|
Lol, no thank you. It is 213 pages... I would rather pass up this project than do that.
This information should be in the OP or on a website in a FAQ. I don't even see a whitelaper, otherwise I would read that. No one seems to know this information. The two people that said anything are just giving their opinion on how it should work and/or don't seem too sure of themselves as to how it will work.
No wonder interest, volume, and market cap for this project is so miniscule. How do you expect people to take it seriously without a whitepaper, website, or FAQ explaining how things will work? You expect everyone to read through 213 forum pages? Lol...
|
|
|
|
Judging by this metric, I would say so.  Block reward inflation in the top 5 PoW cryptocurrencies: 1. Bitcoin = $2,038,522 USD per day
2. Ethereum = $61,039,787 USD per day
3. Ripple = not PoW
4. Litecoin = $173,088 USD per day
5. Dash = $133,472.88 USD per day
Surely the miners will eventually start dumping, then the whales will panic and join them. You think 61 million dollars worth PER DAY, is just miners? I don’t think so, if you look at poloinex for example that ETH has one of the highest volumes every single day. Which means traders love it and people love to trade their coins back and forth on btc-eth parameters. I don’t think it is a bubble, I believe it is a valid altcoin, not gonna be 1 million per coin type of crazy things like people expect Bitcoin to be but definetly has an upside in the long term. No. 61 million USD a day is just the inflation that is currently being created by mining. Surely not all of this is being dumped everyday, as surely there are some believers and holders, but I would imagine a large percentage of it is indeed being dumped. Most miners generally dump whatever they are mining for Bitcoin, or whatever other alt they are interested in. Eventually, this inflation will catch up to the value and the price will drop back to reasonable levels. The market is showing signs of a correction already. I believe it is a valid alt coin too, and a promising project, but I like to be realistic. It is overvalued for what it provides at the moment. There are not really any useful and working smart contracts at the moment. Maybe one day the current valuation will be appropriate, but now is not that time. |
|
|
|
3% PoS inflation combined with 1% to 3% uploader/seeder inflation incentive may be too much. It seems I will have to stake this coin if I get involved to lower that to 1% to 3%.
But, your answer is just a guess... it is really weird to me that no one seems to know how the uploader/seeder incentives will work. To be honest, it is quite worrisome to me as a potential investor.
It is my understanding that uploader/seeder incentive is provided by leechers. Could be wrong though. Hmmm. I did not realize leeches would need to pay. Why would they use torrent when they could use piratebay etc for free? |
|
|
|
|
Definitely, a way of rating content creators and each individual torrent needs to be implemented.
I think it is very important to reduce or negate inflation needed for the incentives too.
Transaction fees should be earmarked for these incentives.
A demurrage fee should also be considered. At the very least, a demurrage fee on dormant accounts should be imposed and earmarked for incentives.
Any other ideas for additional funding?
|
|
|
|
Hope i helped you a little!
Thanks, that is a big help actually. With my posting frequency, I think that one would be more lucrative. Thanks again bud! |
|
|
|
|
After thinking about this more...
Certainly, after the "powers that be" see the biggest alts gaining ground on Bitcoin (as far as utility, transactions, and market cap), which they already are, eventually both sides will come to the bargaining table and compromise, no? It may be a while though until they "see the light" so to speak. It looks like "alt coin mania" will continue for now until they do.
|
|
|
|
Tax.
e.g.
miners find dormant funds, reward tax! [no new coin is created]
I added your idea to the OP. After thinking it over, I think it is a good and viable solution to the main question I presented in the OP. It would certainly help provide added value on top of transaction fees to provide more incentive to people to maintain consensus. Whether or not investors would go for it is another question, but it is a solution nonetheless. I think they are much more likely to accept it if the tax is only imposed on dormant accounts. I elaborate here: 4. Demurrage Incentive (submitted by BitcoinNational)
4. A tax (or demurrage fee) can be imposed on token holders, which is then used to provide incentive for those to maintain consensus. A demurrage fee is a cost associated with owning or holding currency over a given period.
4b. Traditionally, cryptocurrencies have many dormant accounts where the owners have likely lost the private keys. These coins are usually stuck forever in said accounts, but one added benefit with demurrage is that these stuck coins would make their way back into the ecosystem.
4a. Optionally, the tax could only be applied to balances that have been inactive over an arbitrary amount of time. This provides incentive for token holders to actually use the services or features of a blockchain, which in turn also increases Token Value Incentive due to the added amount of fees that are burned. The extra activity also provides extra fees to distribute to those that are maintaining consensus.
|
|
|
|
The reason I made my own thread is because most signature campaigns seem to have all the legendary spots filled already.
