I have a unique perspective on the AMP being between a RHOC and a hard place having friends on both sides.

RChain clergy see Synereo abandoning commitment to scalable proven behaviour of networks under user control owned by the people.

Synereo clergy sees RChain as a pipedream solution to unsolvable problems with too many loose ends to be successful.

In my view they are both right however there is some magic on the RChain direction enabling evolution that in effect conquers the impossible.  I plan to redeem 3/4 of my amps for rhoc.

A case in point is FLP impossibility which proves you cannot guarantee consensus with even one faulty processor on the network. While we may like to ignore the fact this proves that even Bitcoin is vulnerable.  One the one hand the Casper Proof of Stake consensus mechanism of RChain will always be flawed necessarily it embodies a means of attracting consensus in a maximally consistent history attracting in what I call proof of proof. At the same time the rules for conflict resolution are allowed to evolve by following personal rules innovating solutions by human consensus.

Furthermore the RChain vision offers a model of provably trustworthy computing where everything is verified and nothing is taken for granted. This applies far beyond the domain of ordinary blockchains reinverting the internet to be safe enabling personal and social freedom leading toward victory in the information war empowering us to freely collaborate on solving the problems facing humanity.

Synereoites laugh a Greg for suggesting that RChain will enable us to effectively deal with issues like climate change and call me a "true believer" in Greg's pipe dream. I do understand their reservations and agree building the Synereo social network now with existing tools is a good idea.  I agree with Greg that the attention economy will eventually require RChain of the equivalent but it is also important then we experiment with a first approximation that can serve as a bridge to the future. https://medium.com/@jimscarver/rchain-best-synereo-scenario-it-may-be-a-very-good-time-to-buy-amps-f1ce6e446e11#.extf5za67

Getting Synereo out soon should be easy. Building RChain will be hard. While I say RChin is hard, the difficulty is being true to the vision that is so BIG and revolutionary, challenging so much of what we have learned and come to believe, employing mathematics beyond the reach of ordinary programmers, that if it were not for the faith of people like myself and the great minds participating in the project it would indeed be a pipe dream. I am reminded of the words of JFK, "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organise and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.”

The devotion of Greg, myself and many others gives me confidence that we will do this thing with or without finding.  At the say time, the prospects of funding from Otto, others, and potential token sales convinces me RChain will be well funded.

I am active in synereo slack and Dor never even suggested they might develop rchain.  He said rchain, being open source, is one option they might migrate to in the future. What you may be referring to is Dor's statement that there was no decision by the board to not build rchain on December 12th.

RChain is NOT Synereo IP since greg's  design resulted from the Casper POS research funded by the Ethereum Foundation.

The one sided picture I see largely being painted here is simply wrong.

Many investors, including myself, bought into a revolutionary design of a provably correct, provably private, provably secure internet based on the formal asynchronous process calculus.  The internet is after all a network of asynchronous processes and process calculus it the right tool to constrain its behaviour.  The Dor is apparently diverging from that vision.

During initial development, deficiencies were discovered in achieving all the goals of synereo. Greg had been overly optimistic about the utility of his legacy code. Plus it was clear that existing blockchain technology could not scale the network as originally envisioned.  With full support of the community effort was diverted from alpha to the development of the Casper protocol and RChain which would have far greater utility for distributed applications generally than the original design.

Investors in this round were sold the RChain solution and many are angry that Synereo is changing its course now that the funds are in.

The second fallacy being propagated here is that Greg is incompetent and cannot deliver working code. Greg is an outstanding computer scientist who constantly produces working code that often runs the first time without error. He has been doing this in hangouts weekly. He has an open coding style under the constant scrutiny of other professionals. He often amazes us.

It is true the alpha has problems. It has served as a great proof of concept and all the basic capabilities have been tested individually.  It has not been Greg's major focus since the decision to rearchetect a solution. But that he has not delivered anything is total garbage.  Dozens of community members have run nodes and is supporting publically accessible community nodes. It is expected key issues will be fixed soon.
http://i.imgur.com/cbv4ZZV.jpg
http://divvydao.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/synereonodeusers-768x452.jpg

http://divvydao.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Synereo-Cartoon-1-1024x385.jpg  The prior link is out a date. I Mean to say "WOW!" not "HA!

Again you are speaking nonsense. There is ample material for review and comment at http://blog.synereo.com/ and the basic information at http://www.synereo.com/learn-more/, in the weekly hangouts and on the slack.

While I agree completely that more formal up do date publications would be nice, there are some pretty awesome innovations weekly and no paper submitted for publication would be out of date before it came out.  Greg's academic credentials are beyond question and there is more formal definition behind synereo than 99% of the decentralized applications out there.  Greg has done some recent papers http://www.mathpubs.com/author/Lucius+Gregory+Meredith have much more meat than the "hand waving" you characterize. I consider Greg's time better spent on developing Synereo which is why the community is taking on expressing Greg's abstract mathematics in terms you might understand.

Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it.  You do see some merit but doubt there will be strong adoption.  You raise the specter of potential legal issues with what is emerging as best practices in the crypto DAO arena.  You begrudge the founders of a truly revolutionary idea a share of the action.  They are not the least bit greedy in my book and are creating an environment that algorithmically trickles wealth down to the participants for the attention they generate, not to their pocketbooks.

