Here's another rather radical idea: Bitcoin addresses as usernames.
In order to "sign up" for the forum, you must have a legitimate Bitcoin address with a balance greater than 0.1 BTC. You use this address to digitally sign a message verifying that you own the address. In order to trade on the forum, your Bitcoin address must have a balance greater than, say, 2 BTC. Usernames are simply full Bitcoin addresses (or firstbits, if you want to shorten them up a bit).
This would virtually eliminate forum spam, removing one major headache from administration. It would make sockpuppeting more expensive (would have to put 0.1 BTC "on hold" for every sockpuppet you wanted to create) and more difficult to conceal (any accidental link between Bitcoin addresses could be proven by anyone, not just the forum administration looking at IP addresses). It would also force people brand new to Bitcoin to actually acquire some before joining in on any discussions, bringing up the quality of the discussions that do take place. But it wouldn't actually cost the forum users anything.
This is similar to the idea I was promoting only more detailed and fleshed out. I endorse this. By forcing a user to pay with bitcoin you eliminate all those who do not yet own bitcoin, which is a much larger group than those who do... it will hinder adoption of the forum. Perhaps if you want to create a thread you should need a bitcoin address but anyone can post in _______ section.
To the idea of not advertising, I don't see the benefit. Opportunities that ad dollars could provide include things like community events or even advertising the forum in a bigger forum... advertise the forum on google, for example. There are many possible benefits that ad dollars can help with and I do not see the downside to charging companies who want to advertise to do so assuming the money is used to benefit the community. Here's another thing money could/should be spent on: a political lobby toward the Dept of Treasury to benefit the community instead of letting big banks or the winklevoss twins run the exchanges.
Great contributions everyone thank you.
For certain discussions we should exclude people who don't really own any Bitcoins. For certain threads it should be required that you have Bitcoins to participate at all. This keeps out the sort of people who are only involved with the community to try and sabotage it, or keep an eye on it, or spam/scam it. If the scammer/spammer has to actually have Bitcoins to sign up to the site then that is proof that they have faith in or believe in it enough to have purchased or have earned some. Also you're right not every thread should cost coins. There should be newbie sections of the site. I'm just saying the people who want to get to VIP sections should pay to access those sections and to register and not be restricted to the newbie section I think having to verify that you own Bitcoins, Litecoins or some other kind of coin worth beyond a minimum value is important. I think it shouldn't be hard for newbies to acquire enough of these coins from being tipped, lotteries, bounties or from trade. After they have Bitcoin experience or cryptocurrency experience (proven by the fact that they own some), then they should gain access to the more trusted part of the forum. These are just my opinions. On ad dollars, if I'm willing to pay a via micropayments to not have ads on a per page basis then I shouldn't have to view any ads. If and when I'm not paying enough so that it's beyond what the forum would have made off me in ads then I should have to see ads. I think with transaction fees and micropayments you could easily get enough money to not have to worry about ads but I don't blame you if you keep ads because micropayments might not work well or might take a long time to work. This is like Bitcoin eventually going from paying miners through coin generation and then the switch to transaction fees. I think at some point websites are going to switch to transaction fees. How would your forum compete with another forum which offers similar capabilities but paid for entirely in transaction fees? I think the best approach for short to medium term is to profit from ads and micropayments until we know which mechanism will power websites in the future (right now I don't think anyone knows how profitable micropayments could be). I agree with the political organizing aspect. I have posted on that topic in the past. I think we'd need ad revenue, micropayment, all sorts of different methods of getting people to spend their coinage for access. You misunderstood SgtSpike: you wouldn't have to pay to register/post, you would just have to sign a message with a signature whose corresponding address has at least 2BTC
I agree with this
Maybe not in all subforums though
That would make the forum extremely unfriendly to newbies and many others. A lot of people don't have btc due to their financial issues for example but the still believe in bitcoin and want to discuss it with the community. Everyone starts as a newbie. I think right now because the perception is that it's still hard to get Bitcoins you have a point. But I don't think it's hard to earn Bitcoins for anyone who is truly determined. When the person signs up they could be directed to websites to buy or work for Bitcoins which would completely remove all excuses for why someone couldn't have $1 worth in Bitcoin. They can either buy it, or work for it, but since the forum isn't free why shouldn't they be made to work for Bitcoin to access the better part of the forum? It also would act to prove they truly believe in Bitcoin because anyone who would buy or work for it is now invested in it and that in my opinion is essential for a community to thrive. Here's another rather radical idea: Bitcoin addresses as usernames.
