|
The velocity of money is paramount to a strong economy. Guess which currency trades hands faster than any other? Ask yourself why some of the strongest economies have a negative interest rate
But currently, the issuance of new supply has covered up the fact that money is being hoarded at increasingly alarming rates.
Yes, easy loans were a big problem, but those are symptoms of a relaxed money environment. If bitcoin were the defacto currency, I can assure you there would be no NINJA loans
|
|
|
|
You need a "scarce" resource as a replacement where it's not too easy to game the algorithm. If "activity" is the transaction rate, then I think your concept is flawed. While it may make sense to restrict transaction rate (like Bitcoin does with its [post-segwit] 4MB blocks and other coins with a transaction limitation) and make transactions "scarce", the problem is that the "currency validators" and the users are competing for block space. Thus, the coin will run into scalability problems much earlier than Bitcoin.
It also isn't egalitarian at all, because the nodes that will benefit most are big exchange nodes with lots of transactions. That can be positive for a small altcoin where it's essential to get some services (exchanges, wallets etc.) on board, but in the case of a bigger cryptocurrency it makes an exchange hack very, very dangerous.
In our plan, the “scarce" resource is time. The proof is on-chain historical accumulated transactions in a “harvest club”, the reward method is block transaction fees distributed back to all addresses in the club. The “time” will trace back 365 days (our current time frame selection). This shall make speculating costly and unpredictable. This pervasive, long time horizon distribution makes speculators wait one year to complete their return cycle. On the flip side, there is a positive externality from speculative transactions. This will stabilize the transaction fee, just like derivatives make futures prices logical. If speculative trx exceeds 25%, they will be punished in ROI mathematically. In our ecosystem, we accept behaviors from logical rich, logical poor and speculators. For speculators group, it is a zero sum game and contained in 25%. A new block size, that is not fixed, is in our current roadmap, but its not ready for prime-time. Regarding egalitarian, the core assumption is: the wealthy (as a group) make less transactions than the poor. The wealthy spend more per transaction then the poor, but collectively as a group, the poor make more transactions. The reward set will tend to go to a group with more transactions. Regarding exchange attacks, most POS models are vulnerable to this, however our novel on-chain transaction counting methods give less advantage to “hoarders”. Most exchanges work off-chain, so those will not be counted in our transactions count. In POS, the wealthy receive a linear reward, however, in POT, collectively poor club members are much more pervasive than rich. Most exchanges will pursue the lowest possible on-chain transaction fees to retain their own commissions. |
|
|
|
Is it just me, or would this do really well with a single tweet from Elon Musk  |
|
|
|
POI and POW have common algorithms. It helps to maintain the order which is applied for cryptocurrency.
I don't think they have anything in common. One is work related the other is a mix of activity and stake. We are creating one without the staking component |
|
|
|
I can create an ANN thread but you should edit your title as campaign management, community management and ANN design are completely different stuffs . [/quote] Yes it seems that there are more diverse roles in marketing than I could have imagined. |
|
|
|
Proof Of Work -- looks like the OG coins have the widest distribution (BitCoin,Litecoin, etc.) |
|
|
|
Gearing up for our whitepaper release, I wanted to share some thoughts on initial coin distribution and get some feedback on what is the best way to distribute if the goal is widespread reception From the little research ive done, I found this Princeton study https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x23C1sQg6wQ that shows that the higher the market cap of a coin, the greater the distribution. With that in mind it looks like the best methods in order are 1.POW -- widest distribution - but is it the fairest? Favors people with the ability to purchase large hashing power 2.ICO (where the entire/large allocation is released) - think EOS,IOTA,ADA 3.IFO (initial free offering) - like Auroracoin, where all the users had to do was link their facebook and iceland id 4.IBO (initial bounty offering) - Raiblocks and other faucet types, they require different levels of action to receive the airdrop allocation 5.Fork Airdrops - BitcoinCash - most of the allocation is given to the holders of the original chain (in this case it was Bitcoin) I'm POSITIVE ive over simplified and missed methods, so please -- list more and share your thoughts on which lead to the widest distribution |
|
|
|
One of the main drivers of recessions in recent economic history (last 100 years) has been hoarding of cash. By removing money supply, real GDP decreases because prices are "sticky" and remain the same despite these changes in circulation.
