You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why I will be voting NO on the proof-of-research roadmap poll
Proof of Research is great, it's however not appropriate for securing a blockchain as demonstrated back in September.
I think we'd be best implementing the fixed POS block rewards for the short term benefit of network health, then work on improving decentralization/beacons/scaling & MRC.
I agree that PoR should not be used for blockchain, at least not short term. However it is not for the weaknesses, which are minor compared to other current issues.
The issues with PoR blocks that you both are basing on can be almost entirely avoided. The september exploit was a trivial one, not even in the true PoR part of the protocol.
Short term, absolutely.
Long term (5-10 years), if we get users stats built into the blockchain instead of fetched from a central server... anything is possible.
As I see it the way things are going in the cryptocurrency world at the moment, as we grow and bring on more devs paid by the foundation, that 5-10 years will be too long for integration of PoR .
We do need to keep our eyes on that prize as an aspiration and maybe a goal.
"SCIENTIA HUMANA LIBERTAS"
Courtesy of @joshoeah
Well put ..
We need to attend to immediate matters, as much as I like the concept of PoR it is 'pie in the sky' but on the 'wish list' at the moment ..
There are other matters that need attention and are far more immediately important, stability and security are foremost in my mind ..
"SCIENTIA HUMANA LIBERTAS"
Courtesy of @joshoeah