Veteran Blockchain Investment Firm

Thank you guys for campaigning!

50% of node earnings will be allocated to the Factom Protocol Endowment Fund with West Virginia University upon establishment
1. Can we define earnings? Earnings are often defined as after tax net income so I'm curious what you'll be donating specifically.

2. 50% of earnings from both nodes? And when you go down to one node, will you continue to provide 50% of earnings from that node? Is WVU aware that there will be a big drop at some point?
Grant proposal to setup initial infrastructure to begin demonstrating and marketing to the USG the value and utility of the Factom protocol
3. So the "Factom AWS GovCloud Network" won't be part of what you do with your default ANO earned FCT, but is planned if you're able to obtain the grant?

4. How much will you request for the grant?

Thank you and best of luck :)
 
Last edited:
@DChapman, et al.

1. Can we define earnings? Earnings are often defined as after tax net income so I'm curious what you'll be donating specifically.

Thank you for the questions and requests to clarify our position. When we refer to earnings, we mean the FCT that the authority server would earn (~1123 FCT per node per month). For our proposed second node, we are donating half of the earnings, ~561 FCT to the WVU Foundation per month. Our objective will be to donate $500,000 to create the largest blockchain endowment fund in the country. To summarize, for our second node, Veteran will collect ~561 FCT and the WVU Foundation will collect ~561 FCT per month. Our intention will be to program the ~561 FCT per month to go directly to WVU Foundation’s address. For our first node, we will be providing 50% of the ~1123 FCT earned to the grant pool and 50% will be collected by Veteran. Until the Factom/WVU Foundation details are finalized and in place, 50% of the earnings from the second node (~561 FCT) will be contributed to the grant pool as normal.

2. 50% of earnings from both nodes? And when you go down to one node, will you continue to provide 50% of earnings from that node? Is WVU aware that there will be a big drop at some point?


Veteran intends to contribute to the grant pool through our first node via 50% programmed efficiency. The 50% from the second node will be going to the WVU Foundation Factom endowment. When we go down to one node, we will re-evaluate the disbursement to the WVU Foundation. We intend to continue to contribute to meet the goal of $500,000 and creating the largest blockchain endowment fund in the country. WVU is aware that we are interested in establishing an endowment funded by Factom. We have not gone into details into how much per month they can expect and when. This effort is largely a strategic plan to act as a catalyst to the protocol awareness in the short-term and to advance the protocol development and adoption for decades to come. If selected, Veteran will work with WVU to incorporate the Factom protocol into every aspect of the WVU curriculum. Additionally, we see huge potential through WVU’s government partnerships to begin socializing what the Factom protocol can provide to USG entities.

3. So the "Factom AWS GovCloud Network" won't be part of what you do with your default ANO earned FCT, but is planned if you're able to obtain the grant?

Given current FCT price and liquidity options, it will be incredibly difficult to setup, run, secure, and market the AWS Factom GovCloud with ~1123 FCT per month (between two nodes) going to Veteran. We can set up a scaled down version to market to clients, however, when clients adopt the service, we will expect a fully-scaled version to be up and running to provide the best service possible to our USG customers.

4. How much will you request for the grant?


Our initial calculations place the grant amount at $100,000 USD. We intend to run the Factom GovCloud on two dedicated hosts, running multiple instances to make up the authority set, follower nodes, and standby nodes. This will cover costs to setup, manage, and market the Factom GovCloud to USG enterprise clients for one year. We expect some non-recurring engineering costs associated with this effort to migrate the main net code to the GovCloud and this is the majority of the grant proposal. There is substantial interest from USG entities to utilize the Factom Protocol on a GovCloud network. Without this infrastructure in place, the Factom Protocol is limited in our ability to penetrate the USG market sector. Should we be selected, we are open to partnering with other ANOs, and prefer, to diversify the Factom GovCloud to ensure one entity is not in complete control of the network.

Thank you for the questions and please follow-up if you require any further clarification.

-Veteran Team
 
Has your team met with anyone from WVU to discuss this proposal and was WVU interested? How do you plan on structuring the donation to require the fund to be used for the benefit of Factom? And is your vision that the endowment's work would be done by the university (students) or external parties, and what would be the goal of the endowment?

