Why ?
Can you explain, rather than predict as a threat?
Do you really believe that with a 98% drop in 5 years, we’re not in a death spiral that takes us to zero?
look at the firo chart
just before the ponzi like master nodes were introduced you had the biggest pump
now after we are finally at the bottom, the rent seekers want to double down and wreck the tokenomics again
Several of us here have also explained the phenomena of balances which concern mining between the price of the token, the hashrate, the difficulty and the level of security.
It is a little bit simply for an explaination.
I am very uncomfortable defending the introduction of masternodes because I was against it (they were originally useless).
But what is certain is that now they are here, now they play the main role in securing the Firo blockchain and now they are our best card to stop the fall in the price of Firo.
1 Like
That is ridiculous
Just like everything else you have posted.
1 Like
you are securing what
you do things towards an objective
firo is supposed to be better money than btc
if firo is not money then there is no point in securing anything
1 Like
Secures the blockchain: it is the masternodes today that prevent attacks from 51% of miners while a single pool concentrates 80% of mining.
When I chose to invest in ZCoin, I didn’t think ZCoin was going to be better than Bitcoin, but ideally complementary to Bitcoin.
Bitcoin will one day be a highly evolved smart contract currency on which DeFi and NFTs can thrive.
But Bitcoin isn’t meant to be an anonymous currency, that’s about the only function I don’t see possible or desirable for Bitcoin.
ZCoin was the ideal candidate to fulfill this mission (Monero is little evolved but very widespread and Dash has big governance problems).
1 Like
NFTs are worthless scam
you seem to only to be interested in pumping your bags, and do not care about real world use
1 Like
I don’t care about NFTs: I quote them as possible features to say that the only limit of Bitcoin is anonymity (although it’s possible on top of it, I’m not sure it’s desirable)
Stop making defamatory assumptions about my intentions. Stick to what I write.
Do you want me to make some inglorious guesses about your intentions?
1 Like
My intentions are neither to defend the masternodes, nor to defend the miners, nor to defend the team. My intention is to defend Firo and to defend Firo, at the point we are at, is to defend his prize before we are dead.
By defending this price, I defend the project and I defend everyone: the miners, the masternodes, the team and the community. That should be the intention of all of us here.
1 Like
if firo becomes a PoS scam there will be no use for it
why defend it ? are you in a cult ?
Because it is the best pricacy coin : no premine, no ICO, the best technical level, no big internal conflicts. I’m not saying Firo is perfect : just the best.
The best currency to complete Bitcoin.
3 Likes
and what about the proposal, after it, firo won’t even be money
there won’t be a reason to defend it at all
Then do it,
Like what we did in the past
Price tell tales
Down down down to goblin town
1 Like
HI guys, I just want to give my 2 cents in regards with the tokenomics of the project. You are doing a great job with this project and the path you plan on taking in regards to miners i think is wrong. I currently run over 50 nodes and i do not think that a change in tokenomics will incentivise me to run more nodes as I already am incentivized, 10% average is really good. I got into the nodes thru the mining portion as i have solo mined for a couple of weeks with 4.5GH. Having 4-5% of the network hash was really scary to be honest, because I realised that it does not take that much gpus to have a 51% attack(By the way I was mining on woolypooly). The POW and masternodes combination I think is a great for the security of the network. One thing you guys fail to see is that mining brings new people to the network. Adoption is key for any great project, and while i agree with you that big miners will mostly dump the coins they mine because they need to keep the lights on. The adoption and community is created by small miners which i honestly do not think will dump the mined coins but they will actually save them to run a node or more. If a video with step by step instructions would be available on how to run a node I am sure you will find the nodes spread will be much better. I currently run all my nodes on allnodes for convenience, and because a block of ip’s in my area is prohibitive cost wise. Do not hate on the miners for mining eth right now, I am and the only reason is i can get a lot more firo that way. Once eth is gone you want to get as many as possible of those miners, they will bring the real adoption this project needs. So my suggestion is to leave the tokenomics as they are, they seem fair and if you consider changing it you should consider changing it towards the advantage of the miners since they will become your node holders as well. Wish you all the best.
3 Likes
The same causes lead to the same effects: the worst would be not to act.
The current system leads to the permanent decline of Firo.
Not changing the system is guaranteed to continue to assassinate Firo, probably until it is delisted from major exchanges and disappears.
So the system needs to be changed.
The the block-reward distribution I propose is the most likely to save what is left of Firo: I have explained several times the justification for this distribution.
In return to these arguments, there is a questioning of what a currency should be (must it necessarily be PoW? Should Firo be a currency according to one definition rather than another?), concerns on the part of miners who fear for their future income, threats of the end of the world, always from miners and attempts to discredit my words. No facts, no arguments.
I’ve been a fan of Firo since the early days and if I find any interest in this repartition, it’s the interest I have that the project doesn’t die, it’s not because I’m miner ( I am), masternode holder (I am), team member (I am not) or because I hope to capture part of a future community fund. I just want this project to stop dying.
