Regarding the New Technology Rebase Poll and GRC 4.0-2018 Roadmap Proposals
Rob recently proposed a switch to Masternodes based on DASH. This proposal has nothing to do with the current proposals which have been discussed among the community for the past several months. There is currently a poll regarding the switch to Masternodes running on the client. Vote!
It is a busy time of year for me both with work and the holidays so I have not had the time I'd like to put appropriate thought into a post explaining where we stand on the 4.0-2018 roadmap proposals. In short, the discussion inspired by these proposals has been exactly what we were hoping for and will continue. The group that put together the 4.0-2018 roadmap proposal are in agreement regarding a change in poll creation time, length, and deadlines. Expect an update along with the edited discussion from last Saturday to be posted tomorrow or, more likely, Friday.
Happy Thanksgiving, US friends!
Information and discussion regarding a switch to Masternodes can be found here:
Gridcoin Future Technology Base
Poll results can be found here:
If you do not wish to create a CCT account, feel free to post here and I will do my best to relay the general opinions over to the CCT thread.
Onward, Gridcoin!
I've posted my concerns in the thread, particularly in relationship to some of the mental math being done. I need a fuller understanding of how this benefits BOINCers, but I'm concerned to say the least.
1 hour ago, Rob Halförd - (Gridcoin) said:
Well, the investor who wants to be a pure investor would lease a neural node. They would spend $2000 on GRC, lease a neural node from VULTR, set up the software, and then receive about $100 a month in ROI (totally a guess, just for an example here) and leave the $2000 of GRC locked up. So the terminology might change but correct there would be no investor CPID, no proof-of-stake, no interest, etc.
Based on the numbers I've seen, I would also agree with your assessment that there are over 2000 GRCers. But I find the above numbers out of left field.
If our concern is about user base, then when the hell are we getting rid of the team requirement. Let's do that before we do this complicated re-engineering. Or at least let's allow another team or two to work with GRC so we can see the scalability issues.
I agree with others, sure we may have a lot of users but we don't have a lot of coins available. You, the foundation, and several others hold 50%+ of the coins and you're not going to magically start selling them, so how are these magical investors supposed to come in that would ensure we don't become more consolidated and exclude little guys that this network was intended to serve (i.e. the BOINCers)?
I find your use of $2000 - for instance - quite ludicrous and fanciful to legitimize your argument. 400,000 coins at 4 cents is $16,000. I don't know how many people are going to allow that amount of money to be held in escrow. And, if traditional economics holds, the price will increase as more coins are locked in escrow. So again, what happens to the little guys? It's not entirely cleanr to me how this plan benefits BOINCers rather than big fish.
But, of course, since the polling in the wallet is being done by the number of coins owned rather than by user count, I guess it doesn't matter what us little guys thinks. I'm a fairly large fish here compared to many other BOINCers that join our IRC channel at a holding of 70-80K GRCs, but I definitely don't understand this propose and how a BOINCer benefits.
As I understand it, it does not benefit BOINC or BOINCers. It appears to be a detriment, but let's see.
I posted to the CCT thread regarding Rob's proposal. I encouraged him to come here and discuss it. I hope he answers my questions. Thanks for posting this here.
Regarding what you said about how voting in the client works:
It makes sense to me that owning more Gridcoin and contributing more IPP means you have a greater say in the direction of Gridcoin. You are the investor in the first case and the participant in the second. The problems I see are wealth distribution (
5 people50 addresses own 48% of all Gridcoinor something like that -- don't quote me, I cant look it up right now) and the weight relationship between "Balance Owned" and "IPP Contribution (magnitude)". Right now, by my understanding, owning GRC gives you a greater share of power when compared to contributing IPP to BOINC. These seems wrong to me.Fortunately, most of the high balance wallet owners are known among the community, so if one person puts all their weight against 500 other people, the community knows. The current 18 million GRC-weighted vote is Rob. In that situation, and under the current voting system, I would hope that high balance users, particularly those who have a high vote weight solely due to GRC balance, would limit their vote weight to that of the highest voter with a high Mag weight, or find some other solution that disallows them from "owning" the development of the project.
I think the next major improvements outside of the general protocols and codebase need to be on the voting structure, the funding structure, and the organization structure. I think your ideas for the voting structure hold potential and should be explored, but for now, we've got what we've got.
Personally, I will commit myself to the improvement of these 3 structures as best I can... after we get a roadmap for 2018. I think we can get all three structures situated with nice and sturdy foundations within a year.
I also hope he answers your questions, and all of mine, and all of CM's, and all of everyone's lol = ). There was not a lot of information in this proposal and 0 discussion. I would particularly like to hear his vision for the project.
Thank you for being involved!
Edit: 50 addresses own 48% of all Gridcoin. Keep in mind that 1 person might control more than 1 of these addresses.
Source: https://steemit.com/gridcoin/@erkan/the-top50-grc-addresses-own-48-of-all-gridcoins
this seems like a fun topic for the hangout. there's still time to post. :)
https://steemit.com/gridcoin/@peppernrino/gridcoin-community-hangout-044
posted!
I'd like to vote in the gridcoin client but since I never been able to stake a block I can't. This is probably a common problem for a lot of people.
I will look into this, but by my current understanding, you do not need to stake a block to vote. Unlock your wallet completely (uncheck the "For Staking Only"), go to the voting tab found on the left of the client, right click the poll, click vote, tick your choice, click vote -- 0.00041 GRC will be withdrawn from your wallet -- lock your wallet.
If you do not have any GRC, check a GRC faucet or post your address here and I'm sure someone will send you at least 0.00041 GRC to vote. = )
Beacon is now 2 months old and got enough to afford a vote, but not to stake frequently. Still waiting for my first reward :-)
I did fully unlock the wallet with staking only unchecked but the same error comes up:
execute beaconstatus is succesful, CPID is the same for all projects.
I've passed on the issue to #troubleshooting in slack.
It appears that you do in fact need to stake a block before you can vote = (. Add this to the reasons to make it easier for low balance users to stake!
Ty @ravon for clearing this up.
There is a lot to think about! How do people find time? :)
I'm going to see if I can find a free day on the holiday weekend to sit down and think through things.
Tell me about it lol. Take your time, think it through, more often than not someone else will think the same thing your thinking and post about it -- so no rush = ).
Yeah -- that's the good thing about having an active community! It's not just on any one person's shoulders.