I've never been prouder of the GRC community, awesome job guys.
I fully support continuing to explore I've never been prouder of the GRC community, awesome job guys.
I fully support continuing to explore DWP
I like where we are headed with proposal two - I have been an annoying voice with @erkan on securing the network.
The manual rewards claim is interesting and hasn't been something we were talking about in the summer during IRC. I like the superblock pay, but I would like to learn more about what the size limit situation is - what are pros/cons. I still don't really understand the beacon mint deal so I'm going to have to read more into the github articles.
N/A
What private information? Is it just e-mails? If so, that's not a huge deal and not something I would be in favor of pursuing; our e-mails are already available through BOINC - we all know that. Explain more about why moving to a new block-chain is necessary. The fact-base is missing in this proposal if it is about security and private information. Cleaning up the codebase is one thing, moving to a new blockchain is something different. We've seen how we have struggled as a community over the summer to solve the superblock issue, we don't want to introduce more instability with something that isn't adding anything.
Reducing memory and blockchain space are things I support. Far more important than a new UI/GUI.
Where is @erkan and @neuralminer on all this? And what are Rob's thoughts?
We need to update the codebase because it is from 2014. While doing that, we will remove the personal information from the blockchain which yes, is just e-mails.
Again, to me the blockchain itself and the code base are different things. And, why must we update the code base - I understand there are positive aspects to doing so - but it's probably not best to justify it by saying it's from 2014...are all things from 2014 logically bad? No, of course not. So let's build a compelling base. I admit, I need to do some more reading on the situation myself....