Distributed Coin

[jubalix]

How could you make a coin system (maybe one of the alts does this)

that has the feature that an initial distribution is made across the widest number of people, eg 100 coins to every IP address of something?

this couple with some other features may help the mass adoption of a coin, once they are used to the idea of a crypto...I'm not against early adopter windfall, but it seems that it may not allocate resources well and be encompassing enough.

[BTC Books]

How could you make a coin system (maybe one of the alts does this)

that has the feature that an initial distribution is made across the widest number of people, eg 100 coins to every IP address of something?

this couple with some other features may help the mass adoption of a coin, once they are used to the idea of a crypto...I'm not against early adopter windfall, but it seems that it may not allocate resources well and be encompassing enough.

Why?

Who would have the incentive to work their asses off to foster mass adoption?

This makes no sense to me.

[tvbcof]

I've been musing about this a bit lately.

It does seem that a currency with an extraordinarily high JINI may be at a dis-advantage in terms of it's appeal to the masses vs. one without.  It also may have more and more difficulty capturing the passion of the most talented technical folks.  Both could be increasingly stubborn problems for Bitcoin as we march forward I fear.

It also strikes me that with an inflationary currency, value can be siphoned off  in fees but new money is created and distributed among the economic participants.  A deflationary currency with such siphoning will almost certainly develop a high JINI quite rapidly.  Miners and exchange operators can buy only so many massages and so much blow, and the rest will probably go where all wealthy people's funds go...into a hoard which is hoped to be bigger than anyone elses.

I'm not sure that there is a whole lot which can (or should) be done about the JINI issue.  It's basically a pretty understandable phenomenon in the real world.  It tends to be resolved with pitchforks, but one of the niceties of Bitcoin-style crypto-currencies is that there is the potential for the resolution to be somewhat less bloody.

One way or another, the future will be quite interesting to watch unfold.

[jubalix]

I've been musing about this a bit lately.

It does seem that a currency with an extraordinarily high JINI may be at a dis-advantage in terms of it's appeal to the masses vs. one without.  It also may have more and more difficulty capturing the passion of the most talented technical folks.  Both could be increasingly stubborn problems for Bitcoin as we march forward I fear.

It also strikes me that with an inflationary currency, value can be siphoned off  in fees but new money is created and distributed among the economic participants.  A deflationary currency with such siphoning will almost certainly develop a high JINI quite rapidly.  Miners and exchange operators can buy only so many massages and so much blow, and the rest will probably go where all wealthy people's funds go...into a hoard which is hoped to be bigger than anyone elses.

I'm not sure that there is a whole lot which can (or should) be done about the JINI issue.  It's basically a pretty understandable phenomenon in the real world.  It tends to be resolved with pitchforks, but one of the niceties of Bitcoin-style crypto-currencies is that there is the potential for the resolution to be somewhat less bloody.

One way or another, the future will be quite interesting to watch unfold.

Yes pretty much spot on....particularly the alienation of talented people, who just never heard about it at the right time...now this is one of the things that plague any economic system to date.

I agree with the hard limit of coins, but is has to be a large number just so people feel like they can get whole coins (though different issue).

Perhaps one way is to have say 100 coins x population. By Escrow - Premine 50% (a term I have coined), and the rest up for grabs in usual way. The shear weight of the pre mine would act as a buffer to the other 50%

the premine is randomly distributed over time to wallets, or IP's or something, and once it has gone to that wallet or IP then thats it not again to there. The premine would be in an escrow feature that would then auto distribute...over time.

any way just thought in the wind....but there is a problem that results in a lesser market penetration because of alienation.

The Omni-penetration coin may rise to the same value as BTC by virtue of it appeal, It gets  50% market rather that 5% or 1%, and thus has more attraction

[BTC Books]

Alienation?  Maybe you - not me, and I'm hardly an early adopter.  I have no time for envy.  I'm told it's a sin.

And you haven't answered the question at the core of my point:  what's the incentive?

Everybody picks at some/one aspect of Satoshi's creation - "...the rest of it's just great!  But..."

I look at it as a whole:  a gestalt, if you will.  It all fits together - or it doesn't work at all.  Not at all.

But hey!  Start your OwnCoin.  See how it goes...

[jubalix]

Alienation?  Maybe you - not me, and I'm hardly an early adopter.  I have no time for envy.  I'm told it's a sin.

And you haven't answered the question at the core of my point:  what's the incentive?

