The top50 GRC addresses own 48% of all Gridcoins
some intro:
- the price of most coins is falling currently all over the board, and we were talking yesterday and today a little about this and other things on IRC...
What I want to highlight from below is this:
- me: "The top50 GRC addresses own 48.76% of all Gridcoins" (total coins = 392.5 million GRC)
- me: the top50 are surely not 50 individuals but a few people only
- me: that's what I'd do when I'd be smart
- me: having more than 1 address is not only advised due to avoiding people pointing fingers at you, also backup/security wise
The other things discussed below may be true or not, but the above fact doesn't change.
From today's irc chat:
- (the chats are not the complete part, I just copied what was relevant enough... best is when you join us also on IRC)
me: fedi, will we reach the price before the pumps began ?
user2: it will drop to literally 2 cents i guess
me: the BTC price before they pumped was about 1000
user2: the unfinished client, the superblock problem, the entry complexity, and the missing accessability i guess
me: Gridcoin is actually quite lucky, again
user2: quite lucky?
me: yeah
user2: nope
user2: lucky would be an adequate 10 cent per GRC
me: that can always happen, the price for rise does not depend on the product, only on the traders
user2: lucky is what ethereum is
me: I mean lucky with not falling much much more down
user2: it's not the end yet
user2: always you have to dust GRC off, since raw profit counts more if you just view traders
me: traders are happy about both ends, they just buy cheap... much more win than the normal Gridcoin miners
me: losing battle against the traders
user2: reminding those magnitude 0 and superblock issues I would argue that made some potential users jump scare off the boat
me: that is only the tip of the iceberg
me: the !top and !weath_distribution normally scares people off
from yesterday's chat:
- (the chats are not the complete part, I just copied what was relevant enough... best is when you join us also on IRC)
user3: I feel the problem with GRC is inflation
user4: which indicator is the important?
user3: while Bitcoin price will constantly rise because it is harder to mine as time goes on and there is limited amound of Bitcoins that will be mined, Gridcoin has no limit in how many will be produced and it does not get harder to mine as time goes on
user4: I thought GRC got no inflation problem
user3: also some people have like 20 million Gridcoin already
user4: oh ok
user4: yeah ok that's too much
user3: !top (from June 30), see also here
> wealthy GRC addresses and their balance:
> nr.1 SFLRgjBx5HAtR5dedegRLUbQVS6ejvdu6j has 22.4409 million GRC (=5.72%) (!foundation wallet)
> nr.2 S6efnEEMr7XRRAEkBcBCRcJxuvASS7szBm has 14.7594 million GRC (=3.76%) (investor)
> nr.3 S2bWE7QQP3xujqA8ejnNKr6zuMVNECqHVP has 11.5487 million GRC (=2.94%) (rhalford)
> nr.4 RzHya2b8ZUT5RrLrcy7LNnbQUjnWceQT6o has 9.9813 million GRC (=2.55%) (investor)
> nr.5 SAuLXdw4MEoShqy2e3oFDaJ1aeDeNXfYCq has 6.5741 million GRC (=1.68%) (investor)
!wealth_distribution (July 4)
> How much Gridcoins do the whales, barracudas, ... and small fish own ?
> 35.62% (=139.7856 million GRC) owned by richest addresses nr.1-nr.25
> 13.14% (=51.5571 million GRC) by nr.26-nr.50
> 9.58% (=37.572 million GRC) by nr.51-nr.75
> 7.3% (=28.6488 million GRC) by nr.76-nr.100
> 34.36% (=134.8254 million GRC) by nr.101 and below
> >>> The top50 GRC addresses own 48.76% of all Gridcoins! <<<
user4: yeah that's really too much, same like the money systen
user4: ok that means the best way to beat the top 10 is Produce and Sell insta or ? to hold them is bad I think, because price is falling
me: you can never beat them
user4: yeah but maybe the crowd
me: nah
me: important is also this:
me: "The top50 GRC addresses own 48.76% of all Gridcoins"
me: the top50 are surely not 50 individuals but a few people only
me: that's what I'd do when I'd be smart
user4: oh ok
me: forget it, Gridcoin is already staked
me: a few get rich, the others just look
user4: yeah that's what I'm thinking about too
user4: ok guys I found a good idea, close your eyes and don't look up to the rich people
user4: just crunching and believing
user4: but I sell the coins to save real money
edit 2017 July 8:
- besides below comments you can find also lots of comments here.
