I was looking at a waiting room ticket the day. What most people notice is the number on it.. Hardly anyone thinks about when that number was given to them. The thing is, the timing of when you get a number can change who gets helped first.
This made me think about how Dusk works with stakes. A stake is not about how many DUSK you have. It is two things: how many DUSK you have and at what point you added them to the system. At first it seems like the amount of DUSK is the important thing. When you added them seems like a detail.. I do not think that is true.@Dusk
The thing that is not immediately clear is that security is not about being committed. It is about being able to prove that you are committed. Dusk does not just care about how many DUSK're being used to stake. It cares about when those DUSK were added to the network. The rule that you need least 1000 DUSK creates a minimum requirement.. When those DUSK were added creates a history. Together these two things make staking more measurable and harder to cheat.
Most people will probably think about the rewards they can get or how they can participate or how they can get flexibility.. I keep wondering what happens when things get tough. If Provisioners can remove their stake by sending a transaction what happens when the rewards change suddenly? How much of the network staying stable depends on how big the stakesre how much depends on how long people are willing to keep their stakes?
Maybe the interesting thing, about Dusk is not the stakes themselves. Maybe it is the way the protocol quietly connects value, time and patience. #Dusk @Dusk $DUSK
$SNDK
This made me think about how Dusk works with stakes. A stake is not about how many DUSK you have. It is two things: how many DUSK you have and at what point you added them to the system. At first it seems like the amount of DUSK is the important thing. When you added them seems like a detail.. I do not think that is true.@Dusk
The thing that is not immediately clear is that security is not about being committed. It is about being able to prove that you are committed. Dusk does not just care about how many DUSK're being used to stake. It cares about when those DUSK were added to the network. The rule that you need least 1000 DUSK creates a minimum requirement.. When those DUSK were added creates a history. Together these two things make staking more measurable and harder to cheat.
Most people will probably think about the rewards they can get or how they can participate or how they can get flexibility.. I keep wondering what happens when things get tough. If Provisioners can remove their stake by sending a transaction what happens when the rewards change suddenly? How much of the network staying stable depends on how big the stakesre how much depends on how long people are willing to keep their stakes?
Maybe the interesting thing, about Dusk is not the stakes themselves. Maybe it is the way the protocol quietly connects value, time and patience. #Dusk @Dusk $DUSK
$SNDK