Hi Boxalex, it has been a while
Err the addresses are baked into the codebase. Technically the algo gives out the rewards in exactly the same way as it gives out block rewards. This is why this cannot be changed. I know it sounds like a semantic argument because ECC can always change the addresses, but it really isn’t. it would be like them changing the block reward.
This raises a really interesting point I don’t think has been covered yet. maybe @garethtdavies or @str4d would know?
The reward is currently split 4 ways (actually 3, because the investors have already been paid out, although it ‘feels’ like 4 ways)
So the current operating costs of 700k a month would translate to 840k to keep things running as they are.
If a new fund is started, would it be a founders reward? Would it include previous investors and the Founders? What about advisors? Really imho the engineers and working staff (hr, pr, etc) are needed so this would greatly reduce the amount needed. It is not so much as cutting the chaff but releasing the booster rockets. The whole framing of this conversation as a continuation of the founders reward is misleading. I think zooko once spoke about a “dev fund” maybe use that term again?
It could also be argued that the investors, founders and advisors if they are left out of this fund are being enriched by the funds existence indirectly by the adoption of zec, improvement in tech and hopefully an increase in price. It would certainly be true that it would protect any current investment that they have.
To make this clear I am not advocating for any adjustment of anyones money that is already allocated and agreed upon. It was made painfully clear in the ASIC thread and the one about the founders rewards that zec is opt-in.
I do think it is slightly worrying for the project that people (not talking about anyone in particular, a lot of people are saying it) are calling for the engineers and staff to have their salaries changed. This is clearly unreasonable. It doesn’t matter how mismanaged you think the money has been, this is not the fault of the engineers nor majority of staff/founders reward recipients. This shows a huge disconnect from the community and engineers that wasn’t here last year.
This disconnect cannot be fixed by the community, it has to come from the ECC. It is all well and good us trying to crunch numbers, guess at things, etc. Can we have some leadership from the ECC instead please. You have all the numbers, risk analysis and development forecasts.
What are the realistic operating costs for post founders reward?
Anyway this is just my 2p. I will get back in my box now.
edit: “The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks” - maybe it is time for another shmorky cartoon zooko?