US Federate and State government networks present many challenges for software companies and the variety of networks often require substantial support contracts - has your team discussed your proposal with any government agencies that have authorities of what enterprise software solution contracts they consider?
 
Thanks for your application.

Following on Ilzheev's question; my interpretation is also that your official efficiency will be 25%.

1) I believe the 25% you will allocate to WVU will have to be paid to you as the ANO first, and then you forward the appropriate amount to WVU. (even if you provide a payout address that WVU "owns" you would still be the organization that generates the revenue and would carry the tax obligation). If this is true; how will you handle the tax-implications of this setup?

2) What is the lowest FCT-price point you will be able to operate with two servers?
 
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 application and for your service.

What do you see as the major, specific pain-points that Factom could solve for the government entities you mention?

If you were going to pitch use of the protocol to one or more government officials, who would they be (ideally), and what is the gist of what you would say?
 
@quintilian

Allow us to clarify our position regarding our efficiency. We are going to set both nodes to 50% efficiency rate upon entry into the authority set.

When we become successful in setting up the framework for the largest blockchain endowment in the country, we will be proponents for reevaluating and directing a portion of our efficiency based upon the price of FCT. Our intention is to give up half of our potential earnings from the nodes to the advancement of the Factom protocol, whether it be in grant pool contributions or through the WVU endowment fund.

I believe the 25% you will allocate to WVU will have to be paid to you as the ANO first, and then you forward the appropriate amount to WVU. (even if you provide a payout address that WVU "owns" you would still be the organization that generates the revenue and would carry the tax obligation). If this is true; how will you handle the tax-implications of this setup?

Firstly, we are contributing 50%. We have discussed this with our legal team (Gordon Law of Chicago) as well as the WVU Foundation. There are measures and laws in place to alleviate the tax burden of contributing entities as well as the tax the WVU Foundation may get imposed upon them.

2) What is the lowest FCT-price point you will be able to operate with two servers?

If we are just talking about servers, no guard nodes, and no backups running constantly, then based upon our proposed technical specs and calculations, FCT will need to remain above $4 before we begin talking about burning through our reserves. We can scale down the technical aspect of our server to a skeleton operation to save costs, but we would not want to maintain that for the long-term.
 
Last edited:
@ilzheev ,

Veteran will set grant pool efficiency on both nodes to 50% upon acceptance into the authority set. Our average grant pool contribution will be 50%, not 25%. Upon finalization of the WVU Foundation endowment, grant pool efficiency will be re-evaluated to determine best course of action to fund the endowment through Veteran’s second node earnings. In the unlikely case the WVU Foundation endowment falls through, our average efficiency will remain 50% to the grant pool until we can establish an endowment with another university. Veteran believes the contributions we make to the endowment will be significant enough to provide a huge return to the protocol, ANOs, FCT holders, and the DLT community at large. When successful, the media release alone will provide huge visibility and awareness to the Factom protocol and community. Our goal since day one has been to find ways to provide both awareness AND usage to the Factom protocol. This is one of our commitments to the protocol and actions we intend to take to accomplish just that.
 
@Emulvera

1. Has your team met with anyone from WVU to discuss this proposal and was WVU interested?

Yes, we have discussed with the WVU Foundation the process for establishing an endowment and discussed the intention to utilize a cryptocurrency for this. They were interested.

2. How do you plan on structuring the donation to require the fund to be used for the benefit of Factom?

We will enter into an agreement with WVU on behalf of the Factom protocol to establish curriculum that accelerates research, development, and education in ways that advance blockchain transaction speed, efficiency, security, awareness, and expand its uses.

