FreiCoin (FRC) discussion (was FreiCoin (FRC) for TRC, PPC, LTC or BTC)

[Jorgeminator]

Just to give everyone and idea of where Freicoin is right now I made a graph of our hash rate. Have a great rest of the week.

From where did you gather the data for your graph?  

[1714999613]

1714999613

[1714999613]

1714999613

[1714999613]

1714999613

[1714999613]

1714999613

[Balthazar]

Code:

>> print(FRC == 'Federal Reserve Coin')
True
>>

 

[creativex]

lol

[franky1]

lock this thread and close the topic as this coin is such a fail.

this coin will never be used on exchanges like mtgox or btc-e. and this is why

when depositing funds into the exchanges.. they hold them.

you continue your business trading the price fluctuations of the coin using a database of binary numbers that represent the deposited amount.

so while your profiting. the actual owner of the private key you deposited to (the exchange) is losing out due to the demurrage tax.

simply put. they wont touch it.

stick with the 2 longest surviving coins bitcoin and litecoin. or atleast invent something that has some actual use apart from making the first guy that owns the coin the richest and each subsequent person owning it receive less and less as they receive and hold it.

it also fails the demurrage thing by people just sending it to themselves on different addresses. too many loopholes. too many fails to be a viable candidate for mainstreaming

[scrybe]

lock this thread and close the topic as this coin is such a fail.

this coin will never be used on exchanges like mtgox or btc-e. and this is why

when depositing funds into the exchanges.. they hold them.

you continue your business trading the price fluctuations of the coin using a database of binary numbers that represent the deposited amount.

so while your profiting. the actual owner of the private key you deposited to (the exchange) is losing out due to the demurrage tax.

simply put. they wont touch it.

stick with the 2 longest surviving coins bitcoin and litecoin. or atleast invent something that has some actual use apart from making the first guy that owns the coin the richest and each subsequent person owning it receive less and less as they receive and hold it.

it also fails the demurrage thing by people just sending it to themselves on different addresses. too many loopholes. too many fails to be a viable candidate for mainstreaming

Hello Mr. Troll...

Demurrage cannot be sidestepped. It happens to coins that stay still, and it happens to coins that move. This would also generally be applied to balances that sites hold in FRC for users. If the site operator is nice enough to "pay" his users 5% per year by not imposing demurrage, he might get (or want) something in return.

I'm not sure what you mean by "fluctuations" since demurrage can be accurately calculated for any given blockheight. Once difficulty catches up to hashing that will be a pretty reliable indicator and potentially a new fee mechanism that site operators will like.

The genie is out of the bottle with alt-coins and there are a huge number of financial theories out there that are begging for experimentation. Watch the experiment if you don't want to participate, and you might learn something.

You can also continue to show your inability to turn a verb into a noun, and we will mock your failure.

[maaku]

Freicoin is performing exact internal arithmetic, using arbitrary-precision rational type (basically two BigNums, a numerator and a denominator). This is for a variety of reasons, but chiefly because tracking sub-satoshi amounts internally allows us to later increase divisibility by switching to a decimal floating point type for CTxOut::nValue.

How exchange operators should handle demurrage in a fair and equitable manner is outlined here: How to properly handle demurrage in applications

EDIT: The fraction that follows the balance is always in the range (0, 1) satoshi; in other words it's what's left over if you were to truncate to a "normal" bitcoin balance of 8 decimal places. For many applications it is fine to simply ignore/truncate these sub-satoshi values (and indeed, this is what the GUI does).

[Ignore@YourPeril]

I reasonably liked what I read about the freicoin project until I learned the 80% tax today.

Did you ever consider general demurrage to offset the Proof-of-Stake inflation in PPCoin? If the reason is that this introduces extra coding-complexity, would you consider introducing it in a later version of PPCoin? Maybe have a look at the code for demurrage in Freicoin?

[DarkHyudrA]

I reasonably liked what I read about the freicoin project until I learned the 80% tax today.

Did you ever consider general demurrage to offset the Proof-of-Stake inflation in PPCoin? If the reason is that this introduces extra coding-complexity, would you consider introducing it in a later version of PPCoin? Maybe have a look at the code for demurrage in Freicoin?

Here is FRC discussion, not PPC.

[Sunny King]

I reasonably liked what I read about the freicoin project until I learned the 80% tax today.

Did you ever consider general demurrage to offset the Proof-of-Stake inflation in PPCoin? If the reason is that this introduces extra coding-complexity, would you consider introducing it in a later version of PPCoin? Maybe have a look at the code for demurrage in Freicoin?

