I've taken a few days to really think hard about the changes in the future for POW and Darkcoin... it really does feel like a well thought out plan, it's just that you have to look at it in the context of InstantX... first read:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/241012134/Transaction-Locking-and-Masternode-Consensus-A-Mechanism-for-Mitigating-Double-Spending-AttacksBitcoin uses proof of work to maintain consensus throughout its network of peers. Due to its technical parameters this limits the speed at which a transaction can be considered confirmed and safe against double spend attacks.
To decrease the time a transaction needs to be confirmed it’s possible to lower the block generation time. which has the drawback of blockchain bloat and has a lower boundary of ~30 seconds due to network latency.
We are proposing to combine the proof of work algorithm with an implementation of a distributed lock manager (DLM) which will utilise the masternode network: Transaction Locking.
Once finalized and deployed, POW serves as a much slower "backup" to the DLM method. To support transaction locking, a robust network is required - and - logically, as the Masternodes will be doing all of the actual 'work'... doesn't it make sense to adjust the distribution of block reward to provide incentive for that network?
+ if(nHeight > 150000) ret += blockValue / 20; //25%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*1)) ret += blockValue / 20; //30%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*2)) ret += blockValue / 20; //35%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*3)) ret += blockValue / 40; //37.5%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*4)) ret += blockValue / 40; //40%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*5)) ret += blockValue / 40; //42.5%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*6)) ret += blockValue / 40; //45%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*7)) ret += blockValue / 40; //47.5%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*9)) ret += blockValue / 40; //50%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*11)) ret += blockValue / 40; //52.5%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*13)) ret += blockValue / 40; //55%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*15)) ret += blockValue / 40; //57.5%
+ if(nHeight > 150000+((576*30)*17)) ret += blockValue / 40; //60%
60% for the preferred method (DLM), 40% for the auxiliary and slower method (POW). I think the fallacy lies in the term "payment" - it's a distribution of block reward based on service provided to the network.
What if down the road 95% of transactions bypass the POW network entirely? It will be funny looking back on this thread when the roles are reversed and MN owners are complaining about POW "payments" ;-)