No one is talking about Decred, why? Opinions?


#1

Essentially it looks like a better bitcoin. A better ethereum. A better every coin.

It could be argued that the most important part of a blockchain is its governance system which is what decred has created. It has the fastest and most fair governance system in the crypto world I’ve seen. Because of this - it is able to implement every feature extremely fast and so is probably the most flexible coin.

If people vote for the LN network, it will be built.
If people vote for Monero’s privacy on Decred - it will be built.

Oh wait, they were all already voted for and are currently being built.
I literally don’t see a down side to decred imo - it can adapt to any change much faster than any cryptocurrency I’ve seen. It can literally steal every feature from every coin out atm and no one can do anything to stop it lmao. The only thing stopping decred from doing this is the time it takes to develop features which is slowly changing with a growing number of programmers.

But what is your opinion on it guys?

Official decred into video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAMp5V_gG1E if you want a quick summary of it.


#2

experienced team together, fast transactions, built-in system of governance, ability to evolve and iterate quickly, huge privacy factors, can add any new technology, maybe a whole new level…:bomb::boom:


#3

Yeah not much information on it on the interwebs, but it’s pumping now.


#4

unfortunately asics have come out to mine it so my little dual miner card hits an even lower hash rate now than the ethereum hash so I quit trying to mine it


#5

It looks promising and seems to be gaining momentum, but will the concept be realistic way down the road? From what I got from the video, cryptocurrency owners vote and give inputs as to the direction of the company.

How would this even work? Does everyone have an equal say? And Is this sustainable or healthy to have potentially tens of thousands people voting on the direction of a company and token?

I am considering putting some money in as I think it will keep rising in the midterm, but in the long term won’t this concept eventually either cause a stagnation or potential catastrophe?


#6

From what I know, both miners and holders will have an input to keep it fair for them both - it uses a hybrid PoW and PoS voting mechanism. I believe the more coins you have the more influence you can have on decisions. I don’t see how voting will change or get any harder with more people using it than it is now. People vote for something, winner gets implemented.


#7

The more people invested and tied to the decision making, the more people the company has to please, and there is no way everyone will be happy with every decision. So for example, if there is a big vote and it’s close (60/40 or something), what’s stopping the losing 40% from selling out of frustration and potentially damaging the worth of a company.

Also, you mentioned that the more you hold the more input or weight you have. So there might be some people that have a big say and influence because they invested early and greatly influencing the direction of the company. I as an investor though, have no idea who they are, their backgrounds, their expertise etc. to be making such decisions, and that also worries me a bit.


#8

You can’t create a system that is completely fair - it’s pretty much impossible. Decred made the best out of the situation. You also have to assume that anyone who owns a large number of Decred cares more about the future of the network than someone who owns like 1 decred. The network itself is also pretty decentralized. https://www.dcr.observer/

I also believe a 60/40 vote will not pass.

It’s going to be impossible to please everyone ofcourse, but the vast majority should be pleased.

Compared to the currenty crypto governance models - I don’t see any that are better than Decered’s.


#9

Definitely an interesting concept and idea. Based on the image you posted, they set the acceptance at 75%. Does that mean 75% of value in total stakes? So the big holders contribute a bigger percentage?

Also, 75% is high, which is a good thing and it should be high, but that could potentially cause delays and a lot of revotes and failed votes that could hurt the company in terms of growth.

Do they say anything about having the ability to veto? Or will they always follow the vote result?


#10

It’s 95% for people who secure the network and 75% for coin holders. And I’m not sure about veto - considering the whole thing is autonomous no central organisation will have control over it and be able to change decisions.


#11

I think I will put some money into it, as it does seem promising and an interesting idea, I was already considering it before we started discussing after seeing your post earlier. I still have doubts that at some point there might be some sort of conflict or strife because of so many people having a voice and not being able to please everyone.


#12

The main problem I think for Decred is the fact that it’s tech can just be stolen/their voting system may not allow for consensus algorithm changes due to the fact that miners want to stay PoW to keep their profits. Though the LN should solve this issue.


#13

So you think it’s a good idea to invest long term? Or you also think there will be issues down the road?


#14

Idk. I’m still debating whether to invest or not. One thing I like is that decred will be private by the end of this year. Has the potential to therefore be a better monero.