Pending legal review and acceptance by all parties, we intend to structure the endowment in the following ways:

  1. $100,000 to establish the Factom Forward Initiative, providing scholarships to undergraduate and graduate research fellowships.
  2. $100,000 to establish a WVU Blockchain Research Laboratory, so the university can conduct research on blockchain-backed technology.
  3. $250,000 for Blockchain course development, creating undergraduate and graduate curriculum focused on blockchain technology and establishing a Factom-certified developer program. (essentially we want graduates of WVU to be the next Brian Deery’s, Paul Snow’s, and Steven Masley’s to the Factom protocol so they can enjoy their weekends more…)
  4. $50,000 to establish an annual government-focused hackathon, utilizing blockchain and Factom technology to provide blockchain-backed solutions to real-world government requirements. WVU’s proximity to the National Capital Region, provides an opportunity for government entities to participate in the reviewing and judging process, furthuring the awareness of Factom and blockchain-backed solutions.

Keep in mind, this endowment is a Factom sponsored endowment. All Factom stakeholders will benefit immensely from the awareness and proposed long-term results of this endowment.

3. And is your vision that the endowment's work would be done by the university (students) or external parties, and what would be the goal of the endowment?

We intend for the university students to play a major role in the research and development of Factom and blockchain backed projects. Our intention here is long-term development and sustainment of the Factom protocol. Veteran will be responsible for establishing the largest blockchain-funded endowment that will produce blockchain (and specifically Factom) certified developers that will enter into the workforce upon graduation armed with the knowledge to advance and develop the protocol further. All ANOs, employers, and community members will benefit from the establishment of this endowment.

4. US Federate and State government networks present many challenges for software companies and the variety of networks often require substantial support contracts - has your team discussed your proposal with any government agencies that have authorities of what enterprise software solution contracts they consider?

Nolan is a DAWIA Level 1 certified Program Manager as well as a trained USG Contract Officer Representative. He understands both the government side and industry side to the contract process. We cannot go into details about any potential contracts, however, we have had meetings with government agencies to identify their requirements and how we can provide solutions. The Factom GovCloud will be available for other ANOs to utilize to provide their own solutions to USG agencies and institutions concerned with the security of their data.
 
@MattO,

1. What pledges you are making to grow the protocol via grants (if any)?

Our pledge to grow the protocol via grants will be to coordinate, setup and deploy the first and only Factom GovCloud Network. This will provide an incredibly powerful medium through which existing ANO’s can meet the comprehensive needs of potential USG customers who are concerned with meeting FedRAMP High Baseline, Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS), International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and the Department of Defense (DoD) Cloud Computing Security Requirements Guide (SRG) Levels 2 and 4 requirements. USG agencies are interested in Factom. They are interested in the vast solutions it can provide, but are restricted in their ability to utilize the protocol under the existing infrastructure. Veteran will propose the grant to create an enterprise-level Factom GovCloud network that provides the access for these USG agencies to utilize the protocol to meet their requirements.

2. What pledges you are making to grow the protocol in general (via ANO payouts or simply by time/resource dedication)?

The Veteran team will not take a salary in the short term. As we have thus far; we will continue dedicating our time to meeting with USG agencies to advance Factom awareness. In addition, we will be gathering information on the requirements they possess and ways the community can provide solutions.

We are excited about the potential our SBIR/STTR/DIUx grant proposals can bring to the Factom Community. When we talk about adoption and usage, these grants are a way of efficiently connecting the Factom protocol to what Paul Snow referred to as “fire hoses”. Veteran sees these as our way to generate income for Veteran while increasing the usage for the protocol the community desires.
 
@Julianft,

1) How many person-hours per week do you expect your team to devote to this ecosystem?

This question is difficult to answer. A tremendous amount of time, effort and capital has already been expended to get to this point. We want to ensure this time is not dismissed. We have been operating at a loss for the last six months traveling to meet with Factom Inc, agencies within the National Capital Region, teleconferences with other ANOs, and maintaining multiple nodes on the Testnet. We have done this out of our passion and conviction for the protocol as well as a show of faith in doing our part in furthering the protocol.

Our executive team has solely focused on this project for the last six months and we estimate each individual has given at minimum 20 hours of their time weekly to reach this milestone. Going forward, we estimate the exact number of hours per person per week will be dependent on the FCT market price, implementation of our proposal as well as travel requirements with USG agency representatives. It could be as few as 25 hours to in excess of 50 hours. It largely depends on what phase of implementing our business plan that we are in and the amount of continued research will be involved.

2) How will these hours be distributed among your members?

