To provider a clarification, launching an SNS decentralization sales serve few key purposes, EMC on-chain AI computing node is rewarded based on POW (behind all the ideology and tech, what EMC really do is recycling ETH miners or FIL block miners (GPU pool) and converting the GPU into proof of useful work (AI model training). POW mining require consensus, open and fair mechanism. Result of SNS sales will be a DAO, ICRC-1 token will be minted before the mainnet launch and to used for staking of validator node and routing node in EMC network.
We appreciate valuable input and question related to EMC, but certainly do not think that referencing to other project or making unrelated statement would have meaningful conversation.
EMC is designed as the specialty network focus on providing extended capability to current ICP network in processing on-chain AI model training. EMC consensus mechanism and tokenology design are build on ICP (EMC team has done months of research and validation during the design phase, comparing most L1 and even debating on designing EMC as L1). Summarize why EMC build on ICP, 1/ Focus is to solve AI computing power needs and scavenge abandon ETH miners and idling Fil block miners GPUs, EMC never plan to build another ICP who can host DApp on chain. 2/ DApp developer for AIGC and AI application, would start with AI model training and end with building their AIGC DApp that can host and provide web service to User without gas (ICP not only perfect choice but only L1 choice) 3/ Web2 developer to Web3 transformation (leverage on all the benefit and feature of ICP) AI + AIGC open up new opportunity to attract web2 developer to build on Web3 and share the same mission with ICP, first developer to build great DApp product and attract web2 user to use DApp providing seemless UX as web2. Last but not least, what is important is all lead to large increase of cycles burned in ICP network.
There are many ways to produce an icrc token without SNS. Origyn has had one since November of 2021(fork of ICP) and Nat Laos has a very robust motoko icrc implementation.
Why now? If you follow the development roadmap of EMC, EMC is at the stage of testnet, with 150 nodes over 20+ countries launched on 10th May. Current development roadmap is aiming for 3 months target for mainnet launch. EMC design include POW (computing node), POS (validator node) which involve creating of consensus among node participant, best address by DAO. Why SNS? EMC is building as L2 of ICP, it make sense to have NNS community participate in EMC DAO to ensure that voting of the future development of EMC roadmap synergize and strategize with ICP roadmap. While funding is important element to accelerate the project, drive adoption and building ecosystem, the other reason of SNS and Now is more strategic than just fund raising.
We could certainly use DIP20 or DRC 20 taken within SNS, which is what we are doing for the presales over last weekend for implementing of validator node and staking mechanism for Testnet. However, if we are expecting to build L2 project that are strategically integrated with ICP as L1, and driving participation of thousands of new non-ICP standard note (mainly ETH and FIL miners) , we would want to do it the proper way, with open, transaprent and most important support from ICP communities.
I’m not following your logic; why can you not make an ICRC without the SNS?
Where is this stat coming from?
This sounds like a huge waste of energy and would be very slow. Have you built an application on the IC or run any performance tests with your “network” yet?
SNS DAO before seeing any working proof of concept doesn’t make any sense. You need to prove that the thing will work before you get any buy in from the community.
Did they fund you? Did you receive a grant?
This is not true, as previously stated by others in this thread.
Sorry for the harsh criticism, and open to later changing my mind, but from my first impressions, this project reeks of AI buzzwords and lack of understanding of how the IC works. Saying you have gathered 60-70k AI developers is a rediculous stat.
The fact the first thing these guys want to do before showing anyone their product is white paper and SNS is a red flag .
To EMC - if you have a real idea, prove it working with a few “fake” validators, and demo the result.
Publish performance metrics.
Get real IC devs using your AI as a service.
If you’re going to SNS, then you’ll need to open source your project as well.
Welcome EMC Team to ICP!
Its great to see all the interesting projects building on the IC.
I’ve not fully researched the project - just read the above comments. One thing that stands out for me is the massive community fund request. Personally I dont think that will fly with a lot of people.
Is there a demo or some kind of promo video where I could see what you’ve built so far?
It may not be a scam but they certainly aren’t technically qualified in regards to ICP, to even convey why they want to create an SNS. And I say that with all due respect.
“This is the only way we can create an ICRC” has been the worst reasoning I’ve heard yet.
They are unqualified in every aspect. That’s merely the tip of the iceberg.
60k-70k is a HUGE amount of developers. I’m hesitant to believe this based on your presence in social media and on the web. Here are the numbers that make me feel these numbers are inflated and raise red flags for me personally.
The official Twitter account was created in two months ago.
