I’d like to hear greater clarification from Sunny about his reluctance to creating P2Pool mining for PPC? Especially if NVC already has it. http://p2pool.novaco.in/
[quote=“Sunny King”]p2pool development is on hold and discouraged for now, pending protocol support review.
Currently the top 3 ppc pools are:
The Seven’s: http://theseven.bounceme.net/~theseven/pool/[/quote]
Also I’m a bit curious why a coin that is designed for energy efficiency only uses two out of three efficiencies available: proof of stake and ASIC compatible hashing but not merged mining?
p2pool has some peculiarities that complicate things. In March I had to help Balthazar to fix p2pool related block chain fork in NVC. This requires a hard fork protocol change (https://github.com/sunnyking/novacoin/commit/002d24c658e4a2d8306cf69c62ac3c666d106f64)
For PPC it is currently managed as critical public infrastructure, I don’t intend to rush protocol changes unless it is absolutely necessary. Because ppc has proof-of-stake, decentralized mining network is not considered high priority. Even if all major ppc pools are under dos the impact is not severe to ppc network.
As to merged mining (introduced by namecoin), it is a common misunderstanding that merge-mining saves energy. What it does is strengthening parent network (bitcoin), not saving energy. This is because the energy is either consumed mining an altcoin not merge-mineable, or consumed mining bitcoin with merge-mining. So actually no energy is saved. In comparison proof-of-stake technology does save energy, by taking market share from pure proof-of-work networks.