Our website is using the Cookies technology. By continuing to use our site, you are accepting the Terms of Use

Close

Giant Insight #6

18-12-2018

Right now, our developers are working to create products that will ensure the project’s long-term success. At the same time it’s important not to forget that a secure blockchain is another necessary condition of the Giant well-being. Despite the fact that the current condition of the Giant economic infrastructure is good, there are still things to improve in this field, and that’s why we would like to raise a certain issue for community review. It’s a question related to block rewards structure.

Before voicing our initiative, I’d like to tell you about the logic we have used from the very beginning. Both the masternode collateral price of 1000 GIC and the high level of block rewards during the first year were not a random coincidence. We wanted to make Giant masternodes available for the wide audience and speed up the network decentralization process. The miner’s reward was way lower because we wanted to prevent potential price and difficulty manipulations. Despite this, we had to take actions and commence the move to Proof-of-Stake (PoS) before the date initially set in the Roadmap. This was mainly due to the fall of the NiceHash mining cost and the following cryptocurrency price downfall. At that time, the community has taken a proactive stance by supporting this initiative, and all users have made a mandatory update in time. Furthermore, our Devs have made an excellent job by making this transition as fast and painless as it could be.

I hope that now you can understand the current situation with rewards: 16 MN + 4 PoS. 16 MN has been made for faster decentralization, while 4 PoS is a PoW phase legacy when we had to decrease the risks posed by mining. We would like to leave this behind and solve current tasks. One of them is the prevention of a certain underestimated PoS vulnerability.

In PoS, the block approval is made by the pool of stakers. To make a 51% attack, one shouldn’t have a half of coin supply, a half of staking supply will work. It’s easy to deduce here that the pool size depends on the interest of the network participants in staking. Right now, we are experiencing a lack of motivation to participate in PoS.

It’s time to express your opinion on this important issue. If you are ready to propose your own rewards structure and substantiate it, your variant will be added to the voting list. As soon as your various proposals are collected, we are going to launch a Discord vote. The current discussion will be held in Discord in #proposals-chat. I would like to warn you that the discussion on governance fees or developers fees will be undertaken only during the next vote cycle. The participation in the discussion is open for masternode owners who have verified their status. This is fully corresponding with our philosophy of responsible participation in the life of our project. All other users, however, can freely track the discussion and voting results. If you still did not verify your masternode ownership, please send me a masternode page screenshot from your Giant wallet client software.