Are you able to work with the dev @sugoibtc introduced us to?
Have you thought about the incentive and fee structures any further?
There are still parts of your proposal I donât really understand.
Say Iâm a miner and point my equipment to the hauler ip and start hashing, what happens if the pool finds a block and I want withdraw my Bitcoin, how is the accruing of shares of the bitcoin handled? Where is it stored and how does it get withdrawn
I donât really see any connective tissue around the mining that enables this, but maybe Iâm just not looking.
Furthermore I think the incentives are an issue, it doesnât seem right that you or any other dev can decide what the rewards for everybody else should be.
Above it is discussed that 1/2 reduction is still a healthy APR.
I think that it is pretty obvious that it is incredibly unattractive for investors if devs can or will just on a whim slash rewards by half for investors. That does not fall in line with decentralized ethos and I doubt it will find broader support.
In my opinion to change things like rewards there needs to be a governance mechanism in place and this cannot just be the arbitrary decision of a developer.
A recent example of this how what may have initially seemed clever but probably was a mistake is the bridging fee. Touted as self sustaining marking marketing mechanism it has failed to create any momentum at all and if anything has people skeptical to bridge and caused confusion.
During the last pump many people were in the telegram confused about this fee.
Further more now that we are getting CEXs soon we can see the somewhat silly loophole this has created. A person can buy wZNN on uniswap get a 3% percent bonus and then eventually sell on a CEX without spending the 3% penalty for bridging back.
Meaning that over time the wrapped znn on ETH will be probably be useless as nobody will bridge to sell.
So this goes to go show that âcleverâ ideas can easily be the opposite, Just something to keep in mind.
3 Likes
I read through your original post again and can see how you are proposing to keep track of the shares.
I do see though that the original post plans to pay miners in ZNN and not BTC.
Honestly I really donât see the point to any of this - it feels you are trying to shoehorn in a mining pool without any clear purpose or goals.
Please try and take a counter point and show why a miner would use their expensive hardware to mine for znn, what a bitcoin mining pool would accomplish for the network and why network emissions/rewards should be diverted to this, why is it advantageous for the mining pool to keep the bitcoin, what purpose will that serve?
Have you considered maybe offing a mining pool with zero fees to miners and all they would need to pay are transaction fees for withdrawing from the pool? Something like this would be very useful and I think would get broad support.
Thank you for your input, those are some valid things to consider.
Say Iâm a miner and point my equipment to the hauler ip and start hashing, what happens if the pool finds a block and I want withdraw my Bitcoin, how is the accruing of shares of the bitcoin handled? Where is it stored and how does it get withdrawn
We can use a 1:1 zts to bitcoin and they would be able to withdraw using HTLC / PTLC. We could wrap the bitcoin on ethereum and people could just bridge it.
Furthermore I think the incentives are an issue, it doesnât seem right that you or any other dev can decide what the rewards for everybody else should be.
This is why I asked here on the forum, I donât intend to take the decision by myself. I want us, as a community, to find the optimal solution.
I think that it is pretty obvious that it is incredibly unattractive for investors if devs can or will just on a whim slash rewards by half for investors. That does not fall in line with decentralized ethos and I doubt it will find broader support.
No dev has that power, he just proposes and the pillars will vote and actually run the new code eventually. Itâs still decentralized, but a dev can come with an idea and implementation which, based on the community input, reaches a form that satisfies a majority.
In my opinion to change things like rewards there needs to be a governance mechanism in place and this cannot just be the arbitrary decision of a developer.
If we wait for that, we would miss a lot of new ideas
Honestly I really donât see the point to any of this - it feels you are trying to shoehorn in a mining pool without any clear purpose or goals.
We will be able to have BTC as a store of value for the network as itâs scarcity increases. We could use them as funds for further projects ( supposing we only pay a percentage to miners, not 100% and the rest in ZNN).
