Yes, to ~13% at the current stake rate.
Great to see Zaki with new proposal
Agree 100%
May this be the first of many.
Cheers
13% plus ICS rewards. Canbe huge in the future
2 Likes
Exactly! I have been buying ATOM because of the high interest rate.
there are no rewards in staking. itâs just an illusion. inflation compensation > rewards. and it hasnât been compensating.
Overpaying? I would be glad to know this statement is made relative to which chain(s) ? For me, security and governance are the only 2 major things Cosmos is good at. Now do we want to operate at a bear minimum? if this is the case, some chains in cosmos are happily being operated by 25-40 validators.
Yes, distribution is not ideal but instead of making distribution right, we are pointing towards inflation. Because it is a param change and easier to do?
1 Like
Theft is a theft, significant or insignificant. Robbing walmart with 1 KitKat is not going to hurt them, but ânot going to hurt themâ doesnât make the action right.
Theft? What are you talking about?
How is this proposal theft?
2 Likes
I donât see it is a right time to implement these kind of changes, when we all agree that these changes will start to show significant effect in 5-8 years. I believe in next 2-3q there will a time to have these changes but not anytime soon.
I said that metaphorically.
But, in reality, we are depriving people of the governance right by propagating LSM mainly through Stride, and we donât see it as a problem. and we label it as âinsignificantâ
Did you not look at the graphic in the comment you replied to?
Yes. Hub is overpaying for security (by a factor of 2-3x).
Also - we proposed a solution to help fix stake distribution and even help scale Replicated Security to 5-6 chains at current ATOM prices via a Vote Power tax.
I suggest you read
Personally, the added risk of using DeFi for often lower return than simply staking ATOM prevents me from LPing ATOM. Plus, I actively claim airdrops which i would forego by LPing.
So, lowering inflation and staking APY will make DeFi more appealing en mass. We also believe lowering inflation will help to attract institutional capital.
Will lowering inflation affect the bonded ratio and security? How will it affect validator profitability? Weâd like to see more discussion on that. We run validators on 4 chains and ATOM is the only profitable one, and thatâs only because weâve chosen to opt out of running consumer chain infrastructure for now.
High staking yield keeps the lights on, so if yield drops because of lower inflation, will token price really rise to offset it and keep things equal? I dunno.
I agree with those who said the economic model needs to be clear first. We need staking yield to come from revenue, not inflation but where is that revenue?
Lower inflation makes tons of sense, but the revenue model needs to clearly be working first. Iâd heart 
that last sentence 100x if I could.
Stake centralization needs to be figured out too. We could start by demanding that wallet providers display validators by smallest first and largest validators at the bottom of the list. Boom!
3 Likes
Hey, i looked at it before replying, but thank you for confirming.
You are oversimplifying it with your graphic. Share the graphic in terms of USDC and we can have a conclusive discussion where we are actually factoring the matrix that also matters.
Love this conversation. I think itâs fascinating. According to Mintscan there is currently 66.4% of the oustanding ATOM supply that is staked and the current inflation rate is 14.18%.
While we are discussing ATOM supply, maybe the insiders can explain these massive token dumps over the past couple of years.
It seems that the real world ATOM inflation mechanism (7% to 20% depending on above/below 2/3rds bonded) came into play on Sep 1, 2023. We are not even 2 full months into it so nobody can claim whether it works or not.
If I really want to be a dick, I can point out that 66.4% is below 2/3rds (66.667%) so technically the objective is not accomplished and inflation is currently in the process of RISING. Inflation is not on a trajectory to go down to 7% at present, so the incentive mechanism is NOT working as desired, at least so far.
BTW, if I speculate that half the time bonded ATOM is above 2/3rds and half the time below based on how the the incentive mechanism works, that means that over the long term the ATOM average inflation will be the middle between 7% and 20% which is 13.5% (which is roughly where we are today).
So congrats, you are not holding a 20% inflation token, only a 13.5% inflation one.
lmao
This data you presented is inaccurate.
-
It says âcirculating supplyâ yet it shows total blockchain supply. So there is no dumping since it shows how much has been minted. Also circulating supply should represent free atom that is not bounded. Currently it is around 25% of total supply.
-
Messari IMO is not trusted on showing data correctly. This isnât the first time I see inaccurate data from them. By the looks of it it seems they had problems with their archive node at that time. Use Atomscan and Mintscan next time.
Maybe Messari is not great regarding research and showing data correctly, but it seems in sales they are better. They convinced the AADAO to pay them $25k per quarterly report about the Cosmos Hub, for a total of $100k of our money from the community pool for 4 quarterly reports, receiving $60k upfront: ATOM ACCELERATOR DAO TRANSPARENCY REPORT 4 | by Atom Accelerator | Sep, 2023 | Medium
So far it seems only 1 of the 4 promised quarterly reports has been published. This first âresearch reportâ is a basic and simple overview of a couple of pages of cosmos sdk, cometBFT, IBC, replicated security, discussing token supply, issuance, validators, how governance works in the Cosmos Hub, mentioning a few projects in the ecosystem, and a brief comparison with Ethereum. Anyone here in the forum can write a better report for free, and the AADAO gave them $25k for each of these 4 reports. The conclusion of this first Messari research report is that âthe Cosmos Hub can now offer replicated security to other networksâ: https://messari.io/report/cosmos-hub-genesis-of-the-interchain
It seems Messari has this strategy of applying to the grant programs of all crypto projects for their âquarterly research reportsâ. It is interesting that the Osmosis grants program also awarded a grant to Messari but it was for $20k and not $100k as in the case of the AADAO. Basically, for 4 quarterly reports the OGP paid $20k to Messari, and the AADAO also for 4 quarterly reports paid 5x more $100k.
3 Likes
Can you post the link to Mintscan supply graph because I canât find it. They only show current values - at least on the pages I visit.
I didnât know posting links is allowed. As for the data on Mintscan I too canât find it since they moved to new UI. There is some about the assets itself here Mintscan
As for the data I screenshoted it is from Atomscan https://atomscan.com/stats/blockchain
Thanks. Yeah, I mean the chart in that link largely proves my point that having 20% rewards isnât really resulting in pushing down inflation materially. Inflation has been around 14% all year and at present, rewards and inflation are again increasing ever so slightly. Last year I thought the 20% rewards would have us somewhere near 7% inflation today or at least headed in that direction. Going from 14.46% to 14.16% inflation in a year is not much of a progress. If we take off 30bps of inflation per year, it will take us 23 years to get to 7%. lmao
