I am working on Flogram, a programming language, designed to be perfect for writing blockchain projects. And I don't mean a language for smart contracts, though it probably could be used there too, I'm more talking about a language for say building a blockchain or miner or wallet or torrent downloader or other decentralized projects, etc.

After much studying of Rust and other programming languages, I've made some interested discoveries. I've spent 1 1/2 years of designing this language on top of a background high performance and security. I've found a way to automate parallelization, async, memory management and a few other smaller things. I intend to make it simple, secure and yet initial testing shows it to be extremely fast, faster than C kind of fast.

It's well designed and I'm working with a few others to build the compiler.  However, I would love to get feedback from programmers in the decentralized space.

Some specific questions for you:

• If I make trade-offs would you prefer performance or security? I'm thinking security by default allow using a keyword to opt out to allow improving performance via undefined behavior or
• What about building a stronger type system that allows 'dependent types' which essentially adds formal proofing to it to prevent bugs, would you use it? Adds significant complexity, significantly increases compile times, but also allows stronger security and bug prevention. Unit testing is currently a more popular alternative.
• What features do you most value in programming languages in general?

P.S. I'm always looking for C programmers! Or investors who would be willing to help fund development.

I'm in the process of creating the most decentralized currency you've ever seen. Everyone mines as an equal, distributing power over the currency and therefore the everyday people as far and wide as possible.

I had the website we're using to kickstart it ready to go when a bug took out the backend, our codebase for that part has been such a pain to work with and would take more time to fix this then rewrite it.. so I'm rewriting it.

Features of the currency:
Everyone mines as an equal made possible through fully Decentralized, private IDs
Stabilizes much faster in price as much research that I've done shows a strong relationship between number of users of a currency, usage, and price.
Free transaction fees
Scammer protection
Scalable, decentralized IDs make it easier to shard the blockchain
And a lot more in the future

I could really use help rewriting the website's backend. Happy to pay generously with some Frinks (our currency).

Learn more about Frink at www.frink.global

Interested? Questions?

So Warren Buffet is anti-cryptocurrency because he is the single most invested person in the current system. (One reason I think Justin Sun is an idiot.. Buffet isn't going to change his mind)

But just found it very interesting watching the Bill Gates netflix tutorial and Buffet is saying that they are good friends AND that the bill gates foundation is heavily invested into Berkshire Hathaway since they own roughly half of Buffet's stock in the company...

Funny how most of the anti-cryptocurrency people are heavily invested in the current system if you look closely...

When you think about who really has the most power and earn the most profit... it's the miners of a cryptocurrency. Assuming stable prices of course. lol

Is it fair to compare them to shareholders in a company, where the currency is the product?

If you wanted to compare two currencies and compare the level of decentralization, what measurement would you use?

Assuming you could know any information you needed about the number of miners, mining power distribution, number of users, etc.

If you wanted to define the degree to which a currency is decentralized, where the more people who share the mining power, the better.. how would you do it?

For Bitcoin, do mining pools hold the mining power? Or do the miners themselves?


I'm writing and article analyzing various currencies and would like some thoughts from others on what is the fairest way to do this. I'm personally thinking it's the percentage of the users who have more than their share of the mining power. Agreed? Can you think of something better to measure?

For the sake of argument, please assume it's possible to make an ASIC proof coin with "one person, one vote".

Would you mine such a coin?  Would an increased number of miners be more security from a maximum decentralization point of view? Or would you be more unhappy about it cutting into the profitability of your previous investment into an ASIC?

From an emotional point of view, what emotions drive you to adopt cryptocurrency?

Fear of the government? Desire to get rich quick? The desire to be a part of a movement? A little bit of each?

If you didn't need to worry about the technical junk behind the scenes that makes it work.. what would be the features of the perfect cryptocurrency?

Which coins are you mining and how do you choose to split your mining power across coins?

I'm working on a currency that will give users fully decentralized IDs created by allowing them to link to and vouch for each other and analyzing their links to each other. Once you've created your ID, you can use it to mine our currency with mining power equal to every other user with no monetary investment required.. in fact, we pay you to sign up. We additionally use these decentralized IDs to distribute the currency in a manner that should lead to more stable prices for the currency.  What do you think? Would this interest you as a miner?

One of my biggest questions is: is it obvious what I mean by "equal mining power"? Is "equal mining rights" more clear? Any other suggested phrases to describe this?

Is the word 'voting' an accurate way to describe what Bitcoin miners are doing?

As in Bitcoin miners vote on which transactions are correct? Essentially a weighted vote based upon mining power?

I know how a blockchain works, just curious if others believe this is a fair way to describe the process.

Seems perfect for this community and gotta love xkcd. Enjoy!


https://www.xkcd.com/2101

If you have a brand new interesting crypto token that you feel has future promise, what potential ROI do you target?

Or more generally, how do you determine what you believe to be the current fair market value of an early stage crypto token?

Let's say for the sake of argument we have a cryptocurrency and can track the number of users, every time a new user joins, we wish you expand the money supply to accommodate them in a way that keeps prices more stable. The new user is not given his currency upfront but rather must link to 50 friends.

How much money could you give to the new user to get him started?

Known variables:
U - Number of users
V - Velocity of money per time period
M - Current money supply
S - Number of tokens spent per person per time period

I would argue that a new user is worth roughly as much as a current user, where current user includes those users who have claimed and dumped their currency as I'd argue the same percentage of new users will do this.

One way of looking at it is to start with the theory of money: MV = GDP
GDP is also the number of users * spending power of the average user.

So MV=US

So M = US/V

Is it safe to linearly increase M alongside U? S and V are still inversely linked, and S is linked to the price of the currency. So as Velocity of money increases, the price will too. However, I'd like to link price and usage, and practically ignore new users when valuing the currency for increased price stability.

No matter which algorithm, in order to determine which blockchain is the correct blockchain, Proof of Stake blockchain users need to trust that they have been told the correct initial account balances. How can you prove in a decentralized manner whether you are mining the correct blockchain? You can't without outside help. This makes Proof of Stake practically useless.

And along the same lines, POW-POS hybrids are only as strong/decentralized as their Proof of Work component.

Agreed?

I can certainly think of a few advantages to cryptocurrencies such as cross border transactions, competitive transaction fees, and oppressive governments.

However, can you help me come up with a comprehensive list of specific cases where individuals have specific pain points with centralized currency that are since by currency decentralization? Also would be nice to have market size for those pain points, though I can look them up. Trying to write an article about the importance of cryptocurrency stressing that a market exists. Thanks!

When introducing new people to cryptocurrency.. how do you explain decentralization to them? Why is it important?

Think about it, big investor ready to put in billions, you slowly buy, buy, buy, a little bit but their definition, then dump it all at once, just enough to get it below support and freak everyone out. Then dump, then you buy in big time and pump.  Any evidence of this? Any evidence of who started the sale to cause this?

Another thought, this looks to me a lot like Nasdaq in 2008:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8558257.stm

It's just that because the internet has sped everything up, we've had ten years worth of growth compressed into one year. Amazing how similar people are behaving in this situation.

Anyway, I'm bullish.. thoughts?

So, I've been working on a new coin for a while now, and it should be able to stabilize in price faster.  We still expect initial volatility and price finding but it should have less bubbles and I'm wondering if it's something that will attract or scare buyers, particularly for our ICO.

Thoughts? Thanks!