In ppcoin inflation is countered via destruction of transaction fees. No demurrage will not be included in ppcoin. This is irrespective of the fact that I don't like demurrage I think it's effect is sort of equivalent to inflation. Even if I were to be persuade that demurrage has a somewhat positive effect on economy as a whole I would only do it in a separate cryptocurrency instead of messing with ppcoin.

Also I think there is some misunderstanding in your post. Demurrage does not counter inflation. Both inflation and demurrage can be considered a form of taxation on the economy. This tax is paid to miners in the case of bitcoin and freicoin but for ppcoin it's paid to stake minter in addition to miners. Here is a little comparison of mining tax rate between the 3 coins:

asymptotic annual mining tax rate:
bitcoin: 0% + transaction fee tax rate
ppcoin: <1%
freicoin: 5%

freicoin has chosen a rapidly decreasing inflation rate though (inflation stops after 3 years). Comparison of annual mining tax rate 3 years from now (one year before bitcoin's second halving):
bitcoin: ~ 9% (would become 4~5% after the second halving)
ppcoin: unknown (maybe close to bitcoin's depending on market adoption)
freicoin: 5%

So freicoin has one year window where it's mining tax rate is significantly lower than bitcoin's.

However freicoin has an additional centralized tax known as 'foundation tax' at a rate of 80%, on the entire money supply for the first 3 years (80m out of total 100m coins). So the coin's fate will largely depend on the good will of the management of the foundation and the immediate effect is that hash rate of the network will be 'taxed away' and the protection level against 51% attack is lower than a comparably valued (in terms of market cap) cryptocoin. But I think another serious issue is the foundation has too much concentration of wealth and might be subject to confiscation (no plausible deniability as the addresses of the foundation are hardcoded in source code and its accounting is presumably public).

[Rubberduckie]

I'm currently buying FRC @ 0.0002 BTC per FRC (0.2btc per 1000 frc)

Pm me if interested

[smoothie]

I'm currently buying FRC @ 0.0002 BTC per FRC (0.2btc per 1000 frc)

Pm me if interested

I'll buy from you at 0.0000001 btc per FRC ok? Deal. lol 

[Rubberduckie]

I'm currently buying FRC @ 0.0002 BTC per FRC (0.2btc per 1000 frc)

Pm me if interested

I'll buy from you at 0.0000001 btc per FRC ok? Deal. lol 

I'm buying, not selling (Don't tell Luke jr)

[maaku]

I don't know why you insist on using the word “tax” for the initial distribution. A tax is a coercive transfer of wealth; an initial distribution materializes out of nothing. 20% of the initial distribution goes to the miners, 80% is distributed through Foundation grants. We've been upfront about this.

I would not call the demurrage rate and perpetual subsidy a tax either. It is part and parcel with the implicit contract binding the Freicoin protocol together. It's something everyone agrees to by using the coin, and which cannot be retroactively changed. And there's an easy way to opt out: don't use Freicoin.

Yes, I agree that the Foundation represents an existential risk for Freicoin right now. In the near-term Freicoin will succeed or fail based on public perception of how open, transparent, fair, and efficient the grant selection process is. That's why work on the Foundation is our top priority now that the reference client has been released.

However even in the very long-term the Foundation's assets will eventually decay to zero, with those coins re-entering the marketplace through miner subsidies.

[galambo]

I made another graph to celebrate breaking past 50GH/s. Additionally, the difficulty has increased and is now 4096. We now have more hashes/second than any other SHA256 coin (TRC, PPC, etc), besides Bitcoin. The growth in computing power supporting the Freicoin is exceeding all of my expectations.

[Ignore@YourPeril]

Here is FRC discussion, not PPC.

Hey! I´m probing for a swift merger of PP´s- and Frei´s. I even have the name ready: Creuro (crypto-euro) 

[Sunny King]

I don't see how the claim of 0% interest rate could be a stable equilibrium. If I lend freicoin at 0% interest rate, alternatively I could exchange it to bitcoin and lend bitcoin at positive interest rate. Assuming the exchange rate between the two is stable, then obviously I would choose the second alternative.

As you point out, the lender will try to maximize his profits and currencies can be exchanged. But that also applies to the borrower, who will try to minimize his borrowing costs. That way, bitcoin and freicoin financial markets will theoretically equilibrate and produce the same interest rate.
Now you ask why the equilibrium should be zero interest.
The fast answer is that without an artificial barrier for capital yields to drop, they would drop to zero like all profits do in perfect competition and interest rates are intimately linked to interest rates.
But let's make an example with some imaginary assumptions to simplify things. Freicoins and Bitcoins have the same price.

