You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: GRCStarter@Home Proposal
I'm not sure what you mean by remove the competition? It replaces one type of competition with another, it doesn't remove competition -- it's very difficult to remove competition from anything people do.
By changing the magnitude calculation to a socialist style everyone gets the same. It removes the competition from the project. Why would someone BOINC with their most powerful hardware when some of the mag will be distributed to users using low powered hardware?
They would be taking their powerful hardware off other projects. Unless I'm misinterpreting your meaning.
Big guys would just temporarily crunch to help a new/small cruncher and resume whatever project they were on.
To keep myself from going insane, can we not label things with terms that have very complex histories and meanings, like socialism -- socialism is absolutely nothing like "everyone gets the same." It's actually very far from it. It's not even always viewed as an economic model (because it's not). It's often seen as the process of transition away from Capitalism and toward something else -- anything with more social priorities instead of individual priorities: the socialization of economic priorities. Richard Wolfe is a brilliant and reasonable Marxist based pragmatist who combines Marxism and Capitalism.
Anyway,
You're absolutely right. So ask yourself.
Why do people donate to the faucet? Why do people give away GRC when new users come and ask for starter coins? Why do people use the tipbot in IRC? Why do people donate to people who produce things? Because it feels good, is one reason. Because it helps build a user base which benefits everyone, is a second. Because it shows off their philanthropy is a third, and this philanthropy benefits them in some way. So why would someone donate some of their BOINC credit production to GRCStarter?
A scenario:
If 500 people with 500 RAC put 1% of that RAC toward GRCStarter@home you're talking about 2500 RAC. If someone with 1 RAC needs to charge their mag so they might stake some starter coins, they can join up with this group of 500 and, using the current flawed distribution method, get a RAC of 4.99201 instead of 1 ((2500+1)/501). This is nearly five times what they would be getting if they were solo crunching. What a great help for charging their mag! This also means that the 500 heavy magsters will be receiving the 4.99201 RAC. This is 99.8403% of the 5 RAC they each contribute. Since they're getting %99.8 of the value of their invested RAC, their loss in this scenario can be considered negligible. Not bad. I just pulled these numbers out of thin air. I'd love to see what happens in different scenarios. Prove me wrong. Just remember, the distribution protocol will be changed if this proposal moves into production.
So that takes care of the first two reasons people donate. The last has to do with where the competition has been moved.
Those who help new users generally gain more respect from the community. So even without an incentive protocol, there is reason for heavy magsters to throw a percent or 2 or whatever at GRCStarter@home. Who donates the most! It's an open ledger so everyone can follow a CPID and how much RAC that CPID is sacrificing (or gaining) to the GRCStarter average RAC. It is possible to add an incentive structure on top of GRCStarter@home, but not necessary, though worth exploration.
This process creates a GRCStarter economy which depends on RAC, the WUS being crunched, the average RAC of GRCStarter, the number of underaverage (new) users, the number of overaverage (donators) users, and anything else we put into the protocols. So the cost/benefit of GRCStarter will change based on many factors. It may be more beneficial for someone to donate at one time instead of another. This means there is a profitability factor involved. The profit simply isn't GRC. Instead, it's respect, trust, visibility, and a well educated and active user base.
You bring up some valid reasons that I had not thought about, however, I don't ever see this complexity being added to the current system.
Maybe it could be something you modify in the BOINC credit system itself when you setup your BOINC project. But remember it has to be crunching something worthy or it will never make the whitelist.
If the aim of this is to make it easier for New users to stake I think there are better alternatives. One might be to use delegated proof of stake similar to STEEM and BitShares and have the rewards paid out regularly using a transaction so that staking is no longer required.
However, I'm not sure what would happen to the price if people no longer required a balance to stake research rewards.
Meh -- who cares about the price. We're here for science and that is what is going to bring monetary value.
The goals of GRCStarter@home are as mentioned above:
Its priorities are:
This means that all actions taken by GRCStarter will seek to fulfill a top priority before those below it. If it can achieve multiple priorities at the same time, all the better.
So really, GRCStarter is about helping researchers and projects - BOINC - while education new users about BOINC and Gridcoin.
Delegated PoS, or SuperNodes, is something completely unrelated to this project = ), but something I support looking into for GRC.
In relation to magnitude, the point is to reduce the Mag charge time from a few weeks to a few days. We all know how frustrating it is to start the client and not get rewarded as your mag charged up (because your RAC has to build).
I think the best option is to completely rewrite BOINC and GRC as a unified platform (a volunteer oriented grid computing incentive based blockchain), but who here has the money to fund that?!