DagCoin: a cryptocurrency without blocks

[monsterer]

That's not a good argument. If there are comparable competing cryptocurrencies and one of them is subsided by some altruistic or ideological rich sponsor or by indirect monetization and the other expects users to pay, then users will likely choose the former. File your fairness complaint with the market.

Evidence?

[smooth]

That's not a good argument. If there are comparable competing cryptocurrencies and one of them is subsided by some altruistic or ideological rich sponsor or by indirect monetization and the other expects users to pay, then users will likely choose the former. File your fairness complaint with the market.

Evidence?

It is self evident.

[GingerAle]

why not just use an initial POW phase and a standard blockchain that feeds into the DAG? I.e., the POW chain serves no other purpose than to distribute coins that can then be used in the tangle. Once max coins have been emitted (over X years), the chain dies - theres no need for it. Hell, a chain longer than n blocks isn't needed, because the only purpose of the chain's history is to record the current difficulty (i.e., demand) for the currency.

"why not just sell? people will spend money on electricity to create coins, why not just spend money on coins?" Mainly due to the time elongation of the distribution phase. The bootstrap model in bitcoin is... well, just great.

[Come-from-Beyond]

The bootstrap model in bitcoin is... well, just great.

Was it the only option - yes.
Is it great - arguable.

[americanpegasus]

Cryptocurrency is a lot like a religion in that it is free to create, but only has value once a large amount of people "buy-in".  Let's look at two wildly successful religions: Islam and Christianity.  Whether you believe them or not, you can't argue they have been wildly successful in establishing a powerful network that has stood the test of time.  
  
What did both have in common?  A fair launch and distribution.  No line was drawn in the sand between the "haves" and the "have-nots".  At no point did any new member feel they were second-class to previous members (at least by official status or decree).  New members were told there was no barrier to entry for any man - if you wanted in, you got in.  They were then empowered to not only experience this new social network, but also to spread it to others.  It turns out that there was eventual financial value in being an early-adopter once enough people recognized the religion, but the benefits weren't clear at first.  Also it should be noted that this 'value' may not have manifested itself in direct financial compensation, but possibly in other forms such as increased influence, protection, and access to resources.  
  
Now, let's look at an example of a religion that is doomed to failure, as so many in the past have: Scientology.  In this religion there is a clear line of haves vs. have-nots.  New members may be dazzled by the initial presentation and organization but without being empowered by a perpetual feeling of "being on the inside of something great" there is little reason for them to spread their enthusiasm to others.  Eventually the hard lines in the sand which divide the new members from those with status defeat any enthusiasm and exponential network effect.  
  
This is the danger of a presale.  
  
It is not easy to fairly launch a new social network, whether that is a language, currency, government, or religion.  It is very difficult to invent a concept unique and popular enough to merit the creation of such a new network, and once accomplished like you said: people gotta eat.  
  
But as smooth said, the free market doesn't respect "gotta eat".  
  
As I have said, it's not impossible to launch a successful currency with a presale, but you immediately catastrophically damage your chances with such shenanigans.  
  
I am sure if you are brilliant enough to invent something worth a new blockchain, determining a fair and non-monetized launch shouldn't be too difficult of a feat.
  

[Come-from-Beyond]

@AP, I didn't read your entire post, it's an offtopic as I got from the beginning, create a new thread if you want to continue, please.

[smooth]

@AP, I didn't read your entire post, it's an offtopic as I got from the beginning, create a new thread if you want to continue, please.

It's clearly off topic for the Bitcoin section. The original post on this thread talked about being used on a sidechain (where there is no distribution issue), so I guess on topic. But the rest of the discussion is Alt for sure.

[americanpegasus]

@AP, I didn't read your entire post, it's an offtopic as I got from the beginning, create a new thread if you want to continue, please.

Fine, invalidate your own hard work with presale implementations and arrogant ostrich tactics. 
 
Successful strategy only begins with a good product - it also requires broad understanding of psychology and game theory to actually succeed. 

[Come-from-Beyond]

Fine, invalidate your own hard work with presale implementations and arrogant ostrich tactics.  
  
Successful strategy only begins with a good product - it also requires broad understanding of psychology and game theory to actually succeed.  

It's not the ostrich tactics, I just have respect to the topic creator. Create a new thread, PM me with the link and we will continue the discussion.

[americanpegasus]

It's not the ostrich tactics, I just have respect to the topic creator. Create a new thread, PM me with the link and we will continue the discussion.

Conceded, you've done so much explaining I forgot you weren't TC.

[illodin]

As I have always said, if you have a powerful enough technology then simply developing and understanding that tech will eventually make you very wealthy.  There is no need for a pre-sale.  

Yes, that's a big if. Even if a technology seems powerful enough at the launch, it may be obsolete/proven faulty in a year. Having a presale removes that risk from the developer(s).

[sdp]

If say someone who sent me a bitcoin years ago decides to do a double spend, he can create a transaction and that transaction will be ignored because bitcoin has blocks.  It seems to me, dagcoin would be vulnerable to double spends this way.

sdp

[smooth]

If say someone who sent me a bitcoin years ago decides to do a double spend, he can create a transaction and that transaction will be ignored because bitcoin has blocks.  It seems to me, dagcoin would be vulnerable to double spends this way.

In dagcoin as I understand it the second spend would be ignored because the first one would have much more work endorsing it.

[tzpardi]

Thank you for sharing this very innovative solution.

[alicex]

If say someone who sent me a bitcoin years ago decides to do a double spend, he can create a transaction and that transaction will be ignored because bitcoin has blocks.  It seems to me, dagcoin would be vulnerable to double spends this way.

In dagcoin as I understand it the second spend would be ignored because the first one would have much more work endorsing it.

and then.......what will  happened next.

[Come-from-Beyond]

and then.......what will  happened next.

On the next step the double-spending may get a higher share of approvals and eventually become the legit one. So it's dangerous to include double-spendings even if you ignore them.

[Xdragon]

Is this project still alive?

[watashi-kokoto]

Is this project still alive?

No. It could be a part of altcoin

[Decoded]

Is the project open source? I'd love to take a look at it and maybe contribute myself. Github link plz

[wizzardTim]

Is the project open source? I'd love to take a look at it and maybe contribute myself. Github link plz

For the Github you can check these links:

https://github.com/iotaledger/wallet/releases
https://github.com/iotaledger

also, relevant links:

https://learn.iota.org
http://iota.org
https://forum.iotatoken.com
http://iotasupport.com
http://www.tangleblog.com