the emissions rate now ?
Because look at the chart ?! simple math!
Storage rent may not be enough to pay miners after the emission ends.
Ok seems reasonable and why 2056 ?
I'm not 100% why this was chosen, I haven't been super involved in it lately. The ergoforum would be a good place to get some answers! https://www.ergoforum.org/t/emission-soft-fork-proposal/2996
Just read everything, its actually really smart would add an additional 29.88 years to mining bringing the emissions rate to 2057 simultaneously creating a supply shock and further incentives which would keep miners like me aboard
I think it makes sense to ensure the protocol stays alive, but I can understand the opposition against it too since people will lose money short term. It's a complicated subject and definitely deserves broad discussion!
Обсуждают сегодня