So, I assume that we will get the other features as well when we don't change the project settings?
Honestly, I like the big coin supply. We will eventually be able to trade for BTC so what is the problem? Is there any technical reason to lower the amount of coins? If I remember correctly, you had good reasons to make a high coin count, to allow for better granularity. Did that objective change? You shouldn't change this projects objectives just because most exchanges nowadays don't support trading below 1 sat yet. The project is way too innovative and ambitious to be influenced by those constraints. Maybe in 2 years all exchanges will enable trading sub-satoshi? Do you know?
Regarding MAX TX I'm sure you can find a better solution than lowering the coin amount.
Regarding PoS, uhm, I don't know... why exactly would you want to do that? Isn't PoR enough to enable people without mining hardware to run the network? Keep it Simple. The request for PoS just sounds like "eh I know PoS, I like it, I want it. It's better than PoW for me". Again, what's the technical reason?
Espers 2.0 is just another dopamine spike ... it's worth nothing on the long term if the changes are not worth it. What matters is what your decisions now will lead to in one or two years. Have a vision. Follow it.
1. Ofcourse if the community decides the features that were all discussed will be implemented into the current source, however do to sheer simplicity we are offering a faster alternative which will allow the system to get much closer to what we envisioned and provide users with a great service.
2. As for the technical reasons for why we are recommending the swap is this: It's a VERY FAST conversion to a much newer base reference source, it will immediately have PoW/PoS and have the messaging system built into it (this will take longer to properly implement into the current source as
many changes are required). As for the MAX TX issue there are other ways around it besides lowering a coin count, however, lowering coin count will significantly make it easier for the system to handle the current issue if not negate it entirely thus avoiding the need for a "fix".
Now for the PoS concern, we do have a legitimate reason to implement PoS as PoR will need to pay a little extra to bagholders PoS would make for an excellent solution to that while PoR would still be running via the connection count process we've explained before. In other words again it would make the project progress faster.
3. Espers 2.0 would not just be a dopamine spike, we are offering many new features with the swapout immediately upon launch as apposed to changing the current source and burning considerably more time that could be used to further the project to our vision as you aptly put it, we have a vision, we are heading towards it.
So, I assume that we will get the other features as well when we don't change the project settings?
Honestly, I like the big coin supply. We will eventually be able to trade for BTC so what is the problem? Is there any technical reason to lower the amount of coins? If I remember correctly, you had good reasons to make a high coin count, to allow for better granularity. Did that objective change? You shouldn't change this projects objectives just because most exchanges nowadays don't support trading below 1 sat yet. The project is way too innovative and ambitious to be influenced by those constraints. Maybe in 2 years all exchanges will enable trading sub-satoshi? Do you know?
Regarding MAX TX I'm sure you can find a better solution than lowering the coin amount.
Regarding PoS, uhm, I don't know... why exactly would you want to do that? Isn't PoR enough to enable people without mining hardware to run the network? Keep it Simple. The request for PoS just sounds like "eh I know PoS, I like it, I want it. It's better than PoW for me". Again, what's the technical reason?
Espers 2.0 is just another dopamine spike ... it's worth nothing on the long term if the changes are not worth it. What matters is what your decisions now will lead to in one or two years. Have a vision. Follow it.
I think you are the exception in the way you think. Sure the majority isn't always right but still.
Coin supply. They did say they have good reason for the high supply, htough they never really demonstrated the need for such a high supply. Bear in mind 50B is still much much higher than your average altcoin out there and at current prices, even a 10:1 reduction will have us well below 1 sat. That said there is no need to go further down. With all the new features and clear evidence of the project going forward, I am confident the price will surpass 1 sat. And no, exchanges will not implement <1sat trading for 1 coin when no other coin seems to need it even in the future.
Granularity? With 8 decimal points how can granularity ever be a problem? Bitcoin with 21M and a huge market cap has no problem with granularity and still a few digits to spare.
PoS, I agree. If you gonna implement PoR, PoS might be redundant. There can be a such a thing as too many features. It makes the coin seem like its trying to be everything. Just keep it simple. PoS and PoR will cater for the same crowd anyway.
@dev team
When you say reward reduction for PoW do you mean beyond the 10:1 from supply (leading to 5000 PoW reward)? If that is to accomodate PoR, won't the introduction of PoR lead to fewer PoW blocks anyway? And unless you are planning to equate PoR and PoW block reward, new coins will be reduced just by introducing PoR (I assume a much lower block reward for PoR, am I right?)
Also, increasing block time to 30 sec will further reduce new coins and the size growth of the blockchain at the same time. Do we really need 20 secs?
Any thoughts about mining? Perhaps changing the algo to a cpu only variant to end this GPU effort that keeps draining your resources?
Will you keep all the same addresses? Perhaps allowing people to swap effortlessly simply by importing from their old wallet dat?
Can't wait for the new stuff
Well PoS would be more of a topper to PoR, reason being is PoR was designed to also reward bagholders (to a point to prevent abuse) however instead building that feature into PoR and re-inventing the wheel the thought was to modify a PoS system to become that topper to the PoR system instead and save considerable amounts of time (ofcourse everything would be polished up as time progresses)
As for the PoW Mining Reward reduction it would stay a 10:1 redux just like the max redux of the coin count itself sorry for not describing that better. Yes PoR will result in fewer PoW blocks in a sense, the system won't care what Proof Of finds a block as much as it will about hitting the cap as the moment it does it will stop subsidy and pay only network fees ( including those used to send messages and other features that will all be implemented to bring the system full circle. The goal being to have users using the system and having the system pay back the ones using it. As for PoR payout, yes it will be considerably less than PoW blocks as it will pay anyone online (similiar to PoS but definitely not the same)
20 second block times are desired simply because the system requires 6 confirmations @ 20second block intervals in 2 minutes a transaction would be verified and usable. 30 seconds it jumps to 3 minutes, again it's up to the community but 20 second block times shouldn't be an issue, if you're concerned about the chain growth we have developments to solve the inevitable growth of a chain so don't worry.
We do not want to change the Algorithm for many reasons, the main one being that we have been saving to pay for the NVIDIA miner and then this algorithm would have support of all GPUs not to mention all the hard work and effort by people who build miners for CPU and GPU, once the other payout systems like PoR and PoS are put in it will also help alleviate the pure PoW issue for other users without any kind of mining equipment. CPU only projects can also fall prey to botnet mining and other forms of abuse which were seen in the beginning of this project.
The addresses for the new system will have the same starting letter of course but no this is a complete swap to a new system that will not remember your old addresses or balances. As for swap via import of old DAT file. It's a very neat idea don't get me wrong but there many logistical concerns with doing so and abuse concerns, as such we were hoping to conduct the swap over the course of a week ourselves upon uproval to conduct the swap by the community. So far it's been a positive reception with Gandalf raising some good points and of course being concerned about losing focus of the end goal which is not what's happening here, this swap is intended to assist us in providing you folks with all the features we stated are the end goal.
This isn't a pump, this isn't gimmick or a "dopamine spike", this is just something that we are offering to shove all of us users and devs alike forward.
Oh and one last thing, we will NEVER conduct another swap after this. EVER. Just thought you folks should know this won't be a habit.
