RENDER • $VIRTUAL
English
174
19
239
22.8K
RayRay✨️✍🏻🔮
Just increased my participation in the ONICAI SNS launch on the NNS to 31.12 $ICP Gut feeling this one could easily do a 4× after launch 👀 NFA
RayRay✨️✍🏻🔮 tweet media
English
2
2
17
842
icpp_pro
icpp_pro@icpp_pro·
Did you know that the @onicaiHQ team did not set the initial price of FUNNAI but a community member did who started the first Liquidity Pool on ICPSwap
English
0
2
30
600
icpp_pro
icpp_pro@icpp_pro·
Did you know that the 10% fee the funnAI protocol charges is not going to @onicai team, but goes 100% towards the FUNNAI tokenomics engine?
English
1
2
24
323
icpp_pro
icpp_pro@icpp_pro·
Did you know @IConfucius_odin is already 1+ years old and part of the @onicaiHQ roadmap towards Decentralized AI for a long time?
English
1
1
14
364