Quote from: afbitcoins on January 04, 2020, 12:57:22 PM

Quote from: qwizzie on January 04, 2020, 12:50:56 PM

Quote from: afbitcoins on January 04, 2020, 12:44:59 PM

Quote from: qwizzie on January 04, 2020, 12:39:57 PM

Quote from: afbitcoins on January 04, 2020, 12:32:47 PM

Ryan Taylor is only guessing and making assumptions about the market.

A lot of peopleare only guessing and making assumptions about the market .. including you, me, toknormal and Ryan.
Lets face it, thats what toknormal posts are : assumptions about the market.

In this case i put more value to Ryan's assumptions about the market, and put much less value on toknormal assumption about the market.

Its not a popularity contest between Ryan Taylor and Toknormal. Maybe it help if you explain why you put more weight? What is toknormal (and I presume myself) judging badly?

In my opinion our PoW needs adjusting to restrict the miners value over time and make sure they do not become more centralized then they already are.
Toknormal assumption about market focus on restricting masternodes value over time and shift more value to miners.

These are two opposite and clashing views.

Are you worried about 51% attacks? We have chainlocks for that protection. So far mining centralisation has not caused many problems that I am aware of apart from a few 51% attacks in small market cap coins. If a large mining attack were to happen it would cost massive amounts of energy to do anything significant wouldn't it? Or you think a government could attempt it to bring down crypto. Eg china seizes mining pools and directs attacks on bitcoin?

I just don't see much point in shifting value away from masternodes and towards miners, when those miners are centralized through large miningpools already and producing a mining hashrate at ATH level for some time now without any effect on price. This indicates to me that miners can and need to be restricted more and that is therefore where our focus should be. With ChainLocks we are now one of the few PoW projects that can actually make an important change within its PoW model, because we now don't need to give to miners almost half of the block reward to secure the network.

Our governance model already is hampered when we need miners approval, making our updating a very slow months-taking process. With an even more centralized miningpool outlook, just one or two miningpools could actually take our updating proces to a stand still. Not because of malicious intend, but just because its inconvenient in their updating schedule.

In the end i feel this is also about who do we want to have control over Dash ? Centralized mining pools who don't really care about Dash ? Or masternodes who invested long term into Dash and follow its project much more closely ?