Everybody picks at some/one aspect of Satoshi's creation - "...the rest of it's just great!  But..."

I look at it as a whole:  a gestalt, if you will.  It all fits together - or it doesn't work at all.  Not at all.

But hey!  Start your OwnCoin.  See how it goes...

I agree my thoughts are not fleshed out, which is why I write, but I think satoshi can be improved upon, [and inmho LTC does this]

Your right you need to start own coin but before this getting input from the community is important they know a lot.

I think the miners would be insentivised in this way, while only half the coins can ever be mined they can reach 25 times more people or 10 times more people than BTC due to (expected) market penetration, so its worth 5 - 12.5 times more than BTC.

[Aristotle]

It does seem that a currency with an extraordinarily high JINI...

What's JINI?

Anyways... I think the only way to do this properly would be to use a centralized authority (such as social security number verification) to make sure 1 person can have 1 account. Otherwise, people would game the system by buying IP addresses, proxies, forcing DHCP resets, etc. I would imagine botnets to be the biggest violators. Tying IPs to accounts would make transactions much more easy to track too; more so than bank transfers because transactions are public.

[tvbcof]

It does seem that a currency with an extraordinarily high JINI...

What's JINI?

Anyways... I think the only way to do this properly would be to use a centralized authority (such as social security number verification) to make sure 1 person can have 1 account. Otherwise, people would game the system by buying IP addresses, proxies, forcing DHCP resets, etc. I would imagine botnets to be the biggest violators. Tying IPs to accounts would make transactions much more easy to track too; more so than bank transfers because transactions are public.

Opps. s/J/G/ 'Gini Index'.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_index

Anyways...the issue you point out hit me right away to, but I sort of gave up without trying real hard on the problem you mention when I was mulling it over a while back.  I actually switched over to thinking about an 'exchange' currency design which would specifically not be a 'reserve' currency.  In that case it makes sense (to me) to have it automatically extinguish if not readily used which opens up some possibilities for redistribution.  Also some address of the niggling privacy and scaling issues associated with a permanent ledger.

(As for a reserve currency, I have pretty much resigned myself to the fact that there will always be ultra-wealthy folks, and the best we can hope for is that they have limited means of subjugating the rest of us.)

I abandoned all of my thoughts along these lines until I study and understand Ripple more fully though.  No point in re-inventing the wheel if that is a danger.

[Stephen Gornick]

the only way to do this properly would be to use a centralized authority (such as social security number verification) to make sure 1 person can have 1 account.

Meet the OCCCU ("basic income")
 - http://www.bitcoinmoney.com/post/17199295201


[Update: And just so that it is clear, the OCCCU has been around for more than a year now.  If this type of funny money basic income is a good idea, why isn't it the OCCCU gaining traction as an alternative currency instead of Bitcoin?]

[jubalix]

It does seem that a currency with an extraordinarily high JINI...

What's JINI?

Anyways... I think the only way to do this properly would be to use a centralized authority (such as social security number verification) to make sure 1 person can have 1 account. Otherwise, people would game the system by buying IP addresses, proxies, forcing DHCP resets, etc. I would imagine botnets to be the biggest violators. Tying IPs to accounts would make transactions much more easy to track too; more so than bank transfers because transactions are public.

Opps. s/J/G/ 'Gini Index'.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_index

Anyways...the issue you point out hit me right away to, but I sort of gave up without trying real hard on the problem you mention when I was mulling it over a while back.  I actually switched over to thinking about an 'exchange' currency design which would specifically not be a 'reserve' currency.  In that case it makes sense (to me) to have it automatically extinguish if not readily used which opens up some possibilities for redistribution.  Also some address of the niggling privacy and scaling issues associated with a permanent ledger.

(As for a reserve currency, I have pretty much resigned myself to the fact that there will always be ultra-wealthy folks, and the best we can hope for is that they have limited means of subjugating the rest of us.)

I abandoned all of my thoughts along these lines until I study and understand Ripple more fully though.  No point in re-inventing the wheel if that is a danger.

I think friecoin sotra goes towards what I am aiming at, or addresses some issues, but it too centralized....See the thing is BTC had a stealth premine when you think about it.....becuase no one really knew what was going on.

If every one had a year to digest this, and then the code was released....it would be different....though even then I appreciate no one would have listened, it was only by having other see others make money that their interest was sharpened to a pin and their attention glued