That's my guess. Ryan did this estimation a few years ago, about 4 MNs in average, that seems like good estimate to me and things didn't change much since then.
If you have work to do - then do it, stop wasting your time answering me. That's not a rhetorical or irony, I'm dead serious. English isn't my native, so I want to repeat myself - return to work. If I have any say in that - do your code, this whole forum including me can really wait.
The same...
That's just the very typical attempts to avoid responsibility you and @QuantumExplorer show all these days! "That's not us! We only do the proposals! Network decides!!"
That's so nooooo... Every dev (not to say a CTO!) has a VERY strong voice in community. And now these voices persuade us to...
That's exactly what I fear most: censorship happen and nodes decided to censor the network ARE NOT going down.
But thank you for your answer. Yes, indeed, there is a certain point of balance in centralization / decentralization. Right now there are about 1000 of entities validating the network...
The subject is quite simple.
Increasing collateral means decreasing the number of entities involved in quorums. That's an act of centralization by pure definition. So the question is: do we want to trade some decentralization for better perfomance, lesser fees, higher speed and easier coding?
My...
Ok, let's try again. Just to be clear.
Let's say I'm a MNO, and I have 1 MN. Or 2. Or 9. Not enough to establish a HPM, however. I made it through years of constant DCG's delays, failures and quits, bear market and slow dying of Dash. The only beacon of light was the Evo-Platform that was...
No, Sam. You want to cut off "small" MNOs from Platform, allowing only "whales" to participate. That's what your proposals aimed for. You're exactly taking away an option and a choice to run Platform or not. You may have your reasons, but that's the immediate effect - hundreds of MNOs with...