@tyler on Zcash as HTTPS: "The government fought encryption and treated it as a munition. Bitcoin is HTTP, in the clear. Zcash is HTTPS." "The government fought that too, then 180'd and said all government websites must be HTTPS." Encryption always wins in the end.

I’m gonna go with the second option: the mainstream polling industry is cooked. They seem to only get it wrong in one direction these days. More interested in trying to manifest their desired outcome early to depress turnout than getting it right. We’ll know soon enough.

Comparing ZCG to mining is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually illiterate. Miners are the Man in the Arena and mining is the purest market-based competition imaginable. Miners risk their capital and time to enter the race to verify and secure the Zcash network. Execute better than everyone else and the mining reward will be yours. Execute poorly and the consequences are real and brutal. The rules are objective, transparent, and clear. The inputs are GSols/sec, the consensus mechanism is EquiHash, and the finish line is finding a valid nonce and writing the next block to the blockchain faster than anyone else. Bring more compute to bear on the network than everyone else and you will succeed. Falter, and you will wiped out (as we seen many times throughout history of PoW networks). The results are mathematically verifiable and can easily be agreed upon by everyone. The relationship and fidelity between risk, execution, and reward couldn't be more direct or higher. There is no such thing as a truly decentralied crypto network without miners. Mining is not a choice. It is inextricably tied to decentralization and cannot be separated any more than a beating heart can be separated from its body and for that person to still be considered alive. On the other hand, ZCG is a choice. It's optional. It is not existential, intrinsic to, or an ontological basis for a decentralized network. It does not have to exist for Zcash to exist and it should not exist. At its core, ZCG a slush fund with no accountabiility. If all of the dollars deployed are incinerated, nothing changes. Zero consequences. The money pump keeps pumping into the ZCG fund. This can only lead to bad outcomes. ZCG is rife with conflicts of interest and poor incentive structures that all foster moral hazards. The decision-makers have no skin in the game, no limited partners, no shareholders, no fiduciary responsibilities, no liability, no economic risk, and no next fund to raise. Ultimately, they have no consequences or accountability. And Zcash coinholders have no say. This defies all logic and common sense. There is no rational argument to support ZCG.

It's time to turn off the ZCG funding stream. ZCG has over $125M in funding, and will receive millions more before the spigot is turned off. The program was never designed to handle this amount of funding. Draft ZIP:

Zcash Forums are not the town square. @X is the town square. And is so by any and every measure. If you believe in open and transparent dialogue, discourse, and debate, then Zcash discussions should be happening here. Calling that position toxic or blocking people on account of it is instantly credibility-losing.

Zcash doesn’t need to re-invent the governance wheel. Stakeholder voting has worked in capital markets for centuries. Coinholder voting is just the onchain form-factor. Experimenting in governance is not part of the Zcash mission. Its mission is privacy. It’s time to end ZCG and all the distractions and misalignment that come with it.

ZCG is done. 00:00 Intro 01:09 Replacing ZCG with markets 02:20 Committees don’t work 03:10 Grantees elect the committee that funds them 04:28 ZCAP is illegitimate 06:28 ZCG has already 20 years of runway 08:43 No compromises 09:00 ZSAs 10:59 Two paths for ZCG 11:29 The proposal 12:25 Takeaway