What does Hugo mean by this?

[Seoulite]

 

[jn_r]

sounds like instead of having a fixed predetermined number of state-connectors (the nodes that are a node in de SGB network and also monitor the other network), there will now be an undefined number and trustless state-connectors. So anybody can become a stateconnector. Perhaps even generalized to a trustless state-connector for any other chain (my 2cts)

[BillyOckham]

I like how every person arguing on the internet takes the extreme condition as the default whenever there is pushback.

 

Hugo did NOT say he should show himself the door.  Instead Hugo said if you do not have a long term view you should probably exit.  Which is sound advice probably.

But like all internet arguing folk they only seem to hear the extreme end of the set of options.

[BillyOckham]

Also in that thread this person had already said that ‘it feels dishonest’.  
 

There are a lot of paranoid people on the internet apparently.

 

Many seem to immediately assume there is malice and chicanery going on behind all aspects of everything.  It must be a depressing world to live in.

 

[JoeBishop]

I might be completely off base, but Hugo's tweet reminded me of this talk about possibly integrating Handshake (HNS) into Flare. (This was back in May of last year).

Handshake is a domain naming service. Hugo's big idea (if I am understanding him correctly) is to be able to trustlessly tokenize real world items from across participating chains onto the Flare network. Each of these items (think barrels of oil or literally anything else in the physical world) could be verified, tracked(?), collateralized, etc on chain as NFTs (or not).

Big-brained stuff and I'm surely missing key pieces, but might be relevant. @CountZerpula alluded to some of this a while back as well. 

(The relevant bits start around the 7:20 mark of the video and then again at 21:40)

[Seoulite]

Someone in the FF discord said it is a plan to make Flare connect with every chain. Like Hugo said it must be related to the state connector because that is where we have been holding for the last few months. 

I guess the question I would ask is: what changed? Did they discover some new potential of the state connector that they didn't know before? Did they know but didn't think it was feasible? Did they not have the funding? Did they not have the ambition to aim that high? If they are aiming for trustless bridges across every chain then it doesn't get much bigger than that. This obviously wasn't the original plan but it has 'evolved'. I wish they would just tell us a bit more. 

[NightJanitor]

Sounds like they saw the potential of the flux capacitor...

(Of course, I like jokes - but that's one way to get the truth!)