Hi, I come with 2 proposals to improve the quality of the blockchain and its services:
Mandatory system features.
Update the reward formula.
Some of the services our blockchain provides is DeWeb and storage in SC. In order to have stability and performance we need space and data processing as fast as possible.
I propose to set basic mandatory parameters, for example at least 500 GB or even 1TB and a processor with 8 CPUs, which will be checked with a stress test when the node starts up, similar to Solana, and if the test fails we will ban it from running a node. That way we guarantee better stability than we have now. I know a lot of validators that have 5-10 euro virtual servers, and they don’t cope at all with the proposed requirements in the installation guide.
In order to incentivize validators to upgrade the system, I propose to introduce another variable in the reward calculation formula, namely a coefficient that will estimate the system capacity. An example is given below:
Suppose we introduce a minimum and a maximum for storage (min 500Gb, max 4TB). For the minimum we set the variable to 1, and for every 500 GB we add another tenth:
1TB → 1.1
1.5TB → 1.2
2TB → 1.3
. . .
4TB → 1.7
This will get rid of those who intend to make money without participating in improving the system, and we will be a few steps closer to a stable and performing system.
From my own experience, no matter how well you write code, if you don’t have a good hardware system the services fail.
I’ve been thinking about that, too. Increasing storage by 1TB or 2TB will be handled by almost all nodes, and those who want to run Node will increase storage if they run rewards for “small players” who only have 10~50 Rolls, they need to see that the rewards will at least somewhat compensate for their additional investment.
I would be more careful with the CPU limitation, that is something that requires more investment, more modification of the servers where the Node runs, and the “small players” could easily be discouraged and lose several nodes in a short while
I agree, but I don’t think that 10-50 rolls will win you anything even at the moment. Being a validator is optional, and would have to accept the entry requirements. Practically everyone has a minimum amount of tokens to be a validator, and if you turn them into money they are very high! But instead we will have more opportunities if we sacrifice with a few small players.
Yes you are right, yet the numbers of validators with low number of Rolls (which are probably now loss making) are active and there are more who want to be part of the ecosystem, I know it is problematic to solve but I am probably not the only one who wants to support Massa Blockchain precisely because it is resource-light and yet provides modern technology, low fees, high speed, stability, decentralization, ASC but also low HW and energy requirements make Massa Blockchain what it is
I’m not sure this is the best idea, I see 2 main downsides:
Node expenses will increase, thus they will sell more MAS to cover it and there is not enough buying pressure to compensate → MAS will go down
Increasing the number of MAS emitted in each block will result in the same thing, the sell pressure will increase. And big stackers will mostly get the additional rewards so it won’t help the community too
The system is stable, some nodes will just be out if there is more activity.
The best and most sustainable way to increase the block rewards is to have many more operations in each block, thus building use cases of Massa, building apps, and growing the community.
will not increase the cost, that minimum will be enough, just to be mandatory, now if we start that stress test with instllation guide requirement I think 10% of the nodes remain. And the second point is optional, the one who supports the ecosystem must be paid, I don’t agree that I pay 75$ a month to cope with the system, and someone is using us to make money with a 5$ VPS!
and let’s not forget the fact that the big nodes have also invested large sums of money in masss, and have every right to earn better than the one who doesn’t want or doesn’t have to invest. we can’t just ignore them, if we compared without these investors we would be much worse off
1TB is not needed for this stage of the blockchain, it’s the requirement if a lot of storage (maybe all of it) is being used, thus right now it is a waste of money. 4TB is normally not needed in any case so it would even be a bigger waste.
You should instead decrease your setup, you are throwing money out the window. No need to increase the cost for every other node runner, there was an address sending +2.4k tx every few blocks 5 months ago, and the nodes were holding fine.
Concerning the 2nd message, I won’t even argue this… you’re supposed to earn proportionally to the number of tokens you have, not when you bought it nor at what price (even though as invest our medium buying price is still lower than most of the community)
I don’t know about you but I still try to support the price and buy the dip every now and then, Massa can be big if there is the right condition, we just need to keep it alive and well in the meantime.
I just wanted to highlight Seb’s recent proposal regarding our new governance system. If you’re interested in the proposals being discussed, make sure to check it out here :
This system will allow everyone to vote on the proposals, making our community even more engaged and impactful.
