Quote from: windpath on November 24, 2015, 03:32:08 PM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on November 24, 2015, 03:09:34 PM

Quote from: sawa on November 24, 2015, 03:00:34 PM

I'm not sure, but why don't we raise funds for the development team that can do this (maybe it's a bad idea).
I think we should act more active rather than passively wait for volunteers.

This has also been discussed many times in the past, but finding a coder willing to step up (huge task) as well as people who are willing to donate has proven impossible unfortunately. I've read through this thread many times & it seems some users think that either there is no need for development because it's perfect already, or that it is some kind of crime to even think about it - so nothing happens & miners go elsewhere.

**waits for torrent of abuse**

I'm not sure this is the case.

There are qualified developers who I have spoken with that are willing to work on P2Pool, and Forrest is still around, if there was a viable proposed solution I would certainly contribute.

The real problem is solving P2Pool's scaleability challenges, and they are hard problems to solve that require inventing a solution.

I've been waiting for almost 2 years to bump my head in the shower and come up with it, but not there yet Wink

If 100 PH/s was pointed to P2Pool today most (if not all) of the existing miners would see a huge spike in variance, and a large reduction in payout.

Share difficulty would skyrocket, and keeping a share on the chain would become very difficult for most of us.

The share chain has a finite amount of space and there is a threshold to prevent dust payments that would not even constitute a transaction fee.

You can only split the 25BTC reward so many ways in a decentralized trust-less environment, and smaller miners will always get squeezed out.

I believe that the solution may lie with sidechains and micro payments where a miner could accrue shares in some type of trust-less sidechain that would be paid out in BTC once a given threshold amount is reached.

This would allow us to increase the size of the share-chain while eliminating dust payouts from the generation transaction.

This technology does not yet exist, but perhaps we are getting closer....

We actually had this discussion almost word for word previously

. I'm right there with you... all I've gotten is a few lumps on the head from bumping it so many times. The idea of a side chain is interesting, but nobody's been able to come up with a way to implement it. OgNasty and Nonnakip have done the closest thing to a solution with their NastyPoP method (ckpool combined with p2pool). It's a decent workaround, but it's not ideal. I've been mining on it for a year now, and have my thread comparing the results of it to standard p2pool nodes. The biggest problem with their solution is that you lose the decentralized nature of p2pool. Of course, if they expanded their operations from just their two current nodes, so that anyone could operate their own NastyPoP node, then we'd have something workable.

I definitely like what they've done, or I wouldn't have dedicated a year's worth of mining and time to them

.