edit 2017 July 9:
- Rob mentions that the foundation wallet has about 32 million GRC (see below quote)
- I know of these 2 foundation addresses now: SFLRgjBx5HAtR5dedegRLUbQVS6ejvdu6j + RxQ8ycWDTajwAKeaU9MhyitDY54YRm1GfS
- also: "The Gridcoin Foundation was launched on 2014 August 26. It was funded with unclaimed burned coins. Supply 35 million."
his full comment:
"Its pure speculation to guess the amount of distinct addresses that hold half of the Gridcoins, as no one knows how many of our early adopters decided to split their coins.
Some may still have the same wallet.
The report is not even correct anyway, the foundation has around 32 million GRC. I think we had between 50-100 strong early adopters.
They should be compensated because they were here when no one believed in us. Good for them!
One more comment I wanted to elaborate on: Someone on reddit said GRC is just inflationary, and does not get harder to mine like other coins do. The inflation is only 1.5% and that is much lower than central banks print. The Boinc emissions are capped at 40000 GRC per day (thats fixed). Its true that you dont get LESS coins over time for boincing, but, the more researchers online are sharing in the same amount of coins are making it harder to earn more coins per magnitude as popularity grows. So in a sense, it is harder to 'research' as popularity increases. Regardless the true subsidy has a strong relationship to the exchange price and the electric rate."
edit July 13:
- see also: Regarding Wealth and Power Distribution
I don't really get what your key point is. The current reward mechanism? The previous reward mechanisms? The low price?
Gridcoin is around since the end of 2013. Back then it was a proof of work coin wich also rewarded some GRC for doing BOINC. Then it switched to PoS in 2015. The coins were transformed to the new blockchain in a proof of burn process. I think for 1 old GRC you got 10 new GRC coins. (or something like that) After the switch there was a rather quick reduction of BOINC rewards until it reached the current amounts.
Have there been mistakes in the past with the reward mechanism and the switch to the new blockchain? Probabily. But if you started today to mine BTC you also will never reach the amounts people mined in 2009. (Or bought bitcoin at that time)
And there probably are long term Gridcoin participants that managed to accumulate alot of gridcoins in the past 3 and a half years.
Can we improve the reward mechanism? I believe yes. So lets focus on that. And that includes switching from a interest rate to a fixed block reward.
But I think what is more important, is to get a Gridcoin economy going. For example giving an incentive to burn Gridcoins. The problem Gridcoin has in comparison to Bitcoin is that it has no fintie number of coins. I beliefe this is necessary to keep up the incentive to participate in BOINC but we also have to think of ways to reduce the coin supply. We don't want Gridcoin to become a kind of "tradable BOINC credit", it should also be a store of value. I think what we want is some kind of balance between coin creation and growing interest/coin burning. Being able to pay for the electricity costs with your reward should be our goal. And keeping it that way in the future.
I don't think that is possible with increasing the rewards because new users feel like they will never be able to have as many coins as the early adopters.
If we dilute the value of Gridcoin too much by increasing the rewards we will not encourage people to participate in BOINC. We have to think in FIAT currency here, otherwise its nothing more than tradable, decentralized BOINC credits.
I agree, focusing on encouraging people to BOINC is the entire point of the coin - that should be the focus. Anything that doesn't do that is anti-GRC. But, of course, the people that control the votes now (unless we just do it by address or CPID count) are the investors not the BOINCers.
Investors can be researchers too, they may just keep their big pile offline for security
It would - theoretically - show up as a linked account on the block explorer...maybe...
Yeah maybe, maybe not. If you cycled the coins through a couple of exchanges/other cryptos it might get obfuscated. Im not saying there arent just some big whale investors, thats the obvious evidence, but we cant know they arent researchers too.
There are worse coins out there.
How many do you think know about that the top 5(!) Addresses owns more than 50% of the entire wealth on their system.
This is usually how it is with cryptocurrency, it's nothing specific to Gridcoin. The distribution can be debated to be good or bad, but the fact is that there was people there before anyone and they got a bigger share.
The fact that 50 addresses owns 50% isn't weird and they most likely belong to a few of the very early adopters, plus Rob plus the foundation funds.