In order to "sign up" for the forum, you must have a legitimate Bitcoin address with a balance greater than 0.1 BTC. You use this address to digitally sign a message verifying that you own the address. In order to trade on the forum, your Bitcoin address must have a balance greater than, say, 2 BTC. Usernames are simply full Bitcoin addresses (or firstbits, if you want to shorten them up a bit).
This would virtually eliminate forum spam, removing one major headache from administration. It would make sockpuppeting more expensive (would have to put 0.1 BTC "on hold" for every sockpuppet you wanted to create) and more difficult to conceal (any accidental link between Bitcoin addresses could be proven by anyone, not just the forum administration looking at IP addresses). It would also force people brand new to Bitcoin to actually acquire some before joining in on any discussions, bringing up the quality of the discussions that do take place. But it wouldn't actually cost the forum users anything.
So to participate at the peak, it could have cost $520? Numbers could be adjusted to whatever is deemed appropriate, of course. The balance required for participation that I suggested was only 0.1 BTC too - I was just suggesting a higher balance required to participate in trading, as it lends a bit more trust to that person if they have to hold that much of a balance in limbo, so to speak. And it doesn't actually cost anything - you just have to prove ownership of that much. What if someone wants to find out more about Bitcoin or is looking for investment but has no Bitcoin themselves? So for them, no matter how small the amount of Bitcoin, they would need to have a bank account (not everyone does), they would then need to transfer fees to an exchange, then buy some Bitcoin. Sounds like quite a barrier to entry. It should go like this, you sign up for the site and prior to verifying your commitment you're stuck in the newbie section. The only way to get out of this section is to gain enough Bitcoin experience. You can do this by either purchasing Bitcoins, or working for Bitcoins. You could be posting in the newbie section and someone can give you a tip and now you have Bitcoin experience. You can now use that tip money to buy a pass out of the newbie section. But what if no one decides to tip you? Then you can actually go work for Bitcoins. There are sites which offer jobs which pay in Bitcoins and those sites will increasingly become more popular. The forum should be set up so that when you try to exit the newbie section without any Bitcoins then you get redirected to a page which lists various sites to buy Bitcoins from or work for Bitcoins. The point is to make people earn their way into the privileged parts of the site so that they are committed and value it more. Let's say they decide to work for the Bitcoins and after 45 minutes they have $1. Now they can say they have Bitcoin experience and can exit the newbie section of the site. At the same time the site makes plenty of money if everyone pays $1 just to get out of the newbie section, and it's really equal to what they'd generate in ad revenue based on my calculations (actually it's possibly much more). If someone cannot take the time to learn how to earn Bitcoins, will not take any bounty off a forum or go to the Bitcoin job sites or sign up at an exchange, or just make a good post and get tipped, then why would the forum want people who don't intend to contribute? |
|
|
|
"If the fee is high enough then no one will ever sock puppet again."
Lol.
Let me tell you: it's going to be impossible to catch someone who knows what they're doing sockpuppeting.
They'll have to pay a fee to sockpuppet. It's not about catching them it's about attaching a cost to the practice so that it isn't free. |
|
|
|
I wonder if this would really attract highly intelligent people at all - if your IQ is high enough then making money is actually not a problem (so not something you would need to enter a contest to do) - instead typically very IQ people are more interested in solving difficult problems or inventing things (such as Bitcoin).
There is no need to *reward* that as the people who are intelligent enough are already driven by their own desire to improve things (getting financial rewards for winning competitions is typically a far more low IQ thing).
