Quote from: RivAngE on October 11, 2019, 07:55:04 PM

Quote from: SatoNatomato on October 10, 2019, 08:45:14 PM

Quote from: RivAngE on October 10, 2019, 07:19:20 PM

Quote from: Viper1 on October 10, 2019, 05:07:00 AM

Quote from: Hueristic on October 10, 2019, 04:52:52 AM

Quote from: Viper1 on October 10, 2019, 03:15:50 AM

Quote from: Hueristic on October 10, 2019, 03:03:53 AM

They don't cause centralization.

Really? So you think that one person/group controlling 1000s of mining machines where they can achieve more than half the hash rate isn't centralization?

nope.

I see.. Well either you're not all that bright since that's exactly why Satoshi designed what he did, or you have an ulterior motive for spreading that fallacy. Either way, not like it really matters since it's all going to end up being centralized so good luck to you.

What is that difference between 1000s of mining ASICs, 10000 of mining GPUs and 5 people controlling half of the coins in a PoS system?

For as long as there are poor and rich people, centralizion will keep occurring in one form on another.

What is the difference between cryptocurrency and central bankers shitting money out of thin air?

If a currency can not exist without being controlled by a few, then its not a currency, its shit.

Miners, hardware, electricity, ups the stakes significantly compared to PoS, which leads faster to centralization and shitcoins.

You might believe Bitcoin is decentralized, but it's not much better than altcoins.
Thanks to BTC's aggressive halvings, the few who knew about BTC in its early days obtained more than half of its supply in less than 4 years... way to go for a system which hopes to stay around for a long time huh?
We've currently mined 85.70% of BTC, what will happen when there'll be no more interest to mine it?

On this regard, GRIN's system is safer and more decentralization-friendly.

Correct, by the time those that would want to destroy such a system get to the point where they fear it, it will have become massive enough to make that task unpractical (hopefully). Guessing the future is hard enough when dealing with economics let alone fear indexes of global threats.

Quote from: AlecMe on October 13, 2019, 04:01:26 AM

One worry arises in my head:

'Grin was launched without a premine, ICO, or founders rewards and relies on donations to support the long-term development of the project.'

So, there is a risk associated with a lack of interest at a point that could jeopardise the whole project?

What am I missing?

Also, 'early holders advantage and makes it fairer for late adopters' what I read is: 'Join later and make more' which could combat the above and maybe hope people will donate and not only profit? Greed goes a long way though Huh

Monero was launched the same way and a large majority of mining pools donate to a Dev fund and there is a community funding system that anyone can make proposals to.

Quote from: bbc.reporter on October 15, 2019, 04:03:34 AM

@AlecMe. Can you explain join later and make more?

Grin's monetary supply discourages early whales that cause an influence on the supply. It also encourages wider distribution and a more stable price.

How would joining later, make more occur? If it would, it would be occuring under a stable price and less influential whales.

By using the terms "make more" i think he is referring to increasing profits by purchasing the coin cheaper down the road and therefore when the price rises he will have made more for the same initial investment.