Official Youtube was created a little over one month ago.
Your Github was created almost 2 months ago.
Your Discord server was created less than a month ago.
Your blog was created about one month ago.
Your forum account was created about one month ago.
I don’t recall saying there is no relationship with the ICP community, but I think the above statistics related to your presence online says you haven’t been engaged with the community for that long.
Regardless of the above, it is my understanding, that the project is essentially going to try and farm compute power from anywhere and everywhere to power AI projects. This is definitely not a bad idea. It is not one I necessarily agree with at this point in time, but it is definitely something for me to think about. Thank you for responding to my posts and good luck with your project!
This has me very very concerned. You can pay people to create flashy websites and whitepapers.
What I’d like to see is a bit of sweat equity showing a demo product on the IC. I really don’t want to be hostile to new projects because we’ve all been there :: but you can understand that the age of the accounts is strange!
Their domain name was also just registered. Having a look at their 10k twitter followers also shows major signs of bot farms.
I like the idea… but everything is screaming SCAM!
The 60,000 to 70,000 AI developers mentioned are from the developer community our EMC team has collaborated with in the Web2 industry over the past two years. They are not specifically DApp developers but experienced Web2 developers (such as those from Alibaba, Netease, Unity community, etc.) who have shown interest in the rapidly growing AGI industry.
When EMC is deployed on ICP, it will also recommend ICP to those AI developers. AI applications can leverage ICP’s fully on-chain DApps and EMC to achieve cost reduction in hosting.
As for how many AI developers can be converted into DApp developers on ICP, it depends on the progress of development. SNS provides an opportunity for these DApp developers to participate in project decision-making, which can help facilitate the conversion process.
I want to remind everyone that the competitive environment in the crypto industry for ICP is extremely severe. It’s rare to have a reliable project willing to join the IC ecosystem, and what EMC is doing is absolutely a huge opportunity for IC in the future. It is irresponsible to label a project as a scam based on superficial information like the short duration of their social media account registrations. It would be best for everyone to patiently wait for an explanation from EMC.
If I were a potential node contributor, I would need to invest in hardware power and other resources. I would want the emc to be decentralized. icp contracts can be upgraded is a double-edged sword, on the one hand, you can adjust the contract with the development, on the other hand, the contract controller authority is too large. Delivering the contract to sns solves this problem to a large extent. So this stage must start sns, so that more and bigger node contributors feel comfortable to participate.
I am the co-founder of EMC and can find my profile through my Twitter. For those who comment without doing your due dilligent, I urge you to pay respect to our team of 30 developers and work that we have done over last 6 months as a bootstrape. What you have posted is true on the date of registering the website and other official account, EMC and the name of this project was only decided few days before we finalize our master plan, and we completed all the DD and decided to go with ICP and since than we have been working with ICP Asia team on getting started with ICP and securing Grant and meet-up with Dom in HK Web3 event on Apr. Unlike all other Web3 project, we are experienced Enterpreneur and successful start-up team in Web2 world that decided to All-in Web3 2 years ago. We started our business and profit generating by building Metaverse DApp, with over 100K of user, the project is profit generating and self-sustaining, while we dediced to focus our core engineering resource to address the AI-computing shortage, a key problem that slowing down our communities and developer on building AIGC project. Sincerely to all, who do not know our team, we will formerly introduce EMC core team member to ICP community, EMC is bringing NOT a whitepaper but a project that under development over 1 years, and competely our testnet launch on 10th May. Our developer community and teams has already start building prototype on EMC testnet and will share more in coming week.
It’s being portrayed as though these are reasons to do an SNS, or that this is the only solution, but the fact of the matter is, there are already many solutions regarding blackholed canisters. If the team has not done their due diligence on the ICP blockchain to understand these basic functionalities, why should ICP take the risk on a team that hasn’t even shown a demo yet.
Let’s not forget that the SNS is meant for complete products. This clearly isn’t that.
Let me share some data to you, Statista (you can google) shows that there are >2.4m professional developer in China, as a working project over 2 years with >100K of community members and active partication from one of the leading AIGC developer community (with 60-70K) in China, REAL developer from Web2 world is now seriouly coming to build thier AIGC model with the support of cheap and assessable computing power for AI provided by EMC, this is just MARK the beginning of the grant migration of Web2 developer and than Web2 User to the Web3 world. I came from Web2 world and I certainly know how small is the current Web3 developer in total and never mentioned about the limited actual working DApp and web3 user comparing to Web2.