|
Alanay (OP)
|
 |
July 19, 2016, 05:26:03 PM |
|
Instead of having the address hold the public and private key why don't we give coins the public and private key. Then once a coin is sent to a user the private key will change and only be revealed to the receiver. This would mean users can actually have usernames instead of having to use long random addresses. The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID. This would help verifying the validity of the coin, also creating markets where an individual might want to own a coin with a certain ID making some coins more valuable than others. If you think this is a dumb idea or simply infeasible please let me know. Or if you have the time and knowledge to try making something like this then go ahead.  |
|
|
|
achow101
Staff
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 3430
Merit: 6700
Just writing some code
|
|
July 19, 2016, 05:37:50 PM |
|
There is no such thing as a "coin" in Bitcoin. The Bitcoins you see are just values, there is no object of a Bitcoin.
How would you identify each coin?
|
|
|
|
|
Alanay (OP)
|
|
July 19, 2016, 05:40:06 PM |
|
There is no such thing as a "coin" in Bitcoin. The Bitcoins you see are just values, there is no object of a Bitcoin.
How would you identify each coin?
"There is no such thing as a "coin" in Bitcoin. The Bitcoins you see are just values, there is no object of a Bitcoin." When did I say there was a "coin" in Bitcoin? o.O "How would you identify each coin?" I already said how: "The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID." |
|
|
|
AgentofCoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 19, 2016, 05:42:56 PM |
|
...
The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID. This would help verifying the validity of the coin, also creating markets where an individual might want to own a coin with a certain ID making some coins more valuable than others.
...
No one who is reasonable would want coins associated with IDs. All coins are valid and equal and none should be considered more valuable than others. Bitcoin was designed as so for a reason, adding your suggestion defeats many purposes. This is a dangerous road that could lead to blacklisting of coins and a future world of clean versus dirty coins. #AllCoinsMatter  |
I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
|
|
|
achow101
Staff
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3430
Merit: 6700
Just writing some code
|
|
July 19, 2016, 05:47:03 PM |
|
There is no such thing as a "coin" in Bitcoin. The Bitcoins you see are just values, there is no object of a Bitcoin.
How would you identify each coin?
"There is no such thing as a "coin" in Bitcoin. The Bitcoins you see are just values, there is no object of a Bitcoin." When did I say there was a "coin" in Bitcoin? o.O You didn't, but many people who propose ideas based on Bitcoin that have a concept of a "coin" assume that there is an object called a Bitcoin and base their ideas off of that. Thus I thought it was necessary to point this out. "How would you identify each coin?"
I already said how: "The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID."
Who assigns the ID? What prevents me from creating a fake coin? What if I want to blacklist all the coins that I know have been used illegally? |
|
|
|
|
Alanay (OP)
|
|
July 19, 2016, 06:20:53 PM |
|
...
The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID. This would help verifying the validity of the coin, also creating markets where an individual might want to own a coin with a certain ID making some coins more valuable than others.
...
No one who is reasonable would want coins associated with IDs. All coins are valid and equal and none should be considered more valuable than others. Bitcoin was designed as so for a reason, adding your suggestion defeats many purposes. This is a dangerous road that could lead to blacklisting of coins and a future world of clean versus dirty coins. #AllCoinsMatter By ID I mean the first coin to be created will have an ID of 1 for example. Meaning we could all decide coins at 1000 or below ID can be worth more than ones with higher or more recent IDs. I agree with what you're saying though, but it was just an idea I wanted to share. #AllCoinsMatter xD |
|
|
|
AgentofCoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 19, 2016, 07:08:04 PM |
|
...
The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID. This would help verifying the validity of the coin, also creating markets where an individual might want to own a coin with a certain ID making some coins more valuable than others.
...
