Post #3719

Signature not verified

This entry might be using an old signature, or it was signed by a key that does not exist on the server.

The entry content as it exists in the database. This should be verified against the blockchain entry.
Veteran Blockchain Investment Firm

[I]NK02) What is the reason you would be using this Factom on Factom technology which would effectively mean 144 anchors into mainnet a day? Are you actively pushing these private solutions? What are the deciding factors to take a potential customer down this route according to you?[/I]

The primary reason why we see the need for a Factom on Factom technology is if the data is critical enough to justify a private chain, yet can be committed to the mainnet in a secure way that still generates EC usage, albeit low. Even with a private chain, being able to validate whether the data was tampered or changed can be valuable to an audit agency. Considering the nature of the US Government, and potential of some of the use cases we have in mind, even committing hashes of the information to the public blockchain may not be appropriate when planning over a lifetime. In these cases, we would offer private chain services. A Factom AWS GovCloud network is not the end-all solution to the USG requirements. As such, we will evaluate the needs and guide them along the process to encourage public chain use where possible. In the cases where it is just not possible or unlikely, we would like to see a GovCloud specific private network available to meet these needs. Hashing into the mainnet may not be possible in these cases, but we would like to evaluate options. We look forward to sitting down with the protocol architects following this selection process to better understand where these services can be value-added to potential customers.

We do not actively push for private solutions; our incentive as an ANO will be to drive awareness and usage of the FCT token and protocol as a whole. This incentivizes us to push for public mainnet usage. In many cases, a public chain makes more sense when talking interoperability. Given the time and energy required to maintain a private chain(s) that meets ITAR, FEDRAMP, CJIS, etc… compensation purely through FCT/EC conversion does not make sense. Instead, providing a service that enables a distributed ledger-like technology that is auditable and immutable will provide the value of blockchain while creating awareness for Factom… for a cost. We intend to market to this niche while pushing for the widespread public usage through discussion, demonstration, and education.

A unique aspect of our firm is the ability to access agencies who have national security responsibilities. We see value that the Factom Protocol can provide to these agencies and intend to work with them on their requirements. Ultimately, the requirements will drive what kind of solution we present. Luckily, we have personnel familiar with the Federal Acquisition Regulation, including the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement. There are opportunities to discuss and help guide the customer to narrow down the scope of their requirements. A private chain usage will not come cheap. If we can enlighten them that a public chain may better meet their requirements, or budget, we will work with them to tailor a solution that uses this medium. Otherwise, if the requirements or mindset is such that private is the only way, we want to be able to meet this need as well. Our Factom GovCloud concept provides the infrastructure to do so.
This is the raw content, without BBCode parsing.