iexec-RLC Technical Discussion Thread #2

[Anonymous No.24344434]

> Why only 2 Cores per worker?
> Is this going to change?
> Or is there a reason for limiting workers to 2 cores at present?
> Is the end goal to become sort of like a decentralized version of AWS, Azure, and GCE?
> Why is this better than current popular cloud computing solutions like Googles GCE?

Anyone else here running a worker node or worker pool? Why? And what does your current setup look like?

[Anonymous No.24345424]

>>24344434
bump

[Anonymous No.24345648]

>>24345424
I'm setting up a worker node since starting this thread, figured no one here knows anything and /g/ hates crypto so 4chan is in kind of a sad state for this kind of stuff.

/biz/ discusses cryptocurrency, but with profit based off gambling being the main focus. /g/ discusses tech, and is suited for technical discussion of crypto, but hates that shit being mentioned.

Either way, so far it's easy enough, but also a pain in the ass. The Quickstart guide is kind of shit and skims over a lot of necessities.

The VM appliance is nice and easy to get started with. The trickiest thing is linking a wallet and making sure you connect it to the right sidechain.

Still learning. Wish there was an actually useful up-to-date guide.

[Anonymous No.24345684]

>>24344434
>>24345424
>>24345648
DRNSMDO

[Anonymous No.24345722]

>>24344434
Monitoring this thread

I am interesting as well

[Anonymous No.24345737]

>>24345722
Interested*
fuck autocorrect

[Anonymous No.24345786]

>>24345648
I think the sidechain RPC URL is: https://iex.ec/goerli

Based off old video tutorial where a different sidechain URL was used, I went to the iexec explorer and they have three to choose from (pic related):

I don't know what the difference is between bellecour sidechain and goerti sidechain, but I think bellecour is the current sidechain? There's also testnets and the main ethereum chain? I don't really understand this blockchain stuff and I'm stumbling through.

https://explorer.iex.ec/bellecour

Going to use this as the RPC URL, except replace explorer with https:// and connect it via custom rpc using metamask.

[Anonymous No.24345938]

>>24345786
Now I'm stuck here:

The info message says:

"The chain ID is used for signing transactions. It must match the chain ID returned by the network. Enter a decimal or hexadecimal number starting with '0x'.

How do I determine the Chain ID for the bellecour chain? I assume that's what its asking for?

I know this project is still in beta, but for a decentralized world computer to be effective it's going to need to be a lot easier to setup than this, or you're never going to have enough node operators.

I'll keep at it. But seriously, you will never have enough processing power for a truly decentralized cloud super computer if the barrier to entry is this high. I hope iExec team can simplify this in the future.

[Anonymous No.24345970]

>>24345938
Barrier to entry for mostly all tech is annoying at first.

[Anonymous No.24345987]

>>24345938
Somehow it worked, but it didn't let me click save. Makes no sense to me.

[Anonymous No.24346006]

>>24345938
Join the telegram group, ask the devs there

[Anonymous No.24346412]

>>24344434
So what kinds of rewards are we looking at here?

[Anonymous No.24346417]

>>24345987
>>24346006
Thanks, might do. Got it, finally! Just need to add funds to the wallet now.

[Anonymous No.24346525]

>>24346412
Rewards are based on whatever the job costs based on whoever sets the price

[Anonymous No.24346542]

>>24346412
It depends whether RLC achieves what it has set out to do. If it does, then I assume rewards will be similar to, or potentially exceed what you might expect to earn as a Chainlink Certified Node Operator. The reason I've gone with RLC is due to a currenly lower barrier to entry. If it succeeds, and I can get in the market early as a reliable decentralized source of cloud computation, then the rewards naturally will be dependent on the value of RLC, since you would be paid in RLC. But, assuming it gets to the stage that I'm being paid RLC for acting as a decentralized cloud provider - well then, at that point I've probably won. It's either that, or the value of RLC remains too low to incentivize decentralized cloud data providers (like my experimental neet node here) and the whole project fails, or RLC succeeds, the value of the RLC token reaches a point of parity where the cost of running a worker node is covered by the RLC earned for providing services, and this leads to a eureka moment where RLC expands the same way the internet has, allowing me to expand my worker pool using the profits gained by RLC, leading to a more reliable decentralized cloud compute platform as other node operators do the same. The dominos fall into place, and the token increases in value as the RLC worker pools become larger, more numerous, and more capable as a result of RLC value increasing and more customers requesting the service of the decentralized world super computer.

Figured I might as well get in early. Risk/Reward ratio is high, but worth it. If I lose, then I lose a few thousand. If I win, and RLC succeeds, then I never have to work again.

[Anonymous No.24346553]

>>24346417
Keep at it man, I’m rooting for you

[Anonymous No.24346583]

>>24346542
>then the rewards naturally will be dependent on the value of RLC
False. Crypto is infinitely divisible and thus the price of RLC does not matter. That's like saying you can't pay anyone in BTC for a cup of coffee because it costs 16k for 1 BTC.

[Anonymous No.24346657]

>>24346583
Maybe I'm misunderstanding something here, not having a go or anything. You can tell by this thread I'm not the most technically capable person around. Just stumbling through.

But... Even if RLC is divisible by however many decimal points, doesn't the reward earned still depend on the value of RLC? I mean... RLC is the reward "earned" for hosting compute services, so naturally, the reward is dependent on the value of RLC?

I don't know where I'm wrong here. Sure, you get paid a certain amount of RLC from whoever requests the job, and that might have a fixed dollar value to RLC at the time they make the request... But it would still come down to RLC value overall? Right?

