It is suggested to modify the mechanism of POS mining

General
1

It is suggested that some restrictions should be made when PPC purses are used in POS mining to ensure the dispersion of nodes. The current POS mining situation is very bad, it prevents the dispersion of the node, a wallet can have all the money for the POS mining, then the node only one. If we limit the amount of money in the mine purse to a certain extent, for example, 100-5000 coins can be POS mining, then our nodes will be very scattered, system security is also a guarantee. The purse beyond the scope is not allowed to dig.

There is no absolute dispersion, only relative dispersion. Absolute decentralization, in fact, is absolute concentration.

2

The world is definitely not a human world. Although a person’s world is easy to manage, there is no competition mechanism, lack of diversity, and loss of motive force.

3

I don’t agree there should be an upper limit on the amount of PPC which can be staked/minted per node.

If large coin holders had to split their wallets into multiple staking nodes, they won’t do it.

It is easier to secure fewer nodes rather than 100 or 1000.

4

I think the solution to distributing proof-of-stake nodes will be a combination of:

  • affordable minters like StakeBox for regular users/adopters
  • node/wallet software with more usability/ease of use
  • addition of mult-sig minting capability, to improve security of keys (hopefully with good usability later)

That will likely encourage more distributed nodes. Requiring a top limit minting per node, i think will just encourage use of cloud minting, which doesn’t help fight centralization.

1 Like
5

Even using cloud manufacturing is much safer than a node.Large shareholders need to bear the same responsibilities as the number of shares.Otherwise, it will become a game of several people. Finally, only one person will play the game. Everyone will abandon PEERCOIN, and the loss of larger shareholders will be greater.

6

It is clear that a few large holders have divided most of the money, and the large shareholders can do POS mining without any cost. Others can only have a very small amount of money. They do POS mining and the big shareholders to dig up the POS, which is very different in cost. So newcomers don’t come in and play games with big shareholders

7

Large shareholders should contribute more to the community, because the majority of shareholders in the community also benefit most.

8

Large shareholders should contribute more to the community, because if the community is growing, big shareholders also benefit the most. On the contrary, if the community continues to shrink, big shareholders are also the biggest loss. If no one contributes to the community, the community will die and all shareholders will lose.

Changing the status quo will make many people difficult to accept, but the era is developing, the block chain has entered a new stage of development, if we do not make a wise choice, we will eventually be abandoned by the times, I have no other attempts, but hope that the community is better developed.

9

We should not only live in our own world, but also consider how we can communicate and communicate with the world and provide our best service to the world.

1 Like
10

I think a big increase of nodes will come when there is some full node for Android, iOS, OpenWRT, dd-WRT etc. Or even toaster-OS and fridge-OS and Tesla automotive OS. All of that, but highest increase through full nodes on mobile phones. A developer or two should be paid to do that.

And increase the yearly interest rate to at least the typical inflation rate of some popular currencies which is about 2 to 3 %. See typical interest rates on Wikipedia. Maybe even a little bit more, something between inflation and typical government bonds issued by a national government.

11

StakeBox is a full peercoin node on raspbian / raspberry pi, so that exists.

There will never be a full node running on Android or iOS mobile device - not practical.

However, now you got me thinking…
If the standard peercoin wallet/node software were upgraded to allow HD-wallets / BIP32
AND if we had a mobile wallet using BIP32 / BIP44

… then the full node could stake/mint blocks deterministically and the user could plug in the same xpubkey or seed phrase into their mobile wallet and have it all connected. In theory.

12

https://www.peercoinexplorer.net/inflation/

2.76%

13

I meant the yearly average interest rate via minting which is now at 1 %, because it is obvious that this is a to low incentive. Everybody just thinks: The others should do it (have a RaspPi or whatever). Therefore: Full nodes on mobile devices and other common devices would be nice – combined with a slight raise of the interest rate.

14

But that would result in 5% ish total inflation.

15

Not if more PPC are burned through usage. That is: usage must raise. Incentives of usage have to be there – well, have to be found.

16

I don’t think we’ll ever do as much on-chain transactions to counter that.
But that’s not really a inflation-counter measure, that is a weak argument.

I think our economic model is just fine, if stakeholder thinks he’s vote is of no value and 1% block reward is too low - someone else will benefit from it.

17

Interesting: You mean, if only one person/node is minting, then in the end he’ll get more than 1 % annual interest? Because of many more chances to win? Is it really like that?

18

You keep thinking about block reward, block reward is less important than control over the network you get if you participate in block making process.

19

wow we are having this discussion again. and again

1 Like