RE: [Bounty] Community bounty for open source GPU miner. by faddat

`author`	faddat
`permlink`	re-cryptohead-re-picokernel-bounty-community-bounty-for-open-source-gpu-miner-20160905t133710584z
`category`	steem
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steem"]}
`created`	2016-09-05 13:37:12
`last_update`	2016-09-05 13:37:12
`depth`	2
`children`	1
`last_payout`	2016-09-30 17:29:27
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	172
`author_reputation`	36,581,868,473,026
`root_title`	"[Bounty] Community bounty for open source GPU miner."
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	1,134,137
`net_rshares`	0

@cryptohead · Sep 5 '16

Ok, but having the POW queue being dominated by 2 individuals is not the best way to secure the blockchain.
Some code changes could be done to make it more decentralized and just.
If this issue is not handled, then I will shut down my nodes and look for other uses for my hardware and connections.
I might just as well post cat photos and get more incentives than competing against rabbit and gxt-1080 for a place in the POW queue.

properties (22)

`author`	cryptohead
`permlink`	re-faddat-re-cryptohead-re-picokernel-bounty-community-bounty-for-open-source-gpu-miner-20160905t135258349z
`category`	steem
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steem"]}
`created`	2016-09-05 13:52:54
`last_update`	2016-09-05 13:52:54
`depth`	3
`children`	0
`last_payout`	2016-09-30 17:29:27
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	431
`author_reputation`	607,929,583,052
`root_title`	"[Bounty] Community bounty for open source GPU miner."
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	1,134,289
`net_rshares`	0