… and, unlike others, I make no threat if my proposal is not accepted: no threat to stop mining, no threat of massive sale of masternode collateral.
1 Like
I must say, do not understand this talk about the “community” taking over development of the project. It is not a “community” that develop Bitcoin, look at Blockstream, it is a company with 50-100 employees. Look at Lightning Labs, that’s a company, that had a 10 million Series A round funding. It’s not some random community members.
Or take Cardano, they have set up three companies, IOHK, Emurgo and the Cardano Foundation. IOHK alone has more than 100 employees. That is the right approach. In addition they have a community fund where people can get funded for their contribution.
You can not expect random people on the Internet, to develop a huge project by themself. In the very very beginning of Bitcoin, it only consisted of a few people. But nothing great is build by a few unconnected volunteers. It takes structure, it takes full-time workers, it takes organization, it takes long term planning, stability.
What I read is, “I expected random people on the Internet to take over the project within a few years”. That is a pipe dream, that is not how the real world works. A community is great, and they can contribute. To translations, marketing, maybe even some development, but they can not run the entire project. What do you expect? People to quit their jobs, to work full time for a community fund, where people vote if they should pay for your work or not?
A great example of this is all the projects that gets a ton of hype, huge community of people posting on reddit, twitter etc. But no development, no long term plan, no new full time developers taking the project forward. With all the popularity, only marketing is achieved, no real development and the project tanks, slowly over time, normally only lasting one bull run and then dies off.
A better approach is the opposite, set up an organization, hire more people, pay people full salaries with benefits. If you do not want to lead, that is fine, hire someone who will. I say double the development fund, double the developers (if possible), set up a separate team. I would be a hundred times more comfortable with employees, with long term contracts, planning to work on the project for years. Than “community” taking on tasks.
Development team 1: 15%
Development team 2: 15%
Masternode: 50%
Community: 10%
Miner: 10%
5 Likes
I can take my own experience as an example. I work as a full time software developer, in a team of 8 people. I would love to contribute to ios development of the new Firo app, I will look at the code, to see if I can make some small contributions. Maybe I’ll make some PRs with improvements.
Sure I could ask for x amount of Firo from the community fund to develop feature y, but that would of course only be on the little free time I have. It would not even be close to the development I do 8 hours a day, every day, every week, month after month, at my real job. And of course, a team, working together everyday, can do a much better job then one guy working a few hours in the weekend.
1 Like
I think I understand your point of view and it is attractive because it is based on the project and not on a personal interest at the expense of another.
I draw your attention to several of your arguments:
- The development of Bitcoin: the companies you are talking about do not finance themselves with the Bitcoin block-reward: they finance themselves differently and their supposed interest is in the rise in the bitcoin price.
. Bitcoin’s block-reward (and fees) are used exclusively to secure the Bitcoin blockchain: this role in Firo is performed mainly by masternodes and in a minority by miners. - Yes, there are projects without self-financing that are developing around the world, via a community : Linux, for 40 years (the majority of servers and the Internet in the world are under Linux)… and Bitcoin, to name just two projects.
In an ideal project, Firo’s block-reward should only have to fund the security of its blockchain, i.e. masternodes and miners. As the project is experiencing difficulties, there is still a need to fund a development team through the block-reward (but the objective, recalled by the co-founder in this thread, is to remove this funding). Reuben also offers us to fund “community projects”: I am personally cautious with this kind of arrangement, fearing that our meager resources will end up in disappointing things, but if the team is convinced, we can try with 5% of the block-reward.
So, we’re both talking about the same thing, but we don’t come to the same conclusions: you want to massively finance the team with the bock-reward, taking Bitcoin as an example and me, also taking Bitcoin as an example, I tell you that it is not the block-reward which should finance the team.
I summarize :
- Firo needs a team/community (and be careful, Bitcoin that you take as an example remains decentralized in its development, there is no team that has hierarchical power).
- This team/community needs funding.
- It is not up to the reward block to finance this team/community.
- How is this team/community financed?
For the moment this team is engaged on the blockreward, at the expense of the support of the price (the developers sell the Firos with which they are paid to support their rents, food etc…and they sell all the more as the Firo price is low) and the security of the Firo blockchain. Eventually, this funding of the team by the block-reward must cease, but until the team has found other sources of funding (or until the price of Firo rises enough for it to have less to sell to live), we must finance it by the smallest possible puncture on the block-reward (to limit the sales of Firo, to protect the blockchain).
2 Likes
Thanks for your answer, I think we mostly agree.
until the price of Firo rises enough for it to have less to sell to live), we must finance it by the smallest possible puncture on the block-reward (to limit the sales of Firo, to protect the blockchain).
This is the crux of the matter, we both agree here. We are not talking about increasing the amount of Firo being burned. This is simply re-arranging the reward. Instead of giving Firo to Miners, that dump it for usdT or BTC, we can give most of that to masternodes and developers, that invest in the project. By holding or creating and improving the tech.
Maybe there comes a time in the future where no core developers are needed, but it is not the case yet. And I also don’t think the community can take over development, maybe we can help, and the community fund can increase over time.
2 Likes