Firstly, as always, a genuine thank you to all involved here, whether name-checked or not.
Excellent to see progress on the APIs and the start of the Impossible Futures programme. Hopefully this will get picked up by more disruptors like Ed Sutcliffe in other unexpected sectors as well as the ones we all thought of ages ago.
Now for the bad news. I believe the decision to keep emissions at the present absurdly high level is flawed and may even be FATALLY flawed. This decision ONLY benefits the big whales and makes an absolute mockery of the principle that node-runners are rewarded for providing resources - CPU cycles, bandwidth and STORAGE.
The present whales are NOT providing storage in any meaningful way. In fact I doubt that ANYONE other than the those running LaunchPad are providing even 1/10th of the mandated 35Gb per node.
@neo likened it to a stack of sheets of 2D A4 rather than what is required, cubes of storage. Read his post and subsequent discussion here Emission Update and Kicking off Impossible Future Program - #27 by neo
Long and short, we are pissing away ANTs and ETH gas to whales who are actively hampering the network with their mega millions of useless nodes while those who follow the rules and allocate 35Gb/node as LaunchPad mandates are actively discriminated against.
This is in direct conflict with the original aims of the project to utilise ALREADY EXISTING SPARE CAPACITY and what us long-termers signed up for all these years ago.
Right now I and and some others feel BETRAYED by this pandering to those with deep pockets.
The refusal to consider reducing emissions is particularly poor and warrants reconsideration and a much more detailed response than the arrogance of
It is precisely at this stage that changes MUST be made while they still can.
Who benefits from these huge emissions?
Certainly not the small user who can dedicate say a 1 or 2 Tb HDD to the network. This is exactly 180 degrees from what @dirvine proposed all these years ago.
Likewise the refusal to alter the payout schedule.
Who NEEDS payouts twice a day?
Certainly not the small user. Whales with cashflow considerations love it to bits though.
Only paying out when the credits accrued exceed some threshold - $100 has been mentioned - saves pissing away our resources on ETH for gas, arrogantly dismissed as
is simply an insult to our intelligence.
I can understand why a large no of nodes (even though they are almost entirely USELESS) may have some benefits for marketing. These false claims stand up to no scrutiny whatsoever. Looks wonderful on the 2nd slide of a fancy presentation. Shame that when we get further into the meat of any presentation the truth that the network right now is simply UNFIT FOR PURPOSE becomes glaringly apparent and once again a triumph of marketing over engineering brings a promising project to a premature end and tears all round.
Theres more, lots more but this is already far too long. Lets see what responses this brings…