The ideas I see amount to forming a private cartel for the dozen or so vocal members of the community, fundamentally changing the way a coin works to the detriment of the general user and betraying the philosophical principals of crypto in general.
And I see a bunch of people, who should be ashamed of themselves, agreeing with it.
I agree with you.
Proof of Work is not just waste of energy, it is also the Proof that
transactions really happened.
I always assumed that Darkcoin was going to make the public ledger into an
anonymous ledger (not readable by outsiders), but certainly not to make it totally disappear?!?. That would be disastrous.
If we only had masternodes, and no POW, I am not sure that the integrity of who owns which coins can be guaranteed AT ALL.
As I keep saying, you don't need 100GH worth of GPU's to maintain a simple blockchain with a few transactions per minute, or even a few thousand.
Nobody is talking about doing away with the blockchain, we're debating (or at least I am
) whether the contribution of miners is really worth 4X more than the contribution of Masternodes to Darkcoin. I don't think it is.
Darkcoins come into existence thru mining. And only thru mining. The miners share a few of their new found coins with the masternodes.
Mining is not only about maintaining the blockchain.
Even if there are no transactions for days, it doesn't matter. If there are NO transactions for days, then THAT'S the
state of blockchain that has to be integrated and shared for everybody to accept.
The amount of transactions (low or high or whatever) has nothing to do with the validity of mining. It just is what is.
We have Petahashes of POW miners mining for Bitcoin because more and more people want to go after fewer and fewer coins, while technology combined with free market competition creates innovation.
If we only had masternodes... we would basically take darkcoin out of the
most insane innovation cycle we have seen in the last decades.
I agree, thats why I think mining should stay but I also agree with Evan's idea of reducing its relative share with time, as he explained the relative reduction will decrease over time so mining wouldn't actually disappear, it would simply be reduced (evolution of mining?) eventually it will probably become more of responsibility (thinking along the lines of corporate social responsibility…)
quote from darkcoin talk:
''if one day all coins are in masternodes, well then people can trade shares of masternodes…. like people trade company shares today. And then all of a sudden each coin is fundamentally backed. Additionally, if the companies that run the masternodes backed themselves up with precious metals then you have a double backing of valuation.
After all, the reason people started using paper money was because of the inconvenience of carrying precious metals around… That would fundamentally solve the issue for good imo
If mining stays in the equation it would make sense for these decentralised masternode pool companies to also do mining.''
''After all, the tendency to centralisation of mining by corporate interests has been demonstrated by bitcoin, eventually the same thing will probably happen with DRK when better and better asics (with the constant and rising investment costs associated) are developed. This way the problem of centralization of mining could also be countered, slowly reducing its importance with time. Basically, the company hosting the masternodes would generate revenue which would allow it to keep mining, kind of like a functional corporate social responsibility demonstration? hahaha, now that would be something to see, companies being responsible, but it would make sense and create a sustainable shareholders-stakeholder relationship synergy… if i'm thinking this through properly''
, but how are they going to have innovation without competition? Just masternode holders sitting on their piles of coins is not something that is very "competitive")