Considering that Bitcoin has no new issuance, how can hoarding be handled correctly?
Is hoarding the driver or a symptom? It is not clear. Hoarding is a symptom of money in general. Bitcoin definitely isn't to blame anymore than gold or the USD would be. There will always be someone who wants to save for a rainy day, and that isn't necessarily a bad thing. It becomes a problem, when everyone is doing this. You cannot have a fully functional system, without some balance between hoarding and spending of the tokens. The merchant network will stop accepting the token, if nobody is using it to pay for goods and services with it. My solution is to hoard 80% and spending 20% of all the bitcoins I buy. This way, I still get good returns on my investment, when it spikes and I help to support the merchant network. We are in agreement on that for sure -- not everyone can do it and not with extreme volatility. I think its ok if everyone hoards a bit, but there will by fluctuations of money supply that will be influenced by things like death and disaster. If everyone used bitcoin, and savings was generally accepted at 80% -- the prices of goods would be normalized. The moment there is a large influx of money supply -- ie someone inherits a big BTC wallet and goes on a spending spree, the money supply increases but the prices of goods will not have changed. This is where the problem arises -- that prices, currently, are not dynamic. This definitely isn't a BTC problem, its a money supply issue. Austrian economics think its not an issue and I lean towards that school of thought, but this just doesn't sit well. |
|
|
|
One of the main drivers of recessions in recent economic history (last 100 years) has been hoarding of cash. By removing money supply, real GDP decreases because prices are "sticky" and remain the same despite these changes in circulation.
Considering that Bitcoin has no new issuance, how can hoarding be handled correctly?
Is hoarding the driver or a symptom? It is not clear. Hoarding is a symptom of money in general. Bitcoin definitely isn't to blame anymore than gold or the USD would be. There will always be someone who wants to save for a rainy day, and that isn't necessarily a bad thing. |
|
|
|
|
Yes im not convinced its the responsibility of the currency to rectify this problem, but at the same time, we have entered a whole new world with smart contracts.
Bitcoin is the first Gold 2.0, that much is certain. But maybe there is a way to add a decentralized economic layer on top of gold to ensure positive social benefits. Smart money instead of hard money
|
|
|
|
|
We are expanding our community growth team and need more people spreading the word about TAUcoin
The ideal person can devote a few hours everyday to:
-Post taucoin discussions across different crypto forums and groups (telegram,discord,reddit,facebook,twitter,bitcointalk)
-Commenting on existing Medium articles and YouTube reviews
-Engage in the mentioned forums and groups when there are questions about the product
-Submit screenshots weekly to show the work that has been completed - always showing as much context as possible
-Discussing with influencers and attracting more medium articles and YouTube reviews
We are compensating these managers with a combination of BTC/ETH/TAU
ONLY PEOPLE WHO PROVIDE THEIR TELEGRAM IN THIS THREAD WILL BE CONTACTED -DMing me will not work
As always -- you can get a taucoin wallet and coins today with a simple facebook login here at taucoin.io
|
|
|
|
|
King Bit can only be toppled if there is something that has virtually the same structure and
-Can fix the POW weaknesses
-Can also remain decentralized without a leadership team behind it
ITs really the 2nd criteria that is highly unlikely to occur. Pandora's box has been opened and a project creator will have a very hard time staying unknown/unattached to their creation.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't try, but that does mean most efforts for a superior BTC should be spend by working with the Core team
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing more unattractive than glaring grammatical and spelling mistakes in an official whitepaper.
Luquidity. Lollation.
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds unprofitable for miners from day 1
|
|
|
|
|
Congrats on the release. Would love to have more insight into the long term token allocation (ie 5 years)
|
|
|
|
|
I read that it has one of the best distribution that changed model and pervasive
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
