| Time | Item | Who | Notes |
|---|
| Rewards & Utility | Greg | - Nash - It is more important to pay for the validation of blocks. It isn't about a race to solve a puzzle.
- Greg - would like to pay by the measure of utility. But this requires a verifiable identity.
- Mike - we want to issue known bad blocks, per Kent and Kyle. Honest validators have to do the same amount of work as validators that are obtaining transactions.
- Greg likes the idea of issuing challenges. Mike and Kyle are writing it up. Kyle is proposing that we include an invalid COMM event. Produce a proof that others cannot use. In order to know that the proof is correct, you have to know the answer. This will give us a mechanism to eject persons not doing the valuable work. We can determine if it is a slashing condition.
|
| Stake weighting | Greg | - Nash prefers no stake weighting. Rather that spending capital on stake, would rather incent persons to put infrastructure on the network.
- Concern around the army of ants attack - lots of validators. Counter measure is fees to join a namespace.
- Big stake - no work.
- Greg wants to encourage lots of distinct validators, however there is no way to distinguish between the army of ants and a long tail.
- We want infrastructure providers to invest in high end hardware to service the blockchain. We also want these
|
| Next Steps | Greg | - Wants to run the stake weighting by Vlad and Nate.
- Meeting attendees will attend the Casper standup on Monday and discuss with Vlad and Nate.
|
|
|
|
|