There's a given market, say car manufacturing, where factories (capital) yield 2% of their producing costs (the cost to build the factory). Of course, their yield comes from selling the consuming goods (cars). Building a new factory would push the yields down, since all compete selling cars. In perfect competition, profits drop to zero, but not yields, since they represent the borrowing costs for the investment. To be profitable with a new factory you need a loan at a lower rate than 2%. Sorry if I'm repeating myself but I want to stress how yields tend to drop by competition, which, by the way, is good for the consumers, since lower yields mean cheaper products.
If lenders/investors can find another market with higher yields they will prefer to invest on that other market first. Higher yields mean that the demand on that market hasn't fulfilled the whole demand at the lowest possible price. There's more margin for the lowest possible price (which is just the raw costs, without profits nor capital yields) on that market so the demand's signal is transmitted to the financial market. But those markets will eventually hit 2% yields and eventually lenders/investors will have to chose between 1.9% or hoarding money.

A bitcoin lender doesn't have any incentive to lend at zero interest, but a freicoin lender has. Borrowers/entrepreneurs will find lower interests on freicoin's financial market, possibly zero. As yields get lower, bitcoin's financial market would shrink in favor of freicoin's. Borrowers don't care about demurrage because they're going to invest the money, spend it on producing goods.

Why an entrepreneur would plan to invest in something that yields 0% ? That means that the factory on its whole lifetime will only pay for itself, not give more return. The lender just wants to spend his money at another time without paying demurrage nor conversion to bitcoin fees. And the entrepreneur is paying his own wage as part of the production costs. Being selfish that could be enough for him. Ideally at this stage the building costs of the factory equal its total outcomes in its productive lifetime and the consumer is only paying for the real costs of production.

I hope this makes sense to you, but of course don't hesitate to ask questions or criticize the parts you don't agree on.

I feel that your argument hinges on the idea that savers will lose demurrage if not lending freicoin out at 0% interest rate.

It would be true if the demurrage is enforced via state monopoly and legal tender laws like the fiat currencies. However given a free choice between:

1) 'Hoarding' bitcoin
2) Lending freicoin out at 0% interest rate with all the risk associated with lending money (possible default and total loss)

I mean it's an easy choice no?

So no I don't agree that the expectation of an eventual 0% interest rate can materialize as the equilibrium state without state coersion.

Also I don't see where in your argument this 0% is deduced as the logical end state. Maybe you mean that assuming you cannot ban bitcoins so interest rate would just approach the lower bound of bitcoin interest rate (which is 0%) instead of going lower to negative territory? But in reality bitcoin interest rate would be quite a bit higher to compensate for risks associated with lending.

[Vorksholk]

FRC faucet: http://www.theopeneffect.com/freicoin/


LOGO:

[Ignore@YourPeril]

Also I think there is some misunderstanding in your post. Demurrage does not counter inflation. Both inflation and demurrage can be considered a form of taxation on the economy. This tax is paid to miners in the case of bitcoin and freicoin but for ppcoin it's paid to stake minter in addition to miners.

I am only thinking of demurrage in the sense of a tool (tax) to benefit the PP-coin stake minter, somewhere in the magnitude of the 1% you have today from inflation by stake minting (minus the tx fees).

So if we keep to discussing this 1% I see the following main arguments demurrage vs inflation (not considering extra complexity in code):

Demurr+:
1) The selling point of a clearly non-inflating coin base in the long term (much like bitcoin), very helpful for convincing the non-technical adopter for which purely digital money coupled with just the hint of some in-built inflation will sound terrifying.
2) The psychological drive will be higher for any stake holder to connect to the network and mint the stake coins: Just compare the slight inconvenience of having a stash of 100 PPC and miss an opportunity to earn one more VS the horror of not being prudent enough to prevent 100 PPC from decaying down to 99. This is such a strong effect that the percentage might be brought down to 0.5 or less, with the same amount of PPC kept as stake for minting.

Demurr-:
1) The inconvenience for any non-stake holder to see the constant small reduction by demurrage, especially for denominated physical coins, or gift certificates, holding demurrage-PP´s
2) If stake minting is exactly equal to demurrage then any destroyed tx fees will lead to shrinkage of the coin base.

BTW: I think the term tax should not be used for any function of distribution limited to 3-5 years, like for the 80% of Freicoins. This is an initial distribution, not a tax.

[DeathAndTaxes]

I made another graph to celebrate breaking past 50GH/s. Additionally, the difficulty has increased and is now 4096. We now have more hashes/second than any other SHA256 coin (TRC, PPC, etc), besides Bitcoin.

well besides Bitcoin and Namecoin.

[DannyM]

I made another graph to celebrate breaking past 50GH/s. Additionally, the difficulty has increased and is now 4096. We now have more hashes/second than any other SHA256 coin (TRC, PPC, etc), besides Bitcoin.

well besides Bitcoin and Namecoin.

I'm also interested what you estimated the hashes/second of devcoin and ixcoin at.