Is it an ico ?
Sorry, i see now mining mentioned. Ok, well sounds interesting.
One particular question: does it mean JAMBOX is a seperate project from this?
I am writing this after being awake for 18 hours nonstop work. So this is sloppily written. I am rushed.
I don't want to lie. I will give it to you frankly. I did not vet the following statements with HONCHO. So he may have clarifications and I will notify you later if he does.
Okay the good and the bad news.
Everything below is subject to change.Let me try to lay everything out and get the feedback. I haven't made any final decision yet, so you can possibly influence with your replies, but please pay close attention to every detail below and the logic of my circumstance.
1. I did not plan to launch a CC now. My plan was to finish my work on the programming language I am in the midst of designing, then go launch JAMBOX, then after that launch a CC distributed to the users of JAMBOX who I was hoping would number in the 100,000 minimum or quickly rising to a million+. I have a detailed plan on that, and I have not abandoned it. I want to emphasize that the CC for JAMBOX will not meet my goals on distribution if it is not distributed to the actual users of the network. If it is distributed to investors, then the CC will never widely circulate and nothing will have been achieved. You will never never get a CC to widely circulate if you have the investor hoarding the coin. Period.
2. I stumbled onto a clever way to improve anonymity technology to add some potential benefits which I already enumerated in a post over in my thread:
Here are the potential advantages my co-developer and I quickly enumerated today in chat:
Co-dev: "so ours is less bloat, prunable, more anonymous, quantum-computing resistant, more performant, and IP shielding"
myself: "and our anonymity sets are huge, potentially 1000s per mix"
Note that ours will have the weakness compared to RingCT/Zcash that we won't hide values so the mixing will be limited to transactions that people choose to mix with specific denominations (which is the way the current Monero works). I don't think we plan to mix every single transaction and have a complex wallet like Monero. Monero will simplify that when they implement RingCT. But RingCT can never scale to every (micro) transactions of the masses.
Any way I am talking off the top of my head and too prematurely. I need to go write some of these specs down.
3. I did not expect to stumble onto that discovery now. So I decided to offer the technology for that for sale to the highest bidder. I was expecting maybe I could sell it to Dash or other existing altcoin for some token amount (maybe a couple thousands), and get some money and then proceed on my work mentioned in #1. The highest bidder thus far is my angel investor (who we will name HONCHO) who also happens to be a prolific developer in crypto. And it turns out that he is ready and willing to launch a new anonymous coin which we will name ACOIN. So I wanted to just sell the technology to him and/or consider it full payment for the angel investment, so I no longer owe him anything. But he said that he is very interested in JAMBOX and he said that he doesn't want to launch a coin with my anonymity technology unless I will also somehow tie my JAMBOX to the coin we would launch now. Also he wants to do an ICO, and that is one way he can offer to pay me the most. But I told him that I don't want to sell vaporware and also I can't be involved in any ICOs because I am a US citizen. Please note that I am not against an ICO if it doesn't involve me legally, and also if the ICO does not represent the future distribution of the JAMBOX coin. I would not create a CC for the millions and then ICO it. I wouldn't allow it to be professionally mined either. I would make sure that that only people that can mine it are the social networking users, so that the distribution is as wide as possible. How will I do that? Don't ask me now, but I have a way. Also I had long said that I don't want to launch my coin here on Bitcointalk, because I feel I need to be able to market it to millions of users in order to achieve my goal so marketing a CC to speculators here on this forum is not going to reach the goal. So what can I do?
4. HONCHO offered to pay me to add my anonymity, ASIC resistent proof-of-work (which I think is better than Monero's), and some other work on the coin he will create. In exchange, he wants me to exclusively contract him to implement the DE (decentralized exchange) on any CC I will create for JAMBOX. So what this means is that there will be new op codes in ACOIN and in any JAMBOX CC not supported initially by any other CCs. So this means that for some period of months after I would launch any CC for JAMBOX, it is very likely if not certain that only ACOIN could be used to buy coins cheaply from social networking users that want to dump their coins which they mined for free. The social networking users will perceive that they are mining these coins for free because they won't even realize they are mining when they are using the social network. So from their perspective, they will never count the electricity because it will be too minute for them to notice on their electric bill. So it is quite likely many of them will dump these coins for peanuts. But not all of them will (else I will have failed in my responsibility to make many ways for them to spend this JAMBOX CC). So what I am saying to you is that I have an offer to do some contract work on a new ACOIN. And users who buy that ACOIN, then have apparently first dibs on buying cheap JAMBOX CC because in return I will contract HONCHO to implement the DE between both of these CCs. Note of course that over time the free market will make other ways to exchange but for some months it will not be very easy for the free market to go around the exclusive contract because just think about it. Social networking users are not going to go register in some exchange like Poloniex just to sell $10 worth of coins each. Over time the holdings between users and investors will balance out to a market equilibrium and then centralized exchanges will be come viable. Over time others will reverse engineer our op code and make other DE. But that won't happen the day the DE is launch. Competition takes time.
5. So ACOIN would be a way for me to emphasize the anonymity/privacy technology that I probably will not get around to adding to JAMBOX CC at least not in the initial release of JAMBOX CC, and to add other features to ACOIN that I want to put in any JAMBOX CC such as the improved PoW ash function. So I see ACOIN as a viable coin by itself that will have some features the JAMBOX CC won't have. And the ACOIN will have the aforementioned access to the JAMBOX CC. But the ACOIN won't have the scaling that I want to put in the ACOIN CC, because I need to totally rewrite the source code for that. I can't start with the Bitcoin source code and achieve the radical scaling changes. And I am not ready to totally rewrite a CC source code until I complete my new programming language (or abandon the idea of creating a programming language although it is very important for my plans for replacing the web browser with an app browser).
6. The funding I would hopefully gain from ACOIN would enable me to hire a full time top developer (from outside of CC) to help work on both JAMBOX and JAMBOX CC. Most of the money raised for ACOIN, I presume would go to the development of ACOIN. It is possible that the development of ACOIN will mirror the development I do on the JAMBOX CC, but I can't promise that since it won't be my coin. I will be a paid developer on it, but not the only developer on it. The point is I will not go launching my own coin here on Bitcointalk. ACOIN would not be my coin, although I would be having a strong influence on it. And it would be the way for me and others to acquire JAMBOX CC. So you can bet I will hang on to some of my ACOIN (assuming I was paid some in ACOIN and some in BTC)!
7. Let me emphasize that I would not approve of this plan if it involves any vaporware. Any ICO must be for a coin that is already in testnet and ready to launch with all the features as stated. And any ICO must be open to everyone first-come, first-served with a limit on total coins. Or something like that, but any way I am not in control of any ICO. And I am only stating that which I would refuse to be paid to work on. I will tell you that of course HONCHO will make a statement but not yet. And I will also tell you he was involved in all the recent big ICOs. So apparently he knows what he is doing. Because I don't know a damn thing about that and I don't want to know.
8. The person who is helping to set the W3C standard for IoT is asking me to be the co-author of the standard. He and I had conversations in the past. I don't know if I can manage to fit that into my schedule. And I don't know if HONCHO wants to try to target IoT. There are many other ideas that might come into play. We are only 24 hours into this idea so far.
If the community approves, I can continue. If the community doesn't like, then perhaps I will decline the offer and continue working impoverished as I am at my slow pace.
You tell me?
Spoetnik I know you don't approve. Try to read what I wrote above. Think about my situation. I have negative net worth. I have only a small cash reserve which isn't even my own money. I been giving everything of myself to CC research and development. I have been ill for 4 years but doing better now with sublingual oregano oil daily. So which direction does this community think I should go?
