|
184
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Proof of work based on human energy only
|
on: January 26, 2014, 04:09:17 AM
|
This seems fairly simple and cheap to do if you own a gym, and especially great because gym memberships have a roster of ~3 lazy/stupid people per 1 person actually utilizing their membership to a reasonable potential. If you have new, higher-end equipment, it may be possible to interface with existing sensors and only use something like a raspi, or even just have the equipment's internals upload JSON data to a central server which either pays out a special coin or BTC. This shouldn't cost more than $50/machine and would likely be significantly cheaper.
I imagine this being extremely effective in promoting fitness, and possibly the strongest available positive reinforcement, much more so than a guy you pay to stand around telling you you're doing a good job. You offer a subscription-based model which allows users to work off their subscription fee by bettering themselves.
Example:
To join AwesomeGym, pay $150 start-up fee (which includes "handicap assessment"), then $50 or 50 FIT (Fitcoins) per month. $100/yr fee for maintenance handicapping, maybe waivable for making good progress and permitting some form of advertisement. Thus, if you earn 50FIT/mo through decent exercise, you're able to sustain membership for free (except the $150 initially, and $100/mo for handicapping maintenance).
User should be able to earn roughly 50FIT per month with above-average use... maybe 15 hours at the gym, so for each hour of work, you would want to be earning ~3.33FIT.
AG will have a low number of Handicapper Generals on staff (not necessarily essential with smart software and a biometric scan) who assesses the ability of a new user. He will test them on all FIT-compliant equipment, take the best revenue/minute results, and adjust the handicap based on that. Perhaps a fit, young person is able to generate 6FIT/hour. Since the target is 3.33FIT/hour, he would have a handicap multiplyer of .5555. Maybe an out-of-shape elderly person is unable to generate more than 1FIT/hour. That person's handicap multiplier would be 3.
Problems:
1) This absolutely does not require a decentralized solution, and decentralization would be doomed to fail since monitoring to prevent cheating is essential.
2) Gyms profit tremendously from people underutilizing their membership, with over 2/3 of membership-holders never actually going to the gym. I think a good bit of this is made up for with the high start-up fee and the genuinely good things this would likely do for people.
"Sudden cardiac arrest deaths soar as young males worked to death in marathon 28-hour exercise session" "Gaming the system: handicap application rates soared last December" |
|
|
|
|
185
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Major companies accepting BTC will ultimately drive prices down?
|
on: January 25, 2014, 09:13:54 PM
|
Anyone that is a long term holder and cares about the bitcoin economy should consider a strategy of spend and replenish.
Or really, any rational person reading this.
It is super simple: make as many purchases as possible with bitcoin, and immediately buy your bitcoins back with fiat. ( using eg coinbase or your preferred exchange method. ) You do not face any exchange risk because you are buying the bitcoin at the same time you spend.
This way you are effectively spending your fiat cash and keeping your btc holdings intact, however each purchase is a vote for bitcoin to the merchant instead of a vote for fiat.
Also, you are increasing the velocity of money in the bitcoin economy, which stimulates growth.
This is the win-win strategy. rational self interest.
At the cost of "generating" fees for miners, coinbase/bitpay, and possibly your bank. (I estimate somewhere around 2-5%, accounting for spread and all). Yes it's noble, but not a free lunch. |
|
|
|
|
186
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Ixcoin TODO
|
on: January 25, 2014, 05:20:29 PM
|
Hi, I'm one of the artists in that thread. Original files: sm.psd: https://mega.co.nz/#!Oc0UyKbK!VtNzfq3F6HXLQLTwJ05KCXXZlWJWMNHyrUhsH2djNmY smc.psd: https://mega.co.nz/#!PA0wyBYB!kRzNa9xm1d1x7pSe3SRIMSCe9X5ujVxlRSmtS3FRbeA For the update version, the IXC might be too big relative to the circle (especially on the 3 upper right, lower left, and lower right corners). May not reproduce well at smaller sizes. |
|
|
|
|
187
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty Protocol, Client and Coin (built on Bitcoin) - Official
|
on: January 25, 2014, 07:58:34 AM
|
After installing, open a command window and run counterpartyd in the foreground via: cd C:\counterpartyd_build
C:\Python32\python.exe run.py server
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\counterpartyd.py", line 22, in
<module>
from lib import (config, api, zeromq, util, exceptions, bitcoin, blocks)
File "C:\counterpartyd_build\dist\counterpartyd\lib\zeromq.py", line 14, in <m
odule>
import zmq
ImportError: No module named zmq Can you tell me what am I doing wrong? ImportError: No module named zmq You need pyzmq: if windows, download here: http://www.lfd.uci.edu/~gohlke/pythonlibs/ |
|
|
|
|
191
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty Protocol, Client and Coin (built on Bitcoin) - Official
|
on: January 25, 2014, 01:14:41 AM
|
I would say options 1 and 2 are a non-starter simply because it breaks a very crucial part of the contact that was sealed as soon as the first BTC was burnt, and that is that no more XCP will be created after the burn period. Is this even possible though? Can the devs simply change the protocol to issue XCP from a different address? I too would like to hear from the devs on this because if it is possible, we need to somehow take an emergency vote on this one and get the change made ASAP because with only 10ish days left in the burn period, every BTC burnt is BTC that could be funding development. Yea, this is the primary criticism that I anticipated with those two ideas. Part of what motivated people to burn that many BTCs was the contract and immutability of burning; take that away (even for a good cause, such as donations) and you have cracks below the foundation, so to speak. Hence why I proposed the DAC idea -- not sure how to make that "attractive", but it's a start. Also, why #2 comes with a voting stipulation (even if it does technically "break the contract"). Furthermore, proof of stake is the only fair way to do such a vote, because of Sybil effects. It's good to have this discussion now, though. I haven't seen for any other "IPO coin" (or any altcoin, period) a concern whether or not the developers are getting their fair share. |
|
|
|
|
192
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty Protocol, Client and Coin (built on Bitcoin) - Official
|
on: January 24, 2014, 11:51:15 PM
|
|
I don't mind BTC sent to the address as counting for XCP, but here are some potentially better (and fairer) ideas:
1. Allow generation of XCP after the burn period through "donations" to the donate address that decays on a linear scale (the easiest idea to implement technically),
2. Institute a vote (through some proof of stake mechanism) to "pay" a 1-2% "bounty" of XCP to the devs (through inflation - no actual XCP will be deducted). Votes would be yea/nay/abstain; stakeholders who don't vote automatically abstain (no quorum required). This could be repeated in the future (again, shareholder votes required). (this is the fairest idea, IMO)
a. Optionally, addresses that have sent to the donation address (it's all in the blockchain) could be allocated a "piece" of this bounty. Even more proof of stake (yay). No idea how to work this out though.
