PPCoins - Good Idea, Terrible Name

[sangaman]

I've been reading about PPCoins and find them quite interesting and promising. I'm a bit concerned about bitcoins long term because of how expensive it will be to secure the network in the long run. For the network to be completely secure, theoretically, it would need >50% of the world's computing power mining it. Years from now, when the bitcoin network might be larger and a more attractive target, the mining rewards will be decreased therefore disincentivizing security for the network. Best case scenario, the network would stay secure but at a significant cost in power consumption and hardware and it might require transaction fees greater than what we're used to now.

Enter PPCoin, I won't pretend to understand everything about it but it seems like a better long term solution to the crypotocurrency problem. I have one peeve though (well two really, the other being no merged mining which is unusual for a "green" coin) - the name. When written down - PPCoin - it looks ok, and I get that it stands for P2P which makes sense. When spoken out loud - pee pee coin - it sounds ridiculous. I can't imagine it being taken seriously when it sounds like something you might reward a toddler with for making progress with potty training.

It might be too late to change the name, but if not I hope it can be "fixed." Even just PCoin sounds less ridiculous and rolls off the tongue more easily.

Or maybe I should just wait for the next iteration of a POS coin that can fix a few of the concerns PPCoin has raised, enable merged mining, and - most importantly - come out with a better name.

[1715117782]

1715117782

[max in montreal]

peer coin...

[sangaman]

Peercoin would work. I was also thinking Greencoin (everyone loves green stuff and PPCoins are supposed to be more energy efficient) or Worldcoin (sounds global), but really just anything that wouldn't get laughed it when you said it out loud would be a big improvement.

[Jutarul]

Peercoin would work. I was also thinking Greencoin (everyone loves green stuff and PPCoins are supposed to be more energy efficient) or Worldcoin (sounds global), but really just anything that wouldn't get laughed it when you said it out loud would be a big improvement.

call it double p coin

[sangaman]

call it double p coin

Good idea. I wonder if it will catch on. It's not as easy to say as "bitcoin" for example but still an improvement.

[koin]

For the network to be completely secure, theoretically, it would need >50% of the world's computing power mining it.

and theoretically it costs many millions to build a specially-designed zero-gravity, nitrogen-pressurized pen for use by astronauts.  when in reality a twenty-five cent lead pencil does the same job.

bitcoin doesn't need to prevent every attack vector.  because attaining 51% provides so little benefit to the attacker relative to the cost, there isn't a huge level of investment necessary.   the reason bitcoin mining has turned into an industry is because the mining reward subsidy is fixed and just happens to support a lot of investment.  bitcoin doesn't need twenty-three thash/s to be secure from attacks, but with $3 million a month of bitcoins issued, that is how big it grew.

[sangaman]

and theoretically it costs many millions to build a specially-designed zero-gravity, nitrogen-pressurized pen for use by astronauts.  when in reality a twenty-five cent lead pencil does the same job.

bitcoin doesn't need to prevent every attack vector.  because attaining 51% provides so little benefit to the attacker relative to the cost, there isn't a huge level of investment necessary.   the reason bitcoin mining has turned into an industry is because the mining reward subsidy is fixed and just happens to support a lot of investment.  bitcoin doesn't need twenty-three thash/s to be secure from attacks, but with $3 million a month of bitcoins issued, that is how big it grew.

Yeah that's why I said theoretically. But it's true that bitcoin will require "a lot" of computing resources and energy to stay reasonably secure, where "a lot" is way less than 50% of the world's computing but still significant, no? Achieving a similar level of security with much fewer resources seems like a very good thing long term.