That is a myth. Look at statistics and you'll see making money is a problem for most people whether high or low IQ. People with high IQ's don't have more money than everyone else and may not even have jobs. But that is why we should attract them to these opportunities and concepts. Unemployed highly intelligent people with lots of free time to solve puzzles will also have free time to contribute to projects. Financial reward is how people survive. There must always be a financial reward or how else do the market participants know or believe you value something? Saying that people should all work for free just for the joy of it is fine but time isn't free and neither is rent. I think the let's convince smart people to work for free crowd don't grasp what cryptocurrencies can actually do. Let's work for free is a scam until the day where we all have plenty of money and time (and I don't know anyone with both money and time). Let's work for cryptocurrencies, and create money and time so that smart people can contribute more. |
|
|
|
|
Is such a thing possible to make? Would colored coins make it possible?
The wallet should accept any kind of coin. The coins deposited into this special investment/savings wallet should automatically buy any shares or bonds you set it to. It should be perfectly scriptable.
Is this possible?
|
|
|
|
Cryptocurrencies aren't supposed to be a get-rich-quick scheme for miners. Miners exist to secure the blockchain for the currency. Getting that backwards does not sound like a good idea. So here's my plan: I get 1% of mined coins (no premine and no instamine), lol miners get 89% of all mined coins That's even less than currencies that don't revolve around miners btw. and then 10% of all mined coins will be put in either an escrow account or a specific wallet which can be verified by everyone and anyone to show I'm not spending it. I promise full disclosures and full oversight in any way you guys choose to implant such a watchdog. I do not follow. This also doesn't sound like much of a decentralized trust-not-required currency (as in, a big reason many of us like bitcoin). Actually it's both. Miners don't exist if they can't pay their bills so it is about making money WHILE securing the blockchain. It has to be both. The more money miners make the more secure the blockchain can become. |
|
|
|
I promised you guys at least a 3 day heads up warning for any coin I launch and here it is.
The coin will be Nuggets (The first true Miners' Coin) and I am designing it from the ground up, with lots of feedback from many miners and before all else, with the average, struggling miner in mind.
Every coin out there focuses on everything and everyone else but none out the miner first - the lifeblood of any successful coin - yet the masses - the large majority of miners get no real specific edge or benefit for their efforts and contributions.
I wanna change all that!
Nuggets will have no premine, no instamine (the first true fair launch per the people's specs and demands, and not my own desires and so fair that Miners even chose the name no sneak launch, as promised a minimum 3 days heads up for hackers to kill the coin if this is another CrapCoin) and I will add a new feature [I learned in Economics and Finance back in College years ago) never before seen or heard of, called the VGB protocol, which I will detail right before launch so prevent theft before my own launch.
On a % basis the VGB Protocol will favor and more generously reward the smaller miner - the smaller the miner the nicer and more rewarding the benefit. It will also help the solo miner but also the pool miner.
The higher the difficulty goes - this new, never thought of feature (the VGB protocol) will ensure and guarantee that mining a high difficulty coin will not result in a boring flatline effect, which many coins are now plagued by and as the masses come in, mining will become more boring and less and less rewarding - so this VGB protocol will greatly help with this fundamental flaw in all coins out there right now.
I guess it took an Economist to see what very smart computer guys, programmers and hackers missed all this time. lol.
This new VGB feature will make mining more interesting, unpredictable (in a good way) and more fun and exciting for everyone - but especially for the average and smaller miners.
It will be fully inclusive - meaning big miners will be happy to mine it while small miners will be even happier to mine it. It's a win-win coin for everyone involved.
The distribution of the coin which not all may love this particular idea will be like this, and this is where you have to give me a bit of trust, because this is also meant and designed with the smaller miner in mind although once again, this is a democratic coin and i promise nobody will be excluded.
In discussing ways to level the playing field, "Zas" suggested rewarding all miners with 10% of the mined coins straight across but that would be impossible to code and it's ripe for abuse but I love the idea so much that I can't let it go.