You have been pointed to what you can do with synereo for almost a year but keep insisting there is nothing there. Why? http://blog.synereo.com/2015/08/12/top-5-things-you-can-do-with-synereo-now/

Where do you get all the time for all this nonsense?  Are you trying to keep me busy to slow Synereo progress?  It seems to be a destructive activity with no up side.  How is it that you do not have better things to do?

You are greatly misinformed here.  The technology behind Synereo, Greg's SpecialK, the persistent distributed process calculus machine, had been proven in production for more than two years. They also had the distributed Splicious social networking app prototype of Synereo running on SpecialK.  I believe you know all this but continue to repeat that Synereo was vaporware.  Why?

Greg work in process calculus leading BizTalk was also a bases for business process orchestration standards including BPEL, the workhorse of Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) used by enterprises today.  Greg disowned BPEL when it deviated from his model limiting its application. But that its the best thing out there we owe in no small party to Greg.

Greg work on Casper with Ethereum is the tip of the iceberg of the blockchain research Greg is doing. He has devised architecture capable of thousands of transactions per second.  He is leading an evolution of the blockchain that is scalable, objectively fair, incorruptible and mathematically proven. Watch the hangouts, they are awesome.  Synereo is blockchain agnostic and it is not planned to have its own blockchain initially, the point of the research is that synereo is guarenteed to scale and will be able to offer blockchain innovations to users in the future.
You seem to have ignored all the reasons for adoption I have given. Privacy is important to many who would rather not use facebook who will insist their contacts use a private decentralized system nobody owns or controls.  Many users do not want a user experience that is dictated to them without the opportunity to branch their own.  Many do not want others to control their streams.

If everything was spelled out completely in the original whitepaper they would have had it already and not need any funding.  The whitepaper spells out sufficient justification for the approach, not every detail.  You are asking for a book, not a whitepaper.

If you are suggesting that the average person does not understand what synereo is doing, that's very true.  Its quite abstract and the average person or investor isn't going to see the real value it offers without a lot of research and theoretical mathematics.  Dumbing it down is one of Synereo's major initiatives currently along with autonomous governance, UX design, etc.  It's a BIG job but the community is committed and additional funding opportunities are presenting themselves.

It you have been following the hangouts or Gregs posts you should know the #tag or "filter" does control perceived REO.  A religious evangelist, for example might have high REO with respect to his community, but not mine, due to my #filters. Filters are #hashtags on steroids!.

In the Synereo model, @channel are addresses representing bi-directional channels, while #filters are composable general formal social contracts in a language of decentralized mobile communicating process calculus consisting of only @'s (objects) and #'s (code).  Once you see the whole picture is is gorgeous.  Everything is type safe and algorithmically verifiable. Program behaviour is formally provable  Greg is willing to answer anyone's questions.  Don't give up on synerio because it is not one of those shallow ideas that generate a lot of excitement but have no meat behind them.

But, I think you know most of this so I really wonder what your motivation is to disparage synereo.  You appear to agree with my arguments and then seem to ignore them.  If your point is that synereo will not succeed by tomorrow you are correct.  The beta will not be for three months. Adoption may start slow but I anticipate exponential growth. Resistance is futile :-p

You need not war with synereo, but thanks for keeping the AMP price low.

Thanks.  The whitepaper is not up to date.  There have been many advances but they are not private.  They have been unveiled in weekly hangouts, the blog, slack, etc.  There are efforts underway to update the whitepaper.

A better stream is just one reason synereo will be adopted. About 20% of my associates refuse to use facebook due to privacy concerns.  They and those who want to network with them will be drawn to synereo.  Artists and other content providers are unhappy they they do not get a fair share of revenue from facebook.  They and their fans will be drawn to synereo.  Many on facebook are disturbed by the constant changes in facebook functionality and want to be able to control of their interface and functionality.  I myself am pissed off that facebook removed the friend-of-a-friend scope forcing me to either restrict distribution to my immediate friends or make it public.  Putting users in greater control will attract adoption.  And there are those who simply want to get out from under the thumb of the media giants for political reasons.  They will draw their social networks onto synereo.
The AMP model may need tuning.  There are continued advancements in the mathematics and simulation results.  As it is we can at least say AMPs provide economic incentives for the participants to drive the attention economy.  My belief is that the attention market is huge and should not be restricted and controlled by linking it to some other currency. We would not for example tie the cost of beans to the price of carrots.  In order for the attention economy to be allowed to thrive it should be independent.  Selling AMPs, and providing them as bounties to contributors, is no more suspect than selling advance tickets to an event. Many of us, buy AMPs to support the development of synereo because we want to use it, not necessarily as an investment.
Attend the hangouts etc. and you'll be up to date. Transparency to the community is a major philosophy of synereo affirmatively executed.  Updates to the documentation are forthcoming.
Privacy and ownership of personal information, intellectual property and work product is not important to everyone.  Many are quite happy using facebook.  It undeniably provides a venue where they can can network in ways unimaginable a century ago.  They enjoy gaming the system.  But it is not a level playing field and society as a whole will ultimately lose  unless we take back control ourselves and change the game. Synereo is currently the only game in town that gives us that opportunity.  It is a decentralized incorruptible weapon providing us a defense against all forms of information war.  Even id you trust facebook, nobody knows what corrupt elements have infiltrated facebook. We cannot know what purpose our information is being put to. Any centralized power can and will be attacked and by the golden theorem will be subverted in finite time.  Synereo has no central point of attack.  It is prudent that we support it.  The justification is compelling and eventually the public will come around. Resistance it futile :-p

Other P2P social networks do not compete with FaceBook in the ways that Synereo does.

