Quote from: shveicar on May 01, 2017, 06:39:02 AM

Quote from: Berzeck on May 01, 2017, 04:24:44 AM

Quote from: shveicar on April 30, 2017, 11:08:40 PM

Ok, if you agree to recognize that the situation with the network is disturbing and we need a solution, then I propose to hold a vote on this issue.
Maybe this makes sense in the forum.worldcoin.global?

Sadly what you say is not true and is obvious you don't know what you are talking about in technical terms, BUT what I recognize is that having a temporary patch (for a problem we don't have yet) won't hurt, long term nothing will change because we will need to switch again so if you are serious about your proposal I don't have a problem, it also may attract traders so volume should be increased
Please confirm that you are really committed with this and I will put a thread on forum with general guidelines so we make a poll in the future with block chain tech candidates. The way voting will go on is: people who have more WDC have more power vote on proportional means, the exact mechanism to control this can be discussed

I wonder what it means I do not understand what I'm talking about?
There are clear specifications for different coins, with source codes available on github.
If we take into account the system masternodes then you can see about it here - https://github.com/evan82/dashpay

But this implies a serious network change with the opening of masternodes.
If people approve this system and we move on to it, it means setting a certain amount of WDC to open one masternode.
If people invest in this system and buy for this worldcoin, (for example 100k for opening one MN) then how are you going to cancel it later?
It's like telling them that your contribution to the bank will be annulled after a while..

It means that bitcoin has using version 0.8.x up to december 2013 (and many nodes up to 2014) with tens of times more transactions, nodes, etc than wdc and network was not 'disturbing' even then. Many changes that came after that, patches scalability problem giving more time to the network; we do not have those problems right now because number of transactions are very very low in comparison, if you change to a PoW + PoS scheme that should secure a little more the network for a hashrate attack but what you do not realize is that performing a sybill atack is hundreds of times cheaper and easier to destroy a network something even btc is susceptible to. So you want fortify the front door with reinforced steel but you leave the back window open; feeling more secure.
As a side note: PoW will be changed in the future because its an enormous waste of power, the trend technology improves is always in the other direction; there are many experimental schemes that do not waste so much power that will supersede PoW, therefore securing hashrate is definitely a temporary solution because it will be changed again in the future.

But we do not need to argue about this, because as I said if someone else will invest time in temporal improvements I do not have a problem with that. We will coordinate and make the improvements

But some guidelines first:
*We won't use alpha status code (like your last proposal), that would be crazy and very reckless (to say the least) move.because it can kill the network. Changing core crypto functions is hard, changing it correctly with a decent QA is EXTREMELY HARD; it would be suicide if we try to implement alpha code for a new scheme and try to perform QA (Quality Assurance) ourselves
Whats more how exactly this proposal changes the 'disturbing' status of the network?!?!?!?
*We won't change to some experimental scheme which is a project of a single coin (related to point 1)
*The candidate schemes should be currently used and proved to work in production code (Pow + PoS for example)
In the past you wanted to change to some established PoW + PoS which can't hurt (done right of course), other proven schemes could work too

About voting:
Example:
  suppose there are 4 options:
  we will send to your address 0.1 wdc for option 1, 0.2 wdc for option 2 and so on (to whatever you put your vote).
  you have to send us back the amount for your vote to count
  the address used to send the coins will be checked for the amount of WDC you have in it.

  More coins more vote power.