Each member has specialties and strengths that are utilized in the advancement of the Factom protocol. The answer will vary depending upon which specific part of our business plan we are implementing at the time. Our executive team all have different operational responsibilities and at different times, will be required to manage those with increased workloads. We have already anticipated these requirements and have put measures into place in order to strengthen our position going forward.
Everyone at Veteran are in a very unique position within our existing professions that we do not have to take a salary. In addition, we also have the flexibility to go to a limited hour requirement and can dedicate ourselves wholeheartedly to developing and advancing the protocol. In short; we have both the flexibility and operational structure to effectively further the protocol.

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 … )?

We intend to spend a majority of our time and effort on being the business development ANO, with a focus on educating the USG on the value Factom brings to the table. We have a handful of projects we intend to bring to full-force upon selection as an ANO. Nolan will maintain his involvement with the various factom community involvement (Guide/ANO meetings, discord, testnet, etc..).

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?

Veteran is committed to the long-term advancement of the protocol. Our proposals will take time to get established but bring with it exponential potential.

In the next six months, Veteran intends to have finalized the framework on the WVU endowment, which will conclude in creating the nation’s largest blockchain endowment foundation. In turn; the Factom protocol as well as the price of FCT will garner massive visibility as well as create a national platform to catalyze awareness within all spheres of the blockchain community at large.

Within the next year, Veteran intends to have multiple SBIR/STTR/DIUx grant proposals submitted and awards announced. A scaled-down Factom GovCloud will be available so we can solicit and demonstrate ways Factom can provide solutions to the USG’s requirements. Pending market performance or grant proposal results, we will be working to employ the full-scale Factom GovCloud.
 
Last edited:
@88mph,

1) What do you see as the major, specific pain-points that Factom could solve for the government entities you mention?

Thank you for the question and interest. Factom provides a medium through which the USG can save millions through auditing and verification, chain of custody, GAO compliance, etc. There are many major solutions we can see Factom providing to the USG. One is the ability to audit within the acquisitions field. Nolan managed a multi-million dollar portfolio of which the total amount in control under the directorate exceeded $2B. The directorate managed one, two, and three year appropriations. Tracking the funding from appropriation through obligation to closeout was accomplished using rudimentary means. Factom can provide the ability to track how a dollar moves through the budget cycle while limiting the exact nature of the expense. Tracking can be accomplished to determine the obligation rates. This specific use case can be applied to multiple USG agencies budgetary and tracking processes.

Another major project we are working on is the chain of evidence within the DOJ. The Veteran executive team are intimately aware of the requirements involved with regard to chain of evidence and prosecuting individuals. We see an opportunity in Factom providing the foundation to be able to track evidence from collection through storage and eventual disposal. The chain of custody is paramount to proving any wrongdoing on the part of the accused. Anytime this is lost, many of the hours and energy expended to collect that evidence is lost. Factom can save the government hundreds of millions of dollars in the management of evidence and chain of custody.

We also intend to showcase the Factom protocol as a measure to provide Drug Supply Chain Security Act compliance. Factom can be utilized to track the pharmacological production and disposition cycle. We have some ideas on how this can also be utilized to provide a solution to the opioid crisis, of which West Virginia has been one of the most critically impacted states.

There are a number of National Guard specific requirements that are funded through the National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account. We have solutions to ideas ranging from total asset visibility, Fatality Search and Recovery Team remains tracking, Incident and Awareness Assessment collection management, Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and High-Yield Explosive detection, and patient tracking and treatment systems, to name a few. We know who to talk to regarding these solutions and have the means to get face-to-face meetings with the action officers and division chiefs who manage these portfolios. All of our proposed solutions utilize the Factom protocol as a backbone through which the various systems can all write to and be validated against.

Some of the links to previous and existing requirements can be found here:

http://www.ang.af.mil/Portals/77/documents/Resources/2017 DCP Book_Reduced.pdf
http://www.ang.af.mil/Portals/77/do...s/2018 DCP Book.pdf?ver=2017-08-03-100727-930
http://www.ang.af.mil/Portals/77/do...ed - Optimized).pdf?ver=2018-07-10-142845-313

The requirements in these books represent the critical needs of the National Guard Bureau’s domestic response capabilities. As an organization that understands the workings of NGB, we are confident our solutions will not only exceed the expectations, but also provide validation that blockchain technology, and more specifically, Factom, can be trusted and incorporated into future contract awards.