So here's my plan: I get 1% of mined coins (no premine and no instamine), miners get 89% of all mined coins and then 10% of all mined coins will be put in either an escrow account or a specific wallet which can be verified by everyone and anyone to show I'm not spending it. I promise full disclosures and full oversight in any way you guys choose to implant such a watchdog.
Once we can all come to some fair understanding I will then distribute ALL of those coins, every penny back to the miners. So then the miners get 99% of these coins but the idea is that this 10% distribution will be a flat reward which means that even the big miners get a reward but the same exact (flat) reward will be given to the small and smallest miners so on a % basis, relatively speaking, the small miners will feel a much greater benefit.
The idea is to help newbies and small guys who can't afford to keep buying hardware - this 10% reward, combined with my VGB Protocol, should really help the fast majority of miners, especially the smaller struggling miners, before the masses of people come online probably next year and you all lose the control you none possess to make a coin especially for yourselves.
This is a win-win for everyone and I will do anything it takes to show people this is not a pump and dump. I will do all I can to put the power and the reward system in the hands of the miners.
This is the first coin which gives a damn about this alt community and so this coin is made specifically with the miners in mind, before all else and if it succeeds many small miners should see immediate and wonderfully uplifting benefits which will help many of you reach the next level of income and revenues.
Good luck guys!
Let me guess. VGB is some sort of variability to the payout? |
|
|
|
I was part of a discussion earlier and a question was raised. Considering all the information companies are sharing with governments, could it be possible that media players that connect to the internet for data, are not only getting information, but are sending it out? For example if you allow WM11 to connect to the net to get track info, it could send a list of songs you have, which is then saved for later use, either for marketing purposes or more sinister invasions of privacy? Also, could that be used as a consensual conduit for companies to gather information on your habits, preferences and activities?
We should sell the data about ourselves and pocket the money rather than wait for them to steal it and pocket nothing. lol - pretty much. If only we could implement that. Keep your eye on Netcoin. I outlined a plan. |
|
|
|
I was part of a discussion earlier and a question was raised. Considering all the information companies are sharing with governments, could it be possible that media players that connect to the internet for data, are not only getting information, but are sending it out? For example if you allow WM11 to connect to the net to get track info, it could send a list of songs you have, which is then saved for later use, either for marketing purposes or more sinister invasions of privacy? Also, could that be used as a consensual conduit for companies to gather information on your habits, preferences and activities?
We should sell the data about ourselves and pocket the money rather than wait for them to steal it and pocket nothing. |
|
|
|
You have a reputation as a selfish, rude, abrasiveness, and odd person, who is a constant source of conflict. You seem a bit confused here. This forum is not the community. It is a nest of trolls that the community only barely interacts with as necessary. My reputation is quite well in the Bitcoin community. Trolls and scammers may hate me, but I'm fine with that. This forum is part of the community whether you like it or not. Your attitude towards alt-cryptocurrencies is not welcome as it does not help anything. If you care about what Bitcoin is trying to do as a technology then you recognize alt-currencies can only help make it happen. Bitcoin is high profile with a bad reputation and if you're not about centralized power then you would want alt-currencies to compete in an eco-system with Bitcoin to keep Bitcoiners honest and to diminish the power acquired by the Bitcoin elite. Each coin should give people a chance to make money and try new ideas. Primecoin does try a new idea and will make people money. A scamcoin does not try a new idea and does not make money. |
|
|
|
I did not publish this for people to use, but rather for developers to play with.
It is not production-quality code, and without understanding the code you probably will not be able to get it working.
Since it is also only used by a probable-scamcoin at this point, I'd also like to express my preference that others not encourage/help non-developers use it for now, outside of improving the code/documentation in git.
(However, to be clear, I will also not hold any grudge or hard feelings against those who do.)
If any developers wish to work with or improve the code, perhaps even clean it up sufficient for merging into mainline BFGMiner, that is another matter entirely: I am more than willing to help/collaborate on this (but do expect me to ignore you if your questions suggest to me that you don't know the first thing about development!).