This one still open for your rank https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1816787.0Have you tried that? You can earn 0.052 btc monthly in that campaign if i'm not wrong. Or try Rollin.io campaign, they are still have 2 spots open Thanks, I haven't seen that one. I think the one for Rollin only had lower level member slots available, or at least it was like that last time I checked. Thanks for your help!  |
|
|
|
I explained how I think it will work several pages back. You set your own price for bandwidth. $Zero to $1m  There was a discussion about it at the end of last year when the devs gave everyone an opportunity to have their say. My main request was to trickle back payments to the original seeder to avoid a race to zero situation. You also get the benefit of royalty payments going back to content creators, which encourages them to create more. You see this on eBay where people find open source software, spend time marketing it and pretty quickly they end up selling stuff to other sellers and then everyone competes with each other on price. The originator of the whole thing gets priced out and they hardly ever recover their sweat capital. So trickle down payments - The seeder of a file does it once and then as others help with seeding a swarm and they get a cut; but the originator is basically getting a cut from everyone, even a diminishing rate when multiplied up becomes a lot. That all makes sense to me. That is similar to how curator payments work in Steem. The first person to upvote something gets the lionshare of the curator payment for any certain post. This provides incentive for people to spend time curating, and being the first to upvote valuable content. I guess in vTorrent it would provide incentive for people to seed a torrent that might have otherwise eventually gone unseeded. I like your idea of making sure content creators get a cut too. In the legacy BitTorrent ecosystem, they do a lot of work for little to no pay, so it would be good to reward them. |
|
|
|
I think the Edgless Lounge adds unneeded and inconvenient complexity to the ecosystem.
I understand it is due to regulatory issues, but was burning 40% of the fees ever considered? IMO, burning fees is less like paying dividends than the complicated Edgless Lounge gimmick.
No one agrees? You all would rather gamble for the fees?  That doesn't make sense to me. It is inconvenient for casual investors, and sucks for people that don't wish to gamble for the transaction fees. Burning the fees benefits all stakeholders equally, and requires no attention/effort on behalf of investors to get a piece of the pie. Burning fees is not paying dividends, and is unlikely to come across legal scrutiny. It is more likely to get scrutiny from the gambling aspect of this, IMO. |
|
|
|
Can someone link me to how the economics are planned to work (as far as the incentives to reward uploaders and seeders)?
I am worried that it may be similar to STEEM's economic model, which is proving to be unsustainable.
Also, the 5% PoS inflation must be considered by those that are invested in too many coins and do not want to go through the trouble of staking (read: me).
If there is anyway to make this economic model deflationary, then I highly suggest it. It is a no-brainer to invest in a deflationary cryptocurrency that has utility.
vTorrent is an interesting/exciting concept nonetheless.
I'm going to guess that a small percentage (1-3%) will be lost to transaction errors and abandon wallets leading to an actual lower inflation rate. I feel the maximum total supply of 20MM coins has a greater bearing on the price than does annual inflation rate. Also, if this project actually works, there is already an established network of users who would benefit greatly from the unique features offered by vtorrent. This should create utility and massive demand for VTR. I would expect participation rate to grow much higher than 5%/year. As a final note, making it a deflationary token might stifle its usage, as it is meant to incentivize sharing within the network rather than be a store of value like bitcoin. Yes, coins like Steem are vulnerable to hyperinflation (+100%) without massive uptake. I'm not convinced it wasn't a scam right from the beginning. Steem has only ~10% annual inflation (from memory) if your STEEM are powered up, which most are powered up. 3% PoS inflation combined with 1% to 3% uploader/seeder inflation incentive may be too much. It seems I will have to stake this coin if I get involved to lower that to 1% to 3%. But, your answer is just a guess... it is really weird to me that no one seems to know how the uploader/seeder incentives will work. To be honest, it is quite worrisome to me as a potential investor. |
|
|
|
Tax.
e.g.
miners find dormant funds, reward tax! [no new coin is created]
Tax = transaction fees go into a "dormant fund" pool? or Tax = demurrage? And what happens to transaction fees? Do they go to the "dormant fund pool", or do they get burned? The former is pretty much what I am proposing, so I assume that you mean the latter. That could certainly work as far as providing enough incentive to maintain consensus, but don't you think most people hate demurrage? Or, at least hate it enough to where it would not garner enough demand compared to other cryptocurrencies? |
|
|
|
It's not so much about reward for node who produce blocks, but about proof that enough nodes on the network validated it aka solution to byzantine general problem. Otherwise , it's back to trusted nodes, centralized authority, etc, and the cost of operarion are then minimal.