3. Allow a new asset to be generated through donations (e.g. DON -- note that this is a 3 letter asset. Hence, "special"). Stakeholders of this asset can vote on where to allocate future bounties. (This is the most DAC idea)
It's a matter of aligning shareholder interests with developer interests. I believe people are naturally good ... but respond to incentives.
|
|
|
|
|
194
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty Protocol, Client and Coin (built on Bitcoin) - Official
|
on: January 24, 2014, 09:14:01 PM
|
PhantomPhreak and xnova are there any plans for a user friendly client shortly after the burn period is finished? If not should we as a community start discussing and possibly set up a bounty for this? I would be happy to donate some BTC or XCP for a client.
Thanks for all the great work you guys have been doing on this. I’ve donated to the dev fund and intend to donate more.
As a third-party dev, I've started work on a user-friendly client that should be done in about 4-5 weeks working part-time. However, if there were a significant bounty, I could probably justify working on it full-time (I'm a freelancer) and have it done in probably a week or less (at least a beta version). I'd also love to get input from users on what you want. At the moment, it's designed as a client with two tabs, one for your wallet (with the usual wallet features) and one for the market. You will be able to filter the market transactions by type. Probably a third tab for broadcasts. Any other ideas? Edit: Also, depending on user feedback, I could fairly easily change the tabs to a more traditional toolbar-driven interface, if that's what more people want. If you post a BTC/XCP address and maybe a screenshot or two, you could fairly easily get some significant donations that way. Just a suggestion. |
|
|
|
|
195
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty Protocol, Client and Coin (built on Bitcoin) - Official
|
on: January 24, 2014, 04:01:28 AM
|
A practical question that I have:
Say we have an investor, who we want to allocate shares using XCP asset mechanism, how we actually reflect the real value he invested into us in XCP asset?
For example he placed X BTC for Y shares issued, which set the post-money valuation of the asset to = X BTC * Z shares we have now / Y shares issued.
How do we reflect that this was real - perhaps by receiving the funds at same BTC address, which was used for asset creation?
Speaking off, is there a way to change asset details after it was generated (i.e. amount of shares, divisibility, etc...)?
Amount yes - I think you can issue more. Name, divisibility - don't think so. |
|
|
|
|
197
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty Protocol, Client and Coin (built on Bitcoin) - Official
|
on: January 24, 2014, 12:49:47 AM
|
When we look back at all the electricity we've wasted on bitcoins PoW concept to "secure the blockchain" as you put it, I think we will be a little disappointed at how wasteful and naive we were. To that, I simply quote: “Gold gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head.” Take what you will. (I'm not taking sides, BTW). |
|
|
|
|
198
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN][XCP] Counterparty Protocol, Client and Coin (built on Bitcoin) - Official
|
on: January 23, 2014, 09:24:06 PM
|
I hate to say this after the fact, but proof of burn is a really, really, really stupid, inefficient and unproductive concept.
There are much better ways to handle proof of stake.
That money could have fed a whole village in africa for a year.
I would much rather the devs got that 1,400 BTC than it just being destroyed pointlessly.
Of course, I've said this after the fact.
In the same way, many still claim proof of work (as done by Bitcoin) as a "needlessly wasteful expenditure of computing resources". Neither is true. Proof of work, as done for bitcoin and other currencies, is done to secure the blockchain. Proof of burn, as done here, is done to produce a permanent record for fair distribution of an asset that you can't get by sending the "otherwise burnt" BTCs to the devs, to the nearest charity, or whomever. Next, people are going to come out and claim that the 10000 BTC pizza was "a pointless idea". Just like in that example, a price was set for something that otherwise had no perceived value. Think of the 1400 BTC burned as assets to purchase XCP "mining rigs" that produced however many coins you have now. (In fact, the bitcoin.it proof of burn page gives this very description). That is the value of proof of burn. That said, donating to the devs (or better yet, contributing to the project by testing, writing articles, designing sites, etc. ) is a great idea. We can launch publicity campaigns and such after the burn period and after stuff like a centralized exchange and an online client are up and running. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
