Federated Reserve & Prestige IT

Thank you for applying!

1. Did the Federated Reserve and Prestige IT teams know each other prior to the round 1 elections? If not, how did you come to partner?

We will be deferring 50% of gross revenue to the Protocol Grant Pool. In order for this community and project to thrive, all contributing members should continue to invest back as an act of good faith and belief in the underlying project and platform.
2. If I defer revenue, I book it as a liability but I don't think that's what you're referring to. I'm curious how you'll book this gross revenue deferment? It's revenue, so you have to book it somehow, right?

Thank you.
 
1. The teams have known each other personally and professionally for many years, and have collaborated on several blockchain projects in the past. We have very complementary skill sets: Federated Reserve’s expertise is business & marketing; Prestige IT’s expertise is engineering & IT security.

2. By defer, we meant operating at 50% efficiency. Sorry for the confusion on nomenclature. From an accounting perspective, our accountants at Cohen & Co advised us to book the remaining 50% as net income.
 
1. We have two pledges to grow the protocol via grants:

Technical pledge: to build a new secure paper wallet for Factom, using what we learned building cryptocoinbackup.com, which is a free open-source paper wallet/private key backup tool that has no single point of failure. We would build a web app using Javascript that could also be downloaded locally and used securely offline. We already have an actively developed code library for interacting with Factom, in our preferred language. Time to complete: 8 weeks. Estimated grant request: $25k.

Non-technical pledge: to sponsor the monthly chapter meetings of the Silicon Valley Blockchain Society in Austin and other strategic chapters as they’re launched. This will give Factom exposure to a new large group of institutional investors, as well as new potential users and strategic partners. Time to delivery: immediate. Estimated grant request: $2k per month per each sponsored SVBS chapter.

2. Our pledge to grow the protocol in general is to serve as evangelists to the 30+ blockchain projects, vendors, and exchanges we work with, and at the two dozen+ conferences we attend each year where we’re frequently invited as speakers.

Thank you.
 
Thanks @Swibb

1. Does anyone on your team have any relationships with any other ANO that was not developed via participation in the Factom community (I ask a variation of this question to everyone)?

2. I see you have 6 months of operating capital. Will you be selling FCT during that period?

3. How would the ANO community go about measuring your success evangilizing "the 30+ blockchain projects, vendors, and exchanges we work with?"

Thanks!
 
1. Some of our team are in Austin, and as a result we do know the Factom Inc team (existing ANO) and the Multicoin team (candidate ANO), but we don’t have any formal contractual relationship with any of them.

2. As we bring on new team members, we may sell some FCT to cover overhead. But our goal is to hold FCT long term (1 year+).

3. The ANO community could measure the success of our evangelizing by seeing if any of the projects we introduce end up using Factom.
 
Don't at least a couple of you work for the Chairman of the Board of Factom?
Yes, two of our team members manage his personal family office, helping him find new and promising early stage blockchain projects to invest in and advise. However, he is not involved in the operations of Federated Reserve or Prestige IT, is not a member of our LLC, and will not be receiving any of the FCT we would earn as an ANO.

He supports our decision to apply as an ANO because we have more than enough bandwidth between our combined teams to take on this project, and our efforts will be supporting Factom, a project he of course believes in very much.
 
Can you provide us some "success stories" to date? Thanks
Here are a few of our success stories:

We met with IPwe, an intellectual property project that’s putting IP records on the blockchain. We connected them with the Factom team and encouraged them to use it.

We’re connected to the Head of Partnerships at Udacity and helped Factom form a partnership with Udacity, which gives Factom the opportunity to train blockchain developers and evangelize Factom to the 1.6 million Udacity users.

We secured a speaking spot for Factom at the Distribute 2018 Conference in Hamburg, Germany in June.

We met ZED at Polycon. ZED is building a global platform for remittances. We pitched them about using Factom for ZED to validate the dozen or so steps required for KYC in each market for documentation and auditing purposes.

We introduced the Factom Foundation to the Symmitree team to bring smart phones with biometrics to refugees and third world countries so they can own their personal identity.

We are working with DigitalTowns to integrate Factom into their infrastructure layer to secure the identity in local towns.

We've encouraged Lawthentic to build on top of Factom protocol to ensure evidence is immutable for court cases.

As presenters at the Tokenomics Conference in Estonia on May 23, and Alternative Investment Forum in Lithuania on May 24, we evangelized Factom as an example of real world adoption and usage of an enterprise focused blockchain to rooms of investors, crypto exchanges, government regulators, and startups from more than 10 countries, including the US, China, Singapore, Israel, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, and the UK.

We are currently working on getting Cumberland, which is one of the largest OTC desks, to list FCT as one of the tokens they trade. This will provide Factoids additional liquidity without negatively impacting their publicly traded price.
 
Thank you for applying. A few questions I am asking all applicants,
  1. How many person-hours per week do you expect your team to devote to this ecosystem?
  2. How will these hours be distributed among your members?
  3. How will this be distributed among your ANO activities (open source project dev, proprietary project dev, protocol level technical involvement, governance involvement, marketing/promotion … )?
  4. Can you give a list of demonstrable metrics that the community could use say 6 months or a year from now if you are selected in this application to evaluate your ANO?
 
