Quote from: binkshurts on June 25, 2014, 03:59:23 AM

Quote from: hammerbrain on June 25, 2014, 03:50:08 AM

Quote from: TalkTeam on June 24, 2014, 06:15:20 PM

Quote from: loonb on June 24, 2014, 04:19:32 PM

Quote from: binkshurts on June 24, 2014, 02:22:26 PM

Quote from: Amph on June 24, 2014, 02:17:49 PM

you should do something that limit the hash, and about those lunatics renting, that are ruining crypto worl

i'm firmly convinced that the next big feature should be limiting the hash, for a fair distribution not based on your hashpower but based on person

Dev should respond to this. I firmly agree with you on this, I can see the vast majority of people liking this. Mineral coin is showing signs of success with this.

The goal would be fair distribution and wide distribution.

+100500. Developers only pools with 0.5% fee for them, hash limit 100-150 mhs. Sound good. And no MP`s or standart ones.

We have the voting where users can effectively influence the hash through mining profitability. Decentralized way is better than us setting a limit on hash.

Great discussion...not sure where I stand on this...wide/fair distribution is a must obviously...hash has been pretty steady and not astronomical as of late...a fixed limit seems draconian.

But farms/wealthy renters will just leave then jump back on after any attempts to lower block reward to make it unprofitable for them. Great experiment! Could possibly push crypto forward in unexpected ways.

Bravo!

The +/- 10% change per voting period would suppress abuse, no?

I believe so, and it's in the next update apparently.

Good write up: http://thecoinfront.com/talkcoin-wants-your-communications-secure-and-private/