[Anonymous No.24346726]

>>24346657
Also, I would imagine that eventually RLC would expand its services in a way not so dissimilar to payment tiers of cloud compute providers today. After a certain point (if successful), RLC World Super Computer would be ubiquitous enough that their would likely be a platform for simply renting out a portion of the world computer like "gold service, x amount of compute power" for "x RLC amount" per month. Right? Or would it remain a system where individual worker pools are contracted by a client privately? If so, then it will lead to a monopoly of the largest cloud compute providers in the workerpool anyway, and they will grow to corporate size like google, amazon, and microsoft purely for being able to earn the most RLC and expand their compute resources... And this will lead to centralization anyway, wont it? No company will want to pay for a neet node at the bottom of the worker pool if they can pay RLC to the best worker pool available - and that worker pool can expand using its profits?

Either way, providing compute will lead to RLC rewards... Decentralization will either happen, or it wont. If it doesn't, the project will probably fail.

[Anonymous No.24346727]

>>24346657
As the network grows more people provide power so their % of the rewards is lowered proportionally.

[Anonymous No.24346739]

>>24346726
I just realized, there will obviously be worker pools that are comprised of hundreds, if not thousands - maybe even tens of thousands, of neet nodes allowing competition with large centralized worker pools.

[Anonymous No.24346764]

>>24346727
And with 87 million RLC total, that could potentially boost the value of 1 Token to an extremely high value. Imagine, 1 RLC being the cost of a 24 hours of computation larger than any super computer in existence today. The token will have to scale in proportion to this, since demand for access to this resource will naturally increase!

Ha! Holy shit, how is this under $2 per RLC right now?

[Anonymous No.24346768]

>>24346657
It's a job economy. Workers (or worker pools) set the cost per job and get paid if they perform. Can be 1000RLC can be 5RLC.
The price of RLC doesn't matter because the "actual cost" will be in dollars or whatever currency.

>Sure, you get paid a certain amount of RLC from whoever requests the job, and that might have a fixed dollar value to RLC at the time they make the request... But it would still come down to RLC value overall? Right?

I don't understand the confusion, if someone gets paid 1RLC @1$ or 2RLC @$0.50 or 0.5RLC @2$ its the same outcome. The price of computation will always be first thought in dollars. RLC is just the medium of exchange.

However in the distant future, RLC will become stable at a massive price level due to volume, and then the payouts will probably switch to thinking in RLC's.

[Anonymous No.24346807]

>>24346727
That's not necessarily true unless the market dictates that. There is no inherent % reduction built in. You are still getting paid on a per job level.

>>24346739
That's kinda the idea why iExec will outprice centralized cloud

>>24346726
I don't see why someone can't code anything they want in regards to how RLC is spent

[Anonymous No.24346810]

>>24344434
Where do I buy?

[Anonymous No.24346820]

>>24346768
Ah, aha! I get what you're talking about. Makes sense. Sort of like credits for an online platform (e.g. Nintendo points or Microsoft Points or whatever) being valued in dollars by the consumer, me. $5 for 5 Nintendo Points kind of thing. 1 Nintendo Point is worth a dollar in this case, but naturally I don't think in Nintendo Points as a default form of valuation.

[Anonymous No.24346835]

>>24346820
Sure, sort of, except in the future it'll just be 1 RLC = 1 RLC. Just like how 1BTC = 1BTC

[Anonymous No.24346842]

>>24346807
>I don't see why someone can't code anything they want in regards to how RLC is spent

Yeah, now that you mention it, me neither. It really is like the early internet, with many of the developments to come still on the horizon.

[Anonymous No.24346869]

>>24344434
can u not just change the number of processors in the settings lol
2 is the default

[Anonymous No.24346879]

>>24346842
Yea it's still pretty early despite being 5 years in or so.
My favorite use case is probably the hyperconnection of centralized clouds to eachother

[Anonymous No.24346898]

>>24345648
https://youtu.be/iddbO5HeO-0

[Anonymous No.24346944]

>>24346869
But is iExec actually able to make use of more than 2 CPU cores? I don't want to add more cores to the VM, only to have them not be utilized by the worker.

I thought it was similar to how video games could only utilize two CPU cores in the early days of quad core CPU's, because the games/game engines at the time simply hadn't been designed to take advantage of multiple cores and threads.

Is iExec similar to this, or can it make use of more than 2 cores at present?

[Anonymous No.24346970]

>>24346944
I dont see why it couldnt use more than 2, its offchain...

Unless there's a technical reason why idk id ask in slack

[Anonymous No.24347031]

posting in cool bread

[Anonymous No.24347092]

>>24346944
>But is iExec actually able to make use of more than 2 CPU cores?
yes its a cloud computing token lmao
2 is the default so people can use it on potato pcs

[Anonymous No.24347479]

>>24345786
>>24345938
>>24345987
you're doing more to further the project than any "buy and hold NSMDO"-tard

[Anonymous No.24347503]

technical details of rlc

[Anonymous No.24347929]

bumpp

[Anonymous No.24348420]

I thought public worker pools were canceled as of a few months ago?

[Anonymous No.24348552]

Bump

[Anonymous No.24348579]

>>24348420
>He bought ze fud
Pamp et

[Anonymous No.24348772]

>>24345648
>/g/ hates crypto

Ask in a technical way, not like some fuckin moonboi.

[Anonymous No.24348816]

Literal dogshit

[Anonymous No.24348828]

The worker pools closed.

[Anonymous No.24348843]

>>24346970
Realistically speaking what's the number of HSTS tranners who are attracted to actual normal masculine men, not twinks, femboys or other tranners? 1%?

[Anonymous No.24348941]

plz don’t let rlc moon before 12th of december, all of my xrp gains will be going into oil barrels

[Anonymous No.24350142]

iexec dropped public pools/workers a year ago
theyre focused on enterprises now