Bitcoin Forum
May 26, 2024, 07:02:37 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Using "Oracles" as a way to distribute a purely PoS coin more evenly?  (Read 764 times)
CoinHoarder (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1026

In Cryptocoins I Trust


View Profile
July 02, 2014, 12:49:33 AM
Last edit: July 02, 2014, 03:58:16 AM by CoinHoarder
 #1

One of the biggest grudges people have with purely PoS coins are that the coins are unfairly distributed. Side note: I don't agree with this line of thinking, as everyone has a chance to invest in IPOs if they'd like. This same argument could also be applied to early adopters of Bitcoin... but I am getting sidetracked. I think it is a shame something as silly as this could hold back purely PoS coins, as I feel they are a step up from purely PoW coins which consume much more energy to secure their block chains and waste processing power.

Now that "Oracles" can confirm real world data, would it be possible to do a recurring IPO for a purely PoS coin? I feel like this would solve the problems people have with "unfair" distribution. The way I envision it there would be an initial IPO, and then one every year after that as determined by the oracles. The amount of IPO coins should be slowly reduced like Bitcoin's block reward. Using something like Oracles, the current price of the coin could be determined to figure out how much the IPO coins should cost in the recurring IPOs, or they could be sold at the original price (this may affect the market negatively and I'm not sure of the best approach.)

So, it'd go something like this:
1st IPO = 5,000,000,000 coins @ .0001
2nd IPO 1 yr later = 2,500,000,000 @ current market price or original price
3rd IPO 1 yr later = 1,250,000,000 @ current market price or original price
4th IPO 1 yr later = 625,000,000 @ current market price or original price
... so on so forth ...

I have a few questions.

I am not a developer, so would something like this be possible or is it just a pipe dream?

Would this idea even make sense to due to market variables? I'm thinking maybe it would be more fair to just keep the recurring IPOs at the original price of 0.0001, but it would affect the market.

Are recurring IPOs even possible?

Any other ways you guys can think of to improve distribution of IPO/purely PoS coins?
Remember remember the 5th of November
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1862
Merit: 1011

Reverse engineer from time to time


View Profile
July 02, 2014, 01:27:20 AM
 #2

One of the biggest grudges people have with purely PoS coins are that the coins are unfairly distributed. Side note: I don't agree with this line of thinking, as everyone has a chance to invest in IPOs if they'd like. This same argument could also be applied to early adopters of Bitcoin... but I am getting sidetracked. I think it is a shame something as silly as this could hold back purely PoS coins, as I feel they are a step up from purely PoW coins which consume much more energy to secure their block chains and waste processing power.

Now that "Oracles" can confirm real world data, would it be possible to do a recurring IPO for a purely PoS coin? I feel like this would solve the problems people have with "unfair" distribution. The way I envision it there would be an initial IPO, and then one every year after that as determined by the oracles. The amount of IPO coins should be slowly reduced like Bitcoin's block reward. Using something like Oracles, the current price of the coin could be determined to figure out how much the IPO coins should cost in the recurring IPOs, or they could be sold at the original price (this may affect the market negatively and I'm not sure of the best approach.)

So, it'd go something like this:
1st IPO = 5,000,000,000 coins @ .0001
2nd IPO 1 yr later = 2,500,000,000 @ current market price or original price
3rd IPO 1 yr later = 1,250,000,000 @ current market price or original price
4th IPO 1 yr later = 625,000,000 @ current market price or original price
... so on so forth ...

I have a few questions.

I am not a developer, so would something like this be possible or is it just a pipe dream?

Would this idea even make sense to due to market variables? I'm thinking maybe it would be more fair to just keep the recurring IPOs at the original price of 0.0001, but it would affect the market.

Are recurring IPOs even possible?

Any other ways you guys can think of to improve distribution of IPO/purely PoS coins?
How about sticking to Bitcoin?

BTC:1AiCRMxgf1ptVQwx6hDuKMu4f7F27QmJC2
CoinHoarder (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1026

In Cryptocoins I Trust


View Profile
July 02, 2014, 01:34:55 AM
 #3

How about sticking to Bitcoin?

Using a power hungry electronic currency doesn't make sense to me, unless you want to kill planet earth at an accelerated rate. If you insist on it, then why not make it do something useful like Primecoin? Not saying finding prime numbers is going to change the world, but that's only the first use case.

Can you not see the benefits of PoW alternatives?

Bitcoin is not perfect and there is room for alternatives for many reasons to focus on Bitcoin's shortcomings. Such as anonymity, electrical efficiency, transaction speeds, adding features that are not possible with Bitcoin, etcetra..

Anyways... this isn't meant to be a debate. It is meant to be a conversation about how to improve distribution of purely PoS coins. I guess maybe this is the wrong subforum, but I figured there would be more developers here than in the alt subforum.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
July 02, 2014, 02:48:31 AM
 #4

One of the biggest grudges people have with purely PoS coins are that the coins are unfairly distributed. Side note: I don't agree with this line of thinking, as everyone has a chance to invest in IPOs if they'd like. This same argument could also be applied to early adopters of Bitcoin... but I am getting sidetracked. I think it is a shame something as silly as this could hold back purely PoS coins, as I feel they are a step up from purely PoW coins which consume much more energy to secure their block chains and waste processing power.
Right from the start your premise is false. The problem with a PoS coin as a global currency is that you cannot guarantee that a central authority cannot gain and hold majority stake permanently. With that power, they can discretely and secretly reverse transactions. This is fine for a local currency, because nobody trusts their local governments anyway and they can be replaced. You would not want a PoS coin as a store of value.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
CoinHoarder (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1026

In Cryptocoins I Trust


View Profile
July 02, 2014, 03:58:02 AM
 #5

One of the biggest grudges people have with purely PoS coins are that the coins are unfairly distributed. Side note: I don't agree with this line of thinking, as everyone has a chance to invest in IPOs if they'd like. This same argument could also be applied to early adopters of Bitcoin... but I am getting sidetracked. I think it is a shame something as silly as this could hold back purely PoS coins, as I feel they are a step up from purely PoW coins which consume much more energy to secure their block chains and waste processing power.
Right from the start your premise is false. The problem with a PoS coin as a global currency is that you cannot guarantee that a central authority cannot gain and hold majority stake permanently. With that power, they can discretely and secretly reverse transactions. This is fine for a local currency, because nobody trusts their local governments anyway and they can be replaced. You would not want a PoS coin as a store of value.

That doesn't sound much different from someone performing a 51% attack on Bitcoin..

Anyways, as I stated I'm not here to debate... I'm already busy debating the Litecoin worshipers as to why their coin is becoming irrelevant.  Grin

I suppose I'll look elsewhere for an answer, thanks anyways.
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!