Thank you for applying. A few questions I am asking all applicants,
  1. How many person-hours per week do you expect your team to devote to this ecosystem?
  2. How will these hours be distributed among your members?
  3. How will this be distributed among your ANO activities (open source project dev, proprietary project dev, protocol level technical involvement, governance involvement, marketing/promotion … )?
  4. Can you give a list of demonstrable metrics that the community could use say 6 months or a year from now if you are selected in this application to evaluate your ANO?
1. We expect to dedicate 10-15 person-hours per week to the Factom ecosystem.

2. We group our team members based on functional expertise, and estimate their commitments to be as follows:

- Technical team (4 team members): 6-9 hours per week
- Growth & Marketing (3 team members): 2-3 hours per week
- Operations (2 team members): 2-3 hours per week

3. We expect to allocate our time as follows:

- 40% to node administration
- 20% to in-house development efforts
- 20% to marketing/promotion
- 20% to governance involvement

4. Here are a few demonstrable metrics the community could use 6-12 months out to evaluate our success as an ANO:

- Provided that our grant request is accepted, did we successfully build and launch a new secure paper wallet for Factom on time and within budget?

- Provided that our grant request is accepted, did we successfully sponsor at least one chapter of the Silicon Valley Blockchain Society?

- Did we introduce at least 3 new blockchain projects to the Factom team in consideration of building on Factom?

- Did we evangelize Factom at 3 or more conferences where we were presenters, not just attendees?

- Were we actively involved in governance?

- Did we maintain 99% server uptime?
 
1. We expect to dedicate 10-15 person-hours per week to the Factom ecosystem.

2. We group our team members based on functional expertise, and estimate their commitments to be as follows:

- Technical team (4 team members): 6-9 hours per week
- Growth & Marketing (3 team members): 2-3 hours per week
- Operations (2 team members): 2-3 hours per week

3. We expect to allocate our time as follows:

- 40% to node administration
- 20% to in-house development efforts
- 20% to marketing/promotion
- 20% to governance involvement

4. Here are a few demonstrable metrics the community could use 6-12 months out to evaluate our success as an ANO:

- Provided that our grant request is accepted, did we successfully build and launch a new secure paper wallet for Factom on time and within budget?

- Provided that our grant request is accepted, did we successfully sponsor at least one chapter of the Silicon Valley Blockchain Society?

- Did we introduce at least 3 new blockchain projects to the Factom team in consideration of building on Factom?

- Did we evangelize Factom at 3 or more conferences where we were presenters, not just attendees?

- Were we actively involved in governance?

- Did we maintain 99% server uptime?
Hi Federated Reserve and Prestige IT. Thank you for applying to this round of the Factom ANO applications. In terms of the time your teams will devote to the Factom ecosystem, are you saying all of the team members will devote a total of 10-15 hours per week to the ecosystem? As in summing up everyone's weekly contribution will yield a total of 10-15 hours per week? Also, should the price of the FCT increase to say $25 or $50, would you devote a greater amount of time each week to the Factom ecosystem? How might your contributions change if we see significant increases in FCT price? Thank you for your response
 
Hi Federated Reserve and Prestige IT. Thank you for applying to this round of the Factom ANO applications. In terms of the time your teams will devote to the Factom ecosystem, are you saying all of the team members will devote a total of 10-15 hours per week to the ecosystem? As in summing up everyone's weekly contribution will yield a total of 10-15 hours per week? Also, should the price of the FCT increase to say $25 or $50, would you devote a greater amount of time each week to the Factom ecosystem? How might your contributions change if we see significant increases in FCT price? Thank you for your response
At the current FCT price, our team will dedicate a total of 10-15 hours per week. As the price of FCT increases, we will devote a greater amount of time each week directly, and through partners we’ll bring in, to the Factom ecosystem through several new initiatives we look forward to implementing. Examples include:

- Technical integration with other blockchains to allow different groups to access Factom. Since 2009, we’ve seen a plethora of blockchains for various uses and across all kinds of financial markets. Most of these projects lack a data validation layer, and would benefit from integrating with Factom, which in turn would benefit from these additional use cases.

- A new Factom explainer video. Now that Factom is decentralized, we feel it’s time that the Factom explainer video from 2014 get a refresh. We’ve worked with one of the top videographers in the blockchain space on several videos in the past, and would be happy to bring him in on this project.

- Promoting the network to a new audience of users. One of the partners we work closely with manages cryptodisrupt.com, which provides reliable, informative articles on topics related to cryptocurrency. We will work with them to write and publish articles on Factom through their site, and then share them on various social channels including Reddit, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook.
 
The goals sound good - impressive when done with an average of 40 minutes a week per team member.

What community or governance participation do you envisage?
Actually we anticipate a higher amount of participation per team member. Here’s how we’re envisioning it breaking out. We have 9 team members, 3 of whom have shared skillsets and serve as backups. That means 6 team members will be dedicated each week in our operations as an ANO. At 15 hours total per week, that’s about 2.5 hours per week per person.

