Difference between revisions of "Debate on Kulupu emission curve"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 459: | Line 459: | ||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
| − | |''' | + | |'''Max total''' |
|'''158340000''' | |'''158340000''' | ||
| | | | ||
Revision as of 17:24, 12 August 2020
| Blockchain | |
|---|---|
| Wallet | polkadot.js |
| Node | Github |
| Status | Polkadot Telemetry |
| Chat | Discord, Matrix |
| Launched | September 2019 |
This documents the various debate on Kulupu emission curve.
Status quo
Keep the current emission of 60 KLP per block (1 KLP per second), but still retain the ability to discuss other emission curve options later.
Argument Kulupu needs border token distributions.- Argument Infinite supply is a model that works for coins such as Ethereum and Grin.
Objection Investors don't like to work with infinity in the equation, and a lot of people are currently frightened away from Kulupu, because of unclear total supply.
Supply cap of 210 million
Block reduction over a span of 20 years. Each of the next block reward is 90% of the previous one, rounded to the nearest integer. This results in a effective total supply of 210 million.
| Year | Reward | Block count | Start block number | Reward | Block usage | Block fee burn | Total burn |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 60 | 520000 | 0 (era 0) | 31200000 | 1/10 | 1.6 | 832000 |
| 2 | 54 | 520000 | 200000 (era 1) | 28080000 | 1/9 | 1.7 | 884000 |
| 3 | 49 | 520000 | 720000 | 25480000 | 1/8 | 2 | 1040000 |
| 4 | 44 | 520000 | 1240000 | 22880000 | 1/7 | 2.3 | 1196000 |
| 5 | 39 | 520000 | 1760000 | 20280000 | 1/6 | 2.7 | 1404000 |
| 6 | 35 | 520000 | 2280000 | 18200000 | 1/5 | 3.2 | 1664000 |
| 7 | 32 | 520000 | 3320000 | 16640000 | 1/4 | 4 | 2080000 |
| 8 | 29 | 520000 | 3840000 | 15080000 | 1/3 | 5.3 | 2758000 |
| 9 | 26 | 520000 | 4360000 | 13520000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 10 | 23 | 520000 | 4880000 | 11960000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 11 | 21 | 520000 | 5400000 | 10920000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 12 | 19 | 520000 | 5920000 | 9880000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 13 | 17 | 520000 | 6440000 | 8840000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 14 | 15 | 520000 | 6960000 | 7800000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 15 | 14 | 520000 | 7480000 | 7280000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 16 | 12 | 520000 | 8000000 | 6240000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 17 | 11 | 520000 | 8520000 | 5720000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 18 | 10 | 520000 | 9040000 | 5200000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 19 | 9 | 520000 | 9560000 | 4680000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
| 20 | 8 | 520000 | 10080000 | 4160000 | 1/2 | 8 | 4160000 |
- Argument Kulupu needs border token distributions.
- Objection The current investment will still be diluted by a lot, as the current supply is only 27 million.
Supply cap of 100 million
Block reduction over a span of 7 years. This results in an effective total supply of around 100 million.
| Year | Reward | Block count | Start block number | Reward | Block usage | Block fee burn | Total burn |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 60 | 520000 | 0 (era 0) | 31200000 | 1/10 | 1.6 | 832000 |
| 2 | 50 | 520000 | 200000 (era 1) | 26000000 | 1/9 | 1.7 | 884000 |
| 3 | 40 | 520000 | 720000 | 20800000 | 1/8 | 2 | 1040000 |
| 4 | 30 | 520000 | 1240000 | 15600000 | 1/7 | 2.3 | 1196000 |
| 5 | 20 | 520000 | 1760000 | 10400000 | 1/6 | 2.7 | 1404000 |
| 6 | 10 | 520000 | 2280000 | 5200000 | 1/5 | 3.2 | 1664000 |
| 7 | 8 | 520000 | 3320000 | 4160000 | 1/4 | 4 | 2080000 |
- Argument It gives investors more confidence as the total supply is not diluted.
- Objection With this particular table, in later stage the reduction is too high. For example, in the first year the reduction (from 60 KLP to 50 KLP) is less than 20%, while in the fifth year the reduction (from 20 KLP to 10 KLP) is 50%.
Some middle ground
Slow reduction by 5KLP every epoch until tail emission of 8KLP is reached after 11 years of mining. 7% Treasury, accounted for burn.
| Period (520000) | Reward | Blocks/period | End block | Treasury (7%) | Emission/period | Treasury/period | Emission total | Treasury total | Fee burn | Total burn |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 60 | 520000 | 200000 | 31200000 | 0 | 31200000 | 0 | 1.6 | 832000 | |
| 2 | 55 | 520000 | 720000 | 7.9 | 28600000 | 2860000 | 59800000 | 2860000 | 1.7 | 884000 |
| 3 | 50 | 520000 | 1240000 | 7.1 | 26000000 | 2600000 | 85800000 | 5460000 | 2.0 | 1040000 |
| 4 | 45 | 520000 | 1760000 | 6.4 | 23400000 | 2340000 | 109200000 | 7800000 | 2.3 | 1196000 |
| 5 | 40 | 520000 | 2280000 | 5.7 | 20800000 | 2080000 | 130000000 | 9880000 | 2.7 | 1404000 |
| 6 | 35 | 520000 | 2800000 | 5.0 | 18200000 | 1820000 | 148200000 | 11700000 | 3.2 | 1664000 |
| 7 | 30 | 520000 | 3320000 | 4.3 | 15600000 | 1560000 | 163800000 | 13260000 | 5.3 | 2756000 |
| 8 | 25 | 520000 | 3840000 | 3.6 | 13000000 | 1300000 | 176800000 | 14560000 | 8.0 | 4160000 |
| 9 | 20 | 520000 | 4360000 | 2.9 | 10400000 | 1040000 | 187200000 | 15600000 | 8.0 | 4160000 |
| 10 | 15 | 520000 | 4880000 | 2.1 | 7800000 | 780000 | 187980000 | 16380000 | 8.0 | 4160000 |
| 11 | 10 | 520000 | 4880000 | 1.4 | 5200000 | 520000 | 188500000 | 16900000 | 8.0 | 4160000 |
| 12 | 8 | 520000 | 4880000 | 1.1 | 4160000 | 416000 | 188916000 | 17316000 | 8.0 | 4160000 |
| tail emission | Max total | 158340000 | 30576000 |
- Argument
- Objection The reduction is still not evenly distributed. For example, in the first year the reduction (from 60 KLP to 55 KLP) is around 9%, while in the 11th year the reduction (from 15 KLP to 10 KLP) is around 33%.