Topic: [ANN][DCR] Decred - Community Governance | Bitcoin Devs | Lightning Network - page 542. (Read 1201332 times)

Happy new year friends! Thanks to everyone who carefully answers the questions of the users in this thread, that's great. At present the concern is only the distribution of coins, many believe that the developers take too much at the start of the coins and every block mined as well. I have some thoughts on the matter. If the developers are diligent, it can help keep course coins without many mining rigs. I think that the developers are primarily interested in increasing the value of the coin, because of their desire to receive funding from each block are in general justified. However, if the price of the coin in the future will be very high, say 10+ dollars, or even higher, then 10% of each block seem an incredibly large sum on an annual basis. But again, the developers indicated that all the important questions about the development of coins boudot be decided by the community of coin holders, I hope it also applies to the distribution of shares in blocks.

Looking at Group Contribution Timeline in OP, let me mention that 'intention of stewardship' has started a considerable time ago and weighs heavily already IMO. > GO

Probing questions and detailed answers

looks very promising, keep the questions coming and the community will gain confidence that the Devs mean well

best wishes and a happy New Year to all 

Thank you for bringing this up on IRC, it's critically important to understand how the subsidy system works and where the funds are going. The base reasoning is correct, but the inferences require detailed explanation inline below. The calculations referenced in this explanation are contained in a spreadsheet, linked here.

• The premine will split 8% equally between two groups: (A) c0/devs and (B) the airdrop participants. This means that 50% of all the decred in existence at launch will be owned by c0/devs. The other 50% will be owned by the larger community.
• At the time of launch, the development organization (dev org) will have 0 coins. As blocks are mined on mainnet, the dev org will begin to receive its 10% subsidy from each block.
• Since approximately 3.02M coins will come from block subsidies, i.e. not premine, this means the dev org will collect 302K coins. The dev org will fund ongoing work, so it is expected to spend most of the coins it receives and not accumulate large amounts of coins. The average amount of stake held by the dev org should be relatively low as a function of the org not carrying a large balance.
• Starting with 50% of the coins at launch and 4% of the total does not entitle c0/devs to 15% of all minted coins. The reason is that 60% of the subsidy goes to PoW miners, which c0/devs have no overlap with. The plan is to have a few GPUs mining Decred after launch, but 60% of all the coins end up with PoW miners. When these coins are held by PoW miners, or whoever they sell it to, they can be used to mine PoS themselves. If coins are voted in proportion ('in proportion' explained below) to the amount held, the 4% premine turns into 7.32% of the total at the end of year 5, which is assuming none of the premine coins are spent. This means that c0/devs have 4% turning into 7.32% in 5 years, not 4% turning into 19%.

• Per above, the concerns about the dev org mining lots of stake are addressed. The plan is that most of these coins will be paid to a diverse group of developers in the form of contracts who complete deliverables for the project on an ongoing basis.
• There are two "bounding" scenarios to consider: (1) where everyone mines PoS and (2) where nobody mines PoS besides c0/devs. The spreadsheet linked to in this post contains the projection for the "everyone mines" scenario. In that case, the 4% premine, if entirely unspent, grows to approximately 5.38% after year 1, 6.16% after year 2, and 6.67% after year 3. The percentage of total coins held by the 4% drops from 50% at launch to 24.4% after year 1, 18.0% after year 2, and 15.1% after year 3. The "nobody mines" scenario is a failure mode of Decred and is unlikely to happen.
• The hope is that a large number of the coins are used to mine PoS since you not only want users to share in the gains from PoS mining, a strong participation in PoS is needed to secure the network.
• In the event that there is a low participation rate in PoS mining, the plan is to throttle c0/devs' PoS mining so that it does not hoover up all the coins. The goal with PoS is not to hoard the coins, but to create a strong incentive structure for users to participate in securing the network with their voting. c0/devs will not mine more PoS than projected in the "everyone mines" scenario, as it would go against the spirit of the project.

The threat you describe, "How do we moderate the amount of PoS mining power for our 4% premine?", was also discussed prior to your bringing it up. The plan was to start mining PoS at a moderate pace so that people besides the 4% premine can get stake tickets without too much effort. After you brought this up, the other possible options were discussed that have been mentioned by you and others in the community.

The complexity of the constraint for what would be considered good behavior on c0/devs' part makes implementing such a constraint difficult. The belief is that the proper constraint would be "c0/devs can mine some PoS, but not too much PoS, and no pump and dumps" or similar. Other projects have CLTV'ed coins to make them unusable until a certain block number, but this would mean c0/devs cannot use these coins to secure the network by mining PoS. A notable distinction here is that Decred never took external funding for the bringup work, and, as such, has no pre-existing social contract with the userbase that would merit a promise to behave a certain way. Although, it must be said that inappropriate behaviour by c0/devs removes any prospect of sustainable development, which goes against c0/devs' history of development over the years. This is because there is strong incentive to reproduce this level of activity for Decred as one of the development stakeholders in the ecosystem. The reasoning for airdropping 50% of the premine was based on the logic that Decred will be most vulnerable at mainnet launch and therefore require a steward to ensure it is not essentially dead-on-arrival. Airdropping more than 50% of the premine was considered, but doing so would be a risk to the security of the chain since bad actors could scoop up a large percentage of the initial coins and wreak havoc with PoS mining. A 50% airdrop in the premine was the largest safe size for the airdrop that could be determined, and it can be viewed as a set of training wheels that are taken off as time passes after launch.

This is presented as an "intention of stewardship" and will be judged against deliverables, instead of taking people's money and making lots of potentially-empty promises. There's no claim it's a perfect system, it's an alternative model that will explore new areas in both technology and governance, but hopefully this post sheds light on the stewardship process and issues raised.

I am interested, I can help with ARM, Docker and Golang and I can give a hand with fiat exchange with my bank account with 30 currencies.

Happy New Year to all of you & I hope you will evolve to be a better human being in this new year.

Regards

Sam

Just to inform the community & dev team, sp_, the developer of ccminer sp-mod, claims that his current public release can do following numbers on 14 round blake-256 by using switch -a blake

Please contact him, he can further optimize this if a bounty is available. Also if anyone want to donate for his public release you are welcome to do so. Just goto his thread on the forum

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=826901.new#new

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13396843