After we’re fully on-boarded and in smooth operations, 15 hours is our estimate for steady-state maintaining of the servers and our other ANO activities. However we understand that there will be peaks of activity where we’ll need to spend many more hours if there’s a server issue, a bug in the network, or the Factom community needs us to be more responsive. We can be responsive 24/7/365 to have 100% coverage.

Based on recent comments in the #governance chat in Discord, it appears there’s dissatisfaction with the level of involvement and consistency of involvement from existing ANOs. So we want you to know that we understand the importance of your question about governance involvement.

The teams of Federated Reserve & Prestige IT take governance and active involvement very seriously. It’s the main reason we’ve been successful in or prior endeavors. In addition to holding weekly calls with our individual projects, we hold weekly calls with each other to ensure we’re capturing all the value our combined efforts can create - for example, this is how our idea of joining forces to apply as an ANO came about.

With that, we want to reconfirm our commitment to the Factom community and our participation in its governance, which will include among other things:
- participating in governance calls
- reviewing and voting on grant proposals
- participating in the #governance chat on Discord
- suggesting improvements, and voting on changes to the Factom Governance doc and others
 
Well 10-15 hrs was stated, with 40% of that allocated to server operation. Between 9 team members -> averages 40-60 minutes each on the protocol per week.

We'd love to welcome your time in the community/governance aspects as well as your expertise outside of it.
As they say, a rising tide lifts all boats. We’re all in this together, so we’ll add value anywhere we can.
 
Thank you for your application and your answers in this thread.

My questions for you:

Quint1)
What is the lowest FCT price point you would be able to continue operating your authority servers with the listed specifications and technical regime you have proposed?

Quint2)
If not allocated the grants you have proposed (for example due to a low FCT price point preventing more grants going into effect) would you still work on the proposed projects but at at slower pace?

Quint3)
"We have developed internal solutions that protect against the exploitation of common attack vectors and crypto storage pitfalls, that we would be happy to share with the Factom community."
Could you please describe these internal solutions that protect against exploitation of common attack vectors?

Quint4)
Regarding testnet performance; the guides have been told that "Federated Reserve have been very slow to respond to requests for updates and have often been behind in updates".

Could you please explain the background for your lack of staying on top of things on the testnet?
 
Thank you for your application and your answers in this thread.

My questions for you:

Quint1)
What is the lowest FCT price point you would be able to continue operating your authority servers with the listed specifications and technical regime you have proposed?

Quint2)
If not allocated the grants you have proposed (for example due to a low FCT price point preventing more grants going into effect) would you still work on the proposed projects but at at slower pace?

Quint3)
"We have developed internal solutions that protect against the exploitation of common attack vectors and crypto storage pitfalls, that we would be happy to share with the Factom community."
Could you please describe these internal solutions that protect against exploitation of common attack vectors?

Quint4)
Regarding testnet performance; the guides have been told that "Federated Reserve have been very slow to respond to requests for updates and have often been behind in updates".

Could you please explain the background for your lack of staying on top of things on the testnet?
1. We are able to operate our authority servers independent of the price of FCT. We’re firm believers in the long term value of Factom, and are willing to pay for the servers out of pocket, as we’re doing now, even if the price of FCT temporarily drops to unprofitable levels.

2. Yes, if not allocated grants, we will still work on our proposed projects but at a slower pace.

3. We have developed an open source encrypted backup tool specifically designed for paper wallets and private keys called Crypto Coin Backup (cryptocoinbackup.com). Example use cases where this tool could be useful for ANOs include: storing paper FCT wallets/FCT wallet private keys, hardware wallet recovery phrases, Node identity keys, 2FA keys, or any other sensitive string of characters that needs to be securely stored offline. For ANO teams, enforcing multi-password governance on their long term holdings will also ensure that no single person has complete control over their funds and that consensus needs to be reached among the team before funds can be unlocked.

4. We recognized early on that Federated Reserve’s strengths are marketing and business development, but that its testnet performance was not meeting the community’s standards. We wanted to fix that, which is why Federated Reserve partnered with Prestige IT, whose strengths are engineering and IT security. Prestige IT has been fast to respond to all testnet updates, and has maintained 99% uptime for 4 months. This is why a partnership made so much sense - each team makes up for where the other lacks, and that together, the value we can bring to the Factom community is greater than had we applied individually.
 
Should we be concerned that of the two testnet leader nodes run by your combined teams, the Prestige IT leader node has been updated, but the Federated Reserve authority node is the last one that still isn't running the latest Release Candidate code, and is 2 versions behind? I suppose as part of the merger IT duties will be shared. Is that accurate?
 
Should we be concerned that of the two testnet leader nodes run by your combined teams, the Prestige IT leader node has been updated, but the Federated Reserve authority node is the last one that still isn't running the latest Release Candidate code, and is 2 versions behind? I suppose as part of the merger IT duties will be shared. Is that accurate?
Since combining our teams, we are just going to be using Prestige's nodes. We are in the process of decommissioning Federated Reserve's nodes.
 
Top