It hasn’t been fun watching memes and jpegs become 10x worth more than a better bitcoin.
I’m not trying to blow smoke here, or seek forgiveness for some crass statements I’ve made here. And frankly I don’t care about being elected to ZIP1014/MGRC/ZOMG. I only first got involved from being a lurker to protect value of ZEC.
Let me explain again why Zcash has my forever interest. If you truly believe that bitcoin has become a global money/digital gold/network/metanorm, Zcash offers a chance of alternative global governance. If you don’t think Bitcoin’s future is sustainable, (and I have growing concerns) , but still adhere to early days narratives, Zcash offers a bit of pragmatism.
In my opinion, the way that ZIP 1014 was implemented, it must be considered a failure. ZOMG cheapened Zcash’s reputation. I understand it is an “experiment,” but it quickly became a free-for-all anything goes DAO. This was not a mechanism of governance, this was simply spending public funds. I’m not attacking anyone for any efforts, I just think that structure of institutions and incentives leads to predictable results. The way that ZOMG was implemented it was immediately obvious it would lead to what it did. I am glad to pick up Hanh though. I think that is the best thing that came out of it.
I don’t know. Its maybe a frustrating time, but I think we should abandon 1014, and set aside those funds for ECC/ZF entirely for funding POS transition and ZKA. We cannot ignore that another ECC will be asking for another block reward renewal. Let’s not blow funds on unknowns when we have quality at ECC.
For me, this whole situation is a bit paradoxical. The project has money, but thoughts of despondency come to us. It’s very strange. Insanely weird.
Maybe it is not so paradoxical when one considers that many countries blessed with great natural resource riches in minerals, oil, and agriculture have failed to thrive. Does Zcash have its own version of the resource curse?
Even if it may appear that Zcash may have a temporary problem of a resource curse, Zcash is NOT geopolitically handicapped. With a well distributed talent pool, Zcash will overcome any shortcomings and bring the promise of enhanced privacy for its users at scale.
Oh, now that you mention it, I think that the metaphor is even more apt: Zcash, like developing countries experiencing the resource curse, is dominated by European and American governments. Zcash, despite being a privacy coin, feels that it must do KYC in its grantmaking process to avoid the wrath of those governments.
A typical mistake, where money (real) is involved, the laws of states operate, this is the same nonsense as working on economic freedom for everyone, there can be no freedom in the legal world. And they also talked about the Internet, not so long ago, and now they are not what they said initially.
This blocker can be remedied by setting up open bounties & RFPs for anon contributors. I look forward to the frameworks being set up in the coming weeks/months.
I am all ears. If somehow KYC can be avoided for grant recipients, there is a high probability that within 9 months or so you would see a grant proposal from me to research some area of statistical attacks on privacy or blockchain economics.
It makes no sense to argue, I also mentioned the Internet, which was also unique, everything that was said on the Internet says about the crypt, there is no uniqueness, they will introduce a ban at the state level and or banned at the level of international law, and the point is on this uniqueness, precisely by there is no prospect for this in the long term, now they will cut down money and that’s it, the analogy is a gold rush (first, ordinary people and then laws, mining permits and taxes)
Yes, I increasingly think that funds are our problem, not an advantage. Funds interfere with disinterested motivation, or rather shift developers from motivating a long-term holder of purchased coins for their hard-earned savings, to motivating a contractor who wants to receive current remuneration pegged in dollar terms. When I see this, the attacks on miners who do their job based on the motivation of the current market situation become doubly unclear to me. Therefore, the reason why grant moderation is very important is the human factor. We cannot know for sure that the offer we receive does not have parasitic motivation.
However, I am also sure that this year a number of interesting projects have received funding that would not have been implemented without ZOMG. Therefore, we need to keep going down this path and resist the urge to draw conclusions before we can appreciate the effect of this work.
The problem of the goal, if the teams received remuneration from the achieved goals, then there would be visible progress, and they get it simply because they have money, imagine you have a company that receives funding just for its existence, begged from the state, and there is a goal, but to receive salary you do not need to achieve it, just move, how quickly will you achieve the result? This is the problem with benefits, why work if free money is easier? This is a problem all over the world and especially in crypt, because there is no oversight. I have proposed changing funding for a long time, to make motivation for success rather than participation, but clever people know better.
The network will be updated, and nothing will change, we will also drown in our problems. Popularity for such a project will not come, neither this year and next, the management simply will not allow this, for their own reasons.
Again, I see a decadent mood, the reason for which is absolutely clear to me. I’m sorry, but I don’t want to have a conversation in this context. I’m confident of success, this is my right.