A fair and strong Bitcoin fork design exploration, "Faircoin"

[EskimoBob]

No the current distribution is not as good as any, it's bad in a sense that is does not go after the distribution of gold mining. That follows/followed a bell curve, which is what I did suggest.
If you apply the current distribution to gold it would be if early miners did grab head-sized nuggets out of the earth with pick axes and later giant mining apparatuses only being able to drag up microscopic specs of gold out of the depths.

Except gold production in metric tonnes has gone up almost every year and 50% of all gold ever produced was produced since 1967.
Lets not forget, that the damage don to environment grows at absurd rate every yea and less than 10% of the gold gets used by industry for something useful.

[ElectricMucus]

No the current distribution is not as good as any, it's bad in a sense that is does not go after the distribution of gold mining. That follows/followed a bell curve, which is what I did suggest.
If you apply the current distribution to gold it would be if early miners did grab head-sized nuggets out of the earth with pick axes and later giant mining apparatuses only being able to drag up microscopic specs of gold out of the depths.

Except gold production in metric tonnes has gone up almost every year and 50% of all gold ever produced was produced since 1967.

Yes pretty much in tune with a bell shaped curve.

Lets not forget, that the damage don to environment grows at absurd rate every yea and less than 10% of the gold gets used by industry for something useful.

So how would a cryptoconcurrency be more environmentally harmful if it's distribution is closely modelled after gold? If anything it would be more environmentally friendly during the initial period since the rising block reward and exactly as environmentally unfriendly as bitcoin during the second period when the block reward declines.

[markm]

As has been said over and over not just here but all over the place, the initial distribution is pretty much unimportant.

If all the gold on the entire planet had been handed to Adam and Eve in one swell foop it would still work pretty much as it has always worked. The ores we find would be from things like Vesuvius eruptings or something, gold melted band oxidised or whatever, and we'd find larger nuggets such as chests of bars in sunken pirate galleons, there still could well have been gold rushes as people discovered far lands where Cain and Abel each took a big chunk of their parents' hoard and so on, but that is all trivial detail.

-MarkM-

[EskimoBob]

No the current distribution is not as good as any, it's bad in a sense that is does not go after the distribution of gold mining. That follows/followed a bell curve, which is what I did suggest.
If you apply the current distribution to gold it would be if early miners did grab head-sized nuggets out of the earth with pick axes and later giant mining apparatuses only being able to drag up microscopic specs of gold out of the depths.

Except gold production in metric tonnes has gone up almost every year and 50% of all gold ever produced was produced since 1967.

Yes pretty much in tune with a bell shaped curve.

Lets not forget, that the damage don to environment grows at absurd rate every yea and less than 10% of the gold gets used by industry for something useful.

So how would a cryptoconcurrency be more environmentally harmful if it's distribution is closely modelled after gold? If anything it would be more environmentally friendly during the initial period since the rising block reward and exactly as environmentally unfriendly as bitcoin during the second period when the block reward declines.

Absurd amount of power required to keep the network safe and running is one of the biggest flaws in BTC - 51% of the network must be the good guys or it's game over. Constant fear of attack and chance to lose everything - not a healthy mindset for something as important as BTC (or any virtual currency) and if users truly realize this, it's game over. YEs, the chance is small but someone like BFL can fire up all the (still imaginary) ASICS and ... bleep.
Sure, banks get robbed all the time but they are insured and this is can not be compared to 51% attack at all. This is more like wiping out all the banks at the same time. Puff... and it's all gone. 
Those 2 major flaws have to be eliminated in the next coin. 4.5 GB of bc download is also borderline retarded. Yes, Electrum client/server has taken a step in right direction but this has to happen in much lower level.

[cunicula]

As has been said over and over not just here but all over the place, the initial distribution is pretty much unimportant.

You obviously haven't played strategy games much, like Age of Empires, Heroes of Might and Magic or Travian.

You are using the wrong analogy. It is more like WoW, where people who come in late can buy a full suit of armor, weapons, and get leveled up by someone in China.

[markm]

Agreed. The Travian-etc chap has obviously not continued such games beyond the point where he conquered the entire world yet would not really have anything to show for it if he couldn't keep the other players from quitting the game.

It is more like running such games. Notice how the game companies run them now: they kill the server just at the moment when the game starts to get interesting, because unfortunately the way the "winner" plays is not conducive to keeping hordes of players playing and a constant influx of new players joining in generation after generation.

They are tiny little oneshot games, and the winners win by the "default the prisoner's dilemma" method on each single "shot". The games teach people that you need to slaughter all other intelligent beings in their mothers' wombs or failing that in their cradles, and scorched earth their entire civilisations if need be.

They end with an entirely unnihabitable world, so uninhabitable they don't even leave it running for people to explore "what happens next".

-MarkM-

[ElectricMucus]

Eskimobob, somehow around "must be the good guys or it's game over." you lost me. What are you trying to tell us?

You obviously want to bring up some sort of criticism about what we are planning to do, but what is it?