[SOLVED] Early disappointments

[Paouky]

Donating to a dev is definitely not a matter of greed & profit, since you bare the cost and everybody enjoys the reward together. Let’s not pretend these are good incentives.

Devs may ask for financial help but it would be foolish of them base the entire project’s development on it.
Let’s not forget this is open source software. If nobody wants to work on it for free in his spare time, it deserves to be forgotten anyway.

[keepwalking1234]

for long term, i really hope mining pools and ASIC designer can have 1-2 percentage for grin dev.

[Grin1]

Keep in mind some of the miners themselves like the freedom to decide when and, how much to gift themselves; could be that the most giving of them all could come from that pool later in time.

[dewdeded]

@MidasTouch

I almost feel bad for GrinMint because they’ve had to claw their way up to their current position at 0% fees and now people are asking for them to implement a 1% fee before they’ve even enacted a fee to cover their own costs. The issue is that the coin is being dominated by pools and miners from outside of the community, many who straddle multiple currencies and see GRIN as just another revenue stream.

In GRIN’s decision to launch as quickly as possible, likely out of worry that other MW currencies would steal the spotlight, they have ensured that community-driven pools had neither the time nor core infrastructure to make a dent compared to the mining pool behemoths that showed up. How can small teams of mining pool devs expect to successfully launch with the coin when the wallet wasn’t performant enough to handle payouts of that frequency / magnitude and core changes were being made up all of the way up to the launch? The only pools that were able to handle this sort of environment were ones that already had pool infrastructure written (ie from other coins), hash power on standby (again, from mining other coins), and could eat any potential losses (again, because they are well-funded).

I know so many normal individuals who were so excited about this coin for so long and literally none of them are happy with the way things went following launch. I fully understand that this space is no longer a small-man’s industry anymore, but there were so many things that could have been done differently.

If any of the mining software out there isn’t enacting the % fee that is supposed to go to the dev fund then why not out them so that we know which teams they are? As it stands it’s hard to figure out which pools are contributing to dev funds and which are not. Does the dev fund go toward YeastPlume’s fund? The core devs have also been somewhat unclear on that as well.

Ultimately if you wanted to make sure that pools were donating a fair share to the dev fund then helping to support a community-driven open-source pool codebase would have done wonders to help. Unfortunately the only open-source pool that I’m aware of didn’t receive nearly that sort of support and now is becoming defunct.

I feel the same. 10000%

@notguilty

The early launch with breaking changes up to the last days, difficult to use and buggy core code gave a significant advantage to the well-funded corporate operations. Only pools with existing infrastructure and/or the ability to pay for developers to work full-time were able to be ready for launch. Full-time developer/operations work was needed to keep a pool running after launch, which gave additional advantage to large existing pools.

Yes, yes, yes, yes!

[Roelsmajor]

Ethereum Creator Vitalik Buterin Proposes Wallet Fee to Fund Developers -...

[majornite]

He asked “Let’s see what happens”

You said, “Magic will happen”

Indeed. This was pretty cool…

[insider]

Thank you for your comment and opinion! This sent me to the right thoughts and a broader understanding of Grin

[Alice]