Please try and take a counter point and show why a miner would use their expensive hardware to mine for znn
I am pretty sure that a miner will come where itâs most profitable, despite itâs actual cost of equipment. At the beginning we wonât have that many Bitcoin blocks mined so less BTC rewards, but they will get Znn. Probably miners with older equipment will come at first, because they earn so little on the current pools base on their hash power.
what a bitcoin mining pool would accomplish for the network
In the future we can integrate the produced PoW into our consensus, enhancing security. NoM, secured by Bitcoin miners.
why network emissions/rewards should be diverted to this
This can be seen as V1, we wonât just be a mining pool, we will benefit from the gained PoW in the future and I think this deserves network emissions. Sentinels right now donât offer any value to the network.
why is it advantageous for the mining pool to keep the bitcoin
I answered
Have you considered maybe offing a mining pool with zero fees to miners and all they would need to pay are transaction fees for withdrawing from the pool? Something like this would be very useful and I think would get broad support.
We could do that, yes.
1 Like
Yes, looking good so far
The community must agree and adopt those changes. I want to highlight that we donât touch the current inflation, we just rearrange how the inflation is distributed to network participants in order to maximize the potential for everyone in the ecosystem.
Iâve proposed that all the mined BTC will be managed by the network as a collective. For example, a part of the mined Bitcoin can be used to buyback ZNN from a dedicated BTC/ZNN protocol level liquidity pool.
This is why we are all discussing this on a public forum.
Because the mined BTC will be used (by NoM as a collective entity) to:
- Buy block space and enable Bitcoin smart contracts => programmability for Bitcoin
- Secure NoM by anchoring it (using PoW) into the Bitcoin chain => security for NoM
This will in turn make ZNN more valuable as the network will be more secure and will unlock more uses-cases for Bitcoin as well.
Because there will be another type of network participant (the miners) that will supply PoW and must be incentivized to do so.
3 Likes
It seems that @Shuccck is a scammer. He is afk for almost a week, we need another Stratum developer in Golang, one that accepts payment after the work is done. @sugoibtc @0x3639
Later edit: he is not a scammer.
DamnâŚThat sucks to hear man. I tried reaching out to him after he had some wallet questions, but hasnât gotten back to me since the 21st⌠Did he atleast deliver something that you can work with/pay him out?
Nevermind he is back, he just got a problem
6 Likes
This is not part of the post and the ideas he has outlined above.
There is literally no description on how consensus would be effected by the mining. So really one could say that this is just wishful thinking with no concrete path to accomplish it whatsoever.
The idea that a Bitcoin miner will use their rigs to mine bitcoin in exchange for ZNN is - in my view - so completely divorced from reality and displays a complete lack of economic understanding to how the Bitcoin mining community operates. This attitude and outlook then furthermore undermines lofty statements regarding anchoring consensus to the mining.
Anyway good luck with it, interested to see it working on a test net.
1 Like
Disappears and comes back. Already acting like a true alien.
2 Likes
Because this will be implemented at a later stage. The merge-mining will provide 2 benefits for NoM:
SHA-256 ASIC proof-of-workthat will provide additional weight for the dual-ledger system- Anchoring of the consensus into Bitcoin
We need to discuss at a later date how we can actually integrate it into the consensus layer.
Merge-mining means that you mine 2 coins at the same time with the same hashpower. I agree that we must align with Bitcoin miners to boost their earnings (to be economically incentivized to participate). You can read more over here. Miners with low hashrate will be the first ones to come and merge-mine on NoM.
Another discussion is around what happens with the freshly mined BTC. The miner should be able to choose what happens with the rewards. If they are going to NoMâs treasury and theyâre used in a smart way (buy block space and inject zk-proofs on Bitcoin), this will boost the value of ZNN and subsequently the value of their earnings.
Another way to think about it is that ZNN will be backed by BTC, coupled with an increased utility of ZNN (contracts executing on NoM benefiting from Bitcoinâs security).
3 Likes
I have managed to put on a test net, it runs a hauler that keeps the header chain updated and once I integrate the stratum server will be able to also post shares. Do you know anyone from the community who is willing to create a minimal interface which shows data about the header chain, side chains and shares of the miners?
1 Like