5 ms·

2.1 million total for the Founder's Reward out of 21 million total that will ever be minted = 10%

by CiPHPerCoder 10y ago

petertodd 10y ago
That's why I said "for the next few years"
- CiPHPerCoder 10y ago
  I know, but you're both talking about different things. It may be 20% for the next few years, but it's also 10% overall. You're both right, why even try to nitpick over these details or correct anyone?
  - petertodd 10y ago
    Since this is an investment we're talking about, I think we should strongly lean towards the interpretation of the facts that more conservative rather than less; 20% vs. 10% is a big difference to Zcash as an investment for the first few years, which could easily be longer than the lifespan of the currency.
    - CiPHPerCoder 10y ago
      That's a fair point, and I don't really disagree with your priority here now that it's spelled out. I just think that people would be better served with both facts simultaneously rather than demanding one at a time.
  - plasticmachine 10y ago
    You're some random on HN. Peter Todd is a core developer who works on software that runs a billion Dollar economy (Bitcoin), and is also one of the 6 people involved in the ZCash trusted setup. I think you need to stop talking and start listening, because the economics at play and the framing of the founder's reward is critical. Downplaying the 20%, when it is a massive sum that could be used to significantly bolster double-spend attacks and lead to all sorts of perverse incentives, is just irresponsible.
    - TylerE 10y ago
      It wouldn't be a cryptocurrency post without someone invoking the cult of personality.
      - plasticmachine 10y ago
        I think it's relevant, as I've heard a LOT of people claim that ZCash is amazing "because of the dream team behind it". The dream team clearly misunderstand cryptocurrencies, see for eg https://github.com/zcash/zcash/issues/713 https://github.com/zcash/zcash/issues/713
    - CiPHPerCoder 10y ago
      > You're some random on HN. > I think you need to stop talking and start listening That's not really an appropriate way to approach a conversation on HN. I'm surprised this comment hasn't been flagged. Personally, I think you would benefit from incorporating non-violent communication strategies. It's fine that you respect someone's work. It's not okay to open with "You're some random on HN" and then tell them to shut up, just because they were questioning the person you admire. Especially since I wasn't telling them they were wrong, but rather that the disagreement was one of scope and context, not one side being right while the other being wrong. http://qz.com/838321/nonviolent-communication-the-scientifically-proven-step-by-step-guide-to-having-a-breakthrough-conversation-across-party-lines/ http://qz.com/838321/nonviolent-communication-the-scientific... By dismissing people's entire existence and expertise right out of the gate, you destroy any possibility of a constructive conversation that could follow. If you'll notice: Until now, I mostly asked people questions. Regardless of whatever background I may have with cryptography, my interest in these discussions is to learn. Probably not the ideal target to call a nobody and to shut up if you're interested in the strength of a community. Just some food for thought.

2.1 million total for the Founder's Reward out of 21 million total that will ever be minted = 10%

petertodd 10y ago

That's why I said "for the next few years"

CiPHPerCoder 10y ago
I know, but you're both talking about different things. It may be 20% for the next few years, but it's also 10% overall. You're both right, why even try to nitpick over these details or correct anyone?
- petertodd 10y ago
  Since this is an investment we're talking about, I think we should strongly lean towards the interpretation of the facts that more conservative rather than less; 20% vs. 10% is a big difference to Zcash as an investment for the first few years, which could easily be longer than the lifespan of the currency.
  - CiPHPerCoder 10y ago
    That's a fair point, and I don't really disagree with your priority here now that it's spelled out. I just think that people would be better served with both facts simultaneously rather than demanding one at a time.
- plasticmachine 10y ago
  You're some random on HN. Peter Todd is a core developer who works on software that runs a billion Dollar economy (Bitcoin), and is also one of the 6 people involved in the ZCash trusted setup. I think you need to stop talking and start listening, because the economics at play and the framing of the founder's reward is critical. Downplaying the 20%, when it is a massive sum that could be used to significantly bolster double-spend attacks and lead to all sorts of perverse incentives, is just irresponsible.
  - TylerE 10y ago
    It wouldn't be a cryptocurrency post without someone invoking the cult of personality.
    - plasticmachine 10y ago
      I think it's relevant, as I've heard a LOT of people claim that ZCash is amazing "because of the dream team behind it". The dream team clearly misunderstand cryptocurrencies, see for eg https://github.com/zcash/zcash/issues/713 https://github.com/zcash/zcash/issues/713
  - CiPHPerCoder 10y ago
    > You're some random on HN. > I think you need to stop talking and start listening That's not really an appropriate way to approach a conversation on HN. I'm surprised this comment hasn't been flagged. Personally, I think you would benefit from incorporating non-violent communication strategies. It's fine that you respect someone's work. It's not okay to open with "You're some random on HN" and then tell them to shut up, just because they were questioning the person you admire. Especially since I wasn't telling them they were wrong, but rather that the disagreement was one of scope and context, not one side being right while the other being wrong. http://qz.com/838321/nonviolent-communication-the-scientifically-proven-step-by-step-guide-to-having-a-breakthrough-conversation-across-party-lines/ http://qz.com/838321/nonviolent-communication-the-scientific... By dismissing people's entire existence and expertise right out of the gate, you destroy any possibility of a constructive conversation that could follow. If you'll notice: Until now, I mostly asked people questions. Regardless of whatever background I may have with cryptography, my interest in these discussions is to learn. Probably not the ideal target to call a nobody and to shut up if you're interested in the strength of a community. Just some food for thought.