Hi all, I’ve collected some questions before the offsite as below. The questions were mostly collected from the Chinese and Korean community and I listed the questions as they asked so some of the questions could be kind of blunt.
How will Status improve the efficiency of the development? It seems kind of slow and the vision is a little abstract.
What are the Status’ goals specifically? Who are the competitors of Status?
How long can the team fund the development themselves from now on roughly? Is there any plan for refinancing?
Telegram issued tokens. What does that mean to Status?
When will Keycard be rolled out for everyone? Keycard mass production plans
The roadmap of Nimbus in detail, Any collaboration with the Ethereum core team?
What will Status do after the V1 release(KPIs or OKRs after V1)? What does the team think of being late to roll out the V1?
How will the Status team manage the dropping ranking of the market cap? (maybe it means the rank on Coinmarketcap)
When will it be able to spend transaction gas fees with SNT? Paying the gas fees with ETH is bothersome.
Any plans to activate the DApp ecosystem. Isn’t DApp a fad?
What does the Status team think of the current SNT price?
How will the SNT locked up be handled in the future? (I guess it means the SNT reserves the team has)
What teams are using Embark to develop DApps currently? Any dev updates from Embark
Why is Status excluded from EEA? Any plans to join it again or build some partnerships with the current EEA companies?
Q4 events or conferences participation
How to penetrate the Asian market(and others) with the Status application? There are a lot of dominant messaging applications already.
Do the co-founders think that technologies can drive everything?
한국에선 현재 게임재화를 현금화시키는 것을 대통령령으로 금지시켰습니다.
7. 누구든지 게임물의 이용을 통하여 획득한 유ㆍ무형의 결과물(점수, 경품, 게임 내에서 사용되는 가상의 화폐로서 [대통령령](javascript:;)이 정하는 게임머니 및 [대통령령](javascript:;)이 정하는 이와 유사한 것을 말한다)을 환전 또는 환전 알선하거나 재매입을 업으로 하는 행위 http://www.law.go.kr/법령/게임산업진흥에관한법률
게임머니를 법정화폐로 현금화시키는 시장은 한국에서는 아이템매니아/ 아이템베이와 같은 사이트가 있으나 수수료가 높기떄문에(기본5%) 개인간 거래가 성행하고 있으나 에스크로 기능없이
순수하게 신용을 기반으로 거래를 진행하기 때문에 많은 사건사고가 발생하고 있습니다. 이들을 타겟으로 시장을 만들어보는 건 어떤가요?
SNT의 시장인지도 낮기 때문에 게임머니를 SNT로 교환하는 것보다 상대적으로 인지도가 높은 ETH나 BTC로 교환으로 방향을 잡고(대신 거래방 개설은 일정 수량 이상의 SNT를 요구) 차차 SNT의 인지도를 점진적으로 높이는 방식으로 접근하는 것이 괜찮지 않을까 싶습니다.
A: Thanks for this question!
For that be possible we will need the support of Account Contracts in Status, which will implement Gas Abstraction as we specified at ERC-1077: Gas relay for contract calls. This should be the next update after V1, @rachel what do you think?
Gas Abstraction is Status.im contribution to Universal Logins and Self-Sovereign Identities,
and is still being researched, while it’s been proven to be possible 100% gas abstraction in Ethereum 1.0, no one yet implemented a fully decentralized or totally abstract gas market, which is the current step.
The best road-map I see is to soft fork mining clients (geth and parity) to validate and include meta transactions with gas in ERC20 the miners accept, and an optional hard fork to optimize gas abstraction in EVM by support of ‘unsigned/validator-only contract calls’.
Currently there are centralized (authority/trust based) solutions which is what being used now by other wallets, which are not the plan for Status, which seeks a fully decentralized gas market.
These are some very good questions. One that I can answer relating to the core product:
What will Status do after the V1 release(KPIs or OKRs after V1)? What does the team think of being late to roll out the V1?
Status hadn’t committed to a specific timeline for v1, and I think the sense of it being delayed stems from two issues:
A lack of proactively defined expectations, which this question also speaks to.
The decision to include multi-account in the v1 security audit scope.
For the first half of the year, the core product team was focused on delivering our white paper use cases, while another group worked in parallel on multi-account specs and designs. Development time was not reserved for multi-account, and the core team not directly involved with the specifications, until much later in the project’s timeline than would be considered wise. But lack of foresight didn’t significantly alter our timeline; we had only one team for implementation, and they pulled it together very quickly once finished with other priorities.
After v1, we’ll focus primarily on improving the chat experience. On October 15th, the core team will have a planning call to prioritize desired features, improvements & fixes, which you’ll be able to follow here on Discuss.
We’ll make sure to share the outcome, including loose timelines for delivery, here as well. I’m very open to hearing your preferred format for those timelines.
