greymass blog

The future of the "Greymass Wallet" - beta version available now.

Since the genesis of the EOS blockchain, Greymass has dedicated significant efforts to building upon and improving our open-source desktop wallet, eos-voter (commonly referred to as "Greymass Wallet"). Given our prior years of wallet development experience, as well as the trust from the crypto community that we have built over the years, we felt this was a way we could contribute to the ecosystem beyond our primary responsibilities as a block producer.

To date, we have had over 130,000 downloads of eos-voter, have built out support for seven different blockchains, and have connected thousands of stakeholders to various EOSIO networks. It is an effort that has been well worth the time and energy we’ve poured into this flagship product.


A simple system to support blockchain "Workers" in DPoS

Within EOSIO chains today, and even across the greater DPoS spectrum, it is common practice for the system to dedicate a portion of its economic rewards to a fund earmarked for improvements. This is typically done through either fees during on-chain actions, or directly with token inflation.

EOSIO-based chains primarily fund themselves through inflation, since fees are not required for typical network operations. This inflation comes in various forms, either being allocated slowly over time through "block rewards", in tranches through "worker proposals", or even during genesis with "strategic partners", a "development fund", or a "pre-mine".


Greymass Stance on the "retiresaving" Proposal

This past Thursday, we voted in favor of step one of the “ forumretire ” proposal by EOS Nation. This proposal has since been approved in a 15/21 BP vote. In this post, we’d like to offer a short background on the proposal and elaborate on our stance on this important issue.

"retiresaving" is a two-part proposal from EOS Nation that relates to an initiative to burn the EOS that has accumulated in the eosio.saving smart contract. The EOS mainnet launched with a 5% yearly inflation rate— 1% of which is paid out to BPs, and 4% of which goes to the eosio.saving contract. The idea behind this contract was to create a network treasury that could be used to fund various initiatives and developments that could bring value to the EOS ecosystem. The problem was that, while the network launched with an active savings contract, the community did not have a plan in place to allocate those savings. As such, those funds have been accumulating in a smart contract with no clear way to decide on how they are spent.


Greymass Support of the "tokenauction" Referendum Proposal

Today, we’d like to voice our support for the tokenauction referendum proposal by EOS New York. Should this issue be put to a 15/21 BP approval vote, we plan to vote in favor of the approval. As part of our commitment to active participation in EOS governance, we’ve signaled our support of the proposal on-chain (see transaction here ), and will also offer an explanation of our stance below.

This proposal is important for two primary reasons: it provides added security for token projects built on EOS, and it creates a source of revenue for the blockchain itself that can be allocated using the same decision-making process that governs other network upgrades.


Inflation, Centralization, and DPoS

In recent weeks, the EOS community has been engaged in a number of conversations around topics related to the inflation of the EOS token supply. We believe these to be important discussions, as inflation can have a direct impact on the security, distribution, and incentive structure of any given blockchain. When it comes to EOS in particular, we believe that the framing of the inflation debate has been overly simplistic. Inflation can be good, bad, or neutral, depending on where it flows and how it is used. The details of specific implementations are important to consider.

In this post, we’d like to outline concerns around EOS inflation that we believe haven’t been addressed in-depth. Our goal with this post is to demonstrate that there may be tangible benefits to EOS inflation that does not flow directly to validators (consensus participants), and tangible downsides to inflation that flows only to these participants. We hope that this contributes to the community conversation around these issues, and we look forward to hearing voter feedback and discussing these issues further.