As I write in my post about Golem vs Gridcoin.
https://steemit.com/gridcoin/@sc-steemit/why-golem-falls-flat-compared-to-gridcoin-network
Source: https://etherscan.io/token/tokenholderchart/Golem?range=5
Comparison on Gridcoin
Top 3 Users owns 30% of all coins
Top 5 Users owns 35% of all coins
I have joined Gridcoin in late 2015. (i.e. much later than most of the whales, who are with Gridcoin since late 2013. or early 2014. I guess). Yet, I am a whale. As usual - buy low, sell high (hint: the price has dropped quite a lot recently).
P.S. I fully support implementing fixed staked rewards.
Im not concerned with that distribution, even if you say there is an individual behind 2 of those 50 wallets, thats still a concerted effort by 25 people, to only acheive 48% network consensus.
It will sort itself out over time.
In my opinion, we would have to reduce the amount of coins minted dramatically in order for the coin to ever increase in any real value.
And the only way to do that is to get rid of the interest because the purpose of the coin is to reward BOINC research.
Some people have suggested replacing interest with a fixed block reward. I'm not even sure a fixed block reward is required to secure the network because all researchers need to be staking regularly anyway to receive the researcher reward.
If any adjusted inflation is required, it should be more inflation for the growth of researchers not for users sitting on large amounts of GRC.
A fixed block reward is a better idea than accruing interest offline & no pos rewards at all. We do need some form of incentive for staking, otherwise why wouldn't you just stake once every 6 months to earn your GRC?
Do you still think it would be required in the future when Gridcoin is much more popular? I would of thought there would always be people trying to stake constantly because not everyone has the balance or mag to stake often. Or are the whales required to stake often to make the coin secure?
I think you will find that for most cryptocurrencies that get reasonable attention on the markets today, the coins are clustered heavily into a few top individuals' addresses T he big difference here is that due to the current implementation of the 1.5% POS rewards, miners cannot catch up, especially in the long run.
When the voting system is up and running again, it may be worth revisiting some of Huppdiwupp's comments and suggestions regarding the current relationship between POR and POS.
Gridcoin's voting system favours rich people (be it money-wise or magnitude-wise, both types are rich) and we can't change something without the "whales" accepting it also :-(
look for example at this ongoing discussion for nearly 1 year here (most whales would be against the idea, let's see if we come to a compromise)
I'm not sure what makes you think "most whales would be against the idea" -- a number of them have come out in support of the idea because it will ultimately make their holdings more valuable, not less. I think there's a very good chance that a fixed stake reward will be in place within the next year. And it's a very good sign that Rob himself has come out in favor of the idea.
As for your point about the top 50 addresses owning 48% of all GRC, I'm not sure why you think this is so noteworthy. That's pretty much true for every cryptocurrency out there (it would be interesting to know for which currencies that is NOT true) and many of them are much more concentrated. Bitcoin itself is still concentrated in the top 1000 addresses and it's been around significantly longer than the rest; it will take time for holdings to dilute. I don't see a problem here.
Talks are talks, the change (if it ever comes), this I will believe. Talks are going on in that bug thread for 1 year, in the meantime the "gap" between the few "above" and others still increases...
Yes, the concentration of the most portion to a few only is common everywhere (be it virtual or real world).
I see a problem with it, especially when you know of the situations how it came to this concentration also...
newsworthy:
Disclaimer: I am just a bot trying to be helpful.
If you want to look at the power, look at this poll outcome:
The foundation wallet holds currently 22.4 million GRC (5.65% of all coins) and 4 months ago it was decided that we raise the "minimum vote weight required", meaning stuff like:
Thanks for doing this, I do think this is interesting information to know. It was pointed out other cyptrocurrencies may be this concentrated as well.
One thing I would be interested in seeing - even though we know there are limitations due to people have multiple wallets - is a decile breakdown (i.e. the average wallet in the bottom 10% has this much, the next 10% has this much on average, etc.).
Thank you for the information
No one asked me, but... I've always thought the researcher should always be able to come out on top. That is the point after all. The interest on holdings should be cut down to 0.375, and PoR made more of a priority versus GRC as an investment.
Most of the GRC whales will be those people who were at it in the first year, investing more money then GRC was worth at that time.
And actually the coins I looked at the top50 always had more then 50%. Steem is the same I think, with a hundred times bigger user base!!
But you are right, we might have to talk about the PoS and mining. But if so many adresses do not go online, how many additional will not go online with even lower rewards?