2) If you were going to pitch use of the protocol to one or more government officials, who would they be (ideally), and what is the gist of what you would say?

One of the interesting items to note is that there little to no “pitching” required. We are very well versed with the needs and requirements of the various agencies that we will be serving through over ten years of direct contact and face-to-face meetings with agency executive teams. There are common themes among multiple agencies that they have yet to effectively manage and the Factom protocol can provide the solution. We will be the vehicle in which these USG agencies will be educated and indoctrinated into using the protocol for the monetary and operational benefit of their own agency. We have developed specific use cases for each agency that were developed by conversations we have had in the past with their representatives. We already know that we are providing a solution to their stated problem. As with anything with the USG, time and repetitions with key points of contact are paramount.

Specific to who would the representatives of the agencies be, as in times past, we were able to make significant progress with a directorate or division level leadership and IT officer.
 
NK01)
@nolan_vbif Ok I get the donation discussion and the 25% versus 50%, but the statement below clearly states the intent:
Thank you for the questions and requests to clarify our position. When we refer to earnings, we mean the FCT that the authority server would earn (~1123 FCT per node per month). For our proposed second node, we are donating half of the earnings, ~561 FCT to the WVU Foundation per month. Our objective will be to donate $500,000 to create the largest blockchain endowment fund in the country. To summarize, for our second node, Veteran will collect ~561 FCT and the WVU Foundation will collect ~561 FCT per month. Our intention will be to program the ~561 FCT per month to go directly to WVU Foundation’s address. For our first node, we will be providing 50% of the ~1123 FCT earned to the grant pool and 50% will be collected by Veteran. Until the Factom/WVU Foundation details are finalized and in place, 50% of the earnings from the second node (~561 FCT) will be contributed to the grant pool as normal.
Now you are pledging 50% to the grantpool. In reality every ANO can decide what their efficiency will be once onboarded. There might be some social aspects to that as well, but you would be in a good position, since you made it clear from day one.

As such I believe it to be a fair question on whether to rate this at 25% percent. Otherwise everybody will put in submissions in this form in the future. Any thoughts on that?
 
NK02)
Will utilize Factom on Factom technology to provide the Factom protocol for use on US Government-specific networks
•Anchored into the Main Net, generating EC usage while building awareness within one of the largest on-demand customers
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?
 
Last edited:
@Niels,

NK01) Now you are pledging 50% to the grantpool. In reality every ANO can decide what their efficiency will be once onboarded. There might be some social aspects to that as well, but you would be in a good position, since you made it clear from day one.

As such I believe it to be a fair question on whether to rate this at 25% percent. Otherwise everybody will put in submissions in this form in the future. Any thoughts on that?

Niels,

Thank you for your question. If I were in your position and the positions of the guides, I would score the overall efficiency as 50% and here is why:

1. On day one of our acceptance into the authority set, our efficiency for both nodes will be set to 50%.

2. The establishment of the endowment is not a streamlined process and will not be completed for months. We have been waiting for the ANO selection announcement to take the next steps in formalizing the relationship with WVU. Offering to fund an endowment without any legitimacy would be irresponsible of us and wasteful of the WVU foundation’s time. The initial reception from WVU has been warm and we are excited about the potential outcomes. The endowment is not guaranteed; however, we see this as a major piece in our commitment to the protocol to establish as quickly as feasibly possible. Being that this is a community, we plan to open any efficiency adjustment to discussion on the Factomize forum, discord, etc… to ensure everyone is aware of our intent and whether it is appropriate to proceed prior to changing any efficiency. We accept any pressures (and repercussions) if we go changing our efficiency without discussing it and without the approval of the community at-large, but have no intention to do so. In an effort to be open and honest with the guides, other ANO’s (including candidates), and the community, we wanted to disclose our plan for executing the endowment should we be successful at establishing it. At the end of the day, the endowment will be to further and grow the protocol for the long-term. We would not be proposing to change our efficiency if we did not feel this was the case.

