• arseneSpeculoos
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    Not all coins should be privacy coins, not all flowers should be red. The diversity of the ecosystem is very important.

    It’s good that you are interested in it. Described like this, it seems a bit strange. Who’s paying for the security of the network if there are no fees?
    My first idea when I hear that is, someone is running the blockchain at his own cost, very few people can do this. So that part of the network will be quite centralized.

    If that’s good or bad depends on what dance you want for yourself over there.

    • Electricd@lemmybefree.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 days ago

      someone is running the blockchain at his own cost

      That’s right. There’s no direct incentive to help the blockchain, unless you hold some coins, and in that case you do have an interest in doing it

      very few people can do this

      I would argue otherwise. This isn’t POW so costs are a lot lower, and people can ask for donations

      • arseneSpeculoos
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        Good point, as it’s not POW it’s much easier to do.

        Do you have any stats on who is currently running the blockchain?

        • Electricd@lemmybefree.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          I don’t unfortunately. Haven’t really checked out Nano this far.

          Since there’s no POW, the only thing required is running nodes. They have to vote though, so that’s an added load, but I don’t think it is high. Most nodes shouldn’t have to vote by default anyway because they do not have a big % of the voting power

          It seems like there aren’t many public nodes currently