No one who is reasonable would want coins associated with IDs. All coins are valid and equal and none should be considered more valuable than others. Bitcoin was designed as so for a reason, adding your suggestion defeats many purposes. This is a dangerous road that could lead to blacklisting of coins and a future world of clean versus dirty coins. #AllCoinsMatter By ID I mean the first coin to be created will have an ID of 1 for example. Meaning we could all decide coins at 1000 or below ID can be worth more than ones with higher or more recent IDs. I agree with what you're saying though, but it was just an idea I wanted to share. #AllCoinsMatter xD There is no problem with wanting to share an idea. My understanding is, currently there is no way to actually differentiate between coins. For example within the same address, if i have 1BTC that has a ID of 7 and you sent me 1BTC with an ID of 21, then when I send out from my address (which now has 2BTC) one of the 1BTCs, there is no way for the Bitcoin network to know which is the ID 7 or 21. That is not part of the code. The code is designed not to do such a thing, since that could lead to issues with individual input blacklisting. (All coins are seen as equal if commingled.) Bitcoin will also not likely add such an ability since it will be used to make all coins not equal. By creating this ability and making an ID of 4 more valuable than an ID of 317, is like making a 100 USD bill from 2016 more valuable than a 100 USD bill from 2005. In money, all bills need to be equal for the economy to work properly. Ultimately, it would be used to create different classes of bitcoins and thus the potential to deny and control people's bitcoins, which is against the original intent of Bitcoin. |
I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
|
|
|
|
Alanay (OP)
|
|
July 19, 2016, 08:33:33 PM |
|
...
The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID. This would help verifying the validity of the coin, also creating markets where an individual might want to own a coin with a certain ID making some coins more valuable than others.
...
No one who is reasonable would want coins associated with IDs. All coins are valid and equal and none should be considered more valuable than others. Bitcoin was designed as so for a reason, adding your suggestion defeats many purposes. This is a dangerous road that could lead to blacklisting of coins and a future world of clean versus dirty coins. #AllCoinsMatter By ID I mean the first coin to be created will have an ID of 1 for example. Meaning we could all decide coins at 1000 or below ID can be worth more than ones with higher or more recent IDs. I agree with what you're saying though, but it was just an idea I wanted to share. #AllCoinsMatter xD There is no problem with wanting to share an idea. My understanding is, currently there is no way to actually differentiate between coins. For example within the same address, if i have 1BTC that has a ID of 7 and you sent me 1BTC with an ID of 21, then when I send out from my address (which now has 2BTC) one of the 1BTCs, there is no way for the Bitcoin network to know which is the ID 7 or 21. That is not part of the code. The code is designed not to do such a thing, since that could lead to issues with individual input blacklisting. (All coins are seen as equal if commingled.) Bitcoin will also not likely add such an ability since it will be used to make all coins not equal. By creating this ability and making an ID of 4 more valuable than an ID of 317, is like making a 100 USD bill from 2016 more valuable than a 100 USD bill from 2005. In money, all bills need to be equal for the economy to work properly. Ultimately, it would be used to create different classes of bitcoins and thus the potential to deny and control people's bitcoins, which is against the original intent of Bitcoin. Ah, I see the misunderstanding now, you thought I was proposing this idea to be implemented in Bitcoin. That isn't the case, this would be for an entirely new experimental coin. Also there would be no "address", we will have users that can choose usernames. The coins will not be able to be split up, a user can send multiple coins at once but since they all have their own public/private keys they will not be confused with one another. There will also be no 1.0 and 0.5 coins, they will all have the same value unless decided otherwise with their ID as a factor. For example the coin with an ID of #1 would be very valuable. |
|
|
|
AgentofCoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 19, 2016, 08:47:10 PM |
|
...
The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID. This would help verifying the validity of the coin, also creating markets where an individual might want to own a coin with a certain ID making some coins more valuable than others.
...