3. We see the discussion in the market channels. The existing FCT price and community concern regarding inflation has led us to evaluate our position with regards to self-funding this initiative. We would like to think a press release announcing this endowment will have immediate positive effect on the excitement within the community and to garner an institutional-level awareness outside the community looking at what Factom brings to the blockchain technology sector. We will do everything in our power to establish this endowment, but may be faced with the reality that funding it is impossible until the dollar value of FCT recovers. It pains us to think that this may be the case, but it is true. Regardless of the outcome, both of Veteran’s nodes will remain set to 50% efficiency, contributing to the grant pool until the establishment, discussion, and hopeful funding of the endowment.
Our goal as an ANO is first and foremost to securely run successful authority nodes to further decentralize the protocol. Our firms members are committed to growing the protocol in whatever means necessary and we will find the time when available to expand our government outreach (via both the GovCloud and SBIR/STTR/DIU grant) and establishing the endowment fund as our primary and immediate objectives. In addition; we will be attending events where we can market the value Factom brings to entities who may be hesitant about blockchain technology as well as continuing our community involvement.
 
Last edited:
@Niels

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?

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.
 
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.
Could you go into more details. I don't get the critical enough data to justify it in the context of hashes (pure data on Factom certainly)?
I could see other reasons for instance, but that is not about the hashes themselves or lifetime planning. A blockchain also means you have a time associated at commit time. Hashes are one-way functions that over time might mean a collision could be forced if flaws in the hash mechanism is found. When entropy is too low on the data you are hashing you have a potential problem, but then you should be asking yourself whether it should be hashed on the blockchain anyway. I fail to see how Factom on Factom would help in the above situation where hashes are being used. Please ELI5 me.
 
@briandeery,

BD02) I am uncomfortable with your self selecting of grant priorities, especially by setting your efficiency all the way to 0%. While WVU is respectable, this feels like a tradeoff of neglecting near term protocol problems affecting the community today for distant potential ambiguous benefits.

I’m not sure what ambiguous benefits you are highlighting? I think any advancement of the protocol in terms of both visibility and usage as well as further decentralization of the core development is beneficial to the protocol as a whole and all ANOs. In addition to the other ANOs, we would hope Factom Inc. would be one of the first to welcome a major announcement like the partnering of the Factom protocol (through which Factom Inc gets visibility) with a university to further the research and adoption of blockchain technology; all accomplished under the Factom banner, not Veteran. We had actually hoped, if successful, that we could get Factom Inc to participate in the prioritization to help alleviate some of the development workload.

On the subject of self-selecting of grant priorities, nowhere did we mention altering our efficiency to 0%. Where are you seeing this? The lowest our overall efficiency between two nodes (if you assume the WVU endowment is completely worthless) would be 25% (50% to Veteran address, 25% to grant pool, 25% to a worthless WVU address). We stated above we will not be altering our efficiency without first discussing it with the other ANOs and the community. This is also assuming the FCT price facilitates the funding of the endowment. If it is not worth it, we will not pursue what has been described as a “distant potential ambiguous benefit” and 50% of our overall reimbursement for running the nodes will continue being given to the grant pool to fund immediate Factom protocol needs. In addition; it is our view that working on behalf of the protocol and Factom Inc. at our own expense to further the protocol for the last seven months should prove to you and everyone how committed we are. So; let us be clear about this and put the ambiguity to bed once and for all. Our efficiency is set at 50%. We are currently working on behalf of the protocol at our own expense, time and resources. We are actively meeting with executives from multiple agencies within the USG at our own expense and to everyone in this communities benefit. For those that are keeping score; that would be described as privatizing losses and socializing gains. As we are drafting this response, we are 16 hours into synching a Mainnet GovCloud node. Once completed, it will be a major step forward in providing a vector for USG entities to do business with the Factom protocol. We have been and continue to be serving and giving to the protocol without receiving anything; and to be questioned about our self-selection of grant priorities leaves our entire executive team uncomfortable and misunderstood.
 