I am not arguing that rewards to maintain consensus are unnecessary, just that inflation-based rewards are likely unnecessary. I understand the reasoning for the necessity of block rewards, and do think they are necessary for PoW cryptocurrencies. But for PoS variants? I don't think that inflationary rewards are necessary. Maybe PoS variants are not ideal as far as decentralization zealots are concerned. However, for 99% of the worlds population- they do not care about that kind of thing and PoS cryptocurrencies are sufficiently decentralized as is. |
|
|
|
why you see that fee are not enough to pay for the pow network? fee is the final point of any pow network that don't have infinite supply like doge, doge could int heory get rid of fee, if they did not already, other standard coins need high fee, which can be made higher if the coins become big among the comunity, and accepted everywhere, and the only good example is bitcoin.
Bitcoin, even though I think it collects the most fees out of any blockchain, could not rely on only transaction fees at this point. The past year, it only collected about $241,289 worth of transaction fees. That isn't even enough to cover a months worth of an electricity bill at some of the mega farms. The only PoW coins that have ended their inflationary period and relied only on transaction fees were either attacked or had to switch to merge/aux mining. Quarkcoin and Dogecoin come to mind. I am not sure if there are others TBH. And no, Doge cannot get rid of transaction fees... they are necessary to prevent spam and to provide incentive for people to merge mine it. there were some deflationary coins in the past but they didn't work good, because the first investors had more coins that the one that come late, and they dump everything on the new investors, same for miners, i don't like the first come first serve idea behind deflationary coins
Meh... provide some examples. I am not aware of any deflationary coins that have failed. Also, the reason that you stated why they failed... many PoW cryptocurrencies have failed on the same premises. That is not a PoS or deflationary coin only problem, as PoW can suffer from the same scenario. There are many pump and dump PoW coins. I think you are missing an important part to my proposed formula for a good deflationary cryptocurrency. It has to provide utility, a service or a feature which creates demand. If the token value will imminently grow because of supply and demand created by utility, then it provides good incentive not to dump. |
|
|
|
How to solve this problem?
I am fully convinced deflationary cryptocurrencies will be the next big thing in the blockchain space, as they are an investor's wet dream. This is just a solution I have hammered out in my head recently, but I am sure there are other solutions. I am interested in hearing if anyone else has any other ideas to improve upon mine, or perhaps something completely different? I know @Anonymint has a solution of his own, but unfortunately we will have to wait to hear his idea.
ZEIT Community Agrees with you that inflation is a serious issue, so much in fact, we are changing from 5% per year to an Ultra Low .0005% per year. We now list ourselves as a PoST (Proof of Staked Transactions), because you can make more coins from processing transactions than from the ultra low rate. Our conversion to Ultra Low is only a few weeks away.   That's good, but ZEIT is missing some things from my formula... mostly the utility aspect which creates demand. With a $256k market cap and $134 24h volume, there is obviously not much demand. I still think a super low PoS interest rate alone like ZEIT is trying may still be sufficient enough to secure a blockchain. IMO, it is just not ideal as far as utility and demand. I will be following closely nonetheless. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin inflates until year 2140 or so. Worry about this a little later.
Hmm, I think you missed the point of the thread. It is in the altcoin section... I don't expect Bitcoin to ever change its consensus algorithm. Bitcoin can't even agree on how to scale, much less change consensus altos or mess with the distribution. The fact Bitcoin inflates until the year 2140 is exactly the problem. This dilution is bad for investors, as it mainly goes to a few groups with the most amount of capital. They then dump this dilution on the free market, creating unnecessary downward pressure on the price. It is bad for most stakeholders and is unnecessary to maintain consensus. |
|
|
|
|
My point is that it is a little misleading, making it seem as if other smart contracts are somehow breakable.
|
|
|
|
The coin should be in the top 10... it has unbreakable contracts, decentralized markets etc etc... no other coin has anything like this. We even have decentralized voting etc.
I keep hearing this buzzword used to promote Bitbay and it kind of irks me. Not to take anything away from Bitbay, but aren't all "smart contract" platforms "unbreakable contracts"? If my reasoning is correct, then Bitbay is simply swimming in a sea of many cryptocurrencies that have "unbreakable contracts". Or do I misunderstand? The marketplace is a damn cool contract though, I will give you that! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