Why do you think Primecoin is a scamcoin? Because it's not Bitcoin and he's Luke Jr. |
|
|
|
Of course you can "train" the brain to score higher on a specific intelligence test. This effect is mainly based on recall/recognition. But do not expect this effect to generalize at any significant amount to other intelligence tests. The often proclaimend positive effects of "brain training" on intelligence are not supported by any sound scientific evidence. I.e. such effects do *not* generalize. There is evidence however that regular physical excercise leads to some improvement of mental ability. Why must it be an intelligence test? Can't it be something more interesting and useful? You asked for tearing your idea apart. I'm just helping out.  The idea starts with an intelligence test but in the future we can pay people to take personality tests or to give intimate details if there is a market. Sites like OKCupid do something like that. To elaborate, I think the IQ test should be marketed as brain training with the belief that if you keep challenging the brain that the brain keeps growing new connections, stays sharp, and stays plastic. This is something I believe and try to adhere to. In the future I would want to take this brain exercise to the next level and use it as a sort of mining or Proof of Work mechanism where an actual human being has to solve actual puzzles and if they get enough points they go into a lottery where the winner of the lottery gets the coins. My opinion is supported by : http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/06/03/1103228108.abstract |
|
|
|
|
I'll wait until it's on one of the more reliable sites. I'm also not in a rush to sell so if it's not 0.01 BTC I'll just wait for the difficulty to spike a month or two from now when it takes weeks to get 10 coins and then sell.
For Litecoin I would sell for 0.5 LTC and up. The truth is, primecoin could dethrown LTC just because it's to LTC what LTC was to Bitcoin. No coin has had a better launch than primecoin.
|
|
|
|
./primecoind getinfo error: {"code":-1,"message":"CDB() : can't open database file wallet.dat, error -30973"} Can anyone tell me what this means? Error -30973? It looks like I have to import the wallet.dat |
|
|
|
|
I figured it out. ./primecoind setgenerate true -1
then to check that it's running ./primecoind getmininginfo
This applies to anyone else as well who started the daemon and couldn't figure it out. You have to pass commands to it, it's basically the console window from primecoin.exe
|
|
|
|
USE_UPNP=-  primecoind doesn't do anything once compiled. Is there a missing step? |
|
|
|
When I compile on windows with mingw32 and then run primecoind it gives error: can't connect to server. Does anyone know the cause?.
I get that error on linux when I forget to sudo You need to run it as a daemon primecoind --daemon without it thinks your trying to connect to the server to send a command (for example getmininginfo). In my case primecoind runs but doing nothing, and then if I open another cmd window and type primecoind.exe getinfo it tells me error: can't connect to server Getting the same error as you. Someone should show a snapshot of their screen so we can see what its supposed to do. |
|
|
|
When I compile on windows with mingw32 and then run primecoind it gives error: can't connect to server. Does anyone know the cause?.
I get that error on linux when I forget to sudo Are you compiled in Linux then what? Do you have to run primecoind.exe or do you run primecoin.exe? How do we use primecoind.exe if that is necessary because when I run it I seem to get nothing. |
|
|
|
I am an idiot when it comes to linux and trying to run the command.. failing miserably. Can someone please roll this fix in to the full wallet so the whole package is available for download including the fix?
SunnyKing is the only one who can be trusted to compile it. It would be helpful if the files had md5 just to verify the integrity of the compiled files. |
|
|
|
Is there any clue to what kind of systems affected by this issue? I wonder whether my Intel Atom is just too slow to compete, BTW I have OpenSUSE 11.4.
From the reports I have gathered, it impacted some server systems with high thread count, yes it may impact atoms as it's threads are relatively slow. What about AMD based systems? |
|
|
|
If you want a "bank" then use a "bank" (rather than try to create some sort of pseudo-bank).
It is not easy to become a "bank" (at least in most western countries) so you will have the *trust* of the bank itself (although even western banks have gone belly up before).
If you get a reputable bank to buy into the idea (of a BTC account) then you may have something - but if not then you are going to look like a MyBitcoin or even worse Bitcoin Savings and Trust (search for the whole pirate saga).
What about a credit union? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