@briandeery,

BD01) Do you realize that factom as it stands today cannot pay out to more than one address per server? This complicates the plan to have multiple payouts per server for the charity you are planning.

Yes, we are aware. IF we are successful in being able to establish the endowment, we will likely alter one node for grant pool/WVU payout while the other node is for grant/Veteran payout. This is obviously not long term, considering we will be forfeiting a node at some point in time. Where this may become an issue is in the future when Veteran must relinquish a node. We will evaluate the tax implications of this and decide upon the best course of action to meet all of our obligations. Maybe a grant proposal to allow multiple address payouts is in the not too distant future… :)
 
Last edited:
@Niels,

NK follow-up 01) Could you go into more details. I don't get the critical enough data to justify it in the context of hashes (pure data on Factom certainly)? I could see other reasons for instance, but that is not about the hashes themselves or lifetime planning. A blockchain also means you have a time associated at commit time. Hashes are one-way functions that over time might mean a collision could be forced if flaws in the hash mechanism is found. When entropy is too low on the data you are hashing you have a potential problem, but then you should be asking yourself whether it should be hashed on the blockchain anyway. I fail to see how Factom on Factom would help in the above situation where hashes are being used. Please ELI5 me.

We are first to admit that Factom on Factom is a concept that we are still trying to better understand. When we had proposed the GovCloud concept, one of the primary concerns we had was ensuring our efforts would not impact usage on the mainnet significantly if the data is sensitive but unclassified. Our goal is not to pull uses onto a private chain, but if the customer is committed to using a disparate network, we wanted to evaluate options to still generate some usage for the public mainnet. This was one solution offered up. We still have a long way to go to bring it to fruition and may not be possible.


If the mere fact that the public Factom network provides a vector to exploitation, we may not be able to make it work. There are cross-domain solutions but they may be prohibitively expensive to provide the Factom data layer service. What we are discussing is a small piece of what we plan to allocate some of our remaining man-hours and expertise outside of maintaining the node to pursue. We intend to be the USG business development arm of the protocol, providing the medium for other ANOs to market and capitalize on the largest on-demand customer.


We believe in the value the Factom Protocol provides to the many vertical markets that exist. We see the Veteran team as a value-added entity that will enable the Factom protocol to penetrate further into these verticals. Our proposal for a GovCloud is merely a vector to demonstrate the technology, generate awareness, and increase adoption. It may not be obvious, but USG entities are increasingly adopting cloud computing technology on various classification networks. Providing the Factom protocol on these networks to establish trust amongst the entities is the goal here.
 
@SamuelVanderwaal,

SV01) I second Niels' question above. Can you provide a concrete example of how a private Factom blockchain provides benefit to one of your clients over a standard database?

Samuel, thank you for the inquiry. We see more to Factom than just the blockchain available to consumers. We see Factom as a technology, a data layer that the world has not yet truly realized the potential of. We envision a world in the future where data that is not stored via a blockchain is not considered valid. Factom is by far the furthest along in being able to make this happen.

Private chain example: Agency A collaborates with Agency B to action Target #69. The network used to gather, process, and disseminate the information is not a public network, but managed by an independent organization (Agency C). Agency A and Agency B do not always cooperate, have competing budgets, and sometimes are at odds with each other in their information gathering and sharing. Providing a data layer like Factom where they can both contribute their piece of the investigation knowing that the information will not be altered in any way by the other agency, contains timestamps of collection/processing, and can mask the sensitive information that may reveal sources or means of gathering said information is what we are talking about. Agency C of said network can run the Factom protocol on their data nodes to provide the blockchain capability (or we can provide the nodes via the GovCloud).

We have identified a potential market where law enforcement entities regularly upload data to the CJIS compliant GovCloud via the Amazon Cloud Storage Gateway. We are preparing to pursue a solution that will increases awareness of the technology while significantly generating usage through tapping into the Storage Gateway utilization. The potential to commit every piece of cloud-based evidence to the Factom blockchain is immense. The most powerful aspect of the concept is that the Factom protocol will be providing a solution to a real-world problem… proving chain of custody. These are the kinds of ideas we intend to bring to fruition that benefit our firm and the community at large, including the other ANOs.
 
Top