No one who is reasonable would want coins associated with IDs. All coins are valid and equal and none should be considered more valuable than others. Bitcoin was designed as so for a reason, adding your suggestion defeats many purposes. This is a dangerous road that could lead to blacklisting of coins and a future world of clean versus dirty coins. #AllCoinsMatter By ID I mean the first coin to be created will have an ID of 1 for example. Meaning we could all decide coins at 1000 or below ID can be worth more than ones with higher or more recent IDs. I agree with what you're saying though, but it was just an idea I wanted to share. #AllCoinsMatter xD There is no problem with wanting to share an idea. My understanding is, currently there is no way to actually differentiate between coins. For example within the same address, if i have 1BTC that has a ID of 7 and you sent me 1BTC with an ID of 21, then when I send out from my address (which now has 2BTC) one of the 1BTCs, there is no way for the Bitcoin network to know which is the ID 7 or 21. That is not part of the code. The code is designed not to do such a thing, since that could lead to issues with individual input blacklisting. (All coins are seen as equal if commingled.) Bitcoin will also not likely add such an ability since it will be used to make all coins not equal. By creating this ability and making an ID of 4 more valuable than an ID of 317, is like making a 100 USD bill from 2016 more valuable than a 100 USD bill from 2005. In money, all bills need to be equal for the economy to work properly. Ultimately, it would be used to create different classes of bitcoins and thus the potential to deny and control people's bitcoins, which is against the original intent of Bitcoin. Ah, I see the misunderstanding now, you thought I was proposing this idea to be implemented in Bitcoin. That isn't the case, this would be for an entirely new experimental coin. Also there would be no "address", we will have users that can choose usernames. The coins will not be able to be split up, a user can send multiple coins at once but since they all have their own public/private keys they will not be confused with one another. There will also be no 1.0 and 0.5 coins, they will all have the same value unless decided otherwise with their ID as a factor. For example the coin with an ID of #1 would be very valuable. You are correct after re-reading the OP. I thought you were talking about Bitcoin. FYI, this thread should be moved to another section now, since it is not related to Bitcoin Development or Bitcoin Technical Discussion. I'm guessing some Altcoin section, but not really sure here. As a side note as to your idea for a new coin, if coins with the lowest ID are designed to be the most valuable, then the chances are, if people ever use this new coin, they would never transact with it. In theory every time they transfer the coin once, it would lose value by unimaginable amounts. Majority would try to stay below ID 10. That wouldn't make for a good form of a monetary transfer system. But that doesn't mean someone won't try to make something like it anyway.  |
I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
|
|
|
|
Alanay (OP)
|
|
July 19, 2016, 09:12:14 PM |
|
...
The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID. This would help verifying the validity of the coin, also creating markets where an individual might want to own a coin with a certain ID making some coins more valuable than others.
...
No one who is reasonable would want coins associated with IDs. All coins are valid and equal and none should be considered more valuable than others. Bitcoin was designed as so for a reason, adding your suggestion defeats many purposes. This is a dangerous road that could lead to blacklisting of coins and a future world of clean versus dirty coins. #AllCoinsMatter By ID I mean the first coin to be created will have an ID of 1 for example. Meaning we could all decide coins at 1000 or below ID can be worth more than ones with higher or more recent IDs. I agree with what you're saying though, but it was just an idea I wanted to share. #AllCoinsMatter xD There is no problem with wanting to share an idea. My understanding is, currently there is no way to actually differentiate between coins. For example within the same address, if i have 1BTC that has a ID of 7 and you sent me 1BTC with an ID of 21, then when I send out from my address (which now has 2BTC) one of the 1BTCs, there is no way for the Bitcoin network to know which is the ID 7 or 21. That is not part of the code. The code is designed not to do such a thing, since that could lead to issues with individual input blacklisting. (All coins are seen as equal if commingled.) Bitcoin will also not likely add such an ability since it will be used to make all coins not equal. By creating this ability and making an ID of 4 more valuable than an ID of 317, is like making a 100 USD bill from 2016 more valuable than a 100 USD bill from 2005. In money, all bills need to be equal for the economy to work properly. Ultimately, it would be used to create different classes of bitcoins and thus the potential to deny and control people's bitcoins, which is against the original intent of Bitcoin. Ah, I see the misunderstanding now, you thought I was proposing this idea to be implemented in Bitcoin. That isn't the case, this would be for an entirely new experimental coin. Also there would be no "address", we will have users that can choose usernames. The coins will not be able to be split up, a user can send multiple coins at once but since they all have their own public/private keys they will not be confused with one another. There will also be no 1.0 and 0.5 coins, they will all have the same value unless decided otherwise with their ID as a factor. For example the coin with an ID of #1 would be very valuable. You are correct after re-reading the OP. I thought you were talking about Bitcoin. FYI, this thread should be moved to another section now, since it is not related to Bitcoin Development or Bitcoin Technical Discussion. I'm guessing some Altcoin section, but not really sure here. As a side note as to your idea for a new coin, if coins with the lowest ID are designed to be the most valuable, then the chances are, if people ever use this new coin, they would never transact with it. In theory every time they transfer the coin once, it would lose value by unimaginable amounts. Majority would try to stay below ID 10. That wouldn't make for a good form of a monetary transfer system. But that doesn't mean someone won't try to make something like it anyway. How do I move the thread? Or do I wait for a moderator to do it? The ID of the coin will not change though. We can begin with 1,000,000 coins say, then the next coin to be mined will have an ID of #1000001. I was hoping the way it would work would be every year that years IDs are 50% less valuable than the previous years IDs, to work similar to how Bitcoin halves their block rewards every year. If somebody can try this that would be awesome! |
|
|
|
AgentofCoin
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 19, 2016, 09:30:01 PM |
|
...
The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID. This would help verifying the validity of the coin, also creating markets where an individual might want to own a coin with a certain ID making some coins more valuable than others.
...
No one who is reasonable would want coins associated with IDs. All coins are valid and equal and none should be considered more valuable than others. Bitcoin was designed as so for a reason, adding your suggestion defeats many purposes. This is a dangerous road that could lead to blacklisting of coins and a future world of clean versus dirty coins. #AllCoinsMatter By ID I mean the first coin to be created will have an ID of 1 for example. Meaning we could all decide coins at 1000 or below ID can be worth more than ones with higher or more recent IDs. I agree with what you're saying though, but it was just an idea I wanted to share. #AllCoinsMatter xD There is no problem with wanting to share an idea. My understanding is, currently there is no way to actually differentiate between coins. For example within the same address, if i have 1BTC that has a ID of 7 and you sent me 1BTC with an ID of 21, then when I send out from my address (which now has 2BTC) one of the 1BTCs, there is no way for the Bitcoin network to know which is the ID 7 or 21. That is not part of the code. The code is designed not to do such a thing, since that could lead to issues with individual input blacklisting. (All coins are seen as equal if commingled.) Bitcoin will also not likely add such an ability since it will be used to make all coins not equal. By creating this ability and making an ID of 4 more valuable than an ID of 317, is like making a 100 USD bill from 2016 more valuable than a 100 USD bill from 2005. In money, all bills need to be equal for the economy to work properly. Ultimately, it would be used to create different classes of bitcoins and thus the potential to deny and control people's bitcoins, which is against the original intent of Bitcoin. Ah, I see the misunderstanding now, you thought I was proposing this idea to be implemented in Bitcoin. That isn't the case, this would be for an entirely new experimental coin. Also there would be no "address", we will have users that can choose usernames. The coins will not be able to be split up, a user can send multiple coins at once but since they all have their own public/private keys they will not be confused with one another. There will also be no 1.0 and 0.5 coins, they will all have the same value unless decided otherwise with their ID as a factor. For example the coin with an ID of #1 would be very valuable. You are correct after re-reading the OP. I thought you were talking about Bitcoin. FYI, this thread should be moved to another section now, since it is not related to Bitcoin Development or Bitcoin Technical Discussion. I'm guessing some Altcoin section, but not really sure here. As a side note as to your idea for a new coin, if coins with the lowest ID are designed to be the most valuable, then the chances are, if people ever use this new coin, they would never transact with it. In theory every time they transfer the coin once, it would lose value by unimaginable amounts. Majority would try to stay below ID 10. That wouldn't make for a good form of a monetary transfer system. But that doesn't mean someone won't try to make something like it anyway. How do I move the thread? Or do I wait for a moderator to do it? The ID of the coin will not change though. We can begin with 1,000,000 coins say, then the next coin to be mined will have an ID of #1000001. I was hoping the way it would work would be every year that years IDs are 50% less valuable than the previous years IDs, to work similar to how Bitcoin halves their block rewards every year. If somebody can try this that would be awesome! Let a moderator move it, unless you know where it goes. (You move a thread you created by the move topic button on the bottom left of the page). I understand what you are saying now: 1. The altcoin uses usernames for addresses (stored in this altcoin's blockchain? (limited usernames)) 2. The coin will visibly carry the generation number of the coin as a feature (only 1 mined per block?(if more than how to #?)). 3. The altcoin will auto generate a new privatekey upon each confirmed transaction, since each coin is special. 4. The coin will not be divisible. (this coin will need a large coin cap = not good for rarity). This is all probably doable, but there are many important issues to consider, including fungibility and blacklisting. |
I support a decentralized & unregulatable ledger first, with safe scaling over time.
Request a signed message if you are associating with anyone claiming to be me.
|
|
|
|
Alanay (OP)
|
|
July 19, 2016, 09:54:54 PM |
|
...
The coins as well as holding the public/private key can also then hold an ID. This would help verifying the validity of the coin, also creating markets where an individual might want to own a coin with a certain ID making some coins more valuable than others.
...
No one who is reasonable would want coins associated with IDs. All coins are valid and equal and none should be considered more valuable than others. Bitcoin was designed as so for a reason, adding your suggestion defeats many purposes. This is a dangerous road that could lead to blacklisting of coins and a future world of clean versus dirty coins. #AllCoinsMatter By ID I mean the first coin to be created will have an ID of 1 for example. Meaning we could all decide coins at 1000 or below ID can be worth more than ones with higher or more recent IDs. I agree with what you're saying though, but it was just an idea I wanted to share. #AllCoinsMatter xD There is no problem with wanting to share an idea. My understanding is, currently there is no way to actually differentiate between coins. For example within the same address, if i have 1BTC that has a ID of 7 and you sent me 1BTC with an ID of 21, then when I send out from my address (which now has 2BTC) one of the 1BTCs, there is no way for the Bitcoin network to know which is the ID 7 or 21. That is not part of the code. The code is designed not to do such a thing, since that could lead to issues with individual input blacklisting. (All coins are seen as equal if commingled.) Bitcoin will also not likely add such an ability since it will be used to make all coins not equal. By creating this ability and making an ID of 4 more valuable than an ID of 317, is like making a 100 USD bill from 2016 more valuable than a 100 USD bill from 2005. In money, all bills need to be equal for the economy to work properly. Ultimately, it would be used to create different classes of bitcoins and thus the potential to deny and control people's bitcoins, which is against the original intent of Bitcoin. Ah, I see the misunderstanding now, you thought I was proposing this idea to be implemented in Bitcoin. That isn't the case, this would be for an entirely new experimental coin. Also there would be no "address", we will have users that can choose usernames. The coins will not be able to be split up, a user can send multiple coins at once but since they all have their own public/private keys they will not be confused with one another. There will also be no 1.0 and 0.5 coins, they will all have the same value unless decided otherwise with their ID as a factor. For example the coin with an ID of #1 would be very valuable. You are correct after re-reading the OP. I thought you were talking about Bitcoin. FYI, this thread should be moved to another section now, since it is not related to Bitcoin Development or Bitcoin Technical Discussion. I'm guessing some Altcoin section, but not really sure here. As a side note as to your idea for a new coin, if coins with the lowest ID are designed to be the most valuable, then the chances are, if people ever use this new coin, they would never transact with it. In theory every time they transfer the coin once, it would lose value by unimaginable amounts. Majority would try to stay below ID 10. That wouldn't make for a good form of a monetary transfer system. But that doesn't mean someone won't try to make something like it anyway. How do I move the thread? Or do I wait for a moderator to do it? The ID of the coin will not change though. We can begin with 1,000,000 coins say, then the next coin to be mined will have an ID of #1000001. I was hoping the way it would work would be every year that years IDs are 50% less valuable than the previous years IDs, to work similar to how Bitcoin halves their block rewards every year. If somebody can try this that would be awesome! Let a moderator move it, unless you know where it goes. (You move a thread you created by the move topic button on the bottom left of the page). I understand what you are saying now: 1. The altcoin uses usernames for addresses (stored in this altcoin's blockchain? (limited usernames)) 2. The coin will visibly carry the generation number of the coin as a feature (only 1 mined per block?(if more than how to #?)). 3. The altcoin will auto generate a new privatekey upon each confirmed transaction, since each coin is special. 4. The coin will not be divisible. (this coin will need a large coin cap = not good for rarity). This is all probably doable, but there are many important issues to consider, including fungibility and blacklisting. Yes, you've got it. I agree the coin cap will have to be large, I think 1 billion would be good. If I have time I will try to think more about this and create a well organized thread as well as some pseudo code. Thanks for all your polite responses. |
|
|
|
jeffthebaker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1034
|
|
July 19, 2016, 09:59:14 PM |
|
According to Ctrl+F, Color Coins have not been mentioned. Surprising. Anyways, Colored Coins essentially do this. They set aside an amount of Bitcoin to give it a special tag, which can be used to represent other values. I think Spells of Genesis is using this technology? Not sure though, haven't heard much about it recently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