Facebook uses complex analytics to curate your stream.  There is a deep science involved determining what you see. And while the choices made for you are not always to your liking the success of FaceBook is determined by how well they can capture your attention.  Other social network alternatives either employ no analytics, or simple ones to curate your stream.  What mechanisms there are tend to compromise your privacy. Synereo uses intelligent reactive programming techniques based on your choices in directing your attention to automatically give you the content you want without violating your privacy.  

In addition, Synereo provides economic scalability and equitable rewards to content creators, curators, and participants seamlessly.  

These things alone separate Synereo from the pack. There are many other aspects of Synereo that are revolutionary.  It is a platform, not just an application. We cannot put Synereo in the same bucket as the other simplified FaceBook wannabees.  

Synereo extends algorithmic certainty from the blockchain all the way down to the user interface with verifiable formal mobile communicating process calculus ensuring that personal rules as well as social contracts are obeyed with proven certainty by the whole decentralized network.  Social networking is only the tip of the iceberg of decentralized applications of the Synereo stack being developed and being planned for the future. Private social networks and email are the beginning of what may be the next evolutionary step of the internet that will be trustworthy from stem to stern.  Synereo puts a powerful decentralized user agent in the hands of all its users.  It enables sharing of rules that allow users to empower each other. It enables collaborative applications to evolve among users in a community.  Synereo is truly in a class by itself.

Users will run their own Synereo node and become part of the network or use a node they trust.  You will not need a server to run it and can profit from the use of your personal nodes use by the network.

What he is really saying is that "freedom is slavery", he may not even know he is a troll of the obligatory.

As a member of the Synereo community I can say that none of the folks in the synereo community I know profess any communist ideals, the more radical ones are closer to libertarians and anarchists.

Anyone can be part of the community and branch their own branch of the code if their is anything dubious about it.  In my view we are doing wonderful work that is necessary if we hope to be winning the information war. 

The founders are in no way radical as far as I can see and are only interested in building a network nobody can control that is private, economically scalable and rewards people for the attention their participation attracts rather than the corporate giant information silos. 

If there is something wrong with synereo, join the community, let us know and the community will fix it.  The community believes in the ideals Synereo professes of building a safe and fair cyberspace and would not willingly allow it to be subverted.  It is the antithesis of the dominated internet which will guarantee free speech.  Saying that it subverts free speech is so far from the truth that it reaks of Orwellian delusion.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." - Adolf Hitler

Ad hominem remarks are counterproductive and play into the hands of those who seek your information in order to have the advantage over you.  Don't be fooled by fallacious arguments.

Jim

http://FreeTrust.org is a decentralized organization with the mission to revolutionizing the internet by decentralizing trust and providing strong anonymous blockchain identity and unpresendented privacy employing a mashup of disributed applications including Synereo intelegent user agent with provable security and privacy, Eris decentralized blockchains powered FreeTrust's own alternative currency, the privacy coin (PRV).

PRV is a currency engineered to attain and maintain a constant value of the year 2000 dollar. It is to be a medium of exchange for other Dapp alternate currencies employed by FreeTrust (AMPs, Factoids, Ether, Bitcoin, Stellars, Namecoin etc.) without itself being a commodity.

In its incubation PRV is being offered by the FreeTrust community as a bounty for delivery of freetrust components. Bounties have thus far been won for logo development and are now being offered for the implementation or the privacy coin itself. Bounties are being planned for trustless replacement of insecure email and text/audio/video chat in the FreeTrust next generation internet application architecture.

There is an opportunity for investors to bid on PRV bounties to acquire PRV and give developers a cash reward alternative for their efforts. In the logo competition developers elected to take PRV in lieu of cash. There is currently a $1000 bid on a 5000PRV bounty which has not yet motivated developers. Others are welcome to partner and bid to allow the PRV bounty to be increased to motivate development.

The issue raised is that subsequent crowd sales will depress the value of the AMP which an increase in the currency supply is bound to do. 

The answer is that given synereo success, exponentially replacing facebook, insecure email etc., without increasing the amp supply the current of amps will increase exponentially while the share available per server drops exponentially,  potentially  causing exponential increase in the price of each amp.   At the same time operational costs drop roughly according to Moore's law.  The potential gain is phenomenal.   But unless synereo stays ahead of the curve with rapid continuous improvement it will not grow exponentially and be passed by other players and have only a modest return. 

The future crowd sales are to insure synereo stays ahead of the curve while maintaining as least a linear growth in value of the AMP.