We’re continuing to work on improving the calculations associated with resource credits (the manna costs to an account when the account broadcasts a transaction such as a post, a vote, or a coin transfer). Right now that means we are creating tools to effectively measure and record these costs. I expect we will complete this work in the first half of January.
Very good,
IMO the system now is way to static. I would hear more about it if you have the time to explain to me what the plan is to improve it.
IMO it should include price/computing + in some way an avg hive price ( for scaling) power and for sure the already included supply/demand. Maybe also included active/transacting wallets as a hidden correcting part.
because if hive hits for example 400$ each, witness earnings would allow much more computing power for scaling.
sure an extreme example, but mass adoption could end up in those moves, and then 1 Hive today in power (RC) should not be the same as the 400$ one.
Otherwise, hive would IMO not scale. I know L2 and so on. But the value comes IMO with a more powerful Hive token because computing power becomes cheaper and scales too.
Our current improvements are centered on getting more accurate measurements of the costs of transactions and operations that can then be used to rationalize the pricing for them (currently some of the costs are fairly arbitrary and the execution costs of verifying transaction signatures was completely ignored).
I don't expect the current changes to RC to be the last ones done, but this is an important step along the way.
good to know! thank you and a happy new year!
Possibly but there can be bottlenecks that are more tied to the software architecture which don't necessarily lend themselves to scaling up by spending money. For example, fastest single-threaded computer you can buy at any price isn't really all that much faster than an iPhone.
Of course, it is also true that with more money, more work can go into optimizing and rearchitecting the software, to a point.
The concept is good, though, but the relationship between money and scaling isn't linear or simple.
*For example, the fastest single-threaded computer you can buy at any price isn't really all that much faster than an iPhone.
That's true. And the Software is of course in some way the bottleneck.
I agree 100% on this. But to the simple point of storage and the 400$ Hive example, I think the Block size could easily increase or become dynamic? Ok, Dynamic makes it too complex for the example :D
The point was more, there are some " long hanging fruits" out there that would allow scaling and should be included in future RC updates ( or even think about the options)
And to not become behind the curve, I think it's not bad to have in mind the cheaper and more powerful technic that will be affordable :)
Also true but it is exponential between time/computing power ( possible scaling)
Nice talk like always!
I wish you a happy new year!
Maybe? Would still requiring processing that data in real time (every 3 seconds).
Happy new year to you as well!
Remember the differences between 'two', 'too' and 'to'.
no difference, all the same.
oh deer.
What IS IMO